I don't think anyone would say that the Obama economy is perfect, but 73 months of unprecedented...

[Iceweasel]

Obama must be the most racist president in history because most the job growth came from redstates.
.

Most of the Job Growth in the past 6 years has been in big cities.

The United States is on track to be the most competitive manufacturing country in the world by 2020. Cheap Labor is losing it's appeal as automation takes over.

SportsOneSource.com - SGB Media

• 
  

  [*]U.S. projected to take number one spot by end of decade
  [*]The U.S. improved its ranking from 4th in 2010 to 2nd in this year's study, and is expected to reach No.1 by 2020.
  [*]As the U.S. invests heavily in talent and technology, the nation ranks highest as an advanced manufacturing economy. The country is highly competitive in terms of the share of high skill and technology contribution to exports and labor productivity as measured to gross domestic product (GDP).
  [*]The U.S. continues to position itself among the global leaders in research and development (R&D) activities by investing in top universities, R&D talent and venture capital.

But I thought the jobs were being sent overseas? Which is it?

 

[Wildman]

Most of the Job Growth in the past 6 years has been in big cities.

yupp!! that is where most of the burger and pizza joints are

 

[Iceweasel]

Discussing the economy in a political context is not really for serious people.

So politics can't effect the economy? LOL

I'll try again.

Partisans discussing economics have zero (0) credibility, because they're partisans and they only look at and leverage data, news, information and opinions that support their political position, and ignore and avoid all of the above that don't.

As they do with pretty much every other topic.

There. That's better.
.

It's an incredibly stupid point of view. You are declaring that no one can support a political ideology and look objectively at the data. All you are doing is preening yourself as some kind of moral high ground. That you think it's credible is what laughable.

Yes, I've come to the conclusion that adherence to a partisan ideology ultimately and literally distorts thought processes.

What I've not yet fully determined is whether hardcore partisans can't be objective due to this, or whether they consciously choose not to be objective and are simply dishonest. My guess, at this point, is that it's some combination therein, dependent upon the situation. Whichever, there is no reason to believe them on pretty much anything, because they are not rational.

And regarding the "moral high ground", I find that pretty ironic. Hardcore partisans are still the minority in this country, they're just much louder. In other words, there are far more of me than there are of you, so there is nothing special about me.

Rather, hardcore partisans have convinced themselves that they and their "side" have all the answers. That sounds pretty narcissistic to me. Yet another reason not to take them seriously.
.

What you determine or not isn't relevant to anyone but yourself. That was my point. Why does it need to be further explained to you?

A hardcore partisan is someone that stands with their party no matter what. I see a whole shitload of criticism of the GOP by conservatives here and pretty much everywhere I look. So I don't think you even know what the term means, you simply throw it out there as a means to dismiss opinions that differ from your own.

I'm not even a party member but that's too much for your toggle switch brain.

 

[Iceweasel]

Most of the Job Growth in the past 6 years has been in big cities.

yupp!! that is where most of the burger and pizza joints are

bbbbbut minimum wage is going up!

 

[Mac1958]

Discussing the economy in a political context is not really for serious people.

So politics can't effect the economy? LOL

I'll try again.

Partisans discussing economics have zero (0) credibility, because they're partisans and they only look at and leverage data, news, information and opinions that support their political position, and ignore and avoid all of the above that don't.

As they do with pretty much every other topic.

There. That's better.
.

It's an incredibly stupid point of view. You are declaring that no one can support a political ideology and look objectively at the data. All you are doing is preening yourself as some kind of moral high ground. That you think it's credible is what laughable.

Yes, I've come to the conclusion that adherence to a partisan ideology ultimately and literally distorts thought processes.

What I've not yet fully determined is whether hardcore partisans can't be objective due to this, or whether they consciously choose not to be objective and are simply dishonest. My guess, at this point, is that it's some combination therein, dependent upon the situation. Whichever, there is no reason to believe them on pretty much anything, because they are not rational.

And regarding the "moral high ground", I find that pretty ironic. Hardcore partisans are still the minority in this country, they're just much louder. In other words, there are far more of me than there are of you, so there is nothing special about me.

Rather, hardcore partisans have convinced themselves that they and their "side" have all the answers. That sounds pretty narcissistic to me. Yet another reason not to take them seriously.
.

What you determine or not isn't relevant to anyone but yourself. That was my point. Why does it need to be further explained to you?

A hardcore partisan is someone that stands with their party no matter what. I see a whole shitload of criticism of the GOP by conservatives here and pretty much everywhere I look. So I don't think you even know what the term means, you simply throw it out there as a means to dismiss opinions that differ from your own.

I'm not even a party member but that's too much for your toggle switch brain.

Well, it looks like I'll have to find a way to proceed without your approval then, huh?
.

 

[PredFan]

The truth is that you cannot keep American capitalism down for long. 0bama managed to do it for 7 years but it has bounced back some despite him. Had McCain or Romney won, the economy would have rebounded fully and almost immediately.

 

[Nyvin]

Obama must be the most racist president in history because most the job growth came from redstates.
.

Most of the Job Growth in the past 6 years has been in big cities.

The United States is on track to be the most competitive manufacturing country in the world by 2020. Cheap Labor is losing it's appeal as automation takes over.

SportsOneSource.com - SGB Media

• 
  

  [*]U.S. projected to take number one spot by end of decade
  [*]The U.S. improved its ranking from 4th in 2010 to 2nd in this year's study, and is expected to reach No.1 by 2020.
  [*]As the U.S. invests heavily in talent and technology, the nation ranks highest as an advanced manufacturing economy. The country is highly competitive in terms of the share of high skill and technology contribution to exports and labor productivity as measured to gross domestic product (GDP).
  [*]The U.S. continues to position itself among the global leaders in research and development (R&D) activities by investing in top universities, R&D talent and venture capital.

But I thought the jobs were being sent overseas? Which is it?

Jobs have not been going over seas (net anyway) for the past 4 years.

 

[Nyvin]

Most of the Job Growth in the past 6 years has been in big cities.

yupp!! that is where most of the burger and pizza joints are

No...that's where employers can find skilled workers.

 

[Iceweasel]

So politics can't effect the economy? LOL

I'll try again.

Partisans discussing economics have zero (0) credibility, because they're partisans and they only look at and leverage data, news, information and opinions that support their political position, and ignore and avoid all of the above that don't.

As they do with pretty much every other topic.

There. That's better.
.

It's an incredibly stupid point of view. You are declaring that no one can support a political ideology and look objectively at the data. All you are doing is preening yourself as some kind of moral high ground. That you think it's credible is what laughable.

Yes, I've come to the conclusion that adherence to a partisan ideology ultimately and literally distorts thought processes.

What I've not yet fully determined is whether hardcore partisans can't be objective due to this, or whether they consciously choose not to be objective and are simply dishonest. My guess, at this point, is that it's some combination therein, dependent upon the situation. Whichever, there is no reason to believe them on pretty much anything, because they are not rational.

And regarding the "moral high ground", I find that pretty ironic. Hardcore partisans are still the minority in this country, they're just much louder. In other words, there are far more of me than there are of you, so there is nothing special about me.

Rather, hardcore partisans have convinced themselves that they and their "side" have all the answers. That sounds pretty narcissistic to me. Yet another reason not to take them seriously.
.

What you determine or not isn't relevant to anyone but yourself. That was my point. Why does it need to be further explained to you?

A hardcore partisan is someone that stands with their party no matter what. I see a whole shitload of criticism of the GOP by conservatives here and pretty much everywhere I look. So I don't think you even know what the term means, you simply throw it out there as a means to dismiss opinions that differ from your own.

I'm not even a party member but that's too much for your toggle switch brain.

Well, it looks like I'll have to find a way to proceed without your approval then, huh?
.

Sure, proceed with your condescending ways and ignore everything that challenges your belief system. But preaching your anti-partisan rhetoric from your perch just looks silly.

 

[Mac1958]

I'll try again.

Partisans discussing economics have zero (0) credibility, because they're partisans and they only look at and leverage data, news, information and opinions that support their political position, and ignore and avoid all of the above that don't.

As they do with pretty much every other topic.

There. That's better.
.

It's an incredibly stupid point of view. You are declaring that no one can support a political ideology and look objectively at the data. All you are doing is preening yourself as some kind of moral high ground. That you think it's credible is what laughable.

Yes, I've come to the conclusion that adherence to a partisan ideology ultimately and literally distorts thought processes.

What I've not yet fully determined is whether hardcore partisans can't be objective due to this, or whether they consciously choose not to be objective and are simply dishonest. My guess, at this point, is that it's some combination therein, dependent upon the situation. Whichever, there is no reason to believe them on pretty much anything, because they are not rational.

And regarding the "moral high ground", I find that pretty ironic. Hardcore partisans are still the minority in this country, they're just much louder. In other words, there are far more of me than there are of you, so there is nothing special about me.

Rather, hardcore partisans have convinced themselves that they and their "side" have all the answers. That sounds pretty narcissistic to me. Yet another reason not to take them seriously.
.

What you determine or not isn't relevant to anyone but yourself. That was my point. Why does it need to be further explained to you?

A hardcore partisan is someone that stands with their party no matter what. I see a whole shitload of criticism of the GOP by conservatives here and pretty much everywhere I look. So I don't think you even know what the term means, you simply throw it out there as a means to dismiss opinions that differ from your own.

I'm not even a party member but that's too much for your toggle switch brain.

Well, it looks like I'll have to find a way to proceed without your approval then, huh?
.

Sure, proceed with your condescending ways and ignore everything that challenges your belief system. But preaching your anti-partisan rhetoric from your perch just looks silly.

Okie dokie!
.

 

[Theowl32]

So politics can't effect the economy? LOL

I'll try again.

Partisans discussing economics have zero (0) credibility, because they're partisans and they only look at and leverage data, news, information and opinions that support their political position, and ignore and avoid all of the above that don't.

As they do with pretty much every other topic.

There. That's better.
.

It's an incredibly stupid point of view. You are declaring that no one can support a political ideology and look objectively at the data. All you are doing is preening yourself as some kind of moral high ground. That you think it's credible is what laughable.

Yes, I've come to the conclusion that adherence to a partisan ideology ultimately and literally distorts thought processes.

What I've not yet fully determined is whether hardcore partisans can't be objective due to this, or whether they consciously choose not to be objective and are simply dishonest. My guess, at this point, is that it's some combination therein, dependent upon the situation. Whichever, there is no reason to believe them on pretty much anything, because they are not rational.

And regarding the "moral high ground", I find that pretty ironic. Hardcore partisans are still the minority in this country, they're just much louder. In other words, there are far more of me than there are of you, so there is nothing special about me.

Rather, hardcore partisans have convinced themselves that they and their "side" have all the answers. That sounds pretty narcissistic to me. Yet another reason not to take them seriously.
.

What you determine or not isn't relevant to anyone but yourself. That was my point. Why does it need to be further explained to you?

A hardcore partisan is someone that stands with their party no matter what. I see a whole shitload of criticism of the GOP by conservatives here and pretty much everywhere I look. So I don't think you even know what the term means, you simply throw it out there as a means to dismiss opinions that differ from your own.

I'm not even a party member but that's too much for your toggle switch brain.

Well, it looks like I'll have to find a way to proceed without your approval then, huh?
.

Mac, just pick a side. It is not always admirable to sit on the fence and be "neutral" and then constantly exalt yourself incessantly from some moral platitude.

You are either pro-free market or not. You are against America and the Constitution or you are not.

Please do not suggest that there are conservatives on this board that do not criticize the GOP.

Let me know when you have seen one left wing poster that has criticized Hillary or Sanders.

Which makes me wonder. Why would any American be against the free market which has proven to be so beneficial for anyone in the poor class to make it. Thousands and thousands have made it due to the opportunities provided to them.

 

[Mac1958]

I'll try again.

Partisans discussing economics have zero (0) credibility, because they're partisans and they only look at and leverage data, news, information and opinions that support their political position, and ignore and avoid all of the above that don't.

As they do with pretty much every other topic.

There. That's better.
.

It's an incredibly stupid point of view. You are declaring that no one can support a political ideology and look objectively at the data. All you are doing is preening yourself as some kind of moral high ground. That you think it's credible is what laughable.

Yes, I've come to the conclusion that adherence to a partisan ideology ultimately and literally distorts thought processes.

What I've not yet fully determined is whether hardcore partisans can't be objective due to this, or whether they consciously choose not to be objective and are simply dishonest. My guess, at this point, is that it's some combination therein, dependent upon the situation. Whichever, there is no reason to believe them on pretty much anything, because they are not rational.

And regarding the "moral high ground", I find that pretty ironic. Hardcore partisans are still the minority in this country, they're just much louder. In other words, there are far more of me than there are of you, so there is nothing special about me.

Rather, hardcore partisans have convinced themselves that they and their "side" have all the answers. That sounds pretty narcissistic to me. Yet another reason not to take them seriously.
.

What you determine or not isn't relevant to anyone but yourself. That was my point. Why does it need to be further explained to you?

A hardcore partisan is someone that stands with their party no matter what. I see a whole shitload of criticism of the GOP by conservatives here and pretty much everywhere I look. So I don't think you even know what the term means, you simply throw it out there as a means to dismiss opinions that differ from your own.

I'm not even a party member but that's too much for your toggle switch brain.

Well, it looks like I'll have to find a way to proceed without your approval then, huh?
.

Mac, just pick a side. It is not always admirable to sit on the fence and be "neutral" and then constantly exalt yourself incessantly from some moral platitude.

You are either pro-free market or not. You are against America and the Constitution or you are not.

Please do not suggest that there are conservatives on this board that do not criticize the GOP.

Let me know when you have seen one left wing poster that has criticized Hillary or Sanders.

Which makes me wonder. Why would any American be against the free market which has proven to be so beneficial for anyone in the poor class to make it. Thousands and thousands have made it due to the opportunities provided to them.

Why in the world would I want to "pick a side"? What is this, a video game? Pro Wrestling? Mighty Morphin Power Rangers™?

Life is complicated, and the term "free market" is a perfect example. There is no such thing as "free markets", outside of perhaps some village in an African forest.

Am I wrong? Would you like to show me a "free market" in an advanced civilization?

"Free markets", like most everything else (such as capitalism itself) exist on a continuum. There are laws, regulations, statutes. Add or subtract or revise one of them and we move on that continuum.

Life isn't a bumper sticker, and I'm not going to pretend that it is just so that I can be on a "team".
.

 

[Theowl32]

It's an incredibly stupid point of view. You are declaring that no one can support a political ideology and look objectively at the data. All you are doing is preening yourself as some kind of moral high ground. That you think it's credible is what laughable.

Yes, I've come to the conclusion that adherence to a partisan ideology ultimately and literally distorts thought processes.

What I've not yet fully determined is whether hardcore partisans can't be objective due to this, or whether they consciously choose not to be objective and are simply dishonest. My guess, at this point, is that it's some combination therein, dependent upon the situation. Whichever, there is no reason to believe them on pretty much anything, because they are not rational.

And regarding the "moral high ground", I find that pretty ironic. Hardcore partisans are still the minority in this country, they're just much louder. In other words, there are far more of me than there are of you, so there is nothing special about me.

Rather, hardcore partisans have convinced themselves that they and their "side" have all the answers. That sounds pretty narcissistic to me. Yet another reason not to take them seriously.
.

What you determine or not isn't relevant to anyone but yourself. That was my point. Why does it need to be further explained to you?

A hardcore partisan is someone that stands with their party no matter what. I see a whole shitload of criticism of the GOP by conservatives here and pretty much everywhere I look. So I don't think you even know what the term means, you simply throw it out there as a means to dismiss opinions that differ from your own.

I'm not even a party member but that's too much for your toggle switch brain.

Well, it looks like I'll have to find a way to proceed without your approval then, huh?
.

Mac, just pick a side. It is not always admirable to sit on the fence and be "neutral" and then constantly exalt yourself incessantly from some moral platitude.

You are either pro-free market or not. You are against America and the Constitution or you are not.

Please do not suggest that there are conservatives on this board that do not criticize the GOP.

Let me know when you have seen one left wing poster that has criticized Hillary or Sanders.

Which makes me wonder. Why would any American be against the free market which has proven to be so beneficial for anyone in the poor class to make it. Thousands and thousands have made it due to the opportunities provided to them.

Why in the world would I want to "pick a side"? What is this, a video game? Pro Wrestling? Mighty Morphin Power Rangers™?

Life is complicated, and the term "free market" is a perfect example. There is no such thing as "free markets", outside of perhaps some village in an African forest.

Am I wrong? Would you like to show me a "free market" in an advanced civilization?

"Free markets", like most everything else (such as capitalism itself) exist on a continuum. There are laws, regulations, statutes. Add or subtract or revise one of them and we move on that continuum.

Life isn't a bumper sticker, and I'm not going to pretend that it is just so that I can be on a "team".
.

So when we criticize the GOP.......

Oh never mind.

You are just so great.

 

[Mac1958]

Yes, I've come to the conclusion that adherence to a partisan ideology ultimately and literally distorts thought processes.

What I've not yet fully determined is whether hardcore partisans can't be objective due to this, or whether they consciously choose not to be objective and are simply dishonest. My guess, at this point, is that it's some combination therein, dependent upon the situation. Whichever, there is no reason to believe them on pretty much anything, because they are not rational.

And regarding the "moral high ground", I find that pretty ironic. Hardcore partisans are still the minority in this country, they're just much louder. In other words, there are far more of me than there are of you, so there is nothing special about me.

Rather, hardcore partisans have convinced themselves that they and their "side" have all the answers. That sounds pretty narcissistic to me. Yet another reason not to take them seriously.
.

What you determine or not isn't relevant to anyone but yourself. That was my point. Why does it need to be further explained to you?

A hardcore partisan is someone that stands with their party no matter what. I see a whole shitload of criticism of the GOP by conservatives here and pretty much everywhere I look. So I don't think you even know what the term means, you simply throw it out there as a means to dismiss opinions that differ from your own.

I'm not even a party member but that's too much for your toggle switch brain.

Well, it looks like I'll have to find a way to proceed without your approval then, huh?
.

Mac, just pick a side. It is not always admirable to sit on the fence and be "neutral" and then constantly exalt yourself incessantly from some moral platitude.

You are either pro-free market or not. You are against America and the Constitution or you are not.

Please do not suggest that there are conservatives on this board that do not criticize the GOP.

Let me know when you have seen one left wing poster that has criticized Hillary or Sanders.

Which makes me wonder. Why would any American be against the free market which has proven to be so beneficial for anyone in the poor class to make it. Thousands and thousands have made it due to the opportunities provided to them.

Why in the world would I want to "pick a side"? What is this, a video game? Pro Wrestling? Mighty Morphin Power Rangers™?

Life is complicated, and the term "free market" is a perfect example. There is no such thing as "free markets", outside of perhaps some village in an African forest.

Am I wrong? Would you like to show me a "free market" in an advanced civilization?

"Free markets", like most everything else (such as capitalism itself) exist on a continuum. There are laws, regulations, statutes. Add or subtract or revise one of them and we move on that continuum.

Life isn't a bumper sticker, and I'm not going to pretend that it is just so that I can be on a "team".
.

So when we criticize the GOP.......

Oh never mind.

You are just so great.

I'm just honest.

If I said something you feel is incorrect, point it out.
.

 

[Iceweasel]

Why in the world would I want to "pick a side"? What is this, a video game? Pro Wrestling? Mighty Morphin Power Rangers™?

Life is complicated, and the term "free market" is a perfect example. There is no such thing as "free markets", outside of perhaps some village in an African forest.

Am I wrong? Would you like to show me a "free market" in an advanced civilization?

"Free markets", like most everything else (such as capitalism itself) exist on a continuum. There are laws, regulations, statutes. Add or subtract or revise one of them and we move on that continuum.

Life isn't a bumper sticker, and I'm not going to pretend that it is just so that I can be on a "team".
.

Ah, there you go, right on cue. The term "free market" has meaning to honest people. No, it's not a purely free market, nothing is pure. Purity is a religious concept. It just means not regulated to the point it becomes detrimental. Now, us right wing "partisan" hacks would say the market is too heavily regulated, can quote sources that show the harm it's doing business, the left wants even more thinking government can run business better than business and you pop in and claim it's all a bunch of partisanship. Implying no point is valid because it doesn't pass your purity test.

 

[NYcarbineer]

...job growth is anything but a "bad economy ".

I mean okay, the labor participation rate is pretty low and that does matter, but for republicans to pretend that means the economy is shit is just disingenuous bullshit. I mean, Christ the Great Recession began under Bush and ended 6 months into Obama's presidency. Most of that can be directly attributed to Obama's stimulus package. According to the CBO, the stimulus created 3 million private jobs. Since then, we have had NON STOP Jon growth. That is unheard of.

And sure, wages are low under Obama. However, like the labor participation rate, they began to decline BEFORE obama's presidency. Obama tried to fix this by raising the minimum wage to a very reasonable 10.10 per hour.

Face it repubs. Your party is a joke.

Right On!!!!

They either can' read or don't want to. All anybody needs to do is think back before Bush started. Bill Clinton left an unemployment rate of 4.3% and essentially anybody who wanted to work had a job. The budgets for 1999 and 2000 left a surplus. All Bush had to do was leave things alone. He couldn't stand it so he cut taxes for the rich in 2001 and 2003 and doubled the national debt. Now a large portion of Obama's budgets, about two trillion dollars have gone to pay interest on the existing debt.

What are you history fucking stupid or just 16 years old?


Why did he lower taxes ? Because we had a mini recession......why did Obama extend those tax cuts and latter make some of them permanent?????

He didn't make them permanent. The top rate cut expired...

...and the deficit's been falling ever since. What a coincidence.

 

[NYcarbineer]

You don't like this economy? Wait till you get the Trump economy. Now he says he'll pay off the national debt in 8 years.
Where do you suppose that money will come from?

 

[Mac1958]

Why in the world would I want to "pick a side"? What is this, a video game? Pro Wrestling? Mighty Morphin Power Rangers™?

Life is complicated, and the term "free market" is a perfect example. There is no such thing as "free markets", outside of perhaps some village in an African forest.

Am I wrong? Would you like to show me a "free market" in an advanced civilization?

"Free markets", like most everything else (such as capitalism itself) exist on a continuum. There are laws, regulations, statutes. Add or subtract or revise one of them and we move on that continuum.

Life isn't a bumper sticker, and I'm not going to pretend that it is just so that I can be on a "team".
.

Ah, there you go, right on cue. The term "free market" has meaning to honest people. No, it's not a purely free market, nothing is pure. Purity is a religious concept. It just means not regulated to the point it becomes detrimental. Now, us right wing "partisan" hacks would say the market is too heavily regulated, can quote sources that show the harm it's doing business, the left wants even more thinking government can run business better than business and you pop in and claim it's all a bunch of partisanship. Implying no point is valid because it doesn't pass your purity test.

You may want to look at post 31, where Theowl32 said, "You are either pro-free market or not. You are against America and the Constitution or you are not."

That isn't purity? That isn't binary? It's a perfect example of my point, whether you'll admit it or not.
.

 

[Wyatt earp]

...job growth is anything but a "bad economy ".

I mean okay, the labor participation rate is pretty low and that does matter, but for republicans to pretend that means the economy is shit is just disingenuous bullshit. I mean, Christ the Great Recession began under Bush and ended 6 months into Obama's presidency. Most of that can be directly attributed to Obama's stimulus package. According to the CBO, the stimulus created 3 million private jobs. Since then, we have had NON STOP Jon growth. That is unheard of.

And sure, wages are low under Obama. However, like the labor participation rate, they began to decline BEFORE obama's presidency. Obama tried to fix this by raising the minimum wage to a very reasonable 10.10 per hour.

Face it repubs. Your party is a joke.

Right On!!!!

They either can' read or don't want to. All anybody needs to do is think back before Bush started. Bill Clinton left an unemployment rate of 4.3% and essentially anybody who wanted to work had a job. The budgets for 1999 and 2000 left a surplus. All Bush had to do was leave things alone. He couldn't stand it so he cut taxes for the rich in 2001 and 2003 and doubled the national debt. Now a large portion of Obama's budgets, about two trillion dollars have gone to pay interest on the existing debt.

What are you history fucking stupid or just 16 years old?


Why did he lower taxes ? Because we had a mini recession......why did Obama extend those tax cuts and latter make some of them permanent?????

He didn't make them permanent. The top rate cut expired...

...and the deficit's been falling ever since. What a coincidence.

I specifically said "make some of them permenet"


.

 

[NYcarbineer]

...job growth is anything but a "bad economy ".

I mean okay, the labor participation rate is pretty low and that does matter, but for republicans to pretend that means the economy is shit is just disingenuous bullshit. I mean, Christ the Great Recession began under Bush and ended 6 months into Obama's presidency. Most of that can be directly attributed to Obama's stimulus package. According to the CBO, the stimulus created 3 million private jobs. Since then, we have had NON STOP Jon growth. That is unheard of.

And sure, wages are low under Obama. However, like the labor participation rate, they began to decline BEFORE obama's presidency. Obama tried to fix this by raising the minimum wage to a very reasonable 10.10 per hour.

Face it repubs. Your party is a joke.

Right On!!!!

They either can' read or don't want to. All anybody needs to do is think back before Bush started. Bill Clinton left an unemployment rate of 4.3% and essentially anybody who wanted to work had a job. The budgets for 1999 and 2000 left a surplus. All Bush had to do was leave things alone. He couldn't stand it so he cut taxes for the rich in 2001 and 2003 and doubled the national debt. Now a large portion of Obama's budgets, about two trillion dollars have gone to pay interest on the existing debt.

What are you history fucking stupid or just 16 years old?


Why did he lower taxes ? Because we had a mini recession......why did Obama extend those tax cuts and latter make some of them permanent?????

He didn't make them permanent. The top rate cut expired...

...and the deficit's been falling ever since. What a coincidence.

I specifically said "make some of them permenet"


.

Okay, so the president made the tax structure more progressive and the deficit has been falling ever since.