Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Wrong.
An economy can be growing but not fast enough to absorb the millions that were thrown out of work by the Bush recession.
I see....so you admit the economy is weak.
Your claims about being out of a recession are nothing more than optics.
Technically true.
In reality....not worth crap.
Obama is a one termer.
Obama is Reagan in 1984.
The economy is coming back and the opposition party is about to nominate an old pol, Mondale-Gingrich, who will lose.
Suppose your asshole brother-in-law drove your car into a ditch. You get it out, and you're driving down the road again. But you're only going 15 mph, rather than 30. Do you see where I'm going with this?
I see....so you admit the economy is weak.
Your claims about being out of a recession are nothing more than optics.
Technically true.
In reality....not worth crap.
Obama is a one termer.
Obama is Reagan in 1984.
The economy is coming back and the opposition party is about to nominate an old pol, Mondale-Gingrich, who will lose.
The only thing good that Obama does for the economy is nothing.
It improves when he goes on vacation.
Right now is the best time of the year for employment because of the holidays.....and Obama in his usually dishonest manner is trying to take credit for something that is temporary.
Obama is Reagan in 1984.
The economy is coming back and the opposition party is about to nominate an old pol, Mondale-Gingrich, who will lose.
The only thing good that Obama does for the economy is nothing.
It improves when he goes on vacation.
Right now is the best time of the year for employment because of the holidays.....and Obama in his usually dishonest manner is trying to take credit for something that is temporary.
Have you caught that little tidbit about where the unemployment rate would be if we still had as many people looking for work now as when President Obama took office ?
So why do we need a jobs bill ?
Because the economy is not at full employment.
Maybe were in a recession if you define a recession as an economy not at full employment. Then again, thats not the definition of a recession.
Agreed.
Unfortunately, that becomes part of the problem for me. I keep hearing idiots say things are getting better, but they are getting any where good enough.
Suppose your asshole brother-in-law drove your car into a ditch. You get it out, and you're driving down the road again. But you're only going 15 mph, rather than 30. Do you see where I'm going with this?
Lulz good analogy.
Not only that, but your brother in law is in the passenger seat trying to drive the car off the road again.
The republican position is:
1. Stop spending money
2. ????
3. Prosperous economy!
Maybe if the government just fires public workers at a time when the private sector cant hire the existing unemployed, everything will get better.
Maybe if we end subsidies, prices will go down!
Maybe if we stop paying certain benefits, poor people will just magically get more money.
These are the republican positions. Its amazing. Everything is a contradiction
If you just lay off public workers, all your going to do is increase the unemployment rate.
If you end subsidies, prices will go up.
If you stop paying benefits like unemployment insurance, people will get poorer.
Jesus Christ the republican party has flipped economics 101 on its head just to make it agree with current policy.
Can you breath now ?
With everything you listed....you will stack up debt because you don't have the money to pay for it.
You are gambling things will improve. You'll still have the debt that you need to pay for.
On the other hand, if you don't do those things (or follow the GOP plan), you will not have the additional debt. You will have a lot of unhappy people (well, not if they belong to the Tea Party), but you won't have the debt.
Will things get better ?
Who knows.
But you'd need to explain to me how that turns econ on it's head.
Because the economy is not at full employment.
Maybe were in a recession if you define a recession as an economy not at full employment. Then again, thats not the definition of a recession.
Agreed.
Unfortunately, that becomes part of the problem for me. I keep hearing idiots say things are getting better, but they are getting any where good enough.
Maybe i dont understand math and logic.
But arent "getting better", and "good enough" totally different things?
If things were already "good enough" just 3 years after the largest economic downturn weve had in 70 years, obama would be an economic magician.
Agreed.
Unfortunately, that becomes part of the problem for me. I keep hearing idiots say things are getting better, but they are getting any where good enough.
Maybe i dont understand math and logic.
But arent "getting better", and "good enough" totally different things?
If things were already "good enough" just 3 years after the largest economic downturn weve had in 70 years, obama would be an economic magician.
Most of the downturn was artificial.
Notice the same exact thing is happening everywhere. It's all a sham.
We were warned about this a couple of years ago. The socialists said they were gonna take over the world's economies. They just needed the right people in place to get it done.
Lulz good analogy.
Not only that, but your brother in law is in the passenger seat trying to drive the car off the road again.
The republican position is:
1. Stop spending money
2. ????
3. Prosperous economy!
Maybe if the government just fires public workers at a time when the private sector cant hire the existing unemployed, everything will get better.
Maybe if we end subsidies, prices will go down!
Maybe if we stop paying certain benefits, poor people will just magically get more money.
These are the republican positions. Its amazing. Everything is a contradiction
If you just lay off public workers, all your going to do is increase the unemployment rate.
If you end subsidies, prices will go up.
If you stop paying benefits like unemployment insurance, people will get poorer.
Jesus Christ the republican party has flipped economics 101 on its head just to make it agree with current policy.
Can you breath now ?
With everything you listed....you will stack up debt because you don't have the money to pay for it.
You are gambling things will improve. You'll still have the debt that you need to pay for.
On the other hand, if you don't do those things (or follow the GOP plan), you will not have the additional debt. You will have a lot of unhappy people (well, not if they belong to the Tea Party), but you won't have the debt.
Will things get better ?
Who knows.
But you'd need to explain to me how that turns econ on it's head.
Didnt i already do that?
If the government stops spending the economy will get worse. This is econ 101. If a company gets its business partially from the government, and the government stops spending money, that company will see less sales. If someone cant get a job, and the government stops paying unemployment benefits to him, he can no longer be a customer for the community. If the government fires workers at a time when the private sector cant hire them, the unemployment rate will go up. Sure your not piling up debt anymore, but a contracting economy is no better than a growing debt. I would argue its worse, because the debt doesnt hurt individual lives.
But in conserva-land all the poor people need is a little fire in their bellies and everything will be good.
The only thing good that Obama does for the economy is nothing.
It improves when he goes on vacation.
Right now is the best time of the year for employment because of the holidays.....and Obama in his usually dishonest manner is trying to take credit for something that is temporary.
Have you caught that little tidbit about where the unemployment rate would be if we still had as many people looking for work now as when President Obama took office ?
It would be about as high as it was during the 1940s
Because the economy is not at full employment.
Maybe were in a recession if you define a recession as an economy not at full employment. Then again, thats not the definition of a recession.
Agreed.
Unfortunately, that becomes part of the problem for me. I keep hearing idiots say things are getting better, but they are getting any where good enough.
Maybe i dont understand math and logic.
But arent "getting better", and "good enough" totally different things?
If things were already "good enough" just 3 years after the largest economic downturn weve had in 70 years, obama would be an economic magician.
Can you breath now ?
With everything you listed....you will stack up debt because you don't have the money to pay for it.
You are gambling things will improve. You'll still have the debt that you need to pay for.
On the other hand, if you don't do those things (or follow the GOP plan), you will not have the additional debt. You will have a lot of unhappy people (well, not if they belong to the Tea Party), but you won't have the debt.
Will things get better ?
Who knows.
But you'd need to explain to me how that turns econ on it's head.
Didnt i already do that?
If the government stops spending the economy will get worse. This is econ 101. If a company gets its business partially from the government, and the government stops spending money, that company will see less sales. If someone cant get a job, and the government stops paying unemployment benefits to him, he can no longer be a customer for the community. If the government fires workers at a time when the private sector cant hire them, the unemployment rate will go up. Sure your not piling up debt anymore, but a contracting economy is no better than a growing debt. I would argue its worse, because the debt doesnt hurt individual lives.
But in conserva-land all the poor people need is a little fire in their bellies and everything will be good.
I suspected this was the argument.
Would you grant that this might be to much of an oversimplification.
Spending is part of the issue. And not all conservatives disagree with you to some extent.
At the same time, our debt is scary large (and I have no problem saying that is the fault of our previous president and his spend happy congress).
Agreed.
Unfortunately, that becomes part of the problem for me. I keep hearing idiots say things are getting better, but they are getting any where good enough.
Maybe i dont understand math and logic.
But arent "getting better", and "good enough" totally different things?
If things were already "good enough" just 3 years after the largest economic downturn weve had in 70 years, obama would be an economic magician.
Fair enough on the language that was used.
I should have said things are "getting better", but they aren't "getting better" at a rate that creates much hope for anyone.
Maybe i dont understand math and logic.
But arent "getting better", and "good enough" totally different things?
If things were already "good enough" just 3 years after the largest economic downturn weve had in 70 years, obama would be an economic magician.
Fair enough on the language that was used.
I should have said things are "getting better", but they aren't "getting better" at a rate that creates much hope for anyone.
But, what exactly has be been able to do? In the 5 months that he had, he did well. Then things start to slow, once the republicans begin to filibuster throughout 2010, and then gain the house in 2011. The stimulus graph even goes with the GDP growth one pretty well...
Hes been assailed as a total failure, when GDP growth was -8% when he took office, and its 2.5% now. Thats only a failure if you forget that -8% and just pretend it was never bad.
2.5% GDP growth is not bad. By some accounts the united states is growing at a rate similar to long term trends again.
The United Postal Service is gonna lay off about 30 thousand people in March.
The United Postal Service is gonna lay off about 30 thousand people in March.
That's right. Thanks to a Bush rule where the Postal Service has to pay the next 75 years of health care in just the next 10 years. Designed to bankrupt the Postal Service so we can pay 10 times as much to some sleazy corperation to do the job 1/10 as well.
But that is what you insane assholes want.
Fair enough on the language that was used.
I should have said things are "getting better", but they aren't "getting better" at a rate that creates much hope for anyone.
But, what exactly has be been able to do? In the 5 months that he had, he did well. Then things start to slow, once the republicans begin to filibuster throughout 2010, and then gain the house in 2011. The stimulus graph even goes with the GDP growth one pretty well...
Hes been assailed as a total failure, when GDP growth was -8% when he took office, and its 2.5% now. Thats only a failure if you forget that -8% and just pretend it was never bad.
2.5% GDP growth is not bad. By some accounts the united states is growing at a rate similar to long term trends again.
You've failed to explain what Obama did to cause the improvement.
Seems to me him doing nothing did it.
You did say that the since the GOP took back the House things have improved, at least that's what your statisics say.
The United Postal Service is gonna lay off about 30 thousand people in March.
That's right. Thanks to a Bush rule where the Postal Service has to pay the next 75 years of health care in just the next 10 years. Designed to bankrupt the Postal Service so we can pay 10 times as much to some sleazy corperation to do the job 1/10 as well.
But that is what you insane assholes want.
Why must you always lie???
It's impossible for us to want something we've never heard of before.
