Only Democrats Would call This a Recovery...

[KMAN]

However if a Republican were in office they would be ripping him a new one for the Job losses...

Mike Allen's Playbook 24/7 - POLITICO.com

New claims for jobless benefits rise sharply - Yahoo! Finance

U.S. initial jobless claims rise 12,000 to 472,000 - MarketWatch

Jobless Claims in U.S. Increased 12,000 Last Week to 472,000 - BusinessWeek

 

[Care4all]

However if a Republican were in office they would be ripping him a new one for the Job losses...

Mike Allen's Playbook 24/7 - POLITICO.com

New claims for jobless benefits rise sharply - Yahoo! Finance

U.S. initial jobless claims rise 12,000 to 472,000 - MarketWatch

Jobless Claims in U.S. Increased 12,000 Last Week to 472,000 - BusinessWeek

you don't think you and your ilk are ripping him a new a=hole 24/7?



look at your lover's (bush's) recession in 2003 and how well we were doing in the job recovery when people were touting we were out of the recession?

jobs lag....they are the last thing to recover, if ever.....i say if ever, because we tend to drastically improve worker productivity during a recession and many businesses will have no need to have the full staff they once had, even doing the same volume.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

However if a Republican were in office they would be ripping him a new one for the Job losses...

Mike Allen's Playbook 24/7 - POLITICO.com

New claims for jobless benefits rise sharply - Yahoo! Finance

U.S. initial jobless claims rise 12,000 to 472,000 - MarketWatch

Jobless Claims in U.S. Increased 12,000 Last Week to 472,000 - BusinessWeek

you don't think you and your ilk are ripping him a new a=hole 24/7?



look at your lover's (bush's) recession in 2003 and how well we were doing in the job recovery when people were touting we were out of the recession?

jobs lag....they are the last thing to recover, if ever.....i say if ever, because we tend to drastically improve worker productivity during a recession and many businesses will have no need to have the full staff they once had, even doing the same volume.

He's still faring way better than Bush who had the blog community, Congress, every liberal talking head and almost every news outlet bashing him 24/7. Although it is looking like even the MSM is starting to get what an abject dunderhead Obama is. They must be feeling pretty silly.

 

[KMAN]

However if a Republican were in office they would be ripping him a new one for the Job losses...

Mike Allen's Playbook 24/7 - POLITICO.com

New claims for jobless benefits rise sharply - Yahoo! Finance

U.S. initial jobless claims rise 12,000 to 472,000 - MarketWatch

Jobless Claims in U.S. Increased 12,000 Last Week to 472,000 - BusinessWeek

you don't think you and your ilk are ripping him a new a=hole 24/7?



look at your lover's (bush's) recession in 2003 and how well we were doing in the job recovery when people were touting we were out of the recession?

jobs lag....they are the last thing to recover, if ever.....i say if ever, because we tend to drastically improve worker productivity during a recession and many businesses will have no need to have the full staff they once had, even doing the same volume.

He's still faring way better than Bush who had the blog community, Congress, every liberal talking head and almost every news outlet bashing him 24/7. Although it is looking like even the MSM is starting to get what an abject dunderhead Obama is. They must be feeling pretty silly.

Yeah, good point. Another big difference is Conservatives would not be calling this a recovery even if a Republican was in office. It's just more Democrat hypocrisy plain and simple.

 

[WillowTree]

However if a Republican were in office they would be ripping him a new one for the Job losses...

Mike Allen's Playbook 24/7 - POLITICO.com

New claims for jobless benefits rise sharply - Yahoo! Finance

U.S. initial jobless claims rise 12,000 to 472,000 - MarketWatch

Jobless Claims in U.S. Increased 12,000 Last Week to 472,000 - BusinessWeek

Actually they'd call it CYA

 

[Care4all]

you don't think you and your ilk are ripping him a new a=hole 24/7?



look at your lover's (bush's) recession in 2003 and how well we were doing in the job recovery when people were touting we were out of the recession?

jobs lag....they are the last thing to recover, if ever.....i say if ever, because we tend to drastically improve worker productivity during a recession and many businesses will have no need to have the full staff they once had, even doing the same volume.

He's still faring way better than Bush who had the blog community, Congress, every liberal talking head and almost every news outlet bashing him 24/7. Although it is looking like even the MSM is starting to get what an abject dunderhead Obama is. They must be feeling pretty silly.

Yeah, good point. Another big difference is Conservatives would not be calling this a recovery even if a Republican was in office. It's just more Democrat hypocrisy plain and simple.

bull crud kman, and if you don;t know that's bull then there is nothing left to say....you can't make the blind see.....

 

[Mr Natural]

This is as good as it's going to get and it's all the result of 30 years of supply-side, trickle-down, bullshit Reaganonmics.

Hope you enjoyed it while it lasted.

 

[VaYank5150]

However if a Republican were in office they would be ripping him a new one for the Job losses...

Mike Allen's Playbook 24/7 - POLITICO.com

New claims for jobless benefits rise sharply - Yahoo! Finance

U.S. initial jobless claims rise 12,000 to 472,000 - MarketWatch

Jobless Claims in U.S. Increased 12,000 Last Week to 472,000 - BusinessWeek

The job losses are much lower now that Obama is in thw White House. It is a fact. Your lies are far too transparent.

 

[KMAN]

He's still faring way better than Bush who had the blog community, Congress, every liberal talking head and almost every news outlet bashing him 24/7. Although it is looking like even the MSM is starting to get what an abject dunderhead Obama is. They must be feeling pretty silly.

Yeah, good point. Another big difference is Conservatives would not be calling this a recovery even if a Republican was in office. It's just more Democrat hypocrisy plain and simple.

bull crud kman, and if you don;t know that's bull then there is nothing left to say....you can't make the blind see.....

Notice how I said Conservatives... not Republicans...

 

[KMAN]

However if a Republican were in office they would be ripping him a new one for the Job losses...

Mike Allen's Playbook 24/7 - POLITICO.com

New claims for jobless benefits rise sharply - Yahoo! Finance

U.S. initial jobless claims rise 12,000 to 472,000 - MarketWatch

Jobless Claims in U.S. Increased 12,000 Last Week to 472,000 - BusinessWeek

The job losses are much lower now that Obama is in thw White House. It is a fact. Your lies are far too transparent.

Of course they are... lol

 

[rightwinger]

To evaluate a recovery, you have to ask..

Where were you then and where are you now?

By all accounts, we are in an economic recovery. It does not mean we are fully recovered but all major economic indicators have reversed in the last 16 months.

The standard measure of recovery, GDP in positive growth for three quarters has been met. This is not Democrat or Republican , but standard economic indicators

 

[Jarhead]

However if a Republican were in office they would be ripping him a new one for the Job losses...

Mike Allen's Playbook 24/7 - POLITICO.com

New claims for jobless benefits rise sharply - Yahoo! Finance

U.S. initial jobless claims rise 12,000 to 472,000 - MarketWatch

Jobless Claims in U.S. Increased 12,000 Last Week to 472,000 - BusinessWeek

The job losses are much lower now that Obama is in thw White House. It is a fact. Your lies are far too transparent.

The job losses 2 plus years into a recession will ALWAYS be less than they were during the first part of a recession.

However, this time it cost us a trillion dollars to acheive what we would have acheived without committing a trillion dollars.

And likely, unemployment would be lower by now without a commitment of a trillion dollars.

Tax credits to the hiriers for each employee hired would have cost us nothing and lowered unemployment.

And before you say "tax credits cost us tax revenue", it does, but it is made up with the new income tax revenue from the now employed.

Not to mention each state having less of an unemployment burden. And the employers also having their unemployment burden decreased.

 

[Toro]

Most economists are calling this a recovery. What Democrats or Republicans would say depending on whether or not they were in power is merely a political sideshow by people with a vested interest on staying in or obtaining power. Such people are not objective.

 

[Care4all]

However if a Republican were in office they would be ripping him a new one for the Job losses...

Mike Allen's Playbook 24/7 - POLITICO.com

New claims for jobless benefits rise sharply - Yahoo! Finance

U.S. initial jobless claims rise 12,000 to 472,000 - MarketWatch

Jobless Claims in U.S. Increased 12,000 Last Week to 472,000 - BusinessWeek

The job losses are much lower now that Obama is in thw White House. It is a fact. Your lies are far too transparent.

The job losses 2 plus years into a recession will ALWAYS be less than they were during the first part of a recession.

However, this time it cost us a trillion dollars to acheive what we would have acheived without committing a trillion dollars.

And likely, unemployment would be lower by now without a commitment of a trillion dollars.

Tax credits to the hiriers for each employee hired would have cost us nothing and lowered unemployment.

And before you say "tax credits cost us tax revenue", it does, but it is made up with the new income tax revenue from the now employed.

Not to mention each state having less of an unemployment burden. And the employers also having their unemployment burden decreased.

tax credits to hire new employees, don't work....not in a recession.....businesses will not hire people they DON'T NEED....it would be a kiss of death to their business.

 

[VaYank5150]

However if a Republican were in office they would be ripping him a new one for the Job losses...

Mike Allen's Playbook 24/7 - POLITICO.com

New claims for jobless benefits rise sharply - Yahoo! Finance

U.S. initial jobless claims rise 12,000 to 472,000 - MarketWatch

Jobless Claims in U.S. Increased 12,000 Last Week to 472,000 - BusinessWeek

The job losses are much lower now that Obama is in thw White House. It is a fact. Your lies are far too transparent.

The job losses 2 plus years into a recession will ALWAYS be less than they were during the first part of a recession.

However, this time it cost us a trillion dollars to acheive what we would have acheived without committing a trillion dollars.

And likely, unemployment would be lower by now without a commitment of a trillion dollars.

Tax credits to the hiriers for each employee hired would have cost us nothing and lowered unemployment.

And before you say "tax credits cost us tax revenue", it does, but it is made up with the new income tax revenue from the now employed.

Not to mention each state having less of an unemployment burden. And the employers also having their unemployment burden decreased.

So, you have proof/evidence that we would be looking as good as we are without the stimulus? Proof, not what Sean Hannity tells you.

 

[Jarhead]

The job losses are much lower now that Obama is in thw White House. It is a fact. Your lies are far too transparent.

The job losses 2 plus years into a recession will ALWAYS be less than they were during the first part of a recession.

However, this time it cost us a trillion dollars to acheive what we would have acheived without committing a trillion dollars.

And likely, unemployment would be lower by now without a commitment of a trillion dollars.

Tax credits to the hiriers for each employee hired would have cost us nothing and lowered unemployment.

And before you say "tax credits cost us tax revenue", it does, but it is made up with the new income tax revenue from the now employed.

Not to mention each state having less of an unemployment burden. And the employers also having their unemployment burden decreased.

So, you have proof/evidence that we would be looking as good as we are without the stimulus? Proof, not what Sean Hannity tells you.

LOL. Sean Hannity? I need to wonder what he would be doing if Obama did not win. Whenever I am flipping through the channels and I see him I say top my wife "wanna watch a little Obama bashing?"

I have no proof. Just history.

 

[VaYank5150]

The job losses 2 plus years into a recession will ALWAYS be less than they were during the first part of a recession.

However, this time it cost us a trillion dollars to acheive what we would have acheived without committing a trillion dollars.

And likely, unemployment would be lower by now without a commitment of a trillion dollars.

Tax credits to the hiriers for each employee hired would have cost us nothing and lowered unemployment.

And before you say "tax credits cost us tax revenue", it does, but it is made up with the new income tax revenue from the now employed.

Not to mention each state having less of an unemployment burden. And the employers also having their unemployment burden decreased.

So, you have proof/evidence that we would be looking as good as we are without the stimulus? Proof, not what Sean Hannity tells you.

LOL. Sean Hannity? I need to wonder what he would be doing if Obama did not win. Whenever I am flipping through the channels and I see him I say top my wife "wanna watch a little Obama bashing?"

I have no proof. Just history.

Thank you for admitting that you have no proof, nor a crystal ball, and that your partisan hackery is what has caused you to make these assumptions. While you are at it, can you elaborate on the whole "And likely, unemployment would be lower by now without a commitment of a trillion dollars." I would like to know what your sources are for this reaseach as well.

 

[Jarhead]

So, you have proof/evidence that we would be looking as good as we are without the stimulus? Proof, not what Sean Hannity tells you.

LOL. Sean Hannity? I need to wonder what he would be doing if Obama did not win. Whenever I am flipping through the channels and I see him I say top my wife "wanna watch a little Obama bashing?"

I have no proof. Just history.

Thank you for admitting that you have no proof, nor a crystal ball, and that your partisan hackery is what has caused you to make these assumptions. While you are at it, can you elaborate on the whole "And likely, unemployment would be lower by now without a commitment of a trillion dollars." I would like to know what your sources are for this reaseach as well.

My partisan hackery? OK. Now I see where you are coming from. But for the record, I speak what I believe, not what I am told to believe.

For example, wherewas many "partisan hacks" jumped for joy over that Bush/Katrina vs. Obama/Gulf spill poll, I applied my logical thinking and posted why those numbers are skewed.

And to answer your question. From my clients. They are all very skeptical to hire people based on initiatives on the table including the idea of another stimulus that will create an even larger deficit/debt.

I have agreed with much of what you have said in the past, but as time and issues arise with this administration, I am starting to voice my opinion, and it appears you dont agree with me. I am OK with that. But I find it disturbing that I was an OK guy when I agreed with things you said, but now that I dont always agree, I am a partisan hack to you.

I was very much in agreement with Bush for the first 3 years. By the end of his 4th he lost my vote and by the end of the 8th, he lost any confidence I may have had in him in 2000.

Does that make me a partisan hack or a thinking man with my own ideas?

 

[VaYank5150]

LOL. Sean Hannity? I need to wonder what he would be doing if Obama did not win. Whenever I am flipping through the channels and I see him I say top my wife "wanna watch a little Obama bashing?"

I have no proof. Just history.

Thank you for admitting that you have no proof, nor a crystal ball, and that your partisan hackery is what has caused you to make these assumptions. While you are at it, can you elaborate on the whole "And likely, unemployment would be lower by now without a commitment of a trillion dollars." I would like to know what your sources are for this reaseach as well.

My partisan hackery? OK. Now I see where you are coming from. But for the record, I speak what I believe, not what I am told to believe.

For example, wherewas many "partisan hacks" jumped for joy over that Bush/Katrina vs. Obama/Gulf spill poll, I applied my logical thinking and posted why those numbers are skewed.

And to answer your question. From my clients. They are all very skeptical to hire people based on initiatives on the table including the idea of another stimulus that will create an even larger deficit/debt.

I have agreed with much of what you have said in the past, but as time and issues arise with this administration, I am starting to voice my opinion, and it appears you dont agree with me. I am OK with that. But I find it disturbing that I was an OK guy when I agreed with things you said, but now that I dont always agree, I am a partisan hack to you.

I was very much in agreement with Bush for the first 3 years. By the end of his 4th he lost my vote and by the end of the 8th, he lost any confidence I may have had in him in 2000.

Does that make me a partisan hack or a thinking man with my own ideas?

You and I have always gotten along, even thought we disagree on much. Like you, I prefer to think for myself and have called Obama out when I felt he deserved it (think back room deals for Healthcare and expanding the war in Afghanistan). I am OK with you disagreeing with things when you have something, ANYTHING to back it up. Right now, you just look partisan because all you want to do is blame a stimulus package that may or may not have impacted ths jobs market. YOU DO NOT KNOW.

Now, your customers tell you they will not hire based on initiatives. I get that. However, MY customers also do not hire when there is no work to be had. They could give a shit about initiatives. Right now, capital is hard to come by, and they cannot spend money they do not have on employees they do not need. Simple as that. No need to blame Obama for simple economics.

 

[Jarhead]

Thank you for admitting that you have no proof, nor a crystal ball, and that your partisan hackery is what has caused you to make these assumptions. While you are at it, can you elaborate on the whole "And likely, unemployment would be lower by now without a commitment of a trillion dollars." I would like to know what your sources are for this reaseach as well.

My partisan hackery? OK. Now I see where you are coming from. But for the record, I speak what I believe, not what I am told to believe.

For example, wherewas many "partisan hacks" jumped for joy over that Bush/Katrina vs. Obama/Gulf spill poll, I applied my logical thinking and posted why those numbers are skewed.

And to answer your question. From my clients. They are all very skeptical to hire people based on initiatives on the table including the idea of another stimulus that will create an even larger deficit/debt.

I have agreed with much of what you have said in the past, but as time and issues arise with this administration, I am starting to voice my opinion, and it appears you dont agree with me. I am OK with that. But I find it disturbing that I was an OK guy when I agreed with things you said, but now that I dont always agree, I am a partisan hack to you.

I was very much in agreement with Bush for the first 3 years. By the end of his 4th he lost my vote and by the end of the 8th, he lost any confidence I may have had in him in 2000.

Does that make me a partisan hack or a thinking man with my own ideas?

You and I have always gotten along, even thought we disagree on much. Like you, I prefer to think for myself and have called Obama out when I felt he deserved it (think back room deals for Healthcare and expanding the war in Afghanistan). I am OK with you disagreeing with things when you have something, ANYTHING to back it up. Right now, you just look partisan because all you want to do is blame a stimulus package that may or may not have impacted ths jobs market. YOU DO NOT KNOW.

Now, your customers tell you they will not hire based on initiatives. I get that. However, MY customers also do not hire when there is no work to be had. They could give a shit about initiatives. Right now, capital is hard to come by, and they cannot spend money they do not have on employees they do not need. Simple as that. No need to blame Obama for simple economics.

So are you saying that I must only articualte facts that dont exist to prove either way? I am not allowed to say what I feel is true and accurate?

I am a thinking man with my own calculations based on all of the information I gather to come up with my conclusions.

It has allowed me to anticipate, forecast and succeeed. And interestingly enough, I do not need someone elses vote to succeed in life, so I am sure more likely to express accurrate summations than a politician.

Yes, I am confident in my ideas. So much so that I do not need to say "In my opinion" with everything I believe, as it is not just opinion to me. It is fact to me. I mean, lets be real. NBC says one thing and fox says the opposite. Boehner says one thing Pelosi says the opposite. There is no fact in politics and the media anymore. So we, individually, need to determine what facts are facts.

I need to froecast for business, so I poll my clients. I capitalize on my personal understanding of how economic factors work and come up with summaries that allow me to forecast properly and succeed.

SO I am not sure how you see this board, but I see it as a place to state provable fact and as a way to also offer my own "fact" based on my analyses.