Republicans have a poor understanding of economics. They should have no place in making policy

[Oldstyle]

Told ya, my friend ... you ain't worth my time.

Dad's a full fledged Kool Aid drinking, Obama fluffer, Spare. I don't know what's sadder...the amount of time he's willing to devote to pushing the bullshit that he does...or that he seems to actually believe it.

 

[Dad2three]

Told ya, my friend ... you ain't worth my time.

Got it, YOU posit Dubya warned about F/F 13 times and aa DEM CONGRESS IGNORED HIM? When in FACT it was a GOP Congress AND DUBYA WAS THE ONE STOPPING REFORM AND CHEERING ON THE BANKSTERS! lol AND YOU CAN'T REFUTE THE FACTS SO YOU FIRST IGNORE IT FOR A FEW POSTS, THEN THIS LITTLE BS? lol

 

[Dad2three]

Told ya, my friend ... you ain't worth my time.

Dad's a full fledged Kool Aid drinking, Obama fluffer, Spare. I don't know what's sadder...the amount of time he's willing to devote to pushing the bullshit that he does...or that he seems to actually believe it.

Old is one of these K/K/Klowns who lives in the right wing echo chamber who just can't seem to be honest even when shown factual, un-debatable data to back up posits that are based in reality!

 

[Dragonlady]

Read it and weep -

"There has been a distinctive odor of hype lately about the national jobs report for June [2014]. Most people will have the impression that the 288,000 jobs created last month were full-time. Not so.

The Obama administration and much of the media trumpeting the figure overlooked that the government numbers didn't distinguish between new part-time and full-time jobs. Full-time jobs last month plunged by 523,000, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. What has increased are part-time jobs. They soared by about 800,000 to more than 28 million. Just think of all those Americans working part time, no doubt glad to have the work but also contending with lower pay, diminished benefits and little job security.

Only 47.7% of adults in the U.S. are working full time. Yes, the percentage of unemployed has fallen, but that's worth barely a Bronx cheer. It reflects the bleak fact that 2.4 million Americans have become discouraged and dropped out of the workforce. You might as well say that the unemployment rate would be zero if everyone quit looking for work.

Last month involuntary part-timers swelled to 7.5 million, compared with 4.4 million in 2007. Way too many adults now depend on the low-wage, part-time jobs that teenagers would normally fill. Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen had it right in March when she said: "The existence of such a large pool of partly unemployed workers is a sign that labor conditions are worse than indicated by the unemployment rate."

There are a number of reasons for our predicament, most importantly a historically low growth rate for an economic "recovery." Gross domestic product growth in 2013 was a feeble 1.9%, and it fell at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 2.9% in the first quarter of 2014.

But there is one clear political contribution to the dismal jobs trend. Many employers cut workers' hours to avoid the Affordable Care Act's mandate to provide health insurance to anyone working 30 hours a week or more. The unintended consequence of President Obama's "signature legislation"? Fewer full-time workers. In many cases two people are working the same number of hours that one had previously worked.

Since mid-2007 the U.S. population has grown by 17.2 million, according to the Census Bureau, but we have 374,000 fewer jobs since a November 2007 peak and are 10 million jobs shy of where we should be. It is particularly upsetting that our current high unemployment is concentrated in the oldest and youngest workers. Older workers have been phased out as new technologies improve productivity, and young adults who lack skills are struggling to find entry-level jobs with advancement opportunities. In the process, they are losing critical time to develop workplace habits, contacts and new skills.

Most Americans wouldn't call this an economic recovery. Yes, we're not technically in a recession as the recovery began in mid-2009, but high-wage industries have lost a million positions since 2007. Low-paying jobs are gaining and now account for 44% of all employment growth since employment hit bottom in February 2010, with by far the most growth—3.8 million jobs—in low-wage industries. The number of long-term unemployed remains at historically high levels, standing at more than three million in June. The proportion of Americans in the labor force is at a 36-year low, 62.8%, down from 66% in 2008.

Part-time jobs are no longer the domain of the young. Many are taken by adults in their prime working years—25 to 54 years of age—and many are single men and women without high-school diplomas. Why is this happening? It can't all be attributed to the unforeseen consequences of the Affordable Care Act. The longer workers have been out of a job, the more likely they are to take a part-time job to make ends meet.

The result: Faith in the American dream is eroding fast. The feeling is that the rules aren't fair and the system has been rigged in favor of business and against the average person. The share of financial compensation and outputs going to labor has dropped to less than 60% today from about 65% before 1980.

Why haven't increases in labor productivity translated into higher household income in private employment? In part because of very low rates of capital spending on new plant and equipment over the past five years. In the 1960s, only one in 20 American men between the ages of 25 and 54 was not working. According to former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers, in 10 years that number will be one in seven.

The lack of breadwinners working full time is a burgeoning disaster. There are 48 million people in the U.S. in low-wage jobs. Those workers won't be able to spend what is necessary in an economy that is mostly based on consumer spending, and this will put further pressure on growth. What we have is a very high unemployment rate, a slow recovery and across-the-board wage stagnation (except for the top few percent). According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, almost 91 million people over age 16 aren't working, a record high. When Barack Obama became president, that figure was nearly 10 million lower.

The great American job machine is spluttering. We are going through the weakest post-recession recovery the U.S. has ever experienced, with growth half of what it was after four previous recessions. And that's despite the most expansive monetary policy in history and the largest fiscal stimulus since World War II.

That is why the June numbers are so distressing. Five years after the Great Recession, more than 24 million working-age Americans remain jobless, working part-time involuntarily or having left the workforce. We are not in the middle of a recovery. We are in the middle of a muddle-through, and there's no point in pretending that the sky is blue when so many millions can attest to dark clouds.

Mr. Zuckerman is chairman and editor in chief of U.S. News & World Report.

You realize that Zuckerman is the owner of right wing New York tabloid, which is known for wildly inaccurate reporting. Note that there isn't a single source quoted for his suppositions. If what he wrote is true, Fox, Rush and Hannity would be all over this like ham on rye.

I realize it galls right-wingers that Obama's job creation record is strong, but facts are facts, and they haven't been fudged. Admittedly, the new jobs are not paying what the jobs which were lost were paying, but I think we've demonstrated that between large corporate mergers and off-shore manufacturing, those jobs are gone and not coming back.

Too bad Congress didn't spend as much time working on legislation to keep jobs in the US as it does repealing the ACA.

 

[Oldstyle]

Told ya, my friend ... you ain't worth my time.

Dad's a full fledged Kool Aid drinking, Obama fluffer, Spare. I don't know what's sadder...the amount of time he's willing to devote to pushing the bullshit that he does...or that he seems to actually believe it.

Old is one of these K/K/Klowns who lives in the right wing echo chamber who just can't seem to be honest even when shown factual, un-debatable data to back up posits that are based in reality!

Honest? You spew misleading statistics in an attempt to paint a rosy picture of the Obama presidency and then launch childish attacks like that one when it's pointed out how delusional you are!

K/K/Klown? I'm from Massachusetts you buffoon and my great grandfather was an officer in the 54th Massachusetts Infantry. Accusing me of being a member of the Ku Klux Klan simply illustrates what a disingenuous piece of shit you really are!

 

[Oldstyle]

Read it and weep -

"There has been a distinctive odor of hype lately about the national jobs report for June [2014]. Most people will have the impression that the 288,000 jobs created last month were full-time. Not so.

The Obama administration and much of the media trumpeting the figure overlooked that the government numbers didn't distinguish between new part-time and full-time jobs. Full-time jobs last month plunged by 523,000, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. What has increased are part-time jobs. They soared by about 800,000 to more than 28 million. Just think of all those Americans working part time, no doubt glad to have the work but also contending with lower pay, diminished benefits and little job security.

Only 47.7% of adults in the U.S. are working full time. Yes, the percentage of unemployed has fallen, but that's worth barely a Bronx cheer. It reflects the bleak fact that 2.4 million Americans have become discouraged and dropped out of the workforce. You might as well say that the unemployment rate would be zero if everyone quit looking for work.

Last month involuntary part-timers swelled to 7.5 million, compared with 4.4 million in 2007. Way too many adults now depend on the low-wage, part-time jobs that teenagers would normally fill. Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen had it right in March when she said: "The existence of such a large pool of partly unemployed workers is a sign that labor conditions are worse than indicated by the unemployment rate."

There are a number of reasons for our predicament, most importantly a historically low growth rate for an economic "recovery." Gross domestic product growth in 2013 was a feeble 1.9%, and it fell at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 2.9% in the first quarter of 2014.

But there is one clear political contribution to the dismal jobs trend. Many employers cut workers' hours to avoid the Affordable Care Act's mandate to provide health insurance to anyone working 30 hours a week or more. The unintended consequence of President Obama's "signature legislation"? Fewer full-time workers. In many cases two people are working the same number of hours that one had previously worked.

Since mid-2007 the U.S. population has grown by 17.2 million, according to the Census Bureau, but we have 374,000 fewer jobs since a November 2007 peak and are 10 million jobs shy of where we should be. It is particularly upsetting that our current high unemployment is concentrated in the oldest and youngest workers. Older workers have been phased out as new technologies improve productivity, and young adults who lack skills are struggling to find entry-level jobs with advancement opportunities. In the process, they are losing critical time to develop workplace habits, contacts and new skills.

Most Americans wouldn't call this an economic recovery. Yes, we're not technically in a recession as the recovery began in mid-2009, but high-wage industries have lost a million positions since 2007. Low-paying jobs are gaining and now account for 44% of all employment growth since employment hit bottom in February 2010, with by far the most growth—3.8 million jobs—in low-wage industries. The number of long-term unemployed remains at historically high levels, standing at more than three million in June. The proportion of Americans in the labor force is at a 36-year low, 62.8%, down from 66% in 2008.

Part-time jobs are no longer the domain of the young. Many are taken by adults in their prime working years—25 to 54 years of age—and many are single men and women without high-school diplomas. Why is this happening? It can't all be attributed to the unforeseen consequences of the Affordable Care Act. The longer workers have been out of a job, the more likely they are to take a part-time job to make ends meet.

The result: Faith in the American dream is eroding fast. The feeling is that the rules aren't fair and the system has been rigged in favor of business and against the average person. The share of financial compensation and outputs going to labor has dropped to less than 60% today from about 65% before 1980.

Why haven't increases in labor productivity translated into higher household income in private employment? In part because of very low rates of capital spending on new plant and equipment over the past five years. In the 1960s, only one in 20 American men between the ages of 25 and 54 was not working. According to former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers, in 10 years that number will be one in seven.

The lack of breadwinners working full time is a burgeoning disaster. There are 48 million people in the U.S. in low-wage jobs. Those workers won't be able to spend what is necessary in an economy that is mostly based on consumer spending, and this will put further pressure on growth. What we have is a very high unemployment rate, a slow recovery and across-the-board wage stagnation (except for the top few percent). According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, almost 91 million people over age 16 aren't working, a record high. When Barack Obama became president, that figure was nearly 10 million lower.

The great American job machine is spluttering. We are going through the weakest post-recession recovery the U.S. has ever experienced, with growth half of what it was after four previous recessions. And that's despite the most expansive monetary policy in history and the largest fiscal stimulus since World War II.

That is why the June numbers are so distressing. Five years after the Great Recession, more than 24 million working-age Americans remain jobless, working part-time involuntarily or having left the workforce. We are not in the middle of a recovery. We are in the middle of a muddle-through, and there's no point in pretending that the sky is blue when so many millions can attest to dark clouds.

Mr. Zuckerman is chairman and editor in chief of U.S. News & World Report.

You realize that Zuckerman is the owner of right wing New York tabloid, which is known for wildly inaccurate reporting. Note that there isn't a single source quoted for his suppositions. If what he wrote is true, Fox, Rush and Hannity would be all over this like ham on rye.

I realize it galls right-wingers that Obama's job creation record is strong, but facts are facts, and they haven't been fudged. Admittedly, the new jobs are not paying what the jobs which were lost were paying, but I think we've demonstrated that between large corporate mergers and off-shore manufacturing, those jobs are gone and not coming back.

Too bad Congress didn't spend as much time working on legislation to keep jobs in the US as it does repealing the ACA.

Obama's job creation record is "strong"? OMG. I can't believe you people actually believe that nonsense! Barack Obama's job creation record is ABYSMAL! Do you know where more jobs are being created than anywhere else? Not in the liberal enclaves that progressives like you think are so wonderful...oh, no...they're being created in States like North and South Dakota through oil and gas production that Obama never wanted to see happen! They're being created in GOP run States like Texas who had to bring multiple lawsuits against this President they disagreed with his policies so much!

Too bad this President didn't spend as much time passing legislation to help create jobs as he did CREATING the ACA!

 

[Oldstyle]

You talk about the "off shoring" of jobs like it's nothing that Barack Obama had anything to do with...yet Jeffrey Immelts the CEO of General Electric probably sent more jobs to China than any other corporate leader and HE was the man that Barry hand picked to be his "Jobs Czar"! But you don't want to hear about that...do you, Dragonlady?

 

[Neil N. Blowme]

 

[Dragonlady]

You talk about the "off shoring" of jobs like it's nothing that Barack Obama had anything to do with...yet Jeffrey Immelts the CEO of General Electric probably sent more jobs to China than any other corporate leader and HE was the man that Barry hand picked to be his "Jobs Czar"! But you don't want to hear about that...do you, Dragonlady?

Don't you think that a guy who off-loaded jobs to Third World countries would know something the reasons for it and how to get them back?

The problem is that the GOP has fought anything your President tried to do, tooth and nail.

Obama's job creation record IS strong, despite everything Republicans have tried to do. It certainly beats Reagan and both of the Bush's records by miles.

I'm not a fan of Obama - far too right wing for my taste, but I will give him credit for putting the US back on the path to recovery. You lot are so blinded by partisanship, that you are unable to see the forest for the trees.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You talk about the "off shoring" of jobs like it's nothing that Barack Obama had anything to do with...yet Jeffrey Immelts the CEO of General Electric probably sent more jobs to China than any other corporate leader and HE was the man that Barry hand picked to be his "Jobs Czar"! But you don't want to hear about that...do you, Dragonlady?

Don't you think that a guy who off-loaded jobs to Third World countries would know something the reasons for it and how to get them back?

The problem is that the GOP has fought anything your President tried to do, tooth and nail.

Obama's job creation record IS strong, despite everything Republicans have tried to do. It certainly beats Reagan and both of the Bush's records by miles.

I'm not a fan of Obama - far too right wing for my taste, but I will give him credit for putting the US back on the path to recovery. You lot are so blinded by partisanship, that you are unable to see the forest for the trees.

Obama's job creation record IS strong, despite everything Republicans have tried to do. It certainly beats Reagan and both of the Bush's records by miles.

Really? How many have been created during Obama's presidency to date? How many during Reagan's?

 

[The Rabbi]

You talk about the "off shoring" of jobs like it's nothing that Barack Obama had anything to do with...yet Jeffrey Immelts the CEO of General Electric probably sent more jobs to China than any other corporate leader and HE was the man that Barry hand picked to be his "Jobs Czar"! But you don't want to hear about that...do you, Dragonlady?

Don't you think that a guy who off-loaded jobs to Third World countries would know something the reasons for it and how to get them back?

The problem is that the GOP has fought anything your President tried to do, tooth and nail.

Obama's job creation record IS strong, despite everything Republicans have tried to do. It certainly beats Reagan and both of the Bush's records by miles.

I'm not a fan of Obama - far too right wing for my taste, but I will give him credit for putting the US back on the path to recovery. You lot are so blinded by partisanship, that you are unable to see the forest for the trees.

Obama's job creation record IS strong, despite everything Republicans have tried to do. It certainly beats Reagan and both of the Bush's records by miles.

Really? How many have been created during Obama's presidency to date? How many during Reagan's?

Facts are not liberal talking points. Facts have a conservative bias.

 

[Listening]

Told ya, my friend ... you ain't worth my time.

Ernie, you obviously didn't read the link I posted on how mega-mergers and costing jobs, stifling innovation and thereby slowing the growth of the US economy. If you had, you wouldn't be going on about how the Pfizer mergers were a good thing.

Furthermore, a recent study done on the costs of your miracle cancer treatments demonstrated that drug costs in the US have nothing to do with the cost of producing the drugs (all of which are much, much cheaper outside of the US). Rather, big pharma in the US charges as much as they think they can get for the drug.

And if Walmart's margins are so small, how is it that they posted their largest profit in history, and were are the second most profitable corporation in the US in 2013? Are you aware that if they had paid their US employees just $100.00 per week more than they did in 2013, their profit would have been cut by 1/3, but it would still have been close to $10B, and their employees would not have qualified for Food Stamps or Medicaid. Walmart has no problem paying an $11.00 per hour minimum wage in Canada, and it's still one of the most profitable companies in Canada.

Here's a 2013 article from Fortune (yes another conservative, pro-business website), which says the Walmart could afford to give its employees a 50% raise, and still be a highly profitable corporation.

Why Wal-Mart can afford to give its workers a 50 raise - Fortune

Try reading the links Ernie. You might come to some understanding of the many ways the GOP, and its mouthpiece, Fox News, lie, mislead and misinform you about the economy.

The fact that we DID lose 4 million jobs in 2009 should have had us expecting those numbers to rebound strongly coming out of the recession.

LMAO. Sure dude. SO what else was lost during that same time frame the 4 million jobs were lost. Lets see.
People lost their homes. Yep, you may have heard something about all those foreclosures. But then again, maybe not.

What else. Well people who lost their jobs took out their retirement savings to live on. That is if they hadn't lost every bit of money they had bailing out of the markets when they collapsed. Did you read anything about the stock market collapse when Bush was still Pres? The outflow of money from the 401k and IRA's.

Of course all those home owners that didn't lose their homes, lost all the equity in their homes. Maybe you heard something about that? And many are still underwater on their mortgages. Yep, being under water on your mortgage sure makes you want to spend money.

When those that lost their jobs finally found work, the new job pays less than the old one. Yep that's a problem (lower earnings) when you want an economic recovery.

So people lost income, lost value in hard assets, lost money in semi liquid assets and you think that we should have rebounded much more strongly. And that somehow, all the money and equity and jobs that people lost is Obama's fault.

That's kinda strange thinking. How did Obama cause all that loss?

Gee, all that bad stuff going on...and what was Barry's first goal as President? I'll give you a hint it wasn't to get those people in danger of losing their homes back working again! Hell, no! Barry's first priority was to pass ObamaCare...something that was going to dampen job creation.

How did Obama cause the "jobless recovery"? With his namesake piece of legislation...that's how!

Here is from the link:

Many critics argue that because Wal-Mart made $17 billion in profits last year, it can afford to pay more and even has an obligation to do so. That’s silly, too. Public companies have to make enough money to satisfy shareholders, or else their stocks tank and executives end up getting canned.

 

[Dad2three]

Told ya, my friend ... you ain't worth my time.

Dad's a full fledged Kool Aid drinking, Obama fluffer, Spare. I don't know what's sadder...the amount of time he's willing to devote to pushing the bullshit that he does...or that he seems to actually believe it.

Old is one of these K/K/Klowns who lives in the right wing echo chamber who just can't seem to be honest even when shown factual, un-debatable data to back up posits that are based in reality!

Honest? You spew misleading statistics in an attempt to paint a rosy picture of the Obama presidency and then launch childish attacks like that one when it's pointed out how delusional you are!

K/K/Klown? I'm from Massachusetts you buffoon and my great grandfather was an officer in the 54th Massachusetts Infantry. Accusing me of being a member of the Ku Klux Klan simply illustrates what a disingenuous piece of shit you really are!

IF one of you conservatives were EVER honest I might have a heart attack. In conservative world, 8 years of Dubya/GOP 'job creator' policies need to have a do-over because, well you pick the reason, Barney Frank (minority member of the majority House 1995-Jan 2007, lol), 9/11, Dems didn't support Dubya's war of choice, etc. After 8 years of Dubya's/GOP 'job creator' policies, the US lost over 1+ million PRIVATE SECTOR jobs

IF after passing that 'job killer', Obamacares, there have been over 10+ million PRIVATE sector jobs created, THAT'S an attempt to create a 'rosy picture'


Your great grandfather? Oh he must not have been a conservative, you know the guys STILL trying to limit people from voting?

 

[Dad2three]

 

[Dad2three]

You talk about the "off shoring" of jobs like it's nothing that Barack Obama had anything to do with...yet Jeffrey Immelts the CEO of General Electric probably sent more jobs to China than any other corporate leader and HE was the man that Barry hand picked to be his "Jobs Czar"! But you don't want to hear about that...do you, Dragonlady?

Don't you think that a guy who off-loaded jobs to Third World countries would know something the reasons for it and how to get them back?

The problem is that the GOP has fought anything your President tried to do, tooth and nail.

Obama's job creation record IS strong, despite everything Republicans have tried to do. It certainly beats Reagan and both of the Bush's records by miles.

I'm not a fan of Obama - far too right wing for my taste, but I will give him credit for putting the US back on the path to recovery. You lot are so blinded by partisanship, that you are unable to see the forest for the trees.

Obama's job creation record IS strong, despite everything Republicans have tried to do. It certainly beats Reagan and both of the Bush's records by miles.

Really? How many have been created during Obama's presidency to date? How many during Reagan's?

Well since getting out of Dubya'sGOP's hole, Obama has created 10+ million PRIVATE sector jobs since Feb 2010, the same month the Obamacares 'job killer' was passed

Reagan in 8 years

Jan 1981 74,677,000


Jan 1989 89,394,000

14,717,00 Total private IN 8 YEARS

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

Bet Obama's job creation AFTER he got out from Dubya's great recession beats Ronnie's, WHO CREATED HIS RECESSION HIMSELF

01/1981 - Unemployment rate 7.5% …. Reagan sworn in.
02/1981 - 7.4%
03/1981 - 7.4%
04/1981 - 7.2%
05/1981 - 7.5%
06/1981 - 7.5%
07/1981 - 7.2%
08/1981 - 7.4% * Reagan CUTS taxes for top 1% and says unemployment will DROP to 6.9%.
09/1981 - 7.6%
10/1981 - 7.9%
11/1981 - 8.3%
12/1981 - 8.5%

01/1982 - 8.6%
02/1982 - 8.9%
03/1982 - 9.0%
04/1982 - 9.3%
05/1982 - 9.4%
06/1982 - 9.6%
07/1982 - 9.8%
08/1982 - 9.8%
09/1982 - 10.1%
10/1982 - 10.4%
11/1982 - 10.8% * Unemployment HITS a post WW2 RECORD of 10.8%.
12/1982 - 10.8%

01/1983 - 10.4%
02/1983 - 10.4%
03/1983 - 10.3%
04/1983 - 10.3%
05/1983 - 10.1%
06/1983 - 10.1%
07/1983 - 9.4%
06/1983 - 9.5%
07/1983 - 9.4%
08/1983 - 9.5%
09/1983 - 9.2%
10/1983 - 8.8%
11/1983 - 8.5%
12/1983 - 8.3%

01/1984 - 8.0%
02/1984 - 7.8%


It took Reagan 28 MONTHS to get unemployment rate back down below 8 percent.
Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

Reagan created the recession began under HIM after his disastrous tax cuts.


Supply Side Economics


supply side did not work under Reagan nor Bush.the worse recession happened under REAGAN not carter, sure he picked up the economy after he trashed it.

 

[Dad2three]

You talk about the "off shoring" of jobs like it's nothing that Barack Obama had anything to do with...yet Jeffrey Immelts the CEO of General Electric probably sent more jobs to China than any other corporate leader and HE was the man that Barry hand picked to be his "Jobs Czar"! But you don't want to hear about that...do you, Dragonlady?

Don't you think that a guy who off-loaded jobs to Third World countries would know something the reasons for it and how to get them back?

The problem is that the GOP has fought anything your President tried to do, tooth and nail.

Obama's job creation record IS strong, despite everything Republicans have tried to do. It certainly beats Reagan and both of the Bush's records by miles.

I'm not a fan of Obama - far too right wing for my taste, but I will give him credit for putting the US back on the path to recovery. You lot are so blinded by partisanship, that you are unable to see the forest for the trees.

Obama's job creation record IS strong, despite everything Republicans have tried to do. It certainly beats Reagan and both of the Bush's records by miles.

Really? How many have been created during Obama's presidency to date? How many during Reagan's?

Facts are not liberal talking points. Facts have a conservative bias.

Ronnie the guy who had a top tax rate of 50% the first six years? Who as Guv signed the most liberal abortion laws? Who traded guns for hostages? Who ran from terrorists?

Yep, FACTS must have a conservative something, because history says you K/K/Klowns are almost NEVER on the correct side of history!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You talk about the "off shoring" of jobs like it's nothing that Barack Obama had anything to do with...yet Jeffrey Immelts the CEO of General Electric probably sent more jobs to China than any other corporate leader and HE was the man that Barry hand picked to be his "Jobs Czar"! But you don't want to hear about that...do you, Dragonlady?

Don't you think that a guy who off-loaded jobs to Third World countries would know something the reasons for it and how to get them back?

The problem is that the GOP has fought anything your President tried to do, tooth and nail.

Obama's job creation record IS strong, despite everything Republicans have tried to do. It certainly beats Reagan and both of the Bush's records by miles.

I'm not a fan of Obama - far too right wing for my taste, but I will give him credit for putting the US back on the path to recovery. You lot are so blinded by partisanship, that you are unable to see the forest for the trees.

Obama's job creation record IS strong, despite everything Republicans have tried to do. It certainly beats Reagan and both of the Bush's records by miles.

Really? How many have been created during Obama's presidency to date? How many during Reagan's?

Well since getting out of Dubya'sGOP's hole, Obama has created 10+ million PRIVATE sector jobs since Feb 2010, the same month the Obamacares 'job killer' was passed

Reagan in 8 years

Jan 1981 74,677,000


Jan 1989 89,394,000

14,717,00 Total private IN 8 YEARS

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

Bet Obama's job creation AFTER he got out from Dubya's great recession beats Ronnie's, WHO CREATED HIS RECESSION HIMSELF

01/1981 - Unemployment rate 7.5% …. Reagan sworn in.
02/1981 - 7.4%
03/1981 - 7.4%
04/1981 - 7.2%
05/1981 - 7.5%
06/1981 - 7.5%
07/1981 - 7.2%
08/1981 - 7.4% * Reagan CUTS taxes for top 1% and says unemployment will DROP to 6.9%.
09/1981 - 7.6%
10/1981 - 7.9%
11/1981 - 8.3%
12/1981 - 8.5%

01/1982 - 8.6%
02/1982 - 8.9%
03/1982 - 9.0%
04/1982 - 9.3%
05/1982 - 9.4%
06/1982 - 9.6%
07/1982 - 9.8%
08/1982 - 9.8%
09/1982 - 10.1%
10/1982 - 10.4%
11/1982 - 10.8% * Unemployment HITS a post WW2 RECORD of 10.8%.
12/1982 - 10.8%

01/1983 - 10.4%
02/1983 - 10.4%
03/1983 - 10.3%
04/1983 - 10.3%
05/1983 - 10.1%
06/1983 - 10.1%
07/1983 - 9.4%
06/1983 - 9.5%
07/1983 - 9.4%
08/1983 - 9.5%
09/1983 - 9.2%
10/1983 - 8.8%
11/1983 - 8.5%
12/1983 - 8.3%

01/1984 - 8.0%
02/1984 - 7.8%


It took Reagan 28 MONTHS to get unemployment rate back down below 8 percent.
Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

Reagan created the recession began under HIM after his disastrous tax cuts.


Supply Side Economics


supply side did not work under Reagan nor Bush.the worse recession happened under REAGAN not carter, sure he picked up the economy after he trashed it.

Reagan created the recession began under HIM after his disastrous tax cuts.

How'd he do that?

 

[Dad2three]

You talk about the "off shoring" of jobs like it's nothing that Barack Obama had anything to do with...yet Jeffrey Immelts the CEO of General Electric probably sent more jobs to China than any other corporate leader and HE was the man that Barry hand picked to be his "Jobs Czar"! But you don't want to hear about that...do you, Dragonlady?

Don't you think that a guy who off-loaded jobs to Third World countries would know something the reasons for it and how to get them back?

The problem is that the GOP has fought anything your President tried to do, tooth and nail.

Obama's job creation record IS strong, despite everything Republicans have tried to do. It certainly beats Reagan and both of the Bush's records by miles.

I'm not a fan of Obama - far too right wing for my taste, but I will give him credit for putting the US back on the path to recovery. You lot are so blinded by partisanship, that you are unable to see the forest for the trees.

Obama's job creation record IS strong, despite everything Republicans have tried to do. It certainly beats Reagan and both of the Bush's records by miles.

Really? How many have been created during Obama's presidency to date? How many during Reagan's?

Well since getting out of Dubya'sGOP's hole, Obama has created 10+ million PRIVATE sector jobs since Feb 2010, the same month the Obamacares 'job killer' was passed

Reagan in 8 years

Jan 1981 74,677,000


Jan 1989 89,394,000

14,717,00 Total private IN 8 YEARS

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

Bet Obama's job creation AFTER he got out from Dubya's great recession beats Ronnie's, WHO CREATED HIS RECESSION HIMSELF

01/1981 - Unemployment rate 7.5% …. Reagan sworn in.
02/1981 - 7.4%
03/1981 - 7.4%
04/1981 - 7.2%
05/1981 - 7.5%
06/1981 - 7.5%
07/1981 - 7.2%
08/1981 - 7.4% * Reagan CUTS taxes for top 1% and says unemployment will DROP to 6.9%.
09/1981 - 7.6%
10/1981 - 7.9%
11/1981 - 8.3%
12/1981 - 8.5%

01/1982 - 8.6%
02/1982 - 8.9%
03/1982 - 9.0%
04/1982 - 9.3%
05/1982 - 9.4%
06/1982 - 9.6%
07/1982 - 9.8%
08/1982 - 9.8%
09/1982 - 10.1%
10/1982 - 10.4%
11/1982 - 10.8% * Unemployment HITS a post WW2 RECORD of 10.8%.
12/1982 - 10.8%

01/1983 - 10.4%
02/1983 - 10.4%
03/1983 - 10.3%
04/1983 - 10.3%
05/1983 - 10.1%
06/1983 - 10.1%
07/1983 - 9.4%
06/1983 - 9.5%
07/1983 - 9.4%
08/1983 - 9.5%
09/1983 - 9.2%
10/1983 - 8.8%
11/1983 - 8.5%
12/1983 - 8.3%

01/1984 - 8.0%
02/1984 - 7.8%


It took Reagan 28 MONTHS to get unemployment rate back down below 8 percent.
Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

Reagan created the recession began under HIM after his disastrous tax cuts.


Supply Side Economics


supply side did not work under Reagan nor Bush.the worse recession happened under REAGAN not carter, sure he picked up the economy after he trashed it.

Reagan created the recession began under HIM after his disastrous tax cuts.

How'd he do that?

I assume you mean the early 1980's one, not the one he handed to Poppy when he gutted revenues and ignored regulator warnings on the S&L's?

"voodoo economics."

He stuck with Volker



"Voodoo Economics"

Reagan's political rivals—including many conservatives—remained skeptical. George Bush, who opposed Reagan in the 1980 Republican primary before serving as Reagan's vice president and then as president in his own right, infamously derided Reagan's tax scheme as "voodoo economics." Bush's judgment proved to be more apt than Reagan's; the president got his tax cut in 1981 but Laffer's promised voodoo never really worked. Government tax revenues remained stagnant from 1981 through 1984. Revenues did increase later in the 1980s, but this occurred only after Reagan realized that Laffer's program wasn't working and agreed to a series of small tax hikes in an attempt to address soaring budget deficits. These increases offset many of the gains individual taxpayers reaped from Reagan's initial 1981 tax cut. Individual tax savings were further eroded by Reagan's 1982 Social Security reform package, which increased payroll taxes to fund the national retirement system. And yet another hit to taxpayers' savings came from widespread increases in state and municipal taxes across the country, levied as local governments sought to make up for funds lost when Reagan's budgets slashed federal payments to the states.

Tax Cuts or Tax Redistribution?


When all was said and done, the total tax burden imposed on the American people from all sources—state and local taxes, federal income and capital gains taxes, and payroll taxes—remained basically unchanged throughout the 1980s. In the end, Reagan's reputation as a tax-cutter far outran his actual performance.

Economy in The Reagan Era



EXCEPT OF COURSE FOR RONNIE'S 'JOB CREATORS'

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Reagan created the recession began under HIM after his disastrous tax cuts.

How'd he do that?

I assume you mean the early 1980's one, not the one he handed to Poppy when he gutted revenues and ignored regulator warnings on the S&L's?

"voodoo economics."

He stuck with Volker



"Voodoo Economics"

Reagan's political rivals—including many conservatives—remained skeptical. George Bush, who opposed Reagan in the 1980 Republican primary before serving as Reagan's vice president and then as president in his own right, infamously derided Reagan's tax scheme as "voodoo economics." Bush's judgment proved to be more apt than Reagan's; the president got his tax cut in 1981 but Laffer's promised voodoo never really worked. Government tax revenues remained stagnant from 1981 through 1984. Revenues did increase later in the 1980s, but this occurred only after Reagan realized that Laffer's program wasn't working and agreed to a series of small tax hikes in an attempt to address soaring budget deficits. These increases offset many of the gains individual taxpayers reaped from Reagan's initial 1981 tax cut. Individual tax savings were further eroded by Reagan's 1982 Social Security reform package, which increased payroll taxes to fund the national retirement system. And yet another hit to taxpayers' savings came from widespread increases in state and municipal taxes across the country, levied as local governments sought to make up for funds lost when Reagan's budgets slashed federal payments to the states.

Tax Cuts or Tax Redistribution?


When all was said and done, the total tax burden imposed on the American people from all sources—state and local taxes, federal income and capital gains taxes, and payroll taxes—remained basically unchanged throughout the 1980s. In the end, Reagan's reputation as a tax-cutter far outran his actual performance.

Economy in The Reagan Era



EXCEPT OF COURSE FOR RONNIE'S 'JOB CREATORS'

I assume you mean the early 1980's one

You're talking about "the recession began under HIM after his disastrous tax cuts", I don't mean anything.

He stuck with Volker

And?

 

[rdean]

Republicans only econonic solutions are deregulation and cutting taxes for corporations/the wealthy. Both of these methods do next to nothing to help the overall economy.

Regulations cost GDP 2% every year. Now even if you were irresponsible and stupid enough to undo ALL regulations for the sake of growth, you would only be boosting 2%. The growth of that is not nearly worth the chaos that would ensue.

Cutting taxes for corporations does jack shit for the economy in general. Stimuluating supply means dick if you don't stimuluate demand. The extra supply that is created does not meet any increase in demand. This means there is no increase in business just because a company has more to sell. Not only that, but cutting taxes only makes the government borrow more which means more debt. The proposed republican tax cuts would add 440 billion to our national debt.

The recent "experiment" failure in Kansas' economy and the pathetic job growth under Bush proves this.

See the republicans you people elect know this. They say they want to help you but in reality they only care about keeping the wealthy happy.

The reality is that the best way to stimulate economic growth is by stimulating the middle class. That is the driving force of our consumption based economy. Republicans have barely done anything for the middle class since Reagan.

Obama's stimulus created close to 3 million jobs. Why? Because it gave the middle class the biggest middle class tax cut since Reagan. It also extended unemployment benefits for the millions who lost their jobs against their will. This allowed them to spend money they wouldn't have otherwise spent because they were unemployed.

This is what you call demand-side economics.

The greatest economy in the entire history of America is the RONALD REAGAN REPUBLICAN SUPPLY SIDE ECONOMICS 80S.
You lose again.

No it wasn't. What's wrong with you? Where did you hear such nonsense?