Obama is the worst leader in history

[Listening]

No Clinton is the Democrats Reagan

Both did awesome things and kind of lost their minds at the end.

Obama is Carter incarnate.

Nice guys...but terrible presidents.

Speaking of short answers.

4 words....pretty short.

 

[Vidi]

Because people have stopped looking for jobs.

What a moron.

This is what bugs me the most about that statement:

Why the hell do they not count the people who supposedly stopped looking for a job? Is being a deadbeat now a profession?

I don't know the motivation.

In any statistical analysis you have to define parameters.

But, as in any case, it can throw off the numbers.

There are fewer people working than have been in a long time....less jobs...but unemployment drops (and Chris has an orgasm) because people exit the classification.

A total false reading of the UE number. There are other numbers that supposedly reflect this. I have seen other threads on this topic.

The jobs ARE coming back. At least in MN where I live. I know a ton of people who were let go at the beginning of this mess who are almost all working now. Most not for the same companies though.

My wife for example is currently having a position created for her at the company she has been temping at for the last year. very good news indeed for my family.

 

[Listening]

This is what bugs me the most about that statement:

Why the hell do they not count the people who supposedly stopped looking for a job? Is being a deadbeat now a profession?

I don't know the motivation.

In any statistical analysis you have to define parameters.

But, as in any case, it can throw off the numbers.

There are fewer people working than have been in a long time....less jobs...but unemployment drops (and Chris has an orgasm) because people exit the classification.

A total false reading of the UE number. There are other numbers that supposedly reflect this. I have seen other threads on this topic.

The jobs ARE coming back. At least in MN where I live. I know a ton of people who were let go at the beginning of this mess who are almost all working now. Most not for the same companies though.

My wife for example is currently having a position created for her at the company she has been temping at for the last year. very good news indeed for my family.

We've never really had bad unemployment around here. It is mostly on the coasts that things are bad. Places like Oregon.

Congrats to your wife.

Jobs come back in spite of the government. I don't blame Obama for the recession...but I do think he held back the recovery. Even if we had no president.....he was on vacation for two years...things would likely get better.

Still, we need to change the way we think about employment. Our education system is not keeping up with the jobs that need people.

 

[Unkotare]

Until another President throws over 100,000 loyal Americans into concentration camps, FDR will always be the worst.

 

[Vidi]

I don't know the motivation.

In any statistical analysis you have to define parameters.

But, as in any case, it can throw off the numbers.

There are fewer people working than have been in a long time....less jobs...but unemployment drops (and Chris has an orgasm) because people exit the classification.

A total false reading of the UE number. There are other numbers that supposedly reflect this. I have seen other threads on this topic.

The jobs ARE coming back. At least in MN where I live. I know a ton of people who were let go at the beginning of this mess who are almost all working now. Most not for the same companies though.

My wife for example is currently having a position created for her at the company she has been temping at for the last year. very good news indeed for my family.

We've never really had bad unemployment around here. It is mostly on the coasts that things are bad. Places like Oregon.

Congrats to your wife.

Jobs come back in spite of the government. I don't blame Obama for the recession...but I do think he held back the recovery. Even if we had no president.....he was on vacation for two years...things would likely get better.

Still, we need to change the way we think about employment. Our education system is not keeping up with the jobs that need people.[/QUOTE]

We are going to disagree on alot. But we agree 110% on that bolded portion of your post.

I also agree that the President has little overall effect on the recovery. The truth of the matter ( at least as I see it ) is the economy is really based alot on psycology. people think things are good, they spend money and the economy does well. People think things are bad, they dont spend money and things go poorly.

But I also feel that the government does have a role to play in a recovery. I supported the stimulus ( though not with every place it went ) because when everyone else stops spending, the government has to step in and grease the wheels so to speak.

 

[IndependntLogic]

This is what bugs me the most about that statement:

Why the hell do they not count the people who supposedly stopped looking for a job? Is being a deadbeat now a profession?

I don't know the motivation.

In any statistical analysis you have to define parameters.

But, as in any case, it can throw off the numbers.

There are fewer people working than have been in a long time....less jobs...but unemployment drops (and Chris has an orgasm) because people exit the classification.

A total false reading of the UE number. There are other numbers that supposedly reflect this. I have seen other threads on this topic.

The jobs ARE coming back. At least in MN where I live. I know a ton of people who were let go at the beginning of this mess who are almost all working now. Most not for the same companies though.

My wife for example is currently having a position created for her at the company she has been temping at for the last year. very good news indeed for my family.

I own a national legal recruiting agency (like an employment agency but only permenent jobs).
We had an average of 20 positions under contract from the last few months of Bush's term until late last year. Now? My firm has over 250 position under contract. That means that firms and companies are willing to pay anywhere from $15K to over $100 per employee (our average is about $45K) to get people hired. And we're a small firm.
Think about that. Ten times as much business.
Another thing: My business is a bit of a crystal ball. When things are turning bad, I suddenly get a huge demand corporate bankruptcy attorneys and commercial litigators. When things are getting good, the demand is for attorneys who do M&A, securities transactions and intellectual property law.
All of our contracts are in the latter category.
Does this mean construction workers are doing well? No.
But I have friends who are recruiters in health care, accounting, IT and so on. All of them are seeing increased activity.

 

[BDBoop]

Obama is Carter incarnate.

Nice guys...but terrible presidents.

Speaking of short answers.

4 words....pretty short.

And?

 

[Listening]

The jobs ARE coming back. At least in MN where I live. I know a ton of people who were let go at the beginning of this mess who are almost all working now. Most not for the same companies though.

My wife for example is currently having a position created for her at the company she has been temping at for the last year. very good news indeed for my family.

We've never really had bad unemployment around here. It is mostly on the coasts that things are bad. Places like Oregon.

Congrats to your wife.

Jobs come back in spite of the government. I don't blame Obama for the recession...but I do think he held back the recovery. Even if we had no president.....he was on vacation for two years...things would likely get better.

Still, we need to change the way we think about employment. Our education system is not keeping up with the jobs that need people.[/QUOTE]

We are going to disagree on alot. But we agree 110% on that bolded portion of your post.

I also agree that the President has little overall effect on the recovery. The truth of the matter ( at least as I see it ) is the economy is really based alot on psycology. people think things are good, they spend money and the economy does well. People think things are bad, they dont spend money and things go poorly.

But I also feel that the government does have a role to play in a recovery. I supported the stimulus ( though not with every place it went ) because when everyone else stops spending, the government has to step in and grease the wheels so to speak.

While I am not going to advocate for the government...they are always spending something. The problem is that we are to the point that we are paying out a lot of money with no return. There is very little velocity through the economy when it is used for things like S.S.

We need production capability (manufacturing and R&D). Right now we are way out of balance and Obama isn't helping us much.

Romney won't do much (but I think he will be better than Obama) either if the congress does not clean up it's act.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Hyperbole much?

Apologist much?

 

[francoHFW]

600k to 1 million manufacturing jobs going begging now- no trained workers...

 

[IndependntLogic]

Hyperbole much?

Apologist much?

How is he apologizing for anything, by voicing his estimation that your claims are gross exaggerations?

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Hyperbole much?

Apologist much?

How is he apologizing for anything, by voicing his estimation that your claims are gross exaggerations?

Nice try at trolling Mister "Independent Logic" but he wasn't ever regarding a claim that I had made.

 

[Vidi]

We've never really had bad unemployment around here. It is mostly on the coasts that things are bad. Places like Oregon.

Congrats to your wife.

Jobs come back in spite of the government. I don't blame Obama for the recession...but I do think he held back the recovery. Even if we had no president.....he was on vacation for two years...things would likely get better.

Still, we need to change the way we think about employment. Our education system is not keeping up with the jobs that need people.[/QUOTE]

We are going to disagree on alot. But we agree 110% on that bolded portion of your post.

I also agree that the President has little overall effect on the recovery. The truth of the matter ( at least as I see it ) is the economy is really based alot on psycology. people think things are good, they spend money and the economy does well. People think things are bad, they dont spend money and things go poorly.

But I also feel that the government does have a role to play in a recovery. I supported the stimulus ( though not with every place it went ) because when everyone else stops spending, the government has to step in and grease the wheels so to speak.

While I am not going to advocate for the government...they are always spending something. The problem is that we are to the point that we are paying out a lot of money with no return. There is very little velocity through the economy when it is used for things like S.S.

We need production capability (manufacturing and R&D). Right now we are way out of balance and Obama isn't helping us much.

Romney won't do much (but I think he will be better than Obama) either if the congress does not clean up it's act.

And this is where we'll disagree. Obama won't do much but I think he'll do better than Romney hehe.

What I don't get is that we have two really big problems in this country. Crumbling infrastructure and not enough jobs. The solution seems very simple to me. Invest in infrastructure thus creating the so called shovel ready jobs we need.

We needed Obama to be FDR. Some will blame obstructionist right wing politicians ( in my opinion for good reason ) but Obama has never really taken his argument to the people to get public support. I honestly think if he had, Romney wouldn't stand a chance in this election. But Obama kept far too quiet for far too long. He did stuff, but he didnt "spike the ball" when he should have or pump up the crowd when he should have. And it's going to hurt him in this election. I'm predicting an Obama win, but it's going to be very very close. And if Romney wins, well, I'll be disappointed, but not surprised.

 

[IndependntLogic]

Apologist much?

How is he apologizing for anything, by voicing his estimation that <your claims? THE OP's CLAIMS are gross exaggerations?

Nice try at trolling Mister "Independent Logic" but he wasn't ever regarding a claim that I had made.

Hmm. So you jump in to respond to a he made about the OP, with nothing but a petty insult (seems your usual M.O.) and I'm the troll. Got it.

So I have changed it above to the OP. Now. How is he apologizing by voicing his estimation that the OP's claims are gross exaggerations?

 

[Clementine]

The wimpy leader of our wimpy society--did you expect any thing different

so wimpy he killed bin laden

Barry was backed in a corner and had no choice. I am sure he cried bitterly about it.

He had no choice but to go along and hesitated, then immediately went about covering his ass. He was set to take credit for a success or blame others for a failure.

 

[Vidi]

so wimpy he killed bin laden

Barry was backed in a corner and had no choice. I am sure he cried bitterly about it.

He had no choice but to go along and hesitated, then immediately went about covering his ass. He was set to take credit for a success or blame others for a failure.

I've heard you radical sheep play it both ways. Either Obama only did what ANY President would do or he was forced to make the call.

Why can't you all just set aside the bullshit?

Don't like his policies? Fine. Cast your vote. But quit being dishonest.

And look up in the thread what I've said about the man before you go name calling. Im no fan.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

How is he apologizing for anything, by voicing his estimation that <your claims? THE OP's CLAIMS are gross exaggerations?

Nice try at trolling Mister "Independent Logic" but he wasn't ever regarding a claim that I had made.

Hmm. So you jump in to respond to a he made about the OP, with nothing but a petty insult (seems your usual M.O.) and I'm the troll. Got it.

So I have changed it above to the OP. Now. How is he apologizing by voicing his estimation that the OP's claims are gross exaggerations?

You're an idiot. He responded with an apologist post (with no substance) to a post (with substance). I called him out proper. You on the other hand "Jumped" like a dim wit making false claims. Quit while you're behind.

 

[Listening]

And this is where we'll disagree. Obama won't do much but I think he'll do better than Romney hehe.


What I don't get is that we have two really big problems in this country. Crumbling infrastructure and not enough jobs. The solution seems very simple to me. Invest in infrastructure thus creating the so called shovel ready jobs we need.

We needed Obama to be FDR. Some will blame obstructionist right wing politicians ( in my opinion for good reason ) but Obama has never really taken his argument to the people to get public support. I honestly think if he had, Romney wouldn't stand a chance in this election. But Obama kept far too quiet for far too long. He did stuff, but he didnt "spike the ball" when he should have or pump up the crowd when he should have. And it's going to hurt him in this election. I'm predicting an Obama win, but it's going to be very very close. And if Romney wins, well, I'll be disappointed, but not surprised.

Why can't states run infrastructure jobs to get their unemployment down.

Why does it have to be federally driven infrastructure ?

 

[Vidi]

And this is where we'll disagree. Obama won't do much but I think he'll do better than Romney hehe.


What I don't get is that we have two really big problems in this country. Crumbling infrastructure and not enough jobs. The solution seems very simple to me. Invest in infrastructure thus creating the so called shovel ready jobs we need.

We needed Obama to be FDR. Some will blame obstructionist right wing politicians ( in my opinion for good reason ) but Obama has never really taken his argument to the people to get public support. I honestly think if he had, Romney wouldn't stand a chance in this election. But Obama kept far too quiet for far too long. He did stuff, but he didnt "spike the ball" when he should have or pump up the crowd when he should have. And it's going to hurt him in this election. I'm predicting an Obama win, but it's going to be very very close. And if Romney wins, well, I'll be disappointed, but not surprised.

Why can't states run infrastructure jobs to get their unemployment down.

Why does it have to be federally driven infrastructure ?

First off, interstate highways are the responsibility of the federal government.

Second, you need federal regulations dictating certain guidelines...for example, traffic signs have to be standardized so that people traveling through the state understand what the hell they mean.

Third, Most projects of that size require a great deal of interstate commerce to make it happen. That once again falls under federal jurisdiction.

And look at this list of bridges alone that are deficient:

Transportation For America » The Fix We&#8217;re In For: The State of Our Bridges

Look at the Tri Borough Bridge built during the Great Depression ( now called the Robert F kennedy bridge ) the PBS show American Experience: New York ( amazing 18 hour documentary on the complete history of New York City. I highly recommend it. Its fascinating. ) claimed that its construction employed over a million people across 22 states...at the height of the Depression. Both Hoover, through the Reconstruction Finance Corporation and FDR, through the Triborough Bridge Authority, spent tens of millions of dollars to get it built and employ all of those people.

Wtoday are completly ignoring the problem, and as I am from Minneasota and live less than 20 miles away from the bridge that collapsed, I can tell you its something we are going to pay the price for eventually.

 

[francoHFW]

Before Tea Party "cut taxes and spending" ideological insanity, jobs/infrastructure bills were possible- states have never done so, as they can't deficit spend...