Another Good Month On The Jobs Front...unemployment Drops To 5.9%

[bigrebnc1775]

Bush had more people in the work force?
We are at a 35 year low.

The Bushshit just keeps on coming.

When Bush left office there were 153,445,000 in the labor force and there are 155,903,000 now.

Tell another lie
There was no decline until after obama
Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

Another wing-nut pretending to be too stupid to know the difference between PEOPLE and a %.

Stupid follow thew numbers from 2004 until 2008 participation numbers hovered around the 66 mark
From 2009+ until 2014 the participation rate has declined without fluctuating back up. In 2009 it was 65.7 in Sept. 2014 it was 62.7 without going up at any time during those years.

OH and dumb ass the participation rate does represent PEOPLE you dumb mother ******.

There are 1,458,000 more PEOPLE in the workforce now than when Bush left office. You said Bush had "more PEOPLE" in the work force. I love how the Right plays dumb so they can lie with impunity, because thanks to St Ronnie they have convinced themselves that they are not lying if they are too stupid to know they are lying.

Look at the GOVERNMENT CHART ONE MORE TIME DUMB ASS

YOU SHOULD STOP NOW BUT YOU NEVER DO

 

[Dad2three]

Does anyone else see the humor of the liberals blaming the Republican's program to get more minorities into mortgages for the downturn in our economy?

Brilliant work Dad2three, too bad the recession was caused by other factors. No matter how hard you try to make the claim , ultimately the recession was not due to blacks not paying their mortgage, rather the recession led to them not being able to.

Dad2three, is a mindless spammer. I have him also ignored. Don't expect much in the way of intelligent response from him. He'll just spam a thousand articles from leftards that all parrot the same unsupported claims, and cite each other in their support.

In right wing speak, that means you can't refute FACTUAL data and prefer to live in right wing world of spin, distortion and lies

 

[Dad2three]

"Bush warned 17 different times in 2008 alone about the housing bubble."

LIAR


BUSH WAS THE REGULATOR OF F/F. THEY WERE EXECUTIVE BRANCH DUMMY!!!

June 17, 2004


(CNN/Money) - Home builders, realtors and others are preparing to fight a Bush administration plan that would require Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to increase financing of homes for low-income people, a home builder group said Thursday.



Q When did the Bush Mortgage Bubble start?

A The general timeframe is it started late 2004.

From Bush’s President’s Working Group on Financial Markets October 2008

“The Presidents Working Group’s March policy statement acknowledged that turmoil in financial markets clearly was triggered by a dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for U.S. subprime mortgages, beginning in late 2004 and extending into 2007.”

Home builders fight Bush s low-income housing - Jun. 17 2004







"Another form of easing facilitated the rapid rise of mortgages that didn't require borrowers to fully document their incomes. In 2006, these low- or no-doc loans comprised 81 percent of near-prime, 55 percent of jumbo, 50 percent of subprime and 36 percent of prime securitized mortgages."

Q HOLY JESUS! DID YOU JUST PROVE THAT OVER 50 % OF ALL MORTGAGES IN 2006 DIDNT REQUIRE BORROWERS TO DOCUMENT THEIR INCOME?!?!?!?

A Yes.




Q WHO THE HELL LOANS HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS TO PEOPLE WITHOUT CHECKING THEIR INCOMES?!?!?

A Banks.

Q WHY??!?!!!?!

A Two reasons, greed and Bush's regulators let them

Bushs documented policies and statements in timeframe leading up to the start of the Bush Mortgage Bubble include (but not limited to)

Wanting 5.5 million more minority homeowners
Tells congress there is nothing wrong with GSEs
Pledging to use federal policy to increase home ownership
Routinely taking credit for the housing market
Forcing GSEs to buy more low income home loans by raising their Housing Goals
Lowering Invesntment bank’s capital requirements, Net Capital rule
Reversing the Clinton rule that restricted GSEs purchases of subprime loans
Lowering down payment requirements to 0%
Forcing GSEs to spend an additional 440 billion in the secondary markets
Giving away 40,000 free down payments
PREEMPTING ALL STATE LAWS AGAINST PREDATORY LENDING


But the biggest policy was regulators not enforcing lending standards.


FACTS on Dubya s great recession US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

How about pulling more lkies out? Nothing changes with dumb ass obama supporters.

One president controlled the regulators that not only let banks stop checking income but cheered them on. And as president Bush could enact the very policies that caused the Bush Mortgage Bubble and he did. And his party controlled congress.

FACTS on Dubya s great recession US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

You are so full of shit Bush wanted more regulation on freddy and fanny the democrats whined like a ******* little ***** when he did.

Weird, so Dubya cared about what the Dems thought huh? I guess that's why he gave US 2 UNFUNDED Tax cuts to go with his 2 UNFUNDED wars and UNFUNDED Medicare expansion, he was the conservative who 'cared' right? lol

It would have took a republican congress to regulate anything The democrats cried racist and stopped the republicans from doing anything

YES, Because GOPers LOVE to put regulations down right and Dems ALWAYS oppose them, *shaking head*

Bush talked about reform. He talked and he talked. And then he stopped reform. (read that as many times as necessary. Bush stopped reform). And then he stopped it again.

The Bush Mortgage Bubble wasn’t about home prices. It was about banks lowering their lending standards and Bush’s regulators cheering them on. That started late 2004 after Bush preempted all state laws against predatory lending (to name one of his many toxic housing policies) and his successful reelection campaign touting the strength of his housing market.

Bush's working group said it "was triggered by a dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for U.S. subprime mortgages, beginning in late 2004 and extending into 2007". Now what would 'trigger a dramatic weakening' and prevent Bush's regulators from enforcing them? Why Bush and his policies, that's who

FACTS on Dubya s great recession US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

 

[bigrebnc1775]

How about pulling more lkies out? Nothing changes with dumb ass obama supporters.

One president controlled the regulators that not only let banks stop checking income but cheered them on. And as president Bush could enact the very policies that caused the Bush Mortgage Bubble and he did. And his party controlled congress.

FACTS on Dubya s great recession US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

You are so full of shit Bush wanted more regulation on freddy and fanny the democrats whined like a ******* little ***** when he did.

Weird, so Dubya cared about what the Dems thought huh? I guess that's why he gave US 2 UNFUNDED Tax cuts to go with his 2 UNFUNDED wars and UNFUNDED Medicare expansion, he was the conservative who 'cared' right? lol

It would have took a republican congress to regulate anything The democrats cried racist and stopped the republicans from doing anything

YES, Because GOPers LOVE to put regulations down right and Dems ALWAYS oppose them, *shaking head*

Bush talked about reform. He talked and he talked. And then he stopped reform. (read that as many times as necessary. Bush stopped reform). And then he stopped it again.

The Bush Mortgage Bubble wasn’t about home prices. It was about banks lowering their lending standards and Bush’s regulators cheering them on. That started late 2004 after Bush preempted all state laws against predatory lending (to name one of his many toxic housing policies) and his successful reelection campaign touting the strength of his housing market.

Bush's working group said it "was triggered by a dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for U.S. subprime mortgages, beginning in late 2004 and extending into 2007". Now what would 'trigger a dramatic weakening' and prevent Bush's regulators from enforcing them? Why Bush and his policies, that's who

FACTS on Dubya s great recession US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Stop spamming the board with your bullshit. You have no facts.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

Does anyone else see the humor of the liberals blaming the Republican's program to get more minorities into mortgages for the downturn in our economy?

Brilliant work Dad2three, too bad the recession was caused by other factors. No matter how hard you try to make the claim , ultimately the recession was not due to blacks not paying their mortgage, rather the recession led to them not being able to.

Dad2three, is a mindless spammer. I have him also ignored. Don't expect much in the way of intelligent response from him. He'll just spam a thousand articles from leftards that all parrot the same unsupported claims, and cite each other in their support.

In right wing speak, that means you can't refute FACTUAL data and prefer to live in right wing world of spin, distortion and lies

Sonny, I read your thread and I understand you want to blame the black man for the recession, but it's just not true. The housing market (IE mostly black sub prime loans) collapsed because the economy collapsed and people who were sub prime to begin with had NO savings to continue paying their mortgages which only made things worse.

This is proven by the fact that foreclosures didn't start exploding until 2009 almost 2 years AFTER the recession started.

 

[Andylusion]

The Bushshit just keeps on coming.

When Bush left office there were 153,445,000 in the labor force and there are 155,903,000 now.

Tell another lie
There was no decline until after obama
Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

Another wing-nut pretending to be too stupid to know the difference between PEOPLE and a %.

Stupid follow thew numbers from 2004 until 2008 participation numbers hovered around the 66 mark
From 2009+ until 2014 the participation rate has declined without fluctuating back up. In 2009 it was 65.7 in Sept. 2014 it was 62.7 without going up at any time during those years.

OH and dumb ass the participation rate does represent PEOPLE you dumb mother ******.

There are 1,458,000 more PEOPLE in the workforce now than when Bush left office. You said Bush had "more PEOPLE" in the work force. I love how the Right plays dumb so they can lie with impunity, because thanks to St Ronnie they have convinced themselves that they are not lying if they are too stupid to know they are lying.

Look at the GOVERNMENT CHART ONE MORE TIME DUMB ASS

YOU SHOULD STOP NOW BUT YOU NEVER DO

You don't understand. He's not smart enough to grasp that participation rate, is what is important.

If there were 300 Million working, and only 310 million in the country under Bush, and under Obama there was 1 BILLION people, and 300 Million and 5 people were working under Obama, with the other 699 Million collecting welfare...... This particular mindless idiot would conclude that the economy was much better because 5 more people were working under Obama, than under Bush.

He's an idiot. Just point and laugh, but stop trying to discuss this intellectually with him.... because that requires intellect, which he just proved in 3 separate posts, he doesn't have that.

 

[edthecynic]

The Bushshit just keeps on coming.

When Bush left office there were 153,445,000 in the labor force and there are 155,903,000 now.

Tell another lie
There was no decline until after obama
Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

Another wing-nut pretending to be too stupid to know the difference between PEOPLE and a %.

Stupid follow thew numbers from 2004 until 2008 participation numbers hovered around the 66 mark
From 2009+ until 2014 the participation rate has declined without fluctuating back up. In 2009 it was 65.7 in Sept. 2014 it was 62.7 without going up at any time during those years.

OH and dumb ass the participation rate does represent PEOPLE you dumb mother ******.

There are 1,458,000 more PEOPLE in the workforce now than when Bush left office. You said Bush had "more PEOPLE" in the work force. I love how the Right plays dumb so they can lie with impunity, because thanks to St Ronnie they have convinced themselves that they are not lying if they are too stupid to know they are lying.

Look at the GOVERNMENT CHART ONE MORE TIME DUMB ASS

YOU SHOULD STOP NOW BUT YOU NEVER DO

No matter how many times you pretend not to know the difference between people and a %, you were still lying when you claimed there were "MORE PEOPLE" in the labor force under Bush when he left office than now.

 

[Dad2three]

Does anyone else see the humor of the liberals blaming the Republican's program to get more minorities into mortgages for the downturn in our economy?

Brilliant work Dad2three, too bad the recession was caused by other factors. No matter how hard you try to make the claim , ultimately the recession was not due to blacks not paying their mortgage, rather the recession led to them not being able to.

Dad2three, is a mindless spammer. I have him also ignored. Don't expect much in the way of intelligent response from him. He'll just spam a thousand articles from leftards that all parrot the same unsupported claims, and cite each other in their support.

In right wing speak, that means you can't refute FACTUAL data and prefer to live in right wing world of spin, distortion and lies

Sonny, I read your thread and I understand you want to blame the black man for the recession, but it's just not true. The housing market (IE mostly black sub prime loans) collapsed because the economy collapsed and people who were sub prime to begin with had NO savings to continue paying their mortgages which only made things worse.

This is proven by the fact that foreclosures didn't start exploding until 2009 almost 2 years AFTER the recession started.

REALLY? Blacks were the mostly subprimers? lol

Weren't blacks buying houses BEFORE the explosion in subprimes?

The "turmoil in financial markets clearly was triggered by a dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for U.S. subprime mortgages, beginning in late 2004 and extending into 2007," the President's Working Group on Financial Markets OCT 2008

WHAT HAPPENED IN 2004 TO EXPLAIN THIS:

"The sub-prime loans would not have been made if there were not buyers and sellers for them on secondary markets via MBS's.

The MBS's would not have existed if regulators had taken a look at them, realized pretty much no one knew what the hell they were, and acted accordingly.

There would not have been buyers for the MBS's if the ratings agencies had given them appropriate ratings, such as S&P's CCC, about where they should have been.

Those selling the MBS's would not have been able to move risk off their books if someone not been willing to sell them CDS's."


WHO WAS IN CHARGE IN THIS PERIOD? WHO HAD THE SEC, FBI, GSE'S, ETC AS PART OF THEIR EXECUTIVE BRANCH OVERSIGHT?


"The FBI correctly identified the epidemic of mortgage control fraud at such an early point that the financial crisis could have been averted had the Bush administration acted with even minimal competence." William K. Black Sr. regulator during S&L debacle



“When regulators don’t believe in regulation and don’t get what is going on at the companies they oversee, there can be no major white-collar crime prosecutions,”...“If they don’t understand what we call collective embezzlement, where people are literally looting their own firms, then it’s impossible to bring cases.”


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/14/business/14prosecute.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0



Dubya was warned by the FBI of an "epidemic" of mortgage fraud in 2004. He gave them less resources.


FBI saw threat of loan crisis - Los Angeles Times



Shockingly, the FBI clearly makes the case for the need to combat mortgage fraud in 2005, the height of the housing crisis:

Financial Crimes Report to the Public 2005

FBI ? Financial Crimes Report 2005


The Bush Rubber Stamp Congress ignored the obvious and extremely detailed and well reported crime spree by the FBI.

THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION and GOP CONGRESS stripped the White Collar Crime divisions of money and manpower.



"Those selling the CDS's would not have been able to sell them if they had been required by regulators to maintain standard insurance reserves."


2004 Dubya allowed the leverage rules to go from 12-1 to 35-1 which flooded the market with cheap money!

The SEC Rule That Broke Wall Street

The SEC Rule That Broke Wall Street


BUSH REGULATORS ON WALL STREET IN 2004 WITH A CHAINSAW 'CUTTING' REGULATIONS

 

[edthecynic]

participation rate, is what is important.

The participation rate is WORTHLESS as an "important" economic indicator because it is affected by DEMOGRAPHICS as well as the economy. The LPR is down now due to DEMOGRAPHICS and not economic conditions, and you know jot, but the Tea Bag Brotherhood has nothing else to cling to.

 

[Dad2three]

Does anyone else see the humor of the liberals blaming the Republican's program to get more minorities into mortgages for the downturn in our economy?

Brilliant work Dad2three, too bad the recession was caused by other factors. No matter how hard you try to make the claim , ultimately the recession was not due to blacks not paying their mortgage, rather the recession led to them not being able to.

Dad2three, is a mindless spammer. I have him also ignored. Don't expect much in the way of intelligent response from him. He'll just spam a thousand articles from leftards that all parrot the same unsupported claims, and cite each other in their support.

In right wing speak, that means you can't refute FACTUAL data and prefer to live in right wing world of spin, distortion and lies

Sonny, I read your thread and I understand you want to blame the black man for the recession, but it's just not true. The housing market (IE mostly black sub prime loans) collapsed because the economy collapsed and people who were sub prime to begin with had NO savings to continue paying their mortgages which only made things worse.

This is proven by the fact that foreclosures didn't start exploding until 2009 almost 2 years AFTER the recession started.

12/19/2006

The Center for Responsible Lending has released a new report: Losing Ground: Foreclosures in the Subprime Market and Their Cost to Homeowners.


Report: 2.2 Million Subprime Borrowers Face Foreclosure

Calculated Risk: Report: 2.2 Million Subprime Borrowers Face Foreclosure



Losing Ground: Foreclosures in the Subprime Market and Their Cost to Homeowners


Losing Ground: Foreclosures in the Subprime Market and Their Cost to Homeowners




November 27, 2007

A Snapshot of the Subprime Market


Dollar amount of subprime loans outstanding:

2007 $1.3 trillion

Dollar amount of subprime loans outstanding in 2003: $332 billion

Percentage increase from 2003: 292%


Number of subprime mortgages made in 2005-2006 projected to end in foreclosure:

1 in 5



Proportion of subprime mortgages made from 2004 to 2006 that come with "exploding" adjustable interest rates: 89-93%


Proportion approved without fully documented income: 43-50%


Proportion with no escrow for taxes and insurance: 75%



Proportion of completed foreclosures attributable to adjustable rate loans out of all loans made in 2006 and bundled in subprime mortgage backed securities: 93%


Subprime share of all mortgage originations in 2006: 28%


Subprime share of all mortgage origination in 2003: 8%

FACTS on Dubya s great recession Page 2 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum


THE BLACK MAN? Nope, it wasn't the black man, the Asian, Mexicans, the poor, it was DUBYA AND THE BANKSTERS DUMMY!

 

[Andylusion]

Tell another lie
There was no decline until after obama
Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

Another wing-nut pretending to be too stupid to know the difference between PEOPLE and a %.

Stupid follow thew numbers from 2004 until 2008 participation numbers hovered around the 66 mark
From 2009+ until 2014 the participation rate has declined without fluctuating back up. In 2009 it was 65.7 in Sept. 2014 it was 62.7 without going up at any time during those years.

OH and dumb ass the participation rate does represent PEOPLE you dumb mother ******.

There are 1,458,000 more PEOPLE in the workforce now than when Bush left office. You said Bush had "more PEOPLE" in the work force. I love how the Right plays dumb so they can lie with impunity, because thanks to St Ronnie they have convinced themselves that they are not lying if they are too stupid to know they are lying.

Look at the GOVERNMENT CHART ONE MORE TIME DUMB ASS

YOU SHOULD STOP NOW BUT YOU NEVER DO

No matter how many times you pretend not to know the difference between people and a %, you were still lying when you claimed there were "MORE PEOPLE" in the labor force under Bush when he left office than now.

LOL......... Dude.... Are you drunk, or did you intentionally make yourself look unbelievably stupid thrice now?

 

[edthecynic]

Another wing-nut pretending to be too stupid to know the difference between PEOPLE and a %.

Stupid follow thew numbers from 2004 until 2008 participation numbers hovered around the 66 mark
From 2009+ until 2014 the participation rate has declined without fluctuating back up. In 2009 it was 65.7 in Sept. 2014 it was 62.7 without going up at any time during those years.

OH and dumb ass the participation rate does represent PEOPLE you dumb mother ******.

There are 1,458,000 more PEOPLE in the workforce now than when Bush left office. You said Bush had "more PEOPLE" in the work force. I love how the Right plays dumb so they can lie with impunity, because thanks to St Ronnie they have convinced themselves that they are not lying if they are too stupid to know they are lying.

Look at the GOVERNMENT CHART ONE MORE TIME DUMB ASS

YOU SHOULD STOP NOW BUT YOU NEVER DO

No matter how many times you pretend not to know the difference between people and a %, you were still lying when you claimed there were "MORE PEOPLE" in the labor force under Bush when he left office than now.

LOL......... Dude.... Are you drunk, or did you intentionally make yourself look unbelievably stupid thrice now?

You are the one playing dumb so you can repeat a lie!

 

[Andylusion]

participation rate, is what is important.

The participation rate is WORTHLESS as an "important" economic indicator because it is affected by DEMOGRAPHICS as well as the economy. The LPR is down now due to DEMOGRAPHICS and not economic conditions, and you know jot, but the Tea Bag Brotherhood has nothing else to cling to.

Yes yes. If 5 more people are working, even if that 10% lower compared to population, then that's good.... if I was as intellectually retarded, ignorant, and blindly partisan as you, that would make sense.

You go try that claim at any university economic forum, the students themselves would laugh you off the stage, and the professors wouldn't even bother to respond.

 

[Andylusion]

Stupid follow thew numbers from 2004 until 2008 participation numbers hovered around the 66 mark
From 2009+ until 2014 the participation rate has declined without fluctuating back up. In 2009 it was 65.7 in Sept. 2014 it was 62.7 without going up at any time during those years.

OH and dumb ass the participation rate does represent PEOPLE you dumb mother ******.

There are 1,458,000 more PEOPLE in the workforce now than when Bush left office. You said Bush had "more PEOPLE" in the work force. I love how the Right plays dumb so they can lie with impunity, because thanks to St Ronnie they have convinced themselves that they are not lying if they are too stupid to know they are lying.

Look at the GOVERNMENT CHART ONE MORE TIME DUMB ASS

YOU SHOULD STOP NOW BUT YOU NEVER DO

No matter how many times you pretend not to know the difference between people and a %, you were still lying when you claimed there were "MORE PEOPLE" in the labor force under Bush when he left office than now.

LOL......... Dude.... Are you drunk, or did you intentionally make yourself look unbelievably stupid thrice now?

You are the one playing dumb so you can repeat a lie!

You are too dumb to even realize how dumb you are. The only point left in this thread is to mock you for being the fool you are.

 

[Papageorgio]

Does anyone else see the humor of the liberals blaming the Republican's program to get more minorities into mortgages for the downturn in our economy?

Brilliant work Dad2three, too bad the recession was caused by other factors. No matter how hard you try to make the claim , ultimately the recession was not due to blacks not paying their mortgage, rather the recession led to them not being able to.

Dad2three, is a mindless spammer. I have him also ignored. Don't expect much in the way of intelligent response from him. He'll just spam a thousand articles from leftards that all parrot the same unsupported claims, and cite each other in their support.

In right wing speak, that means you can't refute FACTUAL data and prefer to live in right wing world of spin, distortion and lies

Sonny, I read your thread and I understand you want to blame the black man for the recession, but it's just not true. The housing market (IE mostly black sub prime loans) collapsed because the economy collapsed and people who were sub prime to begin with had NO savings to continue paying their mortgages which only made things worse.

This is proven by the fact that foreclosures didn't start exploding until 2009 almost 2 years AFTER the recession started.

12/19/2006

The Center for Responsible Lending has released a new report: Losing Ground: Foreclosures in the Subprime Market and Their Cost to Homeowners.


Report: 2.2 Million Subprime Borrowers Face Foreclosure

Calculated Risk: Report: 2.2 Million Subprime Borrowers Face Foreclosure



Losing Ground: Foreclosures in the Subprime Market and Their Cost to Homeowners


Losing Ground: Foreclosures in the Subprime Market and Their Cost to Homeowners




November 27, 2007

A Snapshot of the Subprime Market


Dollar amount of subprime loans outstanding:

2007 $1.3 trillion

Dollar amount of subprime loans outstanding in 2003: $332 billion

Percentage increase from 2003: 292%


Number of subprime mortgages made in 2005-2006 projected to end in foreclosure:

1 in 5



Proportion of subprime mortgages made from 2004 to 2006 that come with "exploding" adjustable interest rates: 89-93%


Proportion approved without fully documented income: 43-50%


Proportion with no escrow for taxes and insurance: 75%



Proportion of completed foreclosures attributable to adjustable rate loans out of all loans made in 2006 and bundled in subprime mortgage backed securities: 93%


Subprime share of all mortgage originations in 2006: 28%


Subprime share of all mortgage origination in 2003: 8%

FACTS on Dubya s great recession Page 2 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum


THE BLACK MAN? Nope, it wasn't the black man, the Asian, Mexicans, the poor, it was DUBYA AND THE BANKSTERS DUMMY!

If you honestly think the whole recession was Bush's fault after all the information made available to the public, then you are an ignorant partisan and there is no point reasoning with the ignorant.
Take care and I hope you learn to quit following partisan crap and think for yourself.


Sent from my iPad using an Android.

 

[edthecynic]

participation rate, is what is important.

The participation rate is WORTHLESS as an "important" economic indicator because it is affected by DEMOGRAPHICS as well as the economy. The LPR is down now due to DEMOGRAPHICS and not economic conditions, and you know jot, but the Tea Bag Brotherhood has nothing else to cling to.

Yes yes. If 5 more people are working, even if that 10% lower compared to population, then that's good.... if I was as intellectually retarded, ignorant, and blindly partisan as you, that would make sense.

You go try that claim at any university economic forum, the students themselves would laugh you off the stage, and the professors wouldn't even bother to respond.

I think the professors would be smart enough to know the effect of demographics on the LPR and therefore they would check the demographics before they come to any conclusion about the economy based solely on the LPR. Professors are not as stupid as you pretend to be!

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Tell another lie
There was no decline until after obama
Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

Another wing-nut pretending to be too stupid to know the difference between PEOPLE and a %.

Stupid follow thew numbers from 2004 until 2008 participation numbers hovered around the 66 mark
From 2009+ until 2014 the participation rate has declined without fluctuating back up. In 2009 it was 65.7 in Sept. 2014 it was 62.7 without going up at any time during those years.

OH and dumb ass the participation rate does represent PEOPLE you dumb mother ******.

There are 1,458,000 more PEOPLE in the workforce now than when Bush left office. You said Bush had "more PEOPLE" in the work force. I love how the Right plays dumb so they can lie with impunity, because thanks to St Ronnie they have convinced themselves that they are not lying if they are too stupid to know they are lying.

Look at the GOVERNMENT CHART ONE MORE TIME DUMB ASS

YOU SHOULD STOP NOW BUT YOU NEVER DO

No matter how many times you pretend not to know the difference between people and a %, you were still lying when you claimed there were "MORE PEOPLE" in the labor force under Bush when he left office than now.

Moron people make up the participation rate. fewer PEOPLE means less participation meaning the numbers will drop,
Naturally being a dumb ass obama supporter you will never comprehend that. Try to say something else and say you won doesn't work with me dumb ass.

 

[Dad2three]

Does anyone else see the humor of the liberals blaming the Republican's program to get more minorities into mortgages for the downturn in our economy?

Brilliant work Dad2three, too bad the recession was caused by other factors. No matter how hard you try to make the claim , ultimately the recession was not due to blacks not paying their mortgage, rather the recession led to them not being able to.

Dad2three, is a mindless spammer. I have him also ignored. Don't expect much in the way of intelligent response from him. He'll just spam a thousand articles from leftards that all parrot the same unsupported claims, and cite each other in their support.

In right wing speak, that means you can't refute FACTUAL data and prefer to live in right wing world of spin, distortion and lies

Sonny, I read your thread and I understand you want to blame the black man for the recession, but it's just not true. The housing market (IE mostly black sub prime loans) collapsed because the economy collapsed and people who were sub prime to begin with had NO savings to continue paying their mortgages which only made things worse.

This is proven by the fact that foreclosures didn't start exploding until 2009 almost 2 years AFTER the recession started.

12/19/2006

The Center for Responsible Lending has released a new report: Losing Ground: Foreclosures in the Subprime Market and Their Cost to Homeowners.


Report: 2.2 Million Subprime Borrowers Face Foreclosure

Calculated Risk: Report: 2.2 Million Subprime Borrowers Face Foreclosure



Losing Ground: Foreclosures in the Subprime Market and Their Cost to Homeowners


Losing Ground: Foreclosures in the Subprime Market and Their Cost to Homeowners




November 27, 2007

A Snapshot of the Subprime Market


Dollar amount of subprime loans outstanding:

2007 $1.3 trillion

Dollar amount of subprime loans outstanding in 2003: $332 billion

Percentage increase from 2003: 292%


Number of subprime mortgages made in 2005-2006 projected to end in foreclosure:

1 in 5



Proportion of subprime mortgages made from 2004 to 2006 that come with "exploding" adjustable interest rates: 89-93%


Proportion approved without fully documented income: 43-50%


Proportion with no escrow for taxes and insurance: 75%



Proportion of completed foreclosures attributable to adjustable rate loans out of all loans made in 2006 and bundled in subprime mortgage backed securities: 93%


Subprime share of all mortgage originations in 2006: 28%


Subprime share of all mortgage origination in 2003: 8%

FACTS on Dubya s great recession Page 2 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum


THE BLACK MAN? Nope, it wasn't the black man, the Asian, Mexicans, the poor, it was DUBYA AND THE BANKSTERS DUMMY!

If you honestly think the whole recession was Bush's fault after all the information made available to the public, then you are an ignorant partisan and there is no point reasoning with the ignorant.
Take care and I hope you learn to quit following partisan crap and think for yourself.


Sent from my iPad using an Android.

Weird how conservatives HATE to actually critically think OR be honest. Like Reagan ignoring the S&L warnings that started in 1984, Dubya did the same thing, ignoring the FBI warnings that started in 2004 of an 'EPIDEMIC' of mortgage fraud that could rival the S&L crisis, he gutted them by 1,800+ agents. He was fighting ALL 50 states on who regulated 'predatory' lenders since 2003, invoking a civil war era rule saying feds did, THEN in 2004 he allowed the five investment banks to go from 12-1 leverage to more than 40-1


From Bush’s President’s Working Group on Financial Markets October 2008

“The Presidents Working Group’s March policy statement acknowledged that turmoil in financial markets clearly was triggered by a dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for U.S. subprime mortgages, beginning in late 2004 and extending into 2007.”


FACTS on Dubya s great recession US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

 

[edthecynic]

Another wing-nut pretending to be too stupid to know the difference between PEOPLE and a %.

Stupid follow thew numbers from 2004 until 2008 participation numbers hovered around the 66 mark
From 2009+ until 2014 the participation rate has declined without fluctuating back up. In 2009 it was 65.7 in Sept. 2014 it was 62.7 without going up at any time during those years.

OH and dumb ass the participation rate does represent PEOPLE you dumb mother ******.

There are 1,458,000 more PEOPLE in the workforce now than when Bush left office. You said Bush had "more PEOPLE" in the work force. I love how the Right plays dumb so they can lie with impunity, because thanks to St Ronnie they have convinced themselves that they are not lying if they are too stupid to know they are lying.

Look at the GOVERNMENT CHART ONE MORE TIME DUMB ASS

YOU SHOULD STOP NOW BUT YOU NEVER DO

No matter how many times you pretend not to know the difference between people and a %, you were still lying when you claimed there were "MORE PEOPLE" in the labor force under Bush when he left office than now.

Moron people make up the participation rate. fewer PEOPLE means less participation meaning the numbers will drop,
Naturally being a dumb ass obama supporter you will never comprehend that. Try to say something else and say you won doesn't work with me dumb ass.

Obviously not always as the number of people in the labor force increased and the LPR fell. Again, demographics can have a greater effect on the LPR than economic conditions, as is happening now, which is why the LPR cannot be considered without taking into account the effect of demographics.

 

[Papageorgio]

Dad2three, is a mindless spammer. I have him also ignored. Don't expect much in the way of intelligent response from him. He'll just spam a thousand articles from leftards that all parrot the same unsupported claims, and cite each other in their support.

In right wing speak, that means you can't refute FACTUAL data and prefer to live in right wing world of spin, distortion and lies

Sonny, I read your thread and I understand you want to blame the black man for the recession, but it's just not true. The housing market (IE mostly black sub prime loans) collapsed because the economy collapsed and people who were sub prime to begin with had NO savings to continue paying their mortgages which only made things worse.

This is proven by the fact that foreclosures didn't start exploding until 2009 almost 2 years AFTER the recession started.

12/19/2006

The Center for Responsible Lending has released a new report: Losing Ground: Foreclosures in the Subprime Market and Their Cost to Homeowners.


Report: 2.2 Million Subprime Borrowers Face Foreclosure

Calculated Risk: Report: 2.2 Million Subprime Borrowers Face Foreclosure



Losing Ground: Foreclosures in the Subprime Market and Their Cost to Homeowners


Losing Ground: Foreclosures in the Subprime Market and Their Cost to Homeowners




November 27, 2007

A Snapshot of the Subprime Market


Dollar amount of subprime loans outstanding:

2007 $1.3 trillion

Dollar amount of subprime loans outstanding in 2003: $332 billion

Percentage increase from 2003: 292%


Number of subprime mortgages made in 2005-2006 projected to end in foreclosure:

1 in 5



Proportion of subprime mortgages made from 2004 to 2006 that come with "exploding" adjustable interest rates: 89-93%


Proportion approved without fully documented income: 43-50%


Proportion with no escrow for taxes and insurance: 75%



Proportion of completed foreclosures attributable to adjustable rate loans out of all loans made in 2006 and bundled in subprime mortgage backed securities: 93%


Subprime share of all mortgage originations in 2006: 28%


Subprime share of all mortgage origination in 2003: 8%

FACTS on Dubya s great recession Page 2 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum


THE BLACK MAN? Nope, it wasn't the black man, the Asian, Mexicans, the poor, it was DUBYA AND THE BANKSTERS DUMMY!

If you honestly think the whole recession was Bush's fault after all the information made available to the public, then you are an ignorant partisan and there is no point reasoning with the ignorant.
Take care and I hope you learn to quit following partisan crap and think for yourself.


Sent from my iPad using an Android.

Weird how conservatives HATE to actually critically think OR be honest. Like Reagan ignoring the S&L warnings that started in 1984, Dubya did the same thing, ignoring the FBI warnings that started in 2004 of an 'EPIDEMIC' of mortgage fraud that could rival the S&L crisis, he gutted them by 1,800+ agents. He was fighting ALL 50 states on who regulated 'predatory' lenders since 2003, invoking a civil war era rule saying feds did, THEN in 2004 he allowed the five investment banks to go from 12-1 leverage to more than 40-1


From Bush’s President’s Working Group on Financial Markets October 2008

“The Presidents Working Group’s March policy statement acknowledged that turmoil in financial markets clearly was triggered by a dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for U.S. subprime mortgages, beginning in late 2004 and extending into 2007.”


FACTS on Dubya s great recession US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

There were lots of reasons for the recession of 2008 and they go all the way back to the 40's. Many bills and regs and stimulus packages, add to it all the bubbles over the decades. Over spending, no one saving. In the 90's mortgage companies were lending 125% of the value of property, really stupid. Going of the gold standard, easy credit, spending with nothing to back and then 9/11 should have been the end of the bubbles but instead of making the hard decisions, just like in the past, we as America doubled down on spending and inventing new bubbles. No matter the President or the party is was going to happen, and because we haven't righted the ship, it will happen again soon.

So play all the games and gloss over all the bullshit, the next hot to the economy is coming and it will be greater than 2008. Economist were predicting 2008 in the 90's, they are looking ahead to trouble again.