The Summer of Recovery, Part II

Proving or disproving that obama did or did not save jobs is closely akin to proving tax cuts creating jobs.
 
Proving or disproving that obama did or did not save jobs is closely akin to proving tax cuts creating jobs.

Except tax cuts actually work and we don't have to use the phony "jobs saved or created" metric
 
Proving or disproving that obama did or did not save jobs is closely akin to proving tax cuts creating jobs.

Except tax cuts actually work and we don't have to use the phony "jobs saved or created" metric

Ok prove tax cuts create jobs. And how many.

1920 and 1981. And its been repeated so many time you should know it like the days of the week by now and nobody ever used the "jobs saved or created" metric
 
Easy Peasy.

When Reagan took office, Non-Farm employment was 91M. When he left office, it was 107M. That's a net increase of 16M jobs. And that's after enduring the increase in unemployment to cure double digit inflation.

When Obama took office, non-farm employment was 133.6M. At the end of May, 23 months after the end of the recession, the number has decreased to 131.1M - a loss of 2.5M jobs since Obama took office, and a net increase of less than 600K jobs since the official end of the recession.

The 1981-1982 recession ended in November, 1982. Over the following 23 months, the economy created 6.8 Million net new jobs.

Compare Reagan's 6.8M net new jobs in 23 months with Obama's 600K jobs over 23 months.

Which number is bigger?
 
Last edited:
Reagan took office on the upswing of Carter's resession

the metric you people use to prove any potus good or bad for an economy constantly in flux is about as good as my saying you're not a patriot if you don't like Buck Owens
 
Reagan took office on the upswing of Carter's resession

the metric you people use to prove any potus good or bad for an economy constantly in flux is about as good as my saying you're not a patriot if you don't like Buck Owens

The impacts of economic policy are generally not known until several years after they are implemented.
 
Reagan took office on the upswing of Carter's resession

the metric you people use to prove any potus good or bad for an economy constantly in flux is about as good as my saying you're not a patriot if you don't like Buck Owens



Another economic illiterate. There was a second recession in 1981-1982 (The Volcker Recession) which was caused to reduce double digit inflation.

Reagan confronted STAGFLATION. And he didn't go on a media tour whinging that he "inherited" it from Carter.
 
Reagan took office on the upswing of Carter's resession

the metric you people use to prove any potus good or bad for an economy constantly in flux is about as good as my saying you're not a patriot if you don't like Buck Owens
Please tell me you didn't type that with a straight face.
 
Proving or disproving that obama did or did not save jobs is closely akin to proving tax cuts creating jobs.


No it's not. Nobody who supports tax cuts has ever used the bullshit calculus that the tax cuts "saved or created" jobs. That sophistry is all Obama's. We can actually tell when jobs are created.
 
Last edited:
Another economic illiterate

another partisan hack looking to revise history on the basis of partial facts like most Reagan worshipers

i bought my 2nd house during those years @ 18%

and i don't even begin to go down Volker avenue with me missy, the reganista who was summarilly dismissed after resurfacing in the Obama administration by Reagan worshippers because his regulatory ideals FLEW IN THE FACE OF RR's
 
Another economic illiterate

another partisan hack looking to revise history on the basis of partial facts like most Reagan worshipers

i bought my 2nd house during those years @ 18%

and i don't even begin to go down Volker avenue with me missy, the reganista who was summarilly dismissed after resurfacing in the Obama administration by Reagan worshippers because his regulatory ideals FLEW IN THE FACE OF RR's



And you learned nothing from your experiences.

Thanks for sharing.
 
Proving or disproving that obama did or did not save jobs is closely akin to proving tax cuts creating jobs.

"Save jobs?"

Oh, he saved plenty of union and public sector jobs with his bailouts, however for every job he "saved" 7 private sector jobs were lost.

So yeah, he took care of his union buddies and told the rest of the non-union private sector to fuck off.

The ironic part about it all is that the majority of the cash er "credit" he used to "save union jobs" was taxed out of the non-union private sector and will have to be PAID by the non-union private sector. In short the non-union private sector pretty much paid for their own demise.
 
Easy Peasy.

When Reagan took office, Non-Farm employment was 91M. When he left office, it was 107M. That's a net increase of 16M jobs. And that's after enduring the increase in unemployment to cure double digit inflation.

When Obama took office, non-farm employment was 133.6M. At the end of May, 23 months after the end of the recession, the number has decreased to 131.1M - a loss of 2.5M jobs since Obama took office, and a net increase of less than 600K jobs since the official end of the recession.

The 1981-1982 recession ended in November, 1982. Over the following 23 months, the economy created 6.8 Million net new jobs.

Compare Reagans 6.8M net new jobs in 23 months with Obama's 600K jobs over 23 months.

Which number is bigger?

If you add in "jobs saved" that number easily doubles
 
If there is a net loss in employment no jobs were really saved.

If you save 50,000 union jobs but 300,000 non union jobs were lost thats still negative number ( -250,000).

Progressives love to uses dishonest language like "saved jobs."
 
yea baby, got my sun tan lotion, flip flops, cooler..I am ready for some recovery ....

ramirez-bernies.jpg
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: Vel
An we'll show the trailer.....

Coming to a Theater Summer 2012

The Summer of Recovery, Part III: The Prequel, It's Bush's Fault!
 

Forum List

Back
Top