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.
The method for determining unemployment has been the same for the last 19 years.
Saying "Obama is lying" isn't an argument. It's sad.
I know I'll get the whole liberal spending accusation, but if we were to get BACK all the public sector jobs that were lost we would get to 7% and below much faster.
Can't have any job creation too close to the elections, eh? All for a failed attempt at sticking the Coption Romeny in the White House--how disgraceful.
The Bush/right-wing agenda of unessessary tax cuts, deregulation, and credit card wars result in a NET LOSS of jobs during his eight dismal years as president. The GOP needs to move out of the way so we can get this country growing at the brisk pace it was at during the Clinton years. Enough is enough.
I know I'll get the whole liberal spending accusation, but if we were to get BACK all the public sector jobs that were lost we would get to 7% and below much faster.
That would require passing a few job bills--perhaps funding some badly needed infrastructure projects for our cities, similar to Ike's gloriously successful Interstate Highway Act of the 1950's. That would put Americans back to work, which would increase revenues, which would increase consumer confidence, which would get the ball rolling toward a truly robust, pre-GWB economy...
It'll never happen though. The GOP won't let it. Gotta get a Republican in the White House. 2016 is just around the corner!
That would require passing a few job bills--perhaps funding some badly needed infrastructure projects for our cities, similar to Ike's gloriously successful Interstate Highway Act of the 1950's. That would put Americans back to work, which would increase revenues, which would increase consumer confidence, which would get the ball rolling toward a truly robust, pre-GWB economy...
It'll never happen though. The GOP won't let it. Gotta get a Republican in the White House. 2016 is just around the corner!
I wonder if the GOP would agree to a temporary shift in spending (including defense) towards infrastructure instead of a cold turkey cut that would certainly hurt the economy.
The method for determining unemployment has been the same for the last 19 years.
Saying "Obama is lying" isn't an argument. It's sad.
And generally the opinion of those whose main source of news is quick glances at "Fox News" while channel surfing for the sports game and "reading" TV Guide. Yes, it's sad/pathetic.
And generally the opinion of those whose main source of news is quick glances at "Fox News" while channel surfing for the sports game and "reading" TV Guide. Yes, it's sad/pathetic.
Can't have any job creation too close to the elections, eh? All for a failed attempt at sticking the Coption Romeny in the White House--how disgraceful.
The Bush/right-wing agenda of unessessary tax cuts, deregulation, and credit card wars result in a NET LOSS of jobs during his eight dismal years as president. The GOP needs to move out of the way so we can get this country growing at the brisk pace it was at during the Clinton years. Enough is enough.
lols.
This is assuming that the bill would actually create jobs. lols.
I wonder if the GOP would agree to a temporary shift in spending (including defense) towards infrastructure instead of a cold turkey cut that would certainly hurt the economy.
Won't work.
In order for the government to spend money on infrastructure they first have to take it from the private sector. Rearranging money doesn't create jobs or wealth.
And the government is already spending the money you want spent on infrastructure. Again, rearranging it won't do a thing.
If government spending created jobs then we would have the lowest unemployment rate in history under President Obama.
P.S. Why is it liberals are always talking about spending more on infrastructure, teachers, fire and police???? Our infrastructure is fine and we have no shortage of police, fireman or teachers. Sounds good politically to people who never learned how to think.
What will happen politically if we were to get back to less then 7% I'm thinking this will help the dems and Obama tremendously whether they deserve it or not. This will also help to balance the budget on the revenue side, we can end extended unemployment benefits and spend less on other benefits that are being used due to the recession.
Looking forward I'm hoping we can get close to or under 6% by the end of 2014.
Is the drop in unemployment due to job creation or do to people leaving the workforce? Are the jobs being created high paying jobs or low paying jobs? The unemployment percentage alone is not enough to be making the speculations you are making.
On the last three occasions that Republicans controlled both houses of Congress, unemployment declined and either the federal budget deficit declined or the budget was balanced.
If you want low unemployment and shrinking deficits, vote Republican.
... and the only reason the unemployment rate is going down now is the government is not counting everyone who has lost their job and not working as unemployed. More lies to prop up Obama's failed domestic policies. If tomorrow they cancelled all SSI and most welfare benefits we would see the REAL unemployment rate.
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.
