Obama creates 297,000 JOBS!

[Common Sense]

nice self portrait, did your XXXXXX take that picture?

FYI, cherry, newbie, fucking new guy idiot... mentioning ones family is against the board rules... you will be banned.

Best shut your trap while you're still here.

oh, im so scared.... im shaking my boots. what are you gonna do, tell on me? this is a free board you idoit, you can have as many screen names as you want. go ahead and report me, ill start account and call it "Pale Rider is full of shit" just to piss you off.

Multiple Identities are against Site Rules. There are No Exceptions. Sock Puppets are not allowed or tolerated. Any Question's PM Any Moderator or Administrator.

 

[(R)IGHTeous 1]

AGAIN PEOPLE, THIS GRAPH THAT I ALREADY POSTED IS FROM THE USDLS. IT ACCURATELY SHOWS THAT COMMON SENSELESS IS A RETARDED LIAR WHO DESPERATELY TRIES TO COUNT DEFUNCT GOVERNMENT TEMP JOB GAINS IN AN ATTEMPT TO ROSY UP HIS OTHERWISE BLEAK PICTURE.

As yall can see. The rate of Bush/Obama net job gain is ALMOST IDENTICAL with the economy coming back now as a result OF THE PRIVATE SECTOR WHICH OBAMA'S STIMULUS, BAILOUTS, ETC FAILED TO REALLY HELP.

So Senseless, any other comedic routines you wanna try out tonight?

Neg him and move on... he's not even worth arguing with. He's bat shit crazy and got his head buried clear to his shoulders up obama's ass.

Already did. But this is the type of pathetic, far lefty, sheepish BS I came here to destroy.

Seriously, the dude posts flawed, bias graphs that leave out positive Bush Admin, job growth, tries desperately to count defunct, temp GOVERNMENT jobs long since gon to rosy up his picture, etc.

Seriously, and NO ONE'S supposed to call Common SenseLESS out on it?

Fuck that. I've destroyed this dude before, last CS humiliation was when I pwned em in an SS privatization debate. He mysteriously disappeared after I laid out a bunch of government BS from his example that could be cut to reduce spending that might SS privatization might offset, or that aint jive Constitutionally.

But I suppose I can bounce. I've exposed his BS graphs, sources, etc, called em out, pwned em.

Alright then, advice taken. Anyone else who comes in here will see what a moron he is no matter what lies and flame trolling he posts next.

 

[Common Sense]

AGAIN PEOPLE, THIS GRAPH THAT I ALREADY POSTED IS FROM THE USDLS. IT ACCURATELY SHOWS THAT COMMON SENSELESS IS A RETARDED LIAR WHO DESPERATELY TRIES TO COUNT DEFUNCT GOVERNMENT TEMP JOB GAINS IN AN ATTEMPT TO ROSY UP HIS OTHERWISE BLEAK PICTURE.

As yall can see. The rate of Bush/Obama net job gain is ALMOST IDENTICAL with the economy coming back now as a result OF THE PRIVATE SECTOR WHICH OBAMA'S STIMULUS, BAILOUTS, ETC FAILED TO REALLY HELP.

So Senseless, any other comedic routines you wanna try out tonight?

Neg him and move on... he's not even worth arguing with. He's bat shit crazy and got his head buried clear to his shoulders up obama's ass.

Already did. But this is the type of pathetic, far lefty, sheepish BS I came here to destroy.

Seriously, the dude posts flawed, bias graphs that leave out positive Bush Admin, job growth, tries desperately to count defunct, temp GOVERNMENT jobs long since gon to rosy up his picture, etc.

Seriously, and NO ONE'S supposed to call Common SenseLESS out on it?

Fuck that. I've destroyed this dude before, last CS humiliation was when I pwned em in an SS privatization debate. He mysteriously disappeared after I laid out a bunch of government BS from his example that could be cut to reduce spending that might SS privatization might offset, or that aint jive Constitutionally.

But I suppose I can bounce. I've exposed his BS graphs, sources, etc, called em out, pwned em.

Alright then, advice taken. Anyone else who comes in here will see what a moron he is no matter what lies and flame trolling he posts next.

oh you and your SS privatization debate. which you wanted to give all the money in the SS fund to wall street, so they can generate millions in profits off tax payers money. great argument (R)etard. i didnt run away, i showed your retarded ass that its not a sound plan, and will cost the tax payer more money then they are currently spending.

and there it is, your favorite little word "pwned". maybe you like that word so much because you get ur ass pwned nightly by fat sloppy men.

you like to post pretty graphs from right wing website and claim them as fact all the time. i even used the beloved conservative state of arizona to help prove me point. but apparently this logic is lost on you. just as reading comprehension and basic math are. 4.5 million jobs were lost under the Bush administration. yet you call this job growth. a 6 year old can do that math and determine youre a fucking moron.

 

[Avatar4321]

seriously, just answer the question. if policies arent the only things that affect the economy and job creation then what does. its a simple enough question, but youve been avoiding it for several posts now. just answer the damn question.

youre the wing nut who claims that policy isnt the only thing that affects jobs. so back up your claim.

It is a simple question. But it's not the question you asked. I know your pride won't let you admit the truth, so I figured I'd just quote the question you asked:

what warped view. you said policy changes dont affect jobs, i said they do. well if policy changes dont affect jobs then what does?

Anyone familiar with the English language, of course, realizes that those are two very different questions predicated on completely different assumptions. Of course, English might not be your first language, and if so I completely understand why you are having difficulty understanding. Keep working on it and I am sure you will.

To answer the question, there are lots of very complex factors (Which I believe I did mention before). However, since you didn't like that question I suppose Ill exaplain a bit more in depth.

You see it's all about Expectations. If a business believes that they can make more money and will need an additional work force, then they will hire people. If they don't. They will place money in less risky places until the time comes when they can or they might even go out of business.

Now Public policy can change expectations. Lowering taxes, for example, can create a higher expectation for profits, meaning businesses more willing to risk investing in more labor, etc. Increasing taxes means companies might not be able to afford as many employees. Regulations, artificial increases such as minimum wages, etc, are also policies that might change expectations.

But there are also other things that effect expectations. Seasonal sales. The weather. Energy Prices. Land prices. Interest rates. Competitors (Foreign and domestic). New Technology. Etc. Changes in these things may have little to nothing to do with the current government policies or anything.

The best thing for economic growth is stability. When the companies dont know what the government is going to do on a month to month basis it's difficult to predict what potential customers will do and determine where growth posibilities are. Without being able to predict where profits can be made, they aren't going to be hiring anything.

It wouldn't suprise me if Businesses did start hiring more because Republicans took the House. Not necessarily because of any policy changes they might implement. But quite possibly from the hopes that with Republicans and Democrats controlling different parts of the government, there will be gridlock. Which means that sweeping changes are less likely to happen. When there are less changes, there is higher predictibility.

Unfortunately, I dont think they've completely factored in the vast power of the executive branch to unilaterally change policy through it's various agencies. And Im not sure they've completely factored in the Inflation guarenteed to come in the next few months. It might stall any job creation that's occuring and make them even more wary about hiring.

Now, please try to read what I just wrote and not make things up. It's very time consuming and completely disrespectful to other people.

 

[Avatar4321]

nice self portrait, did your mother take that picture?

FYI, cherry, newbie, fucking new guy idiot... mentioning ones family is against the board rules... you will be banned.

Best shut your trap while you're still here.

oh, im so scared.... im shaking my boots. what are you gonna do, tell on me? this is a free board you idoit, you can have as many screen names as you want. go ahead and report me, ill start account and call it "Pale Rider is full of shit" just to piss you off.

Creating multiple accounts is also agaisnt the rules.

 

[Common Sense]

seriously, just answer the question. if policies arent the only things that affect the economy and job creation then what does. its a simple enough question, but youve been avoiding it for several posts now. just answer the damn question.

youre the wing nut who claims that policy isnt the only thing that affects jobs. so back up your claim.

It is a simple question. But it's not the question you asked. I know your pride won't let you admit the truth, so I figured I'd just quote the question you asked:

what warped view. you said policy changes dont affect jobs, i said they do. well if policy changes dont affect jobs then what does?

Anyone familiar with the English language, of course, realizes that those are two very different questions predicated on completely different assumptions. Of course, English might not be your first language, and if so I completely understand why you are having difficulty understanding. Keep working on it and I am sure you will.

To answer the question, there are lots of very complex factors (Which I believe I did mention before). However, since you didn't like that question I suppose Ill exaplain a bit more in depth.

You see it's all about Expectations. If a business believes that they can make more money and will need an additional work force, then they will hire people. If they don't. They will place money in less risky places until the time comes when they can or they might even go out of business.

Now Public policy can change expectations. Lowering taxes, for example, can create a higher expectation for profits, meaning businesses more willing to risk investing in more labor, etc. Increasing taxes means companies might not be able to afford as many employees. Regulations, artificial increases such as minimum wages, etc, are also policies that might change expectations.

But there are also other things that effect expectations. Seasonal sales. The weather. Energy Prices. Land prices. Interest rates. Competitors (Foreign and domestic). New Technology. Etc. Changes in these things may have little to nothing to do with the current government policies or anything.

The best thing for economic growth is stability. When the companies dont know what the government is going to do on a month to month basis it's difficult to predict what potential customers will do and determine where growth posibilities are. Without being able to predict where profits can be made, they aren't going to be hiring anything.

It wouldn't suprise me if Businesses did start hiring more because Republicans took the House. Not necessarily because of any policy changes they might implement. But quite possibly from the hopes that with Republicans and Democrats controlling different parts of the government, there will be gridlock. Which means that sweeping changes are less likely to happen. When there are less changes, there is higher predictibility.

Unfortunately, I dont think they've completely factored in the vast power of the executive branch to unilaterally change policy through it's various agencies. And Im not sure they've completely factored in the Inflation guarenteed to come in the next few months. It might stall any job creation that's occuring and make them even more wary about hiring.

Now, please try to read what I just wrote and not make things up. It's very time consuming and completely disrespectful to other people.

well thank you for finally answering the question. the reason i asked this was to prove a point. Neither Obama, the democrats or the republicans can take all the credit for creating jobs, while at the same time they dont deserve all the blame. but this also proves my point that the right wing will blame the dems and obama for anything negative, and transfer all credit over to the repubs. just like in this case. 297,000 jobs were created in the month of december. they only predicted 100,000 jobs to be created. but for months not the right wing has been blasting Obama for not focusing on job creation. now that he has helped produce some job creation, the wing nuts again simply say, well that because republicans got elected. regardless of the fact that none of the newly elected were in power, and there was no tax compromise on the books until dec 16th. so the entire first half of the month was a reflection of the current congress and current administrations policies.

we should be happy all around that jobs are being created. this means that more people will be working, thus leading to stronger consumer spending and a stronger economy. but right wingers would rather see the economy fail more, just so that they can have more talking points to try and blast at the dems. its partisan politics at its finest. if the right wing really cared about the country, they would applaud the fact the jobs are being created.

 

[Common Sense]

FYI, cherry, newbie, fucking new guy idiot... mentioning ones family is against the board rules... you will be banned.

Best shut your trap while you're still here.

oh, im so scared.... im shaking my boots. what are you gonna do, tell on me? this is a free board you idoit, you can have as many screen names as you want. go ahead and report me, ill start account and call it "Pale Rider is full of shit" just to piss you off.

Creating multiple accounts is also agaisnt the rules.

just because things are against the rules, doesnt mean that people arent doing it already. this is a free message board. im sure people have already taken advantage of this. it also goes to show that threatening someone on a message board is one of the stupidest things to do.

 

[Avatar4321]

That's your point? Funny. It's completely the opposite of what you've been trying to prove for the last 9 pages. You know, when you started the thread about Obama creating all those jobs.

And there is no finally in answering your question. I answered it the first time you asked it. And you still havent apologized the straw man, nor admitted that you have been asking different questions.

I suggest you learn some humility. Hubris never ends well.

 

[Common Sense]

That's your point? Funny. It's completely the opposite of what you've been trying to prove for the last 9 pages. You know, when you started the thread about Obama creating all those jobs.

And there is no finally in answering your question. I answered it the first time you asked it. And you still havent apologized the straw man, nor admitted that you have been asking different questions.

I suggest you learn some humility. Hubris never ends well.

if the right wing can claim that its Obama;s fault for all the job losses under his watch, then i can claim that he created 297,000 jobs, because those happened on his watch as well.

you were the first one to have a real debate on here, (although it took way too many posts to get you to answer a simple question, maybe next time you should just answer it right away instead of deflecting) these other idiots just like to spout off nonsensical bs.

why should i have to apologize for an argument? i made one based on someon elses logic. you may not agree with it, but thats your right. you need to refute that claim, or walk away.

i give respect where respect is due, if you cant have an civil debate based on facts and logic, then you will never get any respect from me.

 

[elvis]

That's your point? Funny. It's completely the opposite of what you've been trying to prove for the last 9 pages. You know, when you started the thread about Obama creating all those jobs.

And there is no finally in answering your question. I answered it the first time you asked it. And you still havent apologized the straw man, nor admitted that you have been asking different questions.

I suggest you learn some humility. Hubris never ends well.

if the right wing can claim that its Obama;s fault for all the job losses under his watch, then i can claim that he created 297,000 jobs, because those happened on his watch as well.

you were the first one to have a real debate on here, (although it took way too many posts to get you to answer a simple question, maybe next time you should just answer it right away instead of deflecting) these other idiots just like to spout off nonsensical bs.

why should i have to apologize for an argument? i made one based on someon elses logic. you may not agree with it, but thats your right. you need to refute that claim, or walk away.

i give respect where respect is due, if you cant have an civil debate based on facts and logic, then you will never get any respect from me.

sorry, but no one has to walk away. They can just call you a dipshit and be done with it.

 

[Avatar4321]

That's your point? Funny. It's completely the opposite of what you've been trying to prove for the last 9 pages. You know, when you started the thread about Obama creating all those jobs.

And there is no finally in answering your question. I answered it the first time you asked it. And you still havent apologized the straw man, nor admitted that you have been asking different questions.

I suggest you learn some humility. Hubris never ends well.

if the right wing can claim that its Obama;s fault for all the job losses under his watch, then i can claim that he created 297,000 jobs, because those happened on his watch as well.

you were the first one to have a real debate on here, (although it took way too many posts to get you to answer a simple question, maybe next time you should just answer it right away instead of deflecting) these other idiots just like to spout off nonsensical bs.

why should i have to apologize for an argument? i made one based on someon elses logic. you may not agree with it, but thats your right. you need to refute that claim, or walk away.

i give respect where respect is due, if you cant have an civil debate based on facts and logic, then you will never get any respect from me.

Because it was a lie.

And again. I didn't deflect anything. You didnt ask the question I answered until the post before I answered it. I even quoted the original question you asked which was premised upon a straw man that you know i didnt argue. Why on earth would I answer a question before you asked it? Or answer another question that was based on a straw man?

Civility isnt where you respect people who respect you. It's where you respect people because they are fellow human beings.

Humility is having the integrity to admit your mistakes. Like creating straw man or repeatedly claiming you asked a question when your question completely changed.

 

[editec]

Obama didn't create the jobs.

And that number bearly manages to keep pace with the natural growth of the labor market, anyway.

Given the economy post 2008, and given the 2.6% growth of the GDP, the economy seems to be fibrilating, not recovering.

Trying to pin the outcome of the economy on the POTUS (any POTUS) is ignorant.

 

[Dis]

oh, im so scared.... im shaking my boots. what are you gonna do, tell on me? this is a free board you idoit, you can have as many screen names as you want. go ahead and report me, ill start account and call it "Pale Rider is full of shit" just to piss you off.

Creating multiple accounts is also agaisnt the rules.

just because things are against the rules, doesnt mean that people arent doing it already. this is a free message board. im sure people have already taken advantage of this. it also goes to show that threatening someone on a message board is one of the stupidest things to do.

You wanna keep talking?

 

[sangha]

AGAIN PEOPLE, THIS GRAPH THAT I ALREADY POSTED IS FROM THE USDLS. IT ACCURATELY SHOWS THAT COMMON SENSELESS IS A RETARDED LIAR WHO DESPERATELY TRIES TO COUNT DEFUNCT GOVERNMENT TEMP JOB GAINS IN AN ATTEMPT TO ROSY UP HIS OTHERWISE BLEAK PICTURE.

As yall can see. The rate of Bush/Obama net job gain is ALMOST IDENTICAL with the economy coming back now as a result OF THE PRIVATE SECTOR WHICH OBAMA'S STIMULUS, BAILOUTS, ETC FAILED TO REALLY HELP.

So Senseless, any other comedic routines you wanna try out tonight?

"As yall can see. The rate of Bush/Obama net job gain is ALMOST IDENTICAL with the economy coming back now as a result OF THE PRIVATE SECTOR WHICH OBAMA'S STIMULUS, BAILOUTS, ETC FAILED TO REALLY HELP"

hahaha, best line of bullshit youve tried to feed in a while.

oh that right did you forget the bailout saved GM and close to 1 million jobs? or that the banks started lending again because Wall Street didnt collapse.

Bush and Obama net job creation is almost identical ... can you even read a simple chart that you posted, showing Bush bleeding jobs and Obama stopping that bleeding. your basic reading and math skill might be at 4th grade level.

It's truly bizare the way wingnuts look at a graph and come away with conclusions that are the exact opposite of what the graph shows. They are so illiterate, they can't even understand pictures

The graph show rising job destruction under bush* and declining job destruction under Obama turning into job creation. That's why the graph stops in Jan2010. The wingnuts don't want to show Obama's job growth

Here's a more accurate chart

As the chart shows, bush* and Reagan have the worst record of job creation

Here's a more detailed chart that doesn't ignore facts the wingnuts don't like

July Jobs Report | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

 

[WillowTree]

nice self portrait, did your XXXXXX take that picture?

FYI, cherry, newbie, fucking new guy idiot... mentioning ones family is against the board rules... you will be banned.

Best shut your trap while you're still here.

oh, im so scared.... im shaking my boots. what are you gonna do, tell on me? this is a free board you idoit, you can have as many screen names as you want. go ahead and report me, ill start account and call it "Pale Rider is full of shit" just to piss you off.

Multiple Identities are against Site Rules. There are No Exceptions. Sock Puppets are not allowed or tolerated. Any Question's PM Any Moderator or Administrator.

"where's all dat mouff now commonsenseical" huh??

 

[Common Sense]

Creating multiple accounts is also agaisnt the rules.

just because things are against the rules, doesnt mean that people arent doing it already. this is a free message board. im sure people have already taken advantage of this. it also goes to show that threatening someone on a message board is one of the stupidest things to do.

You wanna keep talking?

blah blah blah, bitch bitch bitch. defend your useless little cronies.

 

[Common Sense]

That's your point? Funny. It's completely the opposite of what you've been trying to prove for the last 9 pages. You know, when you started the thread about Obama creating all those jobs.

And there is no finally in answering your question. I answered it the first time you asked it. And you still havent apologized the straw man, nor admitted that you have been asking different questions.

I suggest you learn some humility. Hubris never ends well.

if the right wing can claim that its Obama;s fault for all the job losses under his watch, then i can claim that he created 297,000 jobs, because those happened on his watch as well.

you were the first one to have a real debate on here, (although it took way too many posts to get you to answer a simple question, maybe next time you should just answer it right away instead of deflecting) these other idiots just like to spout off nonsensical bs.

why should i have to apologize for an argument? i made one based on someon elses logic. you may not agree with it, but thats your right. you need to refute that claim, or walk away.

i give respect where respect is due, if you cant have an civil debate based on facts and logic, then you will never get any respect from me.

Because it was a lie.

And again. I didn't deflect anything. You didnt ask the question I answered until the post before I answered it. I even quoted the original question you asked which was premised upon a straw man that you know i didnt argue. Why on earth would I answer a question before you asked it? Or answer another question that was based on a straw man?

Civility isnt where you respect people who respect you. It's where you respect people because they are fellow human beings.

Humility is having the integrity to admit your mistakes. Like creating straw man or repeatedly claiming you asked a question when your question completely changed.

you really need to take a class in reading comprehension. i asked the same question 3 times and you finally answered it on the 3rd try. it took you that long to answer the simple question of if policy doesnt affect jobs / create jobs, then what does. this went directly to the idea of you wing nuts blaming Obama for the economy and for losing all these jobs.

you keep spouting off this straw man argument. if thats the way you see it, then you need a better education.

have you read any of the attacks posted by pale and (R), nothing they have posted is rooted in fact or even rational logic. and you wanna talk about civility?

 

[boedicca]

Gallup has quite a different perspective on the situation: unemployment and underemployment got worse in December.

Unemployment, as measured by Gallup without seasonal adjustment, increased to 9.6% at the end of December -- up from 9.3% in mid-December and 8.8% at the end of November...

...Meanwhile, the percentage of part-time workers who want full-time work increased to 9.4% of the workforce in December -- up from 9.2% in mid-December and 8.4% at the end of November...

...The increase in Gallup's U.S. unemployment rate and the worsening in the percentage of part-time workers wanting full-time work combined to raise underemployment to 19.0% in December from 18.5% in mid-December and 17.2% at the end of November.

Gallup Finds Unemployment at 9.6% in December

 

[Common Sense]

That's your point? Funny. It's completely the opposite of what you've been trying to prove for the last 9 pages. You know, when you started the thread about Obama creating all those jobs.

And there is no finally in answering your question. I answered it the first time you asked it. And you still havent apologized the straw man, nor admitted that you have been asking different questions.

I suggest you learn some humility. Hubris never ends well.

if the right wing can claim that its Obama;s fault for all the job losses under his watch, then i can claim that he created 297,000 jobs, because those happened on his watch as well.

you were the first one to have a real debate on here, (although it took way too many posts to get you to answer a simple question, maybe next time you should just answer it right away instead of deflecting) these other idiots just like to spout off nonsensical bs.

why should i have to apologize for an argument? i made one based on someon elses logic. you may not agree with it, but thats your right. you need to refute that claim, or walk away.

i give respect where respect is due, if you cant have an civil debate based on facts and logic, then you will never get any respect from me.

sorry, but no one has to walk away. They can just call you a dipshit and be done with it.

nice to see even someone who is a moderator is full of shit as well.

 

[Common Sense]

Obama didn't create the jobs.

And that number bearly manages to keep pace with the natural growth of the labor market, anyway.

Given the economy post 2008, and given the 2.6% growth of the GDP, the economy seems to be fibrilating, not recovering.

Trying to pin the outcome of the economy on the POTUS (any POTUS) is ignorant.

then why have wing nuts been doing this since he got into office?