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 02-29-2012, 09:26 AM
 
Location: somewhere in the woods
16,880 posts, read 15,196,989 times
Reputation: 5240

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by simetime View Post
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.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 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.

Quote:
Happens all the time. Anyone can fudge a chart.
Indeed. And no one does it better than Fox. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...gNqO_blog.html
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-29-2012, 09:32 AM
 
Location: The Land of Reason
13,221 posts, read 12,319,525 times
Reputation: 3554
Quote:
Originally Posted by monkeywrenching View Post
jail cell would be more appropiate.
If bush/cheney did not go to jail (yet) no one should ever have to go
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-29-2012, 09:35 AM
 
Location: The Land of Reason
13,221 posts, read 12,319,525 times
Reputation: 3554
Quote:
Originally Posted by monkeywrenching View Post
and it sure as heck looks like obama is helping that situation as well. limiting health care benefits for the military now too.
I should take the elitist attitude of many republicans of (so what) since it does not affect me (I got mine, too bad you can't get yours)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-29-2012, 09:36 AM
 
Location: somewhere in the woods
16,880 posts, read 15,196,989 times
Reputation: 5240
Quote:
Originally Posted by simetime View Post
If bush/cheney did not go to jail (yet) no one should ever have to go

cheney more than bush, but you are right.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-29-2012, 09:51 AM
 
913 posts, read 872,630 times
Reputation: 171
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan_ View Post
1. Jan 2009 - 800,000 jobs lost

2. The massive bleeding stopped Jan 2010.

3. We are now healing.

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.


Obama battles job crisis: 3 years...and counting - CNNMoney
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
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-29-2012, 09:55 AM
 
3,045 posts, read 3,192,924 times
Reputation: 1307
Quote:
Originally Posted by MUTGR View Post
Here's a nice chart that shows how labor force participation continued to decline under Obama until apparently bottoming out and it has not recovered:

http://media.hotair.com/wp/wp-conten...-pop-ratio.jpg

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.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-29-2012, 09:56 AM
 
14,292 posts, read 9,677,147 times
Reputation: 4254
Quote:
Originally Posted by monkeywrenching View Post
jail cell would be more appropiate.
After trillions of dollars in theft and waste, with nothing to show for it but a bunch of rich Wall Street tycoons?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-29-2012, 10:54 AM
 
Location: St. Louis
7,444 posts, read 7,015,567 times
Reputation: 4601
Quote:
Originally Posted by noexcuseforignorance View Post
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:

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/02/2...s-of-recovery/

Last edited by MUTGR; 02-29-2012 at 11:07 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-29-2012, 11:20 AM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,815,462 times
Reputation: 12341
Quote:
Originally Posted by MUTGR View Post
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:

Dem pollster warns that voters will scoff at claims of recovery « Hot Air
How do you define recovery? Apply it to last three recessions so there is a better understanding of your point to discuss this further.
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 02:25 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