Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And with Obama's promises of amnesty and no more deportation of foreigners pouring over the border, there will be millions more unemployed joining these.
Obama is doing absolutely nothing to bring jobs to Americans -- he's opened the borders to all takers -- he's actually promising illegal foreigners the jobs and/or welfare handouts.
And with Obama's promises of amnesty and no more deportation of foreigners pouring over the border, there will be millions more unemployed joining these.
Obama is doing absolutely nothing to bring jobs to Americans -- he's opened the borders to all takers -- he's actually promising illegal foreigners the jobs and/or welfare handouts.
Of course he is. It's millions more people to vote Democrat. It is readily apparent that Democrats care more about votes than about the economy. I don't think it is that they truly don't care about jobs, I think it's more that they are simply economically ignorant. It permeates everything they do - the increased regulations, the increased minimum wage, the pushing to tax the rich more, etc. Liberal philosophy is simply at odds with sound economic policy. I think they really believe that getting all these new voters in for their party will be absolutely fine. So what if they are on welfare? Just tax a few more billionaires to pay for the welfare payments. No problem.
FACT: The labor participation rate is about the same as when Reagan took office.
FACT: The main thing driving the lower labor participation rate is that baby boomers are retiring and thus exiting the labor market.
You can try to pretend that baby boomers getting old and retiring is a partisan thing but the reality is it would be happening no matter which party is in power. The labor participation rate has been decline since the year 2000. We knew this was coming for decades, there is a demographic bulge which is entering their retirement years, Bush Sr was talking about it coming way back in the early 1990's and it finally hit us. It's just a mathematical reality and no amount of stupid partisan games will change it. The only way to make the old folks keep working is if they're so financially insecure they feel they have to but I, for one, am happy that the elderly can retire with dignity. I guess that's just me though judging by the posts of the right wing nutjobs.
Last edited by Think4Yourself; 06-07-2014 at 01:11 AM..
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 28 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,573 posts, read 16,564,108 times
Reputation: 6044
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp
Reagan won because the economy sucked at the time.
Which doesnt change the fact that the recession didnt start until after reagan took office and that the economy continued to be sluggish under his Presidency.
The difference between back then and today is that Democrats actually worked with Reagan as opposed to Republican plotting against President Obama on inauguration night.
Which doesnt change the fact that the recession didnt start until after reagan took office and that the economy continued to be sluggish under his Presidency.
Until of course it wasn't. Dealing with the fall out of 20% interest rates take time.
Quote:
The difference between back then and today is that Democrats actually worked with Reagan as opposed to Republican plotting against President Obama on inauguration night.
They fought him all the way. The difference is Reagan was popular. Obama got is stimulus package. He squandered it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.