Obama's Record-Breaking TWO-Years!!!!

[Mr. Shaman]

How does this record breaking performance record grab you? Dems were elected in 2006 to take over congress. They took office in January 2007. Look what happened to the workforce & the economy after they took over.

Fail.
1. Your x-axis only covers the range of 58-64, making the figure visually appear much more dramatic than it actually is.
2. Employment is a lagging indicator.
3. If you believe employment is inextricably linked to Congress in the short term, you have no concept of how the economy works.

1. The drop in employment & workforce are extremely dramatic no matter where you move the axis.

2. Employment is not always a lagging indicator! Employment plunged prior to the stock market.

3. The chart speaks to Democrats in Congress fucking up Jobs & the Economy.

Ooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.....no details.....again!

(The first indication you have no idea what-the-Hell you're talkin'-about.

)​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Classic ad hoc ergo propter hoc argument.

Tell me wingnuts, what did Congress do that caused the employment downturn?

Tic tock, tic tock.

Well....the Red-Side drew a check, for two-years, while they did ZIP!!!

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RpOUctySD68[/ame]​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Classic ad hoc ergo propter hoc argument.

Tell me wingnuts, what did Congress do that caused the employment downturn?

Tic tock, tic tock.

They don't know.

"ummm... Ummm... Umm..... SOCIALISM!"

That's about the best you can hope for... Maybe work "Constitution" in there somewhere.

Don't forget Prayer In Schoo....er....takin' God OUTTA-schools!!!!

​

 

[asterism]

Raised the minimum wage which had a cascading effect on the costs to employ people.

Please show me any empirical support for the notion that higher minimum wages lead to higher unemployment. Good fucking luck.

Empirical support? Costs went up and employment went down. It doesn't get much clearer than that. How many employees do you have?

All the other economic factors added to a general economic decline.

Boilerplate. That is, nothing of substance is actually said here. 11 words and no semantic meaning whatsoever. In it's own way, a statement like this is brilliant in it's vapidity. This kind of rhetoric is aimed squarely at people who have no clue. And, sadly, it works.

True, I didn't detail all the other economic factors that have added to a general economic decline. You didn't ask for them and I am not blaming Congress solely for those factors. You asked a question and I answered it.

Any recovery has been hamstrung by the expectations of future higher costs in taxes and healthcare mandates.

The "rational expectations" model has been dead, totally destroyed, for some time now. But, again, nothing of substance is meant to be communicated with this bit of boilerplate.

That's not true. The expectation of higher costs is definitely a factor. You are free to disagree, but that's the way it is for my company.

Employers listened to the DNC talking points and reacted when it was apparent they were moving forward with an agenda that would make it harder to run businesses.

Idiocy. Only one thing makes an employer hire workers or otherwise invest in added productive capacity. That would be increased demand for product. Only one thing makes employers lay-off or otherwise cut production and/or productive capacity. That would be decreased demand for product.

That's not true. Higher costs with the same demand will stifle new hiring or even cause layoffs. It all depends on the profitability. If the costs go up, the profits go down. As I said previously, all the other economic factors have added to a general economic decline. Higher costs to try something new certainly limits my options.

You can't show me anything resembling a coherent econometric model that would describe the bullshit you are typing never mind support such a model with empirical evidence. You are mindlessly spewing talking points that you don't understand.

It's what wingnuts do.

You can discard my opinion on what is holding my business back all you want. Why did you ask a question if you were just going to discard the answer?

 

[asterism]

Classic ad hoc ergo propter hoc argument.

Tell me wingnuts, what did Congress do that caused the employment downturn?

Tic tock, tic tock.

Raised the minimum wage which had a cascading effect on the costs to employ people. All the other economic factors added to a general economic decline. Any recovery has been hamstrung by the expectations of future higher costs in taxes and healthcare mandates.

Employers listened to the DNC talking points and reacted when it was apparent they were moving forward with an agenda that would make it harder to run businesses.

The Republican Congress raised the minimum wage twice in the 90's. Did it cause a recession? Hardly.

How did it affect the manufacturing sector and other labor intensive jobs that could move overseas? Those jobs are gone and aren't coming back. This recession proves it.

The last recession officially ended July 2009. The last minimum wage increase occurred in July 2009.

When did it start and how is employment these days?

 

[asterism]

OK, I'm waiting for some of those real solutions pal. What is the Republican plan? What is the Tea Party plan? What is your plan?

Sit back and let the almighty market God wave his invisible hand?

Really, what do you propose?

Why are you sitting and waiting for answers? I thouhgt you were hope and change. Where is the progressive plan? Or are you simply acknowledging your side has no plan and would like one?

I wonder why he isn't hiring anyone? He says he "owns."

 

[asterism]

Where is the progressive plan?

Unlike you, I have an actual plan! In the short run, stimulate the economy. Build wind farms from northern Texas to the Dakotas. Solar arrays all across the desert Southwest. Nuclear power plants by the hundreds. Unify the grid and make it smarter. Lay thousands of miles of high speed rail. Do all of this on the public dime. the investment will pay off for generations. Pay for some of it with a tax on fossil fuels.

Cut the Department of Defense by at least 30%. Our nation has STILL not demobilized from WWII and the armed forces we have are STILL structured to fight a major land war in Europe that simply isn't going to happen.

In the long term...redistribute wealth. The core problem with the economy is that wealth has been redistributed from the middle and the bottom to the top. As a result, the masses can't consume to a level equal to the output capacity of industry. End the Bush income tax cuts for the rich. Increase capital gains taxes. Bring back the estate tax, in spades. Expand the earned income tax credit. Expand Pell Grants. Expand subsidies for RENT. Institute single payer healthcare.

There's an outline. I can expand it on request.

I agree on the Defense cuts. I actually think that by streamlining the antiquated appropriations process we could cut it by 50%.

How much do you plan to spend on your green economy and where are you going to get the money? Also, we were told that this was going to happen BIG TIME if Obama and the Democrats got elected. Where are the results, why haven't they done that?

Redistribute wealth? How so, and how much are you planning on giving away?

 

[LiberalNut]

Costs went up and employment went down. It doesn't get much clearer than that.

Classic ad hoc ergo propter hoc. We have raised the minimum wage many times. You should be able to show us a direct correlation between increases in minimum wages and higher unemployment. Good fucking luck with that.

True, I didn't detail all the other economic factors

Umm, you didin't detail, or even name, any. None. Nada. Zip. Zilch. The null set.

Higher costs with the same demand will stifle new hiring or even cause layoffs.

On what planet and in what econometric model? In theory, increased costs lead to higher prices. Please show me your econometric link to layoffs. Describe the mechanism for us. Show us some math. Good fucking luck.

The expectation of higher costs is definitely a factor.

Because, apparently, you say so. Where are your empirical measurements of this supposed "expectation"? What metodology was used? By what mechanism does this expectation effect employment? How do you know?

You can discard my opinion on what is holding my business back all you want.

Let me get this straight. You're saying that your business could be selling more product but you don't invest in producing more product cause of some expectation? Please expand here. What kind of business? What is your projected demand? What is your current production level?

 

[Mr. Shaman]

The OP is absolutely right, and the inability of anyone to refute it proves it.

I made myself watch the vid.....oy.

so what is there to debate or refute? yea, he signed laws and got legislation passed, that in the end will cost his a historic loss, and truin the pres into a lame duck 2 years onto his term...(wonderful, great thats like sooooo huge an achievement.did you watrch the vid btw? )..

What's gonna be REALLY amusing (if there's a serious Republican head-count shift, in Congress), is....watching Republicans TRYING to deconstruct each-and-every thing Obama has accomplished!!!!

Rather than (just) laying-back....like a bunch o' spoiled 4-year-olds, screaming "NO!!!"....Republicans will HAVE TO EXPLAIN WHY we need to can Obama's legislative-wins....while things are slowly IMPROVING, IN-THE-PROCESS.....and, THE WHOLE NATION'S WATCHING!!!!

All the pundits are saying "2010 is just like '94!!!!"....regarding the Election.

I wonder if John Boner REMEMBERS who won.....in '96??!!!!

 

[LiberalNut]

How much do you plan to spend on your green economy and where are you going to get the money?

Approximately 3 trillion dollars. Most of the money will be borrowed but some can be raised with fossil fuel taxes and increased taxes on the rich.

why haven't they done that?

The Republicans literally killed hundreds of bills with the fillibuster. they shattered all records for the use of that extra-constitutional tactic.

Redistribute wealth? How so, and how much are you planning on giving away?

I intend to re-establish the distribution of wealth that existed before Ronald Reagan and the supply-side madness.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

It is so record breaking, that Obama has to send Michelle out to campaign because she has a higher approval rating.

Obama has 70% of his agenda done already. Wondering how the last 30% will look.

That's the SAME thing Republicans suggested, about BILL CLINTON!!!!!

 

[saveliberty]

Where is the progressive plan?

Unlike you, I have an actual plan! In the short run, stimulate the economy. Build wind farms from northern Texas to the Dakotas. Solar arrays all across the desert Southwest. Nuclear power plants by the hundreds. Unify the grid and make it smarter. Lay thousands of miles of high speed rail. Do all of this on the public dime. the investment will pay off for generations. Pay for some of it with a tax on fossil fuels.

Cut the Department of Defense by at least 30%. Our nation has STILL not demobilized from WWII and the armed forces we have are STILL structured to fight a major land war in Europe that simply isn't going to happen.

In the long term...redistribute wealth. The core problem with the economy is that wealth has been redistributed from the middle and the bottom to the top. As a result, the masses can't consume to a level equal to the output capacity of industry. End the Bush income tax cuts for the rich. Increase capital gains taxes. Bring back the estate tax, in spades. Expand the earned income tax credit. Expand Pell Grants. Expand subsidies for RENT. Institute single payer healthcare.

There's an outline. I can expand it on request.

Economic stimulus was a failure.

Solar cells are not efficient enough to use on a large scale at this point.

Wind farms are an eysore and also not efficient sources of power for most of the country.

Nuclear would be a good choice, but liberals seem opposed to using it on a large scale.

We have unsecured borders in the US. Your savings are needed to secure these borders.

Stealing from people should still be illegal. Redistribution of wealth by force or tax is not an acceptable method.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Dimocrats in fights for their political lives aren't campaigning on nothin' they voted for since Barry boy came to town.

And today many of them will learn exactly what Barry means when he says elections have consequences.

Yeah, like.....Majority Leader JOHN BONER....backed-into-a-corner (while the economy is SLOWLY IMPROVING), saying....

"WE'VE GOTTA STOP THIS!!!!!"

 

[LiberalNut]

You aren't getting it Shaman. No matter that the Repugs won't be able to repeal anything. If they have the House, the wingnuts will simply use the old ad hoc ergo propter hoc. The economy got better with a Republican House! That's what did it. It won't matter that they won't be able to point to anything that the Republican House actually did.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

How does this record breaking performance record grab you? Dems were elected in 2006 to take over congress. They took office in January 2007. Look what happened to the workforce & the economy after they took over.

You have to show cause and effect or you're wasting our time.

Hell.....Congressional Republicans did that, for TWO YEARS, and got-away-with-it.

They can't very-well hide-out, again, after THIS election!!!!!

 

[LiberalNut]

Economic stimulus was a failure.

If you are clueless and call turning Great Depression II into a medium sized recession, yup, failure. If you have clue one, you say the stimulus worked but should have been bigger.

Solar cells are not efficient enough to use on a large scale at this point.

Sure they are. You just have to put them in the right places and be able to get the juice where it needs to go.

Wind farms are an eysore and also not efficient sources of power for most of the country.

Which is why you put them in the wind corridor that i described and unify the grid. Duh.

Nuclear would be a good choice, but liberals seem opposed to using it on a large scale.

Convince them. Shouldn't be hard in the scope of the entire program.

We have unsecured borders in the US.

I wasn't talking about FEAR THE HISPANICS! I was talking economic plans. Part of the way the idiot righties get you to vote against your own best interests in favor of the interests of the super rich is by shovelling you this nativist clap-trap. Indeed, we're gonna need to let in a wave of immigration to fix the worker to recipient ratios in the major entitlement programs.

Stealing from people should still be illegal.

And, of course, it is. The "taxation is theft" schpiel is the super rich feeding you a catch phrase so that you will vote against your own interests in favor of the super rich.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Raised the minimum wage which had a cascading effect on the costs to employ people. All the other economic factors added to a general economic decline. Any recovery has been hamstrung by the expectations of future higher costs in taxes and healthcare mandates.

Employers listened to the DNC talking points and reacted when it was apparent they were moving forward with an agenda that would make it harder to run businesses.

The Republican Congress raised the minimum wage twice in the 90's. Did it cause a recession? Hardly.

How did it affect the manufacturing sector and other labor intensive jobs that could move overseas? Those jobs are gone and aren't coming back. This recession proves it.

The last recession officially ended July 2009. The last minimum wage increase occurred in July 2009.

When did it start and how is employment these days?

You want to make us competitive with overseas factories where they build i-phones for 30 cents an hour?

 

[sangha]

How does this record breaking performance record grab you? Dems were elected in 2006 to take over congress. They took office in January 2007. Look what happened to the workforce & the economy after they took over.

The Bush Administration's Dismal Jobs Record | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Raised the minimum wage which had a cascading effect on the costs to employ people.

Please show me any empirical support for the notion that higher minimum wages lead to higher unemployment. Good fucking luck.

That's THE one issue that's always amazed me....how "conservatives" can be so clueless!

The minimum-wage is ALWAYS spent, LOCALLY....rather-than be stashed-away in some offshore/high-interest account, somewhere!!!

"conservatives" would be HARD-PRESSED to find ANY local-business-owners who'd say....

"No WAY do we want our customers to have MORE expendable-income!!!!"

​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

National Deficit Jan. 2009 1.4 Trillion
National Deficit Oct. 2010 1.3 to 1.4 Trillion

National Debt Jan. 2009 11 Trillion
National Debt Oct. 2010 13 Trillion

Unemployment Jan 2009 7.6%
Unemployment Oct. 2010 9.6%

Federal Budget 2009 3.17 Trillion
Federal Budget 2010 3.52 Trillion
Federal Budget 2011 3.8 Trillion (Proposed)

US Forclosures 2009 3.9 Million
Us Forclosures Jan - Oct. 2010 1.4 to 2.4 Million

US Poverty Rate 2009 13.2%
US Poverty Rate 2010 14.3%

In short there are many factors that show just about every bill signed by both the Bush Administration and the current one to help the economy has been a complete failure in terms of the overall health of the economy.

Here's another, from (back) when Republicans insisted Bill Clinton's tax-increases (the rates to which we'd return, after Lil' Dumbya's tax-cuts go belly-up) were "The Highest in History!!!" ​