Obama Administration > Economic Disaster

[rightwinger]

Given the level of cooperation that Pres. Obama has gotten from congress, I wouldn't blame or give credit to him for much of anything.

Agree

Considering Republicans did everything in their power to PREVENT a recovery, Obama did outstandingly well

 

[BuckToothMoron]

Ronald Reagan brought forth an annual real GDP growth of 3.5%.
Barack Obama will be lucky to average a 1.55% GDP growth rate.

This ranks Obama as the fourth worst presidency on record.

So that is what you think we deserved

Yes, we got the growth that we deserved. We elected a Congress that was more concerned with who gets to call the shots rather than what can we do to save the economy. Republicans specifically encouraged the economy to sputter in order to enhance their election chances

What should we have done?
Used near zero interest rates, high unemployment and low wages to start massive infrastructure improvements that would have given you the GDP you desire. Instead we played austerity games, threatened to default on debt and reduced government at a time the economy needed an infusion of cash

So, Yes
We got the recovery we deserved

So on one hand you said BO -
Added 13 million jobs
Cut unemployment rate by 5%

But at the same time we should have used high unemployment, low wages and low interest rates to rebuild the infrastructure and then the economy would have grown more than 1.5%.

I'm confused now, are you saying the 13 million jobs BO supposedly created are low wage jobs. You can't have it both ways. You can't credit BO for a robust economy which created millions of good paying jobs, and then say he should have not created those jobs, but rather used depressed wages to rebuild the infrastructure.

And tell me the actions that congress took to sputter the economy.

Dude, you have been reading too many bumper stickers, and I suggest you put the shovel down before you get any deeper.

Tell me how BO put $800 billion into the economy.

Do you understand what the president can do regarding monetary policy? If so, tell me.

 

[coldjoint]

More than doubled the stock market / that helped the 1% Democrats rail against
Saved the banks and auto companies/ see above
Added $50 trillion to nations wealth/ did not pay down debt
Added 13 million jobs/ over half are part time
Cut unemployment rate by 5%/ cooked numbers

Not even worthy of a response

Denial does not constitute a response....post YOUR numbers if you disagree

Who was helped by the stock market doubling? The middle class? Did it take anyone off welfare?
And saving banks and unions, help the one percent and union auto workers. A vast majority of the country.
Obamacare shot the 40 hour week for a lot of people. The new jobs pay shit.
Unemployment figures do not count those with expired benefits or the people out of the work force. That 5% is bullshit. Actually unemployment is at least 12%.

 

[rightwinger]

Ronald Reagan brought forth an annual real GDP growth of 3.5%.
Barack Obama will be lucky to average a 1.55% GDP growth rate.

This ranks Obama as the fourth worst presidency on record.

So that is what you think we deserved

Yes, we got the growth that we deserved. We elected a Congress that was more concerned with who gets to call the shots rather than what can we do to save the economy. Republicans specifically encouraged the economy to sputter in order to enhance their election chances

What should we have done?
Used near zero interest rates, high unemployment and low wages to start massive infrastructure improvements that would have given you the GDP you desire. Instead we played austerity games, threatened to default on debt and reduced government at a time the economy needed an infusion of cash

So, Yes
We got the recovery we deserved

So on one hand you said BO -
Added 13 million jobs
Cut unemployment rate by 5%

But at the same time we should have used high unemployment, low wages and low interest rates to rebuild the infrastructure and then the economy would have grown more than 1.5%.

I'm confused now, are you saying the 13 million jobs BO supposedly created are low wage jobs. You can't have it both ways. You can't credit BO for a robust economy which created millions of good paying jobs, and then say he should have not created those jobs, but rather used depressed wages to rebuild the infrastructure.

And tell me the actions that congress took to sputter the economy.

Dude, you have been reading too many bumper stickers, and I suggest you put the shovel down before you get any deeper.

Tell me how BO put $800 billion into the economy.

Do you understand what the president can do regarding monetary policy? If so, tell me.

There is no evidence that the 13 million jobs are low wage jobs...it is rightwing propaganda. BLS statistics show job growth in all sectors


What did Congress do to sputter the economy?

1. Insisted on tackling the deficit at a time we had 10% unemployment
2. Refused to invest in needed infrastructure at a time of high unemployment and low interest rates
3. Threatened default on our debt
4. Refused to raise minimum wage

 

[rightwinger]

More than doubled the stock market / that helped the 1% Democrats rail against
Saved the banks and auto companies/ see above
Added $50 trillion to nations wealth/ did not pay down debt
Added 13 million jobs/ over half are part time
Cut unemployment rate by 5%/ cooked numbers

Not even worthy of a response

Denial does not constitute a response....post YOUR numbers if you disagree

Who was helped by the stock market doubling? The middle class? Did it take anyone off welfare?
And saving banks and unions, help the one percent and union auto workers. A vast majority of the country.
Obamacare shot the 40 hour week for a lot of people. The new jobs pay shit.
Unemployment figures do not count those with expired benefits or the people out of the work force. That 5% is bullshit. Actually unemployment is at least 12%.

-You can't have it both ways, You can't accuse Obama of a redistributing the wealth plot and then complain when the economic recovery goes primarily to the wealthy

-Auto workers made bigger concessions in the bailout than auto executives did

-In spite of Republican predictions of an economic "Trainwreck" due to Obamacare, it never happened. We added millions of jobs after Obamacare

-U3 unemployment is calculated the same way it has been for decades. U3 dropped from 10.1 % to 4.9%

 

[Care4all]

Obama said vote for me I'll fix everything, well?

When did he say that?

he didn't say it....the economic collapse was a shocker to everyone, and it was just 6 weeks out from the election.

 

[Norman]

You can post this after what Bush left behind?

THAT was a TRUE disaster. We were literally hours from abject collapse.

If you're going to blame Obama, you'll also need to blame W.
.

You don't need to blame Bush for Obama's failures.

That being said, you do need to blame him for his own failures. But do note, Clinton's policies were very responsible for the housing collapse as well.

 

[rightwinger]

You can post this after what Bush left behind?

THAT was a TRUE disaster. We were literally hours from abject collapse.

If you're going to blame Obama, you'll also need to blame W.
.

You don't need to blame Bush for Obama's failures.

That being said, you do need to blame him for his own failures. But do note, Clinton's policies were very responsible for the housing collapse as well.

You just said Obama can't blame Bush for what happened during his term and in the very next breath blame Clinton for Bush's housing collapse

 

[Norman]

You can post this after what Bush left behind?

THAT was a TRUE disaster. We were literally hours from abject collapse.

If you're going to blame Obama, you'll also need to blame W.
.

You don't need to blame Bush for Obama's failures.

That being said, you do need to blame him for his own failures. But do note, Clinton's policies were very responsible for the housing collapse as well.

You just said Obama can't blame Bush for what happened during his term and in the very next breath blame Clinton for Bush's housing collapse

Learn to read... I said for his FAILURES, not for everything that happened under his watch.

 

[coldjoint]

More than doubled the stock market / that helped the 1% Democrats rail against
Saved the banks and auto companies/ see above
Added $50 trillion to nations wealth/ did not pay down debt
Added 13 million jobs/ over half are part time
Cut unemployment rate by 5%/ cooked numbers

Not even worthy of a response

Denial does not constitute a response....post YOUR numbers if you disagree

Who was helped by the stock market doubling? The middle class? Did it take anyone off welfare?
And saving banks and unions, help the one percent and union auto workers. A vast majority of the country.
Obamacare shot the 40 hour week for a lot of people. The new jobs pay shit.
Unemployment figures do not count those with expired benefits or the people out of the work force. That 5% is bullshit. Actually unemployment is at least 12%.

-You can't have it both ways, You can't accuse Obama of a redistributing the wealth plot and then complain when the economic recovery goes primarily to the wealthy

-Auto workers made bigger concessions in the bailout than auto executives did

-In spite of Republican predictions of an economic "Trainwreck" due to Obamacare, it never happened. We added millions of jobs after Obamacare

-U3 unemployment is calculated the same way it has been for decades. U3 dropped from 10.1 % to 4.9%

In 1994, the BLS changed the way in which it counts “discouraged” workers for the U-3 index. If one is unemployed for more than 52 weeks, even if one continues to look for employment, one is dropped from the labor force. A smaller denominator with the same number employed leads to a higher employment rate and a lower unemployment rate. Ask yourself how much sense this makes in today’s world where the average unemployment duration is 40 weeks and there have been several years where unemployment benefits last for 99 weeks.

Decades is right. That change made that administration look good. Democrats.

All in all, the U-3 unemployment number is deeply flawed and should not be relied on as the business media and even the capital markets do. A better (though still flawed) indicator of labor market conditions is the U-6 measure. For both August and September, U-6 showed an unemployment rate of 14.7%. Unlike U-3, U-6 adds back to both the labor force and to the unemployed “discouraged’ and “marginally attached” workers, i.e., those who have stopped looking for work but still want a job, and accounts for part-time workers who want full time employment. The flaw is that U-6 removes the long-term discouraged worker after 52 weeks of unemployment. Nevertheless, it is still a much better indicator than U-3. John Williams estimates that if U-6 counted the long-term discouraged workers, the unemployment rate would be 22.8%.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/greatsp...jack-welch-has-a-point-about-unemployment-num
You are not earning your paycheck.

 

[rightwinger]

You can post this after what Bush left behind?

THAT was a TRUE disaster. We were literally hours from abject collapse.

If you're going to blame Obama, you'll also need to blame W.
.

You don't need to blame Bush for Obama's failures.

That being said, you do need to blame him for his own failures. But do note, Clinton's policies were very responsible for the housing collapse as well.

You just said Obama can't blame Bush for what happened during his term and in the very next breath blame Clinton for Bush's housing collapse

Learn to read... I said for his FAILURES, not for everything that happened under his watch.

Obama inherited the Bush economy and two wars

You can't absolve Bush's culpability just because he dumped his FAILURES on someone else

 

[BuckToothMoron]

Ronald Reagan brought forth an annual real GDP growth of 3.5%.
Barack Obama will be lucky to average a 1.55% GDP growth rate.

This ranks Obama as the fourth worst presidency on record.

So that is what you think we deserved

Yes, we got the growth that we deserved. We elected a Congress that was more concerned with who gets to call the shots rather than what can we do to save the economy. Republicans specifically encouraged the economy to sputter in order to enhance their election chances

What should we have done?
Used near zero interest rates, high unemployment and low wages to start massive infrastructure improvements that would have given you the GDP you desire. Instead we played austerity games, threatened to default on debt and reduced government at a time the economy needed an infusion of cash

So, Yes
We got the recovery we deserved

So on one hand you said BO -
Added 13 million jobs
Cut unemployment rate by 5%

But at the same time we should have used high unemployment, low wages and low interest rates to rebuild the infrastructure and then the economy would have grown more than 1.5%.

I'm confused now, are you saying the 13 million jobs BO supposedly created are low wage jobs. You can't have it both ways. You can't credit BO for a robust economy which created millions of good paying jobs, and then say he should have not created those jobs, but rather used depressed wages to rebuild the infrastructure.

And tell me the actions that congress took to sputter the economy.

Dude, you have been reading too many bumper stickers, and I suggest you put the shovel down before you get any deeper.

Tell me how BO put $800 billion into the economy.

Do you understand what the president can do regarding monetary policy? If so, tell me.

There is no evidence that the 13 million jobs are low wage jobs...it is rightwing propaganda. BLS statistics show job growth in all sectors


What did Congress do to sputter the economy?

1. Insisted on tackling the deficit at a time we had 10% unemployment
2. Refused to invest in needed infrastructure at a time of high unemployment and low interest rates
3. Threatened default on our debt
4. Refused to raise minimum wage

Actions, what ACTIONS did congress take to sputter the economy? Insisting on tackling the deficit is only words. What bill to invest in infrastructure did they deny? Threatening to default on debt? When did they do that, and if they did do it, how did that sputter the economy? Any state can raise minimum wage when ever they want, and it should be left to the states. And how does somebody flipping burgers making an additional $50 a week really drive the economy?

You keep making statements and allegations without providing any information via links to support them. You my friend are a walking bumper sticker with the depth of a kiddie pool.

You refuse to address most of my questions-

How BO put $800 billion into the economy?
What influence the POTUS has on monetary policy?
What specifically congress did via bills passed or not passed to adversely effect growth during his presidency. Recall, the Dems controlled congress the first 4 years of his presidency, 2 years it was split, and 2 years it was under GOP control.

Answer those questions or go outside and put more bumper stickers on your Prius.

 

[Norman]

You can post this after what Bush left behind?

THAT was a TRUE disaster. We were literally hours from abject collapse.

If you're going to blame Obama, you'll also need to blame W.
.

You don't need to blame Bush for Obama's failures.

That being said, you do need to blame him for his own failures. But do note, Clinton's policies were very responsible for the housing collapse as well.

You just said Obama can't blame Bush for what happened during his term and in the very next breath blame Clinton for Bush's housing collapse

Learn to read... I said for his FAILURES, not for everything that happened under his watch.

Obama inherited the Bush economy and two wars

You can't absolve Bush's culpability just because he dumped his FAILURES on someone else

I blame him for the failures of his own, not Bush failures.

Is there something so difficult about this? It wasn't Bush who passed Obamacare into law.

 

[rightwinger]

More than doubled the stock market / that helped the 1% Democrats rail against
Saved the banks and auto companies/ see above
Added $50 trillion to nations wealth/ did not pay down debt
Added 13 million jobs/ over half are part time
Cut unemployment rate by 5%/ cooked numbers

Not even worthy of a response

Denial does not constitute a response....post YOUR numbers if you disagree

Who was helped by the stock market doubling? The middle class? Did it take anyone off welfare?
And saving banks and unions, help the one percent and union auto workers. A vast majority of the country.
Obamacare shot the 40 hour week for a lot of people. The new jobs pay shit.
Unemployment figures do not count those with expired benefits or the people out of the work force. That 5% is bullshit. Actually unemployment is at least 12%.

-You can't have it both ways, You can't accuse Obama of a redistributing the wealth plot and then complain when the economic recovery goes primarily to the wealthy

-Auto workers made bigger concessions in the bailout than auto executives did

-In spite of Republican predictions of an economic "Trainwreck" due to Obamacare, it never happened. We added millions of jobs after Obamacare

-U3 unemployment is calculated the same way it has been for decades. U3 dropped from 10.1 % to 4.9%

In 1994, the BLS changed the way in which it counts “discouraged” workers for the U-3 index. If one is unemployed for more than 52 weeks, even if one continues to look for employment, one is dropped from the labor force. A smaller denominator with the same number employed leads to a higher employment rate and a lower unemployment rate. Ask yourself how much sense this makes in today’s world where the average unemployment duration is 40 weeks and there have been several years where unemployment benefits last for 99 weeks.

Decades is right. That change made that administration look good. Democrats.

All in all, the U-3 unemployment number is deeply flawed and should not be relied on as the business media and even the capital markets do. A better (though still flawed) indicator of labor market conditions is the U-6 measure. For both August and September, U-6 showed an unemployment rate of 14.7%. Unlike U-3, U-6 adds back to both the labor force and to the unemployed “discouraged’ and “marginally attached” workers, i.e., those who have stopped looking for work but still want a job, and accounts for part-time workers who want full time employment. The flaw is that U-6 removes the long-term discouraged worker after 52 weeks of unemployment. Nevertheless, it is still a much better indicator than U-3. John Williams estimates that if U-6 counted the long-term discouraged workers, the unemployment rate would be 22.8%.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/greatsp...jack-welch-has-a-point-about-unemployment-num
You are not earning your paycheck.

1994-2016 = 22 years

Two decades

 

[rightwinger]

Ronald Reagan brought forth an annual real GDP growth of 3.5%.
Barack Obama will be lucky to average a 1.55% GDP growth rate.

This ranks Obama as the fourth worst presidency on record.

So that is what you think we deserved

Yes, we got the growth that we deserved. We elected a Congress that was more concerned with who gets to call the shots rather than what can we do to save the economy. Republicans specifically encouraged the economy to sputter in order to enhance their election chances

What should we have done?
Used near zero interest rates, high unemployment and low wages to start massive infrastructure improvements that would have given you the GDP you desire. Instead we played austerity games, threatened to default on debt and reduced government at a time the economy needed an infusion of cash

So, Yes
We got the recovery we deserved

So on one hand you said BO -
Added 13 million jobs
Cut unemployment rate by 5%

But at the same time we should have used high unemployment, low wages and low interest rates to rebuild the infrastructure and then the economy would have grown more than 1.5%.

I'm confused now, are you saying the 13 million jobs BO supposedly created are low wage jobs. You can't have it both ways. You can't credit BO for a robust economy which created millions of good paying jobs, and then say he should have not created those jobs, but rather used depressed wages to rebuild the infrastructure.

And tell me the actions that congress took to sputter the economy.

Dude, you have been reading too many bumper stickers, and I suggest you put the shovel down before you get any deeper.

Tell me how BO put $800 billion into the economy.

Do you understand what the president can do regarding monetary policy? If so, tell me.

There is no evidence that the 13 million jobs are low wage jobs...it is rightwing propaganda. BLS statistics show job growth in all sectors


What did Congress do to sputter the economy?

1. Insisted on tackling the deficit at a time we had 10% unemployment
2. Refused to invest in needed infrastructure at a time of high unemployment and low interest rates
3. Threatened default on our debt
4. Refused to raise minimum wage

Actions, what ACTIONS did congress take to sputter the economy? Insisting on tackling the deficit is only words. What bill to invest in infrastructure did they deny? Threatening to default on debt? When did they do that, and if they did do it, how did that sputter the economy? Any state can raise minimum wage when ever they want, and it should be left to the states. And how does somebody flipping burgers making an additional $50 a week really drive the economy?

You keep making statements and allegations without providing any information via links to support them. You my friend are a walking bumper sticker with the depth of a kiddie pool.

You refuse to address most of my questions-

How BO put $800 billion into the economy?
What influence the POTUS has on monetary policy?
What specifically congress did via bills passed or not passed to adversely effect growth during his presidency. Recall, the Dems controlled congress the first 4 years of his presidency, 2 years it was split, and 2 years it was under GOP control.

Answer those questions or go outside and put more bumper stickers on your Prius.

American Jobs Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

1. Cutting and suspending $245 billion worth of payroll taxes for qualifying employers and 160 million medium to low income employees.
2. Spending $62 billion for a Pathways Back to Work Program for expanding opportunities for low-income youth and adults.
3. $49 billion - Extending unemployment benefits for up to 6 million long-term beneficiaries.
4. $8 billion - Jobs tax credit for the long term unemployed.
5. $5 billion - Pathways back to work fund.[15]
6. Spending $50 billion on both new & pre-existing infrastructure projects.
7. Spending $35 billion in additional funding to protect the jobs of teachers, police officers, and firefighters
8. Spending $30 billion to modernize at least 35,000 public schools and community colleges.
9. Spending $15 billion on a program that would hire construction workers to help rehabilitate and refurbishing hundreds of thousands of foreclosed homes and businesses.
10. Creating the National Infrastructure Bank (capitalized with $10 billion), originally proposed in 2007, to help fund infrastructure via private and public capital.
11. Creating a nationwide, interoperable wireless network for public safety, while expanding accessibility to high-speed wireless services.
12. Prohibiting discrimination in hiring against persons who are unemployed because of their status as unemployed persons..
13. Loosening regulations on small businesses that wish to raise capital, including through crowdfunding, while retaining investor protections.

 

[coldjoint]

More than doubled the stock market / that helped the 1% Democrats rail against
Saved the banks and auto companies/ see above
Added $50 trillion to nations wealth/ did not pay down debt
Added 13 million jobs/ over half are part time
Cut unemployment rate by 5%/ cooked numbers

Not even worthy of a response

Denial does not constitute a response....post YOUR numbers if you disagree

Who was helped by the stock market doubling? The middle class? Did it take anyone off welfare?
And saving banks and unions, help the one percent and union auto workers. A vast majority of the country.
Obamacare shot the 40 hour week for a lot of people. The new jobs pay shit.
Unemployment figures do not count those with expired benefits or the people out of the work force. That 5% is bullshit. Actually unemployment is at least 12%.

-You can't have it both ways, You can't accuse Obama of a redistributing the wealth plot and then complain when the economic recovery goes primarily to the wealthy

-Auto workers made bigger concessions in the bailout than auto executives did

-In spite of Republican predictions of an economic "Trainwreck" due to Obamacare, it never happened. We added millions of jobs after Obamacare

-U3 unemployment is calculated the same way it has been for decades. U3 dropped from 10.1 % to 4.9%

In 1994, the BLS changed the way in which it counts “discouraged” workers for the U-3 index. If one is unemployed for more than 52 weeks, even if one continues to look for employment, one is dropped from the labor force. A smaller denominator with the same number employed leads to a higher employment rate and a lower unemployment rate. Ask yourself how much sense this makes in today’s world where the average unemployment duration is 40 weeks and there have been several years where unemployment benefits last for 99 weeks.

Decades is right. That change made that administration look good. Democrats.

All in all, the U-3 unemployment number is deeply flawed and should not be relied on as the business media and even the capital markets do. A better (though still flawed) indicator of labor market conditions is the U-6 measure. For both August and September, U-6 showed an unemployment rate of 14.7%. Unlike U-3, U-6 adds back to both the labor force and to the unemployed “discouraged’ and “marginally attached” workers, i.e., those who have stopped looking for work but still want a job, and accounts for part-time workers who want full time employment. The flaw is that U-6 removes the long-term discouraged worker after 52 weeks of unemployment. Nevertheless, it is still a much better indicator than U-3. John Williams estimates that if U-6 counted the long-term discouraged workers, the unemployment rate would be 22.8%.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/greatsp...jack-welch-has-a-point-about-unemployment-num
You are not earning your paycheck.

1994-2016 = 22 years

Two decades

And the actual numbers. You are using "kitman" are you Islamic? Kitman is telling only half of the truth.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

Ronald Reagan brought forth an annual real GDP growth of 3.5%.
Barack Obama will be lucky to average a 1.55% GDP growth rate.

This ranks Obama as the fourth worst presidency on record.

So that is what you think we deserved

Yes, we got the growth that we deserved. We elected a Congress that was more concerned with who gets to call the shots rather than what can we do to save the economy. Republicans specifically encouraged the economy to sputter in order to enhance their election chances

What should we have done?
Used near zero interest rates, high unemployment and low wages to start massive infrastructure improvements that would have given you the GDP you desire. Instead we played austerity games, threatened to default on debt and reduced government at a time the economy needed an infusion of cash

So, Yes
We got the recovery we deserved

So on one hand you said BO -
Added 13 million jobs
Cut unemployment rate by 5%

But at the same time we should have used high unemployment, low wages and low interest rates to rebuild the infrastructure and then the economy would have grown more than 1.5%.

I'm confused now, are you saying the 13 million jobs BO supposedly created are low wage jobs. You can't have it both ways. You can't credit BO for a robust economy which created millions of good paying jobs, and then say he should have not created those jobs, but rather used depressed wages to rebuild the infrastructure.

And tell me the actions that congress took to sputter the economy.

Dude, you have been reading too many bumper stickers, and I suggest you put the shovel down before you get any deeper.

Tell me how BO put $800 billion into the economy.

Do you understand what the president can do regarding monetary policy? If so, tell me.

There is no evidence that the 13 million jobs are low wage jobs...it is rightwing propaganda. BLS statistics show job growth in all sectors


What did Congress do to sputter the economy?

1. Insisted on tackling the deficit at a time we had 10% unemployment
2. Refused to invest in needed infrastructure at a time of high unemployment and low interest rates
3. Threatened default on our debt
4. Refused to raise minimum wage

Actions, what ACTIONS did congress take to sputter the economy? Insisting on tackling the deficit is only words. What bill to invest in infrastructure did they deny? Threatening to default on debt? When did they do that, and if they did do it, how did that sputter the economy? Any state can raise minimum wage when ever they want, and it should be left to the states. And how does somebody flipping burgers making an additional $50 a week really drive the economy?

You keep making statements and allegations without providing any information via links to support them. You my friend are a walking bumper sticker with the depth of a kiddie pool.

You refuse to address most of my questions-

How BO put $800 billion into the economy?
What influence the POTUS has on monetary policy?
What specifically congress did via bills passed or not passed to adversely effect growth during his presidency. Recall, the Dems controlled congress the first 4 years of his presidency, 2 years it was split, and 2 years it was under GOP control.

Answer those questions or go outside and put more bumper stickers on your Prius.

American Jobs Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

1. Cutting and suspending $245 billion worth of payroll taxes for qualifying employers and 160 million medium to low income employees.
2. Spending $62 billion for a Pathways Back to Work Program for expanding opportunities for low-income youth and adults.
3. $49 billion - Extending unemployment benefits for up to 6 million long-term beneficiaries.
4. $8 billion - Jobs tax credit for the long term unemployed.
5. $5 billion - Pathways back to work fund.[15]
6. Spending $50 billion on both new & pre-existing infrastructure projects.
7. Spending $35 billion in additional funding to protect the jobs of teachers, police officers, and firefighters
8. Spending $30 billion to modernize at least 35,000 public schools and community colleges.
9. Spending $15 billion on a program that would hire construction workers to help rehabilitate and refurbishing hundreds of thousands of foreclosed homes and businesses.
10. Creating the National Infrastructure Bank (capitalized with $10 billion), originally proposed in 2007, to help fund infrastructure via private and public capital.
11. Creating a nationwide, interoperable wireless network for public safety, while expanding accessibility to high-speed wireless services.
12. Prohibiting discrimination in hiring against persons who are unemployed because of their status as unemployed persons..
13. Loosening regulations on small businesses that wish to raise capital, including through crowdfunding, while retaining investor protections.

So are you blaming the Democratically controlled congress for not passing the Bill? The Bill that Harry Reid stalled-
Legislative historyEdit

American Jobs Act, S. 1549
In the Senate, the bill was stalled by Majority leader Harry Reid on September 27, 2011 who said "I don’t think there’s anything more important for a jobs measure than China trade, and that’s what we’re going to work on next week,"[16] with emphasis on taking up more tenuous[clarification needed] legislation which is less likely to draw political attention.[16][not in citation given] On October 4, 2011, Minority Leader Mitch McConnellattempted to offer the Act as an amendment to the China trade bill, saying that while he disagreed with the bill's approach to job creation, it deserved to be voted on.[17] On October 5, Reid announced a plan to pay for the American Jobs Act with a 5% surtax on incomes of more than $1 million a year.[18]

I mean the Dems had both houses in 2011, so you should be pissed off at them for "sputtering" the economy. I would gain respect for you here if acknowledge the Dems were as responsible as the GOP.

Many Democrats have balked at the bill, siding with the Republicans, especially those facing difficult re-elections in congressional districts where they are hesitant to support unpopular legislation.[50] A majority of the Democrats support individual components of the bill, but are unwilling to commit to the bill in its entirety, despite the White House's disapproval of the weak showing of support. While some Democrats are opposed to the bill because it includes too many tax breaks, others oppose the extent of spending. This opposition from fellow Democrats has given Obama more responsibility to sell the plan first to the American public, as he has done on a very prominent, nationwide speaking tour.[51][52][53]

Both moderate and liberal Democrats have expressed concerns about the bill. Joe Manchin, a more conservative Democrat, has openly voiced his opposition to the Administration by arguing against the inclusion of too much spending, given by his remarks on September 29, "The ugly part of that act is $450 billion of spending, after we've spent, spent, spent." On the other side, liberal Democrat Peter DeFazio argued against the inclusion of nearly $250 billion of tax breaks, saying "Half of it is tax cuts, and quite frankly tax cuts don't work."[54][55]

 

[protectionist]

WWII started and finished in less time than Obama's been in office, when do you guys ever stop whining about the predecessor?

If Kerry and Gore would have won, they'd be crabbing about Reagan. Maybe even Nixon and Ford.

 

[protectionist]

Until protectionist can account for the 50 million retirees, 12 million handicapped and 20 million teens and stay at home moms........Labor Participation Rate is a bogus tool to evaluate employment

Until, or unless, RW can account for these things not being present also in past years, which the current LPR is compared with, and is much less than (dropped from 67% in 2002 to 62% in 2016), it looks like RW's post is bogus and hardly worth mentioning.

 

[protectionist]

To be exact, 6 trillion has been added to the debt

When Obama took over in January 2009, the total national debt stood at $10.6 trillion. It's now at $20 Trillion. Did you pass your arithmetic courses ?