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 05-02-2013, 09:53 AM
 
13,900 posts, read 9,771,097 times
Reputation: 6856

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by texdav View Post
I seem to remmber that both repubicans and democrats created the sequester when they agreeed cuts where needed then coud make the chices later.One has to remmber democrats wanted the major portition to be from military budget.
That's true, but they thought it would force Republicans to cut a deal. They were wrong.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-02-2013, 09:55 AM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,108,083 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter_Sucks View Post
I thought you wanted military cut backs, now all of a sudden you dont while you pretend it represents the sum of the nations business
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter_Sucks View Post
That's true, but they thought it would force Republicans to cut a deal. They were wrong.
Obama always is
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-02-2013, 09:58 AM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,108,083 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by legalsea View Post
I am slightly confused. I believe that whenever a thread is started about how some employment figure shows improvement in the economy, we quickly have postings about how the numbers are wrong, dead wrong, and that the number of unemployed people is actually going up due to people 'dropping out of the workforce', and how when the latest unemployment gauge is refigured again in a month the news will be bad, etc.

So, is this new unemployment number 'true'?

Also, I thought that spending by the Federal Government was 'up'. Many have said it has increased, while the sequestration only cut some of the increase, but did not negate the increase.
The unemployment numbers are wrong, the number of claims arent
Quote:
Originally Posted by Think4Yourself View Post
It's called trying to have it both ways and the OP is a master at it.
What both ways would that be? I've been saying for YEARS that the economy will improve when government stops increasing spending, crowding out the private sector, I've been VERY consistant on the issue.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-02-2013, 09:58 AM
 
Location: Long Island, NY
19,792 posts, read 13,948,900 times
Reputation: 5661
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
Well according to left wing posters here, government should be increasing spending to boost the economy, so that jobs can be created.

Is this is true, then explain to me how new unemployment numbers are lowest in 5 years, considering we are "cutting" federal spending under sequester..

US weekly unemployment aid applications drop to 324K, lowest in 5 years, sign of fewer layoffs - The Washington Post
The sequester has been effect for one month. Do you really think the full impact is reflected in last months numbers?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-02-2013, 09:58 AM
 
Location: Del Rio, TN
39,869 posts, read 26,508,031 times
Reputation: 25771
Quote:
Originally Posted by Think4Yourself View Post
FACT: The sequestor killed 1 million jobs. Yes, it was nice that the rest of the economy was able to make up the difference, albeit only slightly, but it is fact that the huge cuts Republicans demanded harmed the economy. That is not open for debate and instead is simply a fact.
Question...how does increasing government spending "kill" jobs? Keeping in mind of course that spending under sequester increased since last year.

It seems much more likely that government policies that would "kill" jobs would be things that drive up businesses' costs. Specifically things like Obamacare and higher taxes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-02-2013, 09:59 AM
 
13,900 posts, read 9,771,097 times
Reputation: 6856
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
I thought you wanted military cut backs, now all of a sudden you dont while you pretend it represents the sum of the nations business

Obama always is
I thought you said the sequester hasn't hurt the economy?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-02-2013, 10:00 AM
 
Location: Long Island, NY
19,792 posts, read 13,948,900 times
Reputation: 5661
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toyman at Jewel Lake View Post
Question...how does increasing government spending "kill" jobs? Keeping in mind of course that spending under sequester increased since last year.

It seems much more likely that government policies that would "kill" jobs would be things that drive up businesses' costs. Specifically things like Obamacare and higher taxes.
Since taxes are paid on profits, raising taxes doesn't reduce employment; it just lowers profits. Considering that businesses needed employees to make the profit in the first place, it has no effect.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-02-2013, 10:00 AM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,108,083 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTAtech View Post
The sequester has been effect for one month. Do you really think the full impact is reflected in last months numbers?
So you expect next months unemployment number to skyrocket then? How did you come to this conclusion?

Where is this great crash you guys were shouting was going to happen?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-02-2013, 10:03 AM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,108,083 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter_Sucks View Post
I thought you said the sequester hasn't hurt the economy?
I'm not dumb enough to equate one segment of society is responsible for the complete economy. I see you dont have the same problem I do.
Why dont we quote you
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter_Sucks View Post
The deficit is caused by entitlements, military spending, and the loss of economic activity from the recession. Wasteful spending is a problem, but's an anthill compared to the mountain of our actually problems.
So you objected to all of this military spending, but now moaning cause they are making cut backs?

hypocrite
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-02-2013, 10:05 AM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,108,083 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTAtech View Post
Since taxes are paid on profits, raising taxes doesn't reduce employment; it just lowers profits. Considering that businesses needed employees to make the profit in the first place, it has no effect.
Um, raising taxes, leaves less money in the economy to be spent on things like restaurants, thereby reducing jobs.

For gods sakes man, stop and think beyond government.

Why dont we raise taxes to 100% then, clearly that wont affect jobs.. What a tool.
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 02:45 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