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.
Now, use the same metric for Bush to Obama transition. And is it better economy when it had lost more jobs in a year than were added in the previous seven?
This is why you're a GD boiling frog.
Your eyes are so closed that you can't possibly see that what Obama had and will leave us with is the status quo. He isn't the God you all tried to sell us. he's just another in a long line of leaders who are doing everything they can to keep your lifestyle the same and all they've really done is guarantee you that when all is said and done and you still lose that lifestyle you'll be strapped with so much debt your GD children's children's heads will be spinning in their lifelong attempt to work their way out of 3rd party slavery and every time they think about how they got there they'll be holding up pictures of you and your parents and they'll make sure they pee on them every night.
Your eyes are so closed that you can't possibly see that what Obama had and will leave us with is the status quo. He isn't the God you all tried to sell us. he's just another in a long line of leaders who are doing everything they can to keep your lifestyle the same and all they've really done is guarantee you that when all is said and done and you still lose that lifestyle you'll be strapped with so much debt your GD children's children's heads will be spinning in their lifelong attempt to work their way out of 3rd party slavery and every time they think about how they got there they'll be holding up pictures of you and your parents and they'll make sure they pee on them every night.
Deflection. I take it that you prefer double standards and would not respond to the question with any honesty.
Tell that to those on your boat who're in love with it so much that they want government to keep its hands off it.
It's really funny though, you always hear Seniors whine about the government getting too big, their country being taken away and the socialist welfare program.
Yet, when someone brings up their Social Security checks and Medicare, they're as silent as a mouse.
FYI, bush was handed a unemployment rate near 4% and immediately screwed things up. Without bush's war on Terra and his off budget war spending the great recession would have started in 2002.
Bush handed Obama an unemployment rate approaching twice what he was given. And the 10% Obama ultimately faced was a direct result of bush's record setting GREAT RECESSION.
The Bush haters keep repeating the same thing, "Without bush's war on Terra and his off budget war spending the great recession would have started in 2002." ALWAYS ignoring that the bill to give authority for the wars was CO- SPONSORED by the DEMOCRAT MAJORITY LEADER. Yes that is right, the DEMS controlled the Senate.
As we know, with Harry Reid, if the Senate Leader DOESN"T want a bill to pass he can kill it.
We also know that the DEM controlled Senate funded, continually the wars.
Also, "and his off budget war spending". The president does NOT tell Congress how to fund thing. That is entirely up to them.
Again, a DEM controlled Senate.
Also WASHINGTON -- Today, the Bureau of Labor Statistics released new jobs figures - 18,000 jobs created in December. Since August 2003, more than 8.3 million jobs have been created, with more than 1.3 million jobs created throughout 2007. Our economy has now added jobs for 52 straight months - the longest period of uninterrupted job growth on record. The unemployment rate remains low at 5 percent.
When, under Clinton, Unemployment reach 5.7% it was considered "full' employment.
So? This isn't about Bush's record. Bush was not a very good president, but that's beside the point.
And - BTW - if Bush deserves to be blamed for the job losses in the early 2000's recession, then Obama deserves to be blamed for the job losses in this one that took place right after he took office. The early 2000's recession was getting under way right as Bush was elected, but I bet you would never blame Clinton for any role in it (though he is actually partially responsible for not only that recession, but also the recent one).
And - Obama still has a net loss of jobs even before you consider the new jobs that needed to be created just to account for population growth.
I don't blame Obama for all this, just as I don't blame GWB or Clinton or Congress for all this. I blame them all. They've all played a role in this mess. That said, I see no evidence that Obama will get us out of it.
I should actually add to this....we did NOT have a net loss of jobs under GWB (unless, of course, you count the jobs lost in the recession after Obama took office which would not be a fair way of calculating it using your own standards).
Deflection. I take it that you prefer double standards and would not respond to the question with any honesty.
Pot, meet kettle
You (and buzzards27 and MTATech and plenty of others) will excuse anything as long as there is a D next to the person's name. Blame can always be shifted to someone who has an R next to their name.
You (and buzzards27 and MTATech and plenty of others) will excuse anything as long as there is a D next to the person's name. Blame can always be shifted to someone who has an R next to their name.
So back to your usual self, and "conservative" argument we're I see.
FYI, bush was handed a unemployment rate near 4% and immediately screwed things up. Without bush's war on Terra and his off budget war spending the great recession would have started in 2002.
Bush handed Obama an unemployment rate approaching twice what he was given. And the 10% Obama ultimately faced was a direct result of bush's record setting GREAT RECESSION.
So Bush immediately screwed things up and the early 2000's recession was entirely his fault even though it was already getting started right when he took office? LOL
Without the Bush tax cuts stimulating the economy, things would have been much worse. (On a related note - the graph posted by MTATech ignores that we have no clue what tax revenue would have been/would be now without the stimulus in the economy from the Bush tax cuts.)
Bush handed Obama an unemployment rate of 7.7%, which was bad but not entirely his fault (partially, yes, just as the early 2000's recession was partially Clinton's fault). Now it would be over 11% without labor force dropouts and close to 11% even when you account for baby boomers retiring.
Last edited by afoigrokerkok; 05-07-2012 at 12:33 PM..
So back to your usual self, and "conservative" argument we're I see.
I blame Republicans when they are deserving of blame. You NEVER blame Democrats for anything or at least I haven't seen it if you have.
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.
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.
