Unemployment rate to 8.8%

[pinqy]

As I sad using your argument and the orther source I used the true unemployment numbers will be higher than what the OP states.

Why? Why are you assuming the error of the survey would only make it lower than "true?"

The actual unemployment rate is between 8.6% and 9.0% at the 90% confidence interval.

 

[Truthseeker420]

When I remember the Democrats moaning about how miserable the Buuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuush economy was when we were suffering the intense pains of 4.5% unemployment, this seems disingenuous. However, the fact it is finally under 9% for the first time in two years is a Very Good Thing, and a definite silver lining to the hurricane we are suffering under.

Even so......
This counts as whistling through the graveyard.

Bush benefited from the Cinton surplus economy plus war creates jobs and the fed kept lowering the interest rate to re-elect Bush and ballon the economy to make the rich richer.

Also i would like to mention at this time in the Reagan presidency unemployment was at 10.5%.

There was no Clinton surplus.

Q: During the Clinton administration was the federal budget balanced? Was the federal deficit erased?


A: Yes to both questions, whether you count Social Security or not.
This chart, based on historical figures from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, shows the total deficit or surplus for each fiscal year from 1990 through 2006. Keep in mind that fiscal years begin Oct. 1, so the first year that can be counted as a Clinton year is fiscal 1994. The appropriations bills for fiscal years 1990 through 1993 were signed by Bill Clinton's predecessor, George H.W. Bush. Fiscal 2002 is the first for which President George W. Bush signed the appropriations bills, and the first to show the effect of his tax cuts.


FactCheck.org: During the Clinton administration was the federal budget balanced? Was the federal deficit erased?

 

[Trajan]

When I remember the Democrats moaning about how miserable the Buuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuush economy was when we were suffering the intense pains of 4.5% unemployment, this seems disingenuous. However, the fact it is finally under 9% for the first time in two years is a Very Good Thing, and a definite silver lining to the hurricane we are suffering under.

Even so......
This counts as whistling through the graveyard.

Bush benefited from the Cinton surplus economy plus war creates jobs and the fed kept lowering the interest rate to re-elect Bush and ballon the economy to make the rich richer.

Also i would like to mention at this time in the Reagan presidency unemployment was at 10.5%.

right now, at 20 months past the end of this recession, you really should not be bringing up Reagan, you know?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Bush benefited from the Cinton surplus economy plus war creates jobs and the fed kept lowering the interest rate to re-elect Bush and ballon the economy to make the rich richer.

Also i would like to mention at this time in the Reagan presidency unemployment was at 10.5%.

There was no Clinton surplus.

Q: During the Clinton administration was the federal budget balanced? Was the federal deficit erased?


A: Yes to both questions, whether you count Social Security or not.
This chart, based on historical figures from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, shows the total deficit or surplus for each fiscal year from 1990 through 2006. Keep in mind that fiscal years begin Oct. 1, so the first year that can be counted as a Clinton year is fiscal 1994. The appropriations bills for fiscal years 1990 through 1993 were signed by Bill Clinton's predecessor, George H.W. Bush. Fiscal 2002 is the first for which President George W. Bush signed the appropriations bills, and the first to show the effect of his tax cuts.


FactCheck.org: During the Clinton administration was the federal budget balanced? Was the federal deficit erased?

Fact Check?

The Myth of the Clinton Surplus

Time and time again, anyone reading the mainstream news or reading articles on the Internet will read the claim that President Clinton not only balanced the budget, but had a surplus. This is then used as an argument to further highlight the fiscal irresponsibility of the federal government under the Bush administration.

The claim is generally made that Clinton had a surplus of $69 billion in FY1998, $123 billion in FY1999 and $230 billion in FY2000 . In that same link, Clinton claimed that the national debt had been reduced by $360 billion in the last three years, presumably FY1998, FY1999, and FY2000--though, interestingly, $360 billion is not the sum of the alleged surpluses of the three years in question ($69B + $123B + $230B = $422B, not $360B).
The Myth of the Clinton Surplus

 

[bigrebnc1775]

As I sad using your argument and the orther source I used the true unemployment numbers will be higher than what the OP states.

Why? Why are you assuming the error of the survey would only make it lower than "true?"

The actual unemployment rate is between 8.6% and 9.0% at the 90% confidence interval.

Like I said earlier in the part you side stepped

OH WOW something like a poll. And we all know how polls are done, and how much weight they carry. Around 60,000 addresses a month are surveyed out of how many addresses in America?

And the true unempolyed and under employed rate is much higher than you suggested with 90% confidence interval it's more like 23%

 

[Truthseeker420]

When I remember the Democrats moaning about how miserable the Buuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuush economy was when we were suffering the intense pains of 4.5% unemployment, this seems disingenuous. However, the fact it is finally under 9% for the first time in two years is a Very Good Thing, and a definite silver lining to the hurricane we are suffering under.

Even so......
This counts as whistling through the graveyard.

Bush benefited from the Cinton surplus economy plus war creates jobs and the fed kept lowering the interest rate to re-elect Bush and ballon the economy to make the rich richer.

Also i would like to mention at this time in the Reagan presidency unemployment was at 10.5%.

right now, at 20 months past the end of this recession, you really should not be bringing up Reagan, you know?

I will when Republicans quit idolizing a mediocre president at best, so.....

 

[Trajan]

Bush benefited from the Cinton surplus economy plus war creates jobs and the fed kept lowering the interest rate to re-elect Bush and ballon the economy to make the rich richer.

Also i would like to mention at this time in the Reagan presidency unemployment was at 10.5%.

There was no Clinton surplus.

Q: During the Clinton administration was the federal budget balanced? Was the federal deficit erased?


A: Yes to both questions, whether you count Social Security or not.
This chart, based on historical figures from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, shows the total deficit or surplus for each fiscal year from 1990 through 2006. Keep in mind that fiscal years begin Oct. 1, so the first year that can be counted as a Clinton year is fiscal 1994. The appropriations bills for fiscal years 1990 through 1993 were signed by Bill Clinton's predecessor, George H.W. Bush. Fiscal 2002 is the first for which President George W. Bush signed the appropriations bills, and the first to show the effect of his tax cuts.


FactCheck.org: During the Clinton administration was the federal budget balanced? Was the federal deficit erased?

no, it wasn't. it was a paper surplus, we still had debt and he spent fica to make it so, shoving that off on future liabilities as well as raising taxes.... it was a shell game like buying our own debt. which we are doing right now, even rachel madcow doesn't buy that....and I am sure you're on board with her.

 

[Trajan]

Bush benefited from the Cinton surplus economy plus war creates jobs and the fed kept lowering the interest rate to re-elect Bush and ballon the economy to make the rich richer.

Also i would like to mention at this time in the Reagan presidency unemployment was at 10.5%.

right now, at 20 months past the end of this recession, you really should not be bringing up Reagan, you know?

I will when Republicans quit idolizing a mediocre president at best, so.....

I never idolized Obama..

 

[Truthseeker420]

right now, at 20 months past the end of this recession, you really should not be bringing up Reagan, you know?

I will when Republicans quit idolizing a mediocre president at best, so.....

I never idolized Obama..

lol good one !

 

[Norman]

Bush benefited from the Cinton surplus economy plus war creates jobs and the fed kept lowering the interest rate to re-elect Bush and ballon the economy to make the rich richer.

Also i would like to mention at this time in the Reagan presidency unemployment was at 10.5%.

There was no Clinton surplus.

Q: During the Clinton administration was the federal budget balanced? Was the federal deficit erased?


A: Yes to both questions, whether you count Social Security or not.
This chart, based on historical figures from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, shows the total deficit or surplus for each fiscal year from 1990 through 2006. Keep in mind that fiscal years begin Oct. 1, so the first year that can be counted as a Clinton year is fiscal 1994. The appropriations bills for fiscal years 1990 through 1993 were signed by Bill Clinton's predecessor, George H.W. Bush. Fiscal 2002 is the first for which President George W. Bush signed the appropriations bills, and the first to show the effect of his tax cuts.


FactCheck.org: During the Clinton administration was the federal budget balanced? Was the federal deficit erased?

But didn't the debt still grow in those years?

The debt grows and there is a surplus? I wonder for what assets... Of course I necessarily would not count the federal reserve debt as debt as it's paid by with inflation.

 

[rightwinger]

Census Bureau. Around 60,000 addresses a month are surveyed. Households are in the survey 4 months, out for 8, and back in for 4. Rotation is staggered so that 3/4 of the sample is the same from one month to the next, and in the same month from one year to the next, half the sample will be the same.

OH WOW something like a poll. And we all know how polls are done, and how much weight they carry. Around 60,000 addresses a month are surveyed out of how many addresses in America? As I sad using your argument and the orther source I used the true unemployment numbers will be higher than what the OP states.

Statistical sampling theory is voodoo

"They didn't ask me"

 

[Immanuel]

Bush benefited from the Cinton surplus economy plus war creates jobs and the fed kept lowering the interest rate to re-elect Bush and ballon the economy to make the rich richer.

Also i would like to mention at this time in the Reagan presidency unemployment was at 10.5%.

There was no Clinton surplus.

Q: During the Clinton administration was the federal budget balanced? Was the federal deficit erased?


A: Yes to both questions, whether you count Social Security or not.
This chart, based on historical figures from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, shows the total deficit or surplus for each fiscal year from 1990 through 2006. Keep in mind that fiscal years begin Oct. 1, so the first year that can be counted as a Clinton year is fiscal 1994. The appropriations bills for fiscal years 1990 through 1993 were signed by Bill Clinton's predecessor, George H.W. Bush. Fiscal 2002 is the first for which President George W. Bush signed the appropriations bills, and the first to show the effect of his tax cuts.


FactCheck.org: During the Clinton administration was the federal budget balanced? Was the federal deficit erased?

There was no Clinton surplus.

Q: During the Clinton administration was the federal budget balanced? Was the federal deficit erased?


A: Yes to both questions, whether you count Social Security or not.
This chart, based on historical figures from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, shows the total deficit or surplus for each fiscal year from 1990 through 2006. Keep in mind that fiscal years begin Oct. 1, so the first year that can be counted as a Clinton year is fiscal 1994. The appropriations bills for fiscal years 1990 through 1993 were signed by Bill Clinton's predecessor, George H.W. Bush. Fiscal 2002 is the first for which President George W. Bush signed the appropriations bills, and the first to show the effect of his tax cuts.


FactCheck.org: During the Clinton administration was the federal budget balanced? Was the federal deficit erased?

Fact Check?

The Myth of the Clinton Surplus

Time and time again, anyone reading the mainstream news or reading articles on the Internet will read the claim that President Clinton not only balanced the budget, but had a surplus. This is then used as an argument to further highlight the fiscal irresponsibility of the federal government under the Bush administration.

The claim is generally made that Clinton had a surplus of $69 billion in FY1998, $123 billion in FY1999 and $230 billion in FY2000 . In that same link, Clinton claimed that the national debt had been reduced by $360 billion in the last three years, presumably FY1998, FY1999, and FY2000--though, interestingly, $360 billion is not the sum of the alleged surpluses of the three years in question ($69B + $123B + $230B = $422B, not $360B).
The Myth of the Clinton Surplus

The Myth of the Clinton Surplus

FactCheck.org: During the Clinton administration was the federal budget balanced? Was the federal deficit erased?

Wow! Isn't it funny how two different articles can come up with two completely different answers on the same question? Hmmm, who to trust? I know nothing about Craig Steiner. I know a little bit about FactCheck.org. I have in the past looked at the government's take on this (can't remember the site and really don't care to go looking for it) and it showed that there was a surplus. Wait a minute, that was a government site.

Dagnammit! I still have no idea whom to trust!

Immie

 

[bigrebnc1775]

OH WOW something like a poll. And we all know how polls are done, and how much weight they carry. Around 60,000 addresses a month are surveyed out of how many addresses in America? As I sad using your argument and the orther source I used the true unemployment numbers will be higher than what the OP states.

Statistical sampling theory is voodoo

"They didn't ask me"

according to the polls obama will not be re-elected in 2012

 

[Trajan]

There was no Clinton surplus.

Q: During the Clinton administration was the federal budget balanced? Was the federal deficit erased?


A: Yes to both questions, whether you count Social Security or not.
This chart, based on historical figures from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, shows the total deficit or surplus for each fiscal year from 1990 through 2006. Keep in mind that fiscal years begin Oct. 1, so the first year that can be counted as a Clinton year is fiscal 1994. The appropriations bills for fiscal years 1990 through 1993 were signed by Bill Clinton's predecessor, George H.W. Bush. Fiscal 2002 is the first for which President George W. Bush signed the appropriations bills, and the first to show the effect of his tax cuts.


FactCheck.org: During the Clinton administration was the federal budget balanced? Was the federal deficit erased?

Q: During the Clinton administration was the federal budget balanced? Was the federal deficit erased?


A: Yes to both questions, whether you count Social Security or not.
This chart, based on historical figures from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, shows the total deficit or surplus for each fiscal year from 1990 through 2006. Keep in mind that fiscal years begin Oct. 1, so the first year that can be counted as a Clinton year is fiscal 1994. The appropriations bills for fiscal years 1990 through 1993 were signed by Bill Clinton's predecessor, George H.W. Bush. Fiscal 2002 is the first for which President George W. Bush signed the appropriations bills, and the first to show the effect of his tax cuts.


FactCheck.org: During the Clinton administration was the federal budget balanced? Was the federal deficit erased?

Fact Check?

The Myth of the Clinton Surplus

Time and time again, anyone reading the mainstream news or reading articles on the Internet will read the claim that President Clinton not only balanced the budget, but had a surplus. This is then used as an argument to further highlight the fiscal irresponsibility of the federal government under the Bush administration.

The claim is generally made that Clinton had a surplus of $69 billion in FY1998, $123 billion in FY1999 and $230 billion in FY2000 . In that same link, Clinton claimed that the national debt had been reduced by $360 billion in the last three years, presumably FY1998, FY1999, and FY2000--though, interestingly, $360 billion is not the sum of the alleged surpluses of the three years in question ($69B + $123B + $230B = $422B, not $360B).
The Myth of the Clinton Surplus

The Myth of the Clinton Surplus

FactCheck.org: During the Clinton administration was the federal budget balanced? Was the federal deficit erased?

Wow! Isn't it funny how two different articles can come up with two completely different answers on the same question? Hmmm, who to trust? I know nothing about Craig Steiner. I know a little bit about FactCheck.org. I have in the past looked at the government's take on this (can't remember the site and really don't care to go looking for it) and it showed that there was a surplus. Wait a minute, that was a government site.

Dagnammit! I still have no idea whom to trust!

Immie

this might help....

National debt by U.S. presidential terms - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Immanuel]

Q: During the Clinton administration was the federal budget balanced? Was the federal deficit erased?


A: Yes to both questions, whether you count Social Security or not.
This chart, based on historical figures from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, shows the total deficit or surplus for each fiscal year from 1990 through 2006. Keep in mind that fiscal years begin Oct. 1, so the first year that can be counted as a Clinton year is fiscal 1994. The appropriations bills for fiscal years 1990 through 1993 were signed by Bill Clinton's predecessor, George H.W. Bush. Fiscal 2002 is the first for which President George W. Bush signed the appropriations bills, and the first to show the effect of his tax cuts.


FactCheck.org: During the Clinton administration was the federal budget balanced? Was the federal deficit erased?

Fact Check?

The Myth of the Clinton Surplus

Time and time again, anyone reading the mainstream news or reading articles on the Internet will read the claim that President Clinton not only balanced the budget, but had a surplus. This is then used as an argument to further highlight the fiscal irresponsibility of the federal government under the Bush administration.

The claim is generally made that Clinton had a surplus of $69 billion in FY1998, $123 billion in FY1999 and $230 billion in FY2000 . In that same link, Clinton claimed that the national debt had been reduced by $360 billion in the last three years, presumably FY1998, FY1999, and FY2000--though, interestingly, $360 billion is not the sum of the alleged surpluses of the three years in question ($69B + $123B + $230B = $422B, not $360B).
The Myth of the Clinton Surplus

The Myth of the Clinton Surplus

FactCheck.org: During the Clinton administration was the federal budget balanced? Was the federal deficit erased?

Wow! Isn't it funny how two different articles can come up with two completely different answers on the same question? Hmmm, who to trust? I know nothing about Craig Steiner. I know a little bit about FactCheck.org. I have in the past looked at the government's take on this (can't remember the site and really don't care to go looking for it) and it showed that there was a surplus. Wait a minute, that was a government site.

Dagnammit! I still have no idea whom to trust!

Immie

this might help....

National debt by U.S. presidential terms - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hehe,

Thanks, but it came from Wiki! Dagnammit, I still don't have any idea who to trust.

Wait, I have an idea! Brilliant if I do say so myself... I will quietly wait for TDM to stick her two cents into this conversation and when she shows which one she supports, I will chose the exact opposite!! Brilliant idea if I do say so myself.

Immie

 

[Sallow]

Q: During the Clinton administration was the federal budget balanced? Was the federal deficit erased?


A: Yes to both questions, whether you count Social Security or not.
This chart, based on historical figures from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, shows the total deficit or surplus for each fiscal year from 1990 through 2006. Keep in mind that fiscal years begin Oct. 1, so the first year that can be counted as a Clinton year is fiscal 1994. The appropriations bills for fiscal years 1990 through 1993 were signed by Bill Clinton's predecessor, George H.W. Bush. Fiscal 2002 is the first for which President George W. Bush signed the appropriations bills, and the first to show the effect of his tax cuts.


FactCheck.org: During the Clinton administration was the federal budget balanced? Was the federal deficit erased?

Fact Check?

The Myth of the Clinton Surplus

Time and time again, anyone reading the mainstream news or reading articles on the Internet will read the claim that President Clinton not only balanced the budget, but had a surplus. This is then used as an argument to further highlight the fiscal irresponsibility of the federal government under the Bush administration.

The claim is generally made that Clinton had a surplus of $69 billion in FY1998, $123 billion in FY1999 and $230 billion in FY2000 . In that same link, Clinton claimed that the national debt had been reduced by $360 billion in the last three years, presumably FY1998, FY1999, and FY2000--though, interestingly, $360 billion is not the sum of the alleged surpluses of the three years in question ($69B + $123B + $230B = $422B, not $360B).
The Myth of the Clinton Surplus

The Myth of the Clinton Surplus

FactCheck.org: During the Clinton administration was the federal budget balanced? Was the federal deficit erased?

Wow! Isn't it funny how two different articles can come up with two completely different answers on the same question? Hmmm, who to trust? I know nothing about Craig Steiner. I know a little bit about FactCheck.org. I have in the past looked at the government's take on this (can't remember the site and really don't care to go looking for it) and it showed that there was a surplus. Wait a minute, that was a government site.

Dagnammit! I still have no idea whom to trust!

Immie

this might help....

National debt by U.S. presidential terms - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You do realize debt and deficits are different..right?

And your own chart shows conservatives growing debt..and liberals shrinking it.

Thanks.

 

[JimH52]

Statistical sampling theory is voodoo

"They didn't ask me"

according to the polls obama will not be re-elected in 2012

So, who is going to defeat him. Will it be Michelle, Sarah, Huck, Romney...just who will it be? The GOP needs to worry that the economy is improving. They are wringing their hands with worry. So, the best thing to do is screw it up with their "tea party induced" budget deals. Yeah, they need to kill 200,000 jobs quickly. THEY CAN DO IT!

 

[william the wie]

according to the polls obama will not be re-elected in 2012

So, who is going to defeat him. Will it be Michelle, Sarah, Huck, Romney...just who will it be? The GOP needs to worry that the economy is improving. They are wringing their hands with worry. So, the best thing to do is screw it up with their "tea party induced" budget deals. Yeah, they need to kill 200,000 jobs quickly. THEY CAN DO IT!

The only poll that counts is on election day. What may get Obama tossed is the idiotic DNC strategy last year. In a redistricting year, ending in 9 or 0 depending on the state, state not national elections are what counts. The DNC has been whiffing in the two most critical years of each decade. As a result far more radical representatives will emerge from the D primaries next year and that will hurt the Dems not just in the presidential but also in senatorial elections. This process of radicalizing D seats at the state level has been building since 1970 and without major reform repeats of 2010 when the less trusted and less popular GOP won by default will become the rule.

 

[Sallow]

according to the polls obama will not be re-elected in 2012

Taking bets..you in?

 

[Truthseeker420]

The Myth of the Clinton Surplus

FactCheck.org: During the Clinton administration was the federal budget balanced? Was the federal deficit erased?

Wow! Isn't it funny how two different articles can come up with two completely different answers on the same question? Hmmm, who to trust? I know nothing about Craig Steiner. I know a little bit about FactCheck.org. I have in the past looked at the government's take on this (can't remember the site and really don't care to go looking for it) and it showed that there was a surplus. Wait a minute, that was a government site.

Dagnammit! I still have no idea whom to trust!

Immie

this might help....

National debt by U.S. presidential terms - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You do realize debt and deficits are different..right?

And your own chart shows conservatives growing debt..and liberals shrinking it.

Thanks.

Common now... a conservite(so called) doesn't want to admit Clinton had a surplus. lol this might help you.
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/108xx/doc10871/HistoricalTables.pdf