Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-30-2016, 10:29 AM
 
78,433 posts, read 60,640,522 times
Reputation: 49743

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Suburban_Guy View Post
While some things can be credited to Trump so far such as consumer confidence, there's no denying he's inheriting many upward ticks in the economy that happened on Obama's watch. So Trump can't take all that credit.

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/p...205127147.html
True, both deserve some degree of credit.

However, that's not how the partisans will see it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-30-2016, 10:30 AM
 
Location: Crooklyn, New York
32,114 posts, read 34,747,185 times
Reputation: 15093
Quote:
Originally Posted by kevinm View Post
Barry is busy signing off on thousands of new regulations before he leaves office. Every regulation is a roadblock that must be overcome. That is a waste of time and money.
Which specific regulations are roadblocks?

Does anybody here bother to go and read the Federal Register when new rules are finalized?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2016, 10:37 AM
 
649 posts, read 316,765 times
Reputation: 364
There should be something to show for the 10 trillion he added to our debt .
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2016, 12:09 PM
 
Location: Alameda, CA
7,605 posts, read 4,848,211 times
Reputation: 1438
Quote:
Originally Posted by NxtGen View Post
Yep, when you change the way the numbers are calculated and fix them to favor a positive result, that sure is "somethin'", but some of us would call that unethical. Then agian, progressives love lies to promote their ideal, so maybe it is really "somethin'"?
The way the numbers were calculated was not changed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2016, 12:17 PM
 
3,357 posts, read 1,235,426 times
Reputation: 2302
Quote:
Originally Posted by kevinm View Post
The economy is trying to recover in spite of Barry trying to keep it down, not because of any business wrecking regulation he signed. The economy is about to explode because of what Trump represents, not Barry's unqualified meddling.
Which of his executive order regulations wrecked the economy?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2016, 12:43 PM
 
Location: Long Island
57,311 posts, read 26,236,916 times
Reputation: 15651
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40 View Post
Good for you. My in pocket income went way down thanks to Obamacare and higher taxes. Someone had to pay for keeping people on unemployment for years.
What taxes went up, Obama carried over the Bush Tax cuts?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2016, 12:44 PM
 
575 posts, read 299,113 times
Reputation: 290
Quote:
Originally Posted by NxtGen View Post
In a progressive educational system, this would seem like a win/win, but well... those of us who know how to do math, understand what honest statistical evaluation is and don't buy into the progressive manipulation narrative, well... we know when people are blowing smoke up our arse.

It reminds me of Obama's WH claiming how there was a dramatic increase in tornado's, in the first part of his term. It was a sharp increase, I mean.. it was rather astounding!!!

What the lying idiots failed to inform the public about was that they had implemented technology that could now identify through models the likelihood of an F0 tornado occurrence when before, we only counted F3+ tornado's and only based on proper verification of the damage.

So yeah, you can take your "numbers" and go find some idiot who is willing to buy into such, because those of us who aren't drooling morons know better.
Facts remain:

We've now had 79 straight months of economic expansion.

We are currently enjoying the longest period of private sector job creation in American history.

Unemployment has dropped from 10.1% in October of 2009 to 4.9% by early 2016.

Under President Obama, government spending has increased only 3.3% annually, the lowest rate since Eisenhower was president.

For 95% of American taxpayers, income taxes are as low or lower than they were at almost any point in the last 50 years.

In just 7 years under Obama, there were more than three times as many jobs created as there were in the whole 8 years under George W. Bush.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2016, 12:55 PM
 
Location: N Atlanta
4,584 posts, read 4,201,005 times
Reputation: 2323
Quote:
Originally Posted by JK508 View Post
Employment did decrease to 4.9% under Obama, that's somethin'. Romney promised 6% when he ran.

I know people were disappointed with him after the first term, but overall I think he had a successful presidency and that history will remember him kindly.
The employment rate never tells us how many folks are working at jobs for which they're over-qualified or how many folks are working 2 jobs to survive.

Better to look at real median household income :

Real Median Household Income: Momentum In 2016 Continues To Disappoint - ProShares Inflation Expectations ETF (NYSEARCA:RINF) | Seeking Alpha

How much do Americans earn? What is the average US income and other income figures. Fiscal cliff talks only useful in context of incomes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2016, 12:56 PM
 
Location: Long Island
32,816 posts, read 19,496,494 times
Reputation: 9618
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlatandFlat View Post
Facts remain:


In just 7 years under Obama, there were more than three times as many jobs created as there were in the whole 8 years under George W. Bush.
not even close to 3 times as many jobs


total employed Jan 2001....................................135,800,00 0


total employed in oct 2007…........................……..146,743,000

jobs increase under bush 10.9 million from 2001 up till oct 2007

total employed in oct 2008…........................……..144,657,000


jobs lost start of recession oct 07 to oct 08...............2.1 million

total employed in dec 2008…........................……..143,338,000

jobs lost in 2 months after election.. from oct 07 to dec 08...............2.0 million


jobs lost in recession from oct 2007 up till jan 2009..... 4.1 million


Americans Employed, January 2009:.................. 142,187,000

total gain/loss under bush ENTIRE 2 TERMS ........... 6.8 million gain


dec 09 the ''peak'' of the employment losses.................137,792,000

one year after the ''perk'' ..............dec 10....................139,206,000

.....dec 11................................................ ...............140,790,000

.....dec 12................................................ ...............143,305,000

STILL NOT BACK TO 2007 LEVELS

.....dec 13................................................ ...............144,586,000

....may 14................................................ ..............145,868,000

STILL NOT BACK TO 2007 LEVELS

.....oct 14................................................ ...............147,260,000

FINALLY pass the 2007 employment picture

....dec 2014.............................................. ...............147,442,000

.....jun 2015.............................................. ...............148,739,000

....sep 2015.............................................. ................148,800,000

total employed nov 2015............................................14 9, 364,000




total employed sept 2016……………………………………… …….151,968,000


all according to the BLS
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2016, 12:58 PM
 
575 posts, read 299,113 times
Reputation: 290
The BLS? We all know the BLS numbers are cooked.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:15 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top