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.
There is one thing that he has to take blame for ......The cost of IRAQ! Just because the troops are back, there is still the lifetime cost of caring for the veterans who came back sick and wounded, not to mention their families of the ones who never returned. The VA's are filled to the max and there are even more scheduled for treatment. The cuts made to the government workers by the refuticans does not help the matter either.
and it sure as heck looks like obama is helping that situation as well. limiting health care benefits for the military now too.
02-29-2012, 09:27 AM
i7pXFLbhE3gq
n/a posts
Quote:
Remember, when Romer' claimed that UE wouldn't top 8% with the passage of the (**** poor) stimulus?
I remember when the White House (actually, I think it was the transition team, before he took office) put out a report that mentioned 8%, with a huge disclaimer that there was considerable uncertainty in the numbers, because it wasn't clear just how bad the situation was or exactly what would make it through congress. Of course, Republicans, in typical zero-nuance, reality-denying fashion, ignored that bit.
I must say I find it endlessly amusing to watch Republicans bash the stimulus while calling for tax cuts, despite the largest portion of the stimulus being tax cuts.
4. The bleeding stopped under Obama, remember that!
5. That's why the stock market was dropping hundreds of points every day when Obama took over the White House and now the stock market is at record highs.
loss of liberty stabilized too. at first we thought he was going to buck the trend, but with time he proved as reliable as dubya in trashing civil liberties. we also thought that he might be a little more considerate when it came to foreign policy. i guess the more 'change' we get, the more things stay the same
The labor force participation rate is at a 30 year low. The official unemployment rate dropped recently largely due to so many people giving up looking for work - so they are not counted.
So congrats on the Obama recovery.
I get a kick out of people who didn't pay attention in grade school and who didn't go to college now suddenly pining about the labor force participation rate.
The rate now is roughly the same as when the United States last had a 9% unemployment rate. We went through that with Reagan in the early 80's. There's a reason why this is excluded in the unemployment rate always. There's a reason why economists don't typically talk about it a lot. It's the actual unemployment rate and delta's therein that matter.
Someone on the right popped out a talking point about labor force participation as they want to push an agenda and get any information out there for the tin foil hat wearing puppets who spout back.
The economy has turned around for a number of reasons. Some to do with Obama, many not. The really stupid thing you have all through this site is people putting the Great Recession on the shoulders of the guy who inherited the mess.
I guess pointing the finger at Obama is easier than realizing that your beloved party caused this mess and you voted for it.
I get a kick out of people who didn't pay attention in grade school and who didn't go to college now suddenly pining about the labor force participation rate.
The rate now is roughly the same as when the United States last had a 9% unemployment rate. We went through that with Reagan in the early 80's. There's a reason why this is excluded in the unemployment rate always. There's a reason why economists don't typically talk about it a lot. It's the actual unemployment rate and delta's therein that matter.
Someone on the right popped out a talking point about labor force participation as they want to push an agenda and get any information out there for the tin foil hat wearing puppets who spout back.
The economy has turned around for a number of reasons. Some to do with Obama, many not. The really stupid thing you have all through this site is people putting the Great Recession on the shoulders of the guy who inherited the mess.
I guess pointing the finger at Obama is easier than realizing that your beloved party caused this mess and you voted for it.
The low labor rate participation speaks more to (i) whether we are in a recovery at all; and (ii) the effectiveness of Obama's policies.
I believe the objective data shows that if we are in a recovery at all it is tepid at best and Obama's policies have not been effective. In fact, since this is the weakest recovery on record, one could say they have been more harmful than helpful.
It's not just me questioning whether we are really in a "recovery". Here a dem pollster tells team Obama not to make that claim because voters skoff at it:
The low labor rate participation speaks more to (i) whether we are in a recovery at all; and (ii) the effectiveness of Obama's policies.
I believe the objective data shows that if we are in a recovery at all it is tepid at best and Obama's policies have not been effective. In fact, since this is the weakest recovery on record, one could say they have been more harmful than helpful.
It's not just me questioning whether we are really in a "recovery". Here a dem pollster tells team Obama not to make that claim because voters skoff at it:
How do you define recovery? Apply it to last three recessions so there is a better understanding of your point to discuss this further.
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.