Toddsterpatriot
Diamond Member
If they were so damaging, why did the recession end and non stop stretch of job growth begin?
If they weren't so damaging, why was the recovery so weeeeeak?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
If they were so damaging, why did the recession end and non stop stretch of job growth begin?
Bush admin National security advisors are war mongers. That's true in the case of both Bushes.Why would national security advisors automatically be warmongers?So warmongers from previous warmongering regimes don't like Trump....oh boo hoo!
It wasnāt weak actually. 100-200k jobs per month. Obviously it would take awhile to recover the full 8 million.If they were so damaging, why did the recession end and non stop stretch of job growth begin?
If they weren't so damaging, why was the recovery so weeeeeak?
It wasnāt weak actually. 100-200k jobs per month. Obviously it would take awhile to recover the full 8 million.If they were so damaging, why did the recession end and non stop stretch of job growth begin?
If they weren't so damaging, why was the recovery so weeeeeak?
Also, why was the Bush recession so big?
The recession Carter handed Reagan was worse. It only took a couple of years to recover from that:It wasnāt weak actually. 100-200k jobs per month. Obviously it would take awhile to recover the full 8 million.If they were so damaging, why did the recession end and non stop stretch of job growth begin?
If they weren't so damaging, why was the recovery so weeeeeak?
Also, why was the Bush recession so big?
No it really wasnāt. Iām mean you can pretend the recession being the biggest since WWII doesnāt somehow matter in context to the recovery, but we both know it does.It wasnāt weak actually. 100-200k jobs per month. Obviously it would take awhile to recover the full 8 million.If they were so damaging, why did the recession end and non stop stretch of job growth begin?
If they weren't so damaging, why was the recovery so weeeeeak?
Also, why was the Bush recession so big?
It wasnāt weak actually.
It actually was.
The weakest since WWII.
No it really wasnāt. Iām mean you can pretend the recession being the biggest since WWII doesnāt somehow matter in context to the recovery, but we both know it does.It wasnāt weak actually. 100-200k jobs per month. Obviously it would take awhile to recover the full 8 million.If they were so damaging, why did the recession end and non stop stretch of job growth begin?
If they weren't so damaging, why was the recovery so weeeeeak?
Also, why was the Bush recession so big?
It wasnāt weak actually.
It actually was.
The weakest since WWII.
Brady, vice chairman of the Congressional Joint Economic Committee, released two charts showing figures for 10 recessionary periods beginning in 1949. (Data from the Great Depression are not included.)No it really wasnāt. Iām mean you can pretend the recession being the biggest since WWII doesnāt somehow matter in context to the recovery, but we both know it does.It wasnāt weak actually. 100-200k jobs per month. Obviously it would take awhile to recover the full 8 million.If they were so damaging, why did the recession end and non stop stretch of job growth begin?
If they weren't so damaging, why was the recovery so weeeeeak?
Also, why was the Bush recession so big?
It wasnāt weak actually.
It actually was.
The weakest since WWII.
www.cnbc.com
Your own article said how crushing the Bush recession was. You act as though 100k-200k jobs per month was weak which is stupid. Youāre basically saying that the recovery should have been 400,000+ new jobs per month which is something thatās never seen before. Why this basic logic escapes you is beyond me.No it really wasnāt. Iām mean you can pretend the recession being the biggest since WWII doesnāt somehow matter in context to the recovery, but we both know it does.It wasnāt weak actually. 100-200k jobs per month. Obviously it would take awhile to recover the full 8 million.If they were so damaging, why did the recession end and non stop stretch of job growth begin?
If they weren't so damaging, why was the recovery so weeeeeak?
Also, why was the Bush recession so big?
It wasnāt weak actually.
It actually was.
The weakest since WWII.
The bigger the drop, the bigger the recovery.
Unless, like Obama, you stupidly pile on economy crushing regulations.
View attachment 355121
![]()
The closing of the jobs gap: A decade of recession and recovery | Brookings
The Jobs gap has closed The Great Recession caused labor market devastation on a scale not seen for many decades. Millions of jobs were lost in the United States during 2008 and 2009, leaving the labor market with a hard road to recovery. Indeed, that recovery has required many years of job...www.brookings.edu
I donāt care what this moron says. Ugh youāre stupid. The economy lost 8 million jobs during that recession and they were all gained back. Your desperation on this is really getting old lolBrady, vice chairman of the Congressional Joint Economic Committee, released two charts showing figures for 10 recessionary periods beginning in 1949. (Data from the Great Depression are not included.)No it really wasnāt. Iām mean you can pretend the recession being the biggest since WWII doesnāt somehow matter in context to the recovery, but we both know it does.It wasnāt weak actually. 100-200k jobs per month. Obviously it would take awhile to recover the full 8 million.If they were so damaging, why did the recession end and non stop stretch of job growth begin?
If they weren't so damaging, why was the recovery so weeeeeak?
Also, why was the Bush recession so big?
It wasnāt weak actually.
It actually was.
The weakest since WWII.
The first is the percent change of private sector job growth 28 months after a cycle low, with an average of prior recessions at 8 percent. He cites Obamaās track record from February 2010, with a growth of 4.1 percent.
The second chart shows an average real GDP growth of 13.8 percent over the 11 quarters following the end of each recession. The data during Obamaās presidency are calculated from the second quarter of 2009, clocking in at 6.7 percent GDP growth.
The news release cites data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics and JEC Republican staff calculations.
Brady also criticized the 4 million new jobs Obama claims to have created.
āWell, heās telling about half the story,ā he said. āItās unfortunate weāre still more than 4 million jobs short of where this recession began, 41 straight months of unemployment above 8 percent. Thatās a post-World War II record.ā
![]()
Rep. Brady: Obama Recovery āDead Lastā
President Obama is presiding over an economic recovery that is ādead last in the modern era,ā Texas Congressman Kevin Brady said Friday on CNBC.www.cnbc.com
It wasn't. Reagan's recession was worse. Unemployment was larger.No it really wasnāt. Iām mean you can pretend the recession being the biggest since WWII doesnāt somehow matter in context to the recovery, but we both know it does.It wasnāt weak actually. 100-200k jobs per month. Obviously it would take awhile to recover the full 8 million.If they were so damaging, why did the recession end and non stop stretch of job growth begin?
If they weren't so damaging, why was the recovery so weeeeeak?
Also, why was the Bush recession so big?
It wasnāt weak actually.
It actually was.
The weakest since WWII.
Um no. In terms of actual jobs lost, Bushās second recession was the worst.It wasn't. Reagan's recession was worse. Unemployment was larger.No it really wasnāt. Iām mean you can pretend the recession being the biggest since WWII doesnāt somehow matter in context to the recovery, but we both know it does.It wasnāt weak actually. 100-200k jobs per month. Obviously it would take awhile to recover the full 8 million.If they were so damaging, why did the recession end and non stop stretch of job growth begin?
If they weren't so damaging, why was the recovery so weeeeeak?
Also, why was the Bush recession so big?
It wasnāt weak actually.
It actually was.
The weakest since WWII.
Your own article said how crushing the Bush recession was. You act as though 100k-200k jobs per month was weak which is stupid. Youāre basically saying that the recovery should have been 400,000+ new jobs per month which is something thatās never seen before. Why this basic logic escapes you is beyond me.No it really wasnāt. Iām mean you can pretend the recession being the biggest since WWII doesnāt somehow matter in context to the recovery, but we both know it does.It wasnāt weak actually. 100-200k jobs per month. Obviously it would take awhile to recover the full 8 million.If they were so damaging, why did the recession end and non stop stretch of job growth begin?
If they weren't so damaging, why was the recovery so weeeeeak?
Also, why was the Bush recession so big?
It wasnāt weak actually.
It actually was.
The weakest since WWII.
The bigger the drop, the bigger the recovery.
Unless, like Obama, you stupidly pile on economy crushing regulations.
View attachment 355121
![]()
The closing of the jobs gap: A decade of recession and recovery | Brookings
The Jobs gap has closed The Great Recession caused labor market devastation on a scale not seen for many decades. Millions of jobs were lost in the United States during 2008 and 2009, leaving the labor market with a hard road to recovery. Indeed, that recovery has required many years of job...www.brookings.edu
I donāt care what this moron says. Ugh youāre stupid. The economy lost 8 million jobs during that recession and they were all gained back. Your desperation on this is really getting old lolBrady, vice chairman of the Congressional Joint Economic Committee, released two charts showing figures for 10 recessionary periods beginning in 1949. (Data from the Great Depression are not included.)No it really wasnāt. Iām mean you can pretend the recession being the biggest since WWII doesnāt somehow matter in context to the recovery, but we both know it does.It wasnāt weak actually. 100-200k jobs per month. Obviously it would take awhile to recover the full 8 million.If they were so damaging, why did the recession end and non stop stretch of job growth begin?
If they weren't so damaging, why was the recovery so weeeeeak?
Also, why was the Bush recession so big?
It wasnāt weak actually.
It actually was.
The weakest since WWII.
The first is the percent change of private sector job growth 28 months after a cycle low, with an average of prior recessions at 8 percent. He cites Obamaās track record from February 2010, with a growth of 4.1 percent.
The second chart shows an average real GDP growth of 13.8 percent over the 11 quarters following the end of each recession. The data during Obamaās presidency are calculated from the second quarter of 2009, clocking in at 6.7 percent GDP growth.
The news release cites data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics and JEC Republican staff calculations.
Brady also criticized the 4 million new jobs Obama claims to have created.
āWell, heās telling about half the story,ā he said. āItās unfortunate weāre still more than 4 million jobs short of where this recession began, 41 straight months of unemployment above 8 percent. Thatās a post-World War II record.ā
![]()
Rep. Brady: Obama Recovery āDead Lastā
President Obama is presiding over an economic recovery that is ādead last in the modern era,ā Texas Congressman Kevin Brady said Friday on CNBC.www.cnbc.com
Itās sad you need to google random articles you are reading for the first time just to give the illusion you know what youāre talking about.
You mean after both were underwater? Donāt be stupid about this.Your own article said how crushing the Bush recession was. You act as though 100k-200k jobs per month was weak which is stupid. Youāre basically saying that the recovery should have been 400,000+ new jobs per month which is something thatās never seen before. Why this basic logic escapes you is beyond me.No it really wasnāt. Iām mean you can pretend the recession being the biggest since WWII doesnāt somehow matter in context to the recovery, but we both know it does.It wasnāt weak actually. 100-200k jobs per month. Obviously it would take awhile to recover the full 8 million.If they were so damaging, why did the recession end and non stop stretch of job growth begin?
If they weren't so damaging, why was the recovery so weeeeeak?
Also, why was the Bush recession so big?
It wasnāt weak actually.
It actually was.
The weakest since WWII.
The bigger the drop, the bigger the recovery.
Unless, like Obama, you stupidly pile on economy crushing regulations.
View attachment 355121
![]()
The closing of the jobs gap: A decade of recession and recovery | Brookings
The Jobs gap has closed The Great Recession caused labor market devastation on a scale not seen for many decades. Millions of jobs were lost in the United States during 2008 and 2009, leaving the labor market with a hard road to recovery. Indeed, that recovery has required many years of job...www.brookings.edu
You act as though 100k-200k jobs per month was weak
Job growth and GDP, very weak.
You mean after both were underwater? Donāt be stupid about this.Your own article said how crushing the Bush recession was. You act as though 100k-200k jobs per month was weak which is stupid. Youāre basically saying that the recovery should have been 400,000+ new jobs per month which is something thatās never seen before. Why this basic logic escapes you is beyond me.No it really wasnāt. Iām mean you can pretend the recession being the biggest since WWII doesnāt somehow matter in context to the recovery, but we both know it does.It wasnāt weak actually. 100-200k jobs per month. Obviously it would take awhile to recover the full 8 million.If they were so damaging, why did the recession end and non stop stretch of job growth begin?
If they weren't so damaging, why was the recovery so weeeeeak?
Also, why was the Bush recession so big?
It wasnāt weak actually.
It actually was.
The weakest since WWII.
The bigger the drop, the bigger the recovery.
Unless, like Obama, you stupidly pile on economy crushing regulations.
View attachment 355121
![]()
The closing of the jobs gap: A decade of recession and recovery | Brookings
The Jobs gap has closed The Great Recession caused labor market devastation on a scale not seen for many decades. Millions of jobs were lost in the United States during 2008 and 2009, leaving the labor market with a hard road to recovery. Indeed, that recovery has required many years of job...www.brookings.edu
You act as though 100k-200k jobs per month was weak
Job growth and GDP, very weak.
Why donāt you look it up if youāre just going to randomly google shit? What I will tell you is the Trump recession has eliminated all of those jobs.I donāt care what this moron says. Ugh youāre stupid. The economy lost 8 million jobs during that recession and they were all gained back. Your desperation on this is really getting old lolBrady, vice chairman of the Congressional Joint Economic Committee, released two charts showing figures for 10 recessionary periods beginning in 1949. (Data from the Great Depression are not included.)No it really wasnāt. Iām mean you can pretend the recession being the biggest since WWII doesnāt somehow matter in context to the recovery, but we both know it does.It wasnāt weak actually. 100-200k jobs per month. Obviously it would take awhile to recover the full 8 million.If they were so damaging, why did the recession end and non stop stretch of job growth begin?
If they weren't so damaging, why was the recovery so weeeeeak?
Also, why was the Bush recession so big?
It wasnāt weak actually.
It actually was.
The weakest since WWII.
The first is the percent change of private sector job growth 28 months after a cycle low, with an average of prior recessions at 8 percent. He cites Obamaās track record from February 2010, with a growth of 4.1 percent.
The second chart shows an average real GDP growth of 13.8 percent over the 11 quarters following the end of each recession. The data during Obamaās presidency are calculated from the second quarter of 2009, clocking in at 6.7 percent GDP growth.
The news release cites data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics and JEC Republican staff calculations.
Brady also criticized the 4 million new jobs Obama claims to have created.
āWell, heās telling about half the story,ā he said. āItās unfortunate weāre still more than 4 million jobs short of where this recession began, 41 straight months of unemployment above 8 percent. Thatās a post-World War II record.ā
![]()
Rep. Brady: Obama Recovery āDead Lastā
President Obama is presiding over an economic recovery that is ādead last in the modern era,ā Texas Congressman Kevin Brady said Friday on CNBC.www.cnbc.com
Itās sad you need to google random articles you are reading for the first time just to give the illusion you know what youāre talking about.
The economy lost 8 million jobs during that recession and they were all gained back.
Over what time frame?
Why donāt you look it up if youāre just going to randomly google shit? What I will tell you is the Trump recession has eliminated all of those jobs.I donāt care what this moron says. Ugh youāre stupid. The economy lost 8 million jobs during that recession and they were all gained back. Your desperation on this is really getting old lolBrady, vice chairman of the Congressional Joint Economic Committee, released two charts showing figures for 10 recessionary periods beginning in 1949. (Data from the Great Depression are not included.)No it really wasnāt. Iām mean you can pretend the recession being the biggest since WWII doesnāt somehow matter in context to the recovery, but we both know it does.It wasnāt weak actually. 100-200k jobs per month. Obviously it would take awhile to recover the full 8 million.If they were so damaging, why did the recession end and non stop stretch of job growth begin?
If they weren't so damaging, why was the recovery so weeeeeak?
Also, why was the Bush recession so big?
It wasnāt weak actually.
It actually was.
The weakest since WWII.
The first is the percent change of private sector job growth 28 months after a cycle low, with an average of prior recessions at 8 percent. He cites Obamaās track record from February 2010, with a growth of 4.1 percent.
The second chart shows an average real GDP growth of 13.8 percent over the 11 quarters following the end of each recession. The data during Obamaās presidency are calculated from the second quarter of 2009, clocking in at 6.7 percent GDP growth.
The news release cites data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics and JEC Republican staff calculations.
Brady also criticized the 4 million new jobs Obama claims to have created.
āWell, heās telling about half the story,ā he said. āItās unfortunate weāre still more than 4 million jobs short of where this recession began, 41 straight months of unemployment above 8 percent. Thatās a post-World War II record.ā
![]()
Rep. Brady: Obama Recovery āDead Lastā
President Obama is presiding over an economic recovery that is ādead last in the modern era,ā Texas Congressman Kevin Brady said Friday on CNBC.www.cnbc.com
Itās sad you need to google random articles you are reading for the first time just to give the illusion you know what youāre talking about.
The economy lost 8 million jobs during that recession and they were all gained back.
Over what time frame?
![]()
The US economy has wiped out all the job gains since the Great Recession
The jobless claims report showed that it took only five weeks for the U.S. economy to erase all the job gains since the Great Recession.www.cnbc.com
We both know youāre just grasping for straws.Why donāt you look it up if youāre just going to randomly google shit? What I will tell you is the Trump recession has eliminated all of those jobs.I donāt care what this moron says. Ugh youāre stupid. The economy lost 8 million jobs during that recession and they were all gained back. Your desperation on this is really getting old lolBrady, vice chairman of the Congressional Joint Economic Committee, released two charts showing figures for 10 recessionary periods beginning in 1949. (Data from the Great Depression are not included.)No it really wasnāt. Iām mean you can pretend the recession being the biggest since WWII doesnāt somehow matter in context to the recovery, but we both know it does.It wasnāt weak actually. 100-200k jobs per month. Obviously it would take awhile to recover the full 8 million.If they were so damaging, why did the recession end and non stop stretch of job growth begin?
If they weren't so damaging, why was the recovery so weeeeeak?
Also, why was the Bush recession so big?
It wasnāt weak actually.
It actually was.
The weakest since WWII.
The first is the percent change of private sector job growth 28 months after a cycle low, with an average of prior recessions at 8 percent. He cites Obamaās track record from February 2010, with a growth of 4.1 percent.
The second chart shows an average real GDP growth of 13.8 percent over the 11 quarters following the end of each recession. The data during Obamaās presidency are calculated from the second quarter of 2009, clocking in at 6.7 percent GDP growth.
The news release cites data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics and JEC Republican staff calculations.
Brady also criticized the 4 million new jobs Obama claims to have created.
āWell, heās telling about half the story,ā he said. āItās unfortunate weāre still more than 4 million jobs short of where this recession began, 41 straight months of unemployment above 8 percent. Thatās a post-World War II record.ā
![]()
Rep. Brady: Obama Recovery āDead Lastā
President Obama is presiding over an economic recovery that is ādead last in the modern era,ā Texas Congressman Kevin Brady said Friday on CNBC.www.cnbc.com
Itās sad you need to google random articles you are reading for the first time just to give the illusion you know what youāre talking about.
The economy lost 8 million jobs during that recession and they were all gained back.
Over what time frame?
![]()
The US economy has wiped out all the job gains since the Great Recession
The jobless claims report showed that it took only five weeks for the U.S. economy to erase all the job gains since the Great Recession.www.cnbc.com
Why donāt you look it up
Because you're the one bragging about Obama's strong performance.
We both know youāre just grasping for straws.Why donāt you look it up if youāre just going to randomly google shit? What I will tell you is the Trump recession has eliminated all of those jobs.I donāt care what this moron says. Ugh youāre stupid. The economy lost 8 million jobs during that recession and they were all gained back. Your desperation on this is really getting old lolBrady, vice chairman of the Congressional Joint Economic Committee, released two charts showing figures for 10 recessionary periods beginning in 1949. (Data from the Great Depression are not included.)No it really wasnāt. Iām mean you can pretend the recession being the biggest since WWII doesnāt somehow matter in context to the recovery, but we both know it does.It wasnāt weak actually. 100-200k jobs per month. Obviously it would take awhile to recover the full 8 million.If they were so damaging, why did the recession end and non stop stretch of job growth begin?
If they weren't so damaging, why was the recovery so weeeeeak?
Also, why was the Bush recession so big?
It wasnāt weak actually.
It actually was.
The weakest since WWII.
The first is the percent change of private sector job growth 28 months after a cycle low, with an average of prior recessions at 8 percent. He cites Obamaās track record from February 2010, with a growth of 4.1 percent.
The second chart shows an average real GDP growth of 13.8 percent over the 11 quarters following the end of each recession. The data during Obamaās presidency are calculated from the second quarter of 2009, clocking in at 6.7 percent GDP growth.
The news release cites data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics and JEC Republican staff calculations.
Brady also criticized the 4 million new jobs Obama claims to have created.
āWell, heās telling about half the story,ā he said. āItās unfortunate weāre still more than 4 million jobs short of where this recession began, 41 straight months of unemployment above 8 percent. Thatās a post-World War II record.ā
![]()
Rep. Brady: Obama Recovery āDead Lastā
President Obama is presiding over an economic recovery that is ādead last in the modern era,ā Texas Congressman Kevin Brady said Friday on CNBC.www.cnbc.com
Itās sad you need to google random articles you are reading for the first time just to give the illusion you know what youāre talking about.
The economy lost 8 million jobs during that recession and they were all gained back.
Over what time frame?
![]()
The US economy has wiped out all the job gains since the Great Recession
The jobless claims report showed that it took only five weeks for the U.S. economy to erase all the job gains since the Great Recession.www.cnbc.com
Why donāt you look it up
Because you're the one bragging about Obama's strong performance.