When Bush outsourced 8 million low wage jobs - it put pressure on Food Stamps

[R.C. Christian]

How do you outsource a burger flipping job to India?

Good Question, and here is the answer:
Fast-food restaurants begin outsourcing drive-through order-taking
Fast-food restaurants begin outsourcing drive-through order-taking - Home & Food - Home & Family - Catholic Online

and you thought it could not be done.

OMG you have got to be ******* kidding me? More jobs for the target heads.

Welcome to McDonalds my name is Randeep can I a take a your order please? Would you like extra curry with your fries? Thank you, come again.

 

[Stephanie]

Who was it that signed NAFTA?

oopsie...not Bushie

 

[jasonnfree]

These were predominantly unskilled jobs that Bush and Republicans outsourced.

And most have gone on food stamps, while Republicans have blocked every Obama measure to create what Republicans call "burger flipping" jobs

... while Republicans have blocked an increase to the minimum wage.

But the President will get past this road block and create jobs for these folks.

Dems guilty of outsourcing also but throw some bones to the unemployed in the form of food stamps unlike the republican rats.

 

[jasonnfree]

Show any bill that outsources jobs...

Show any 'Obama measure' that would create any private sector job in any way, shape, or form

Idiot troll

Republicans also support government subsidies for companies that send jobs overseas because they reap tax breaks and benefits written into the tax code for “expansion” regardless that it occurs in foreign countries.

The Republican focus on jobs since January 2009 has been killing them, not creating them. They voted against the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (stimulus), opposed the auto industry bailout, payroll tax cut and extension, all of the President’s jobs bills, and have blocked any new revenue sources that would fund rebuilding the nation’s infrastructure. All of the Republican job-killing measures have as their basis protection of the rich and keeping unemployment figures high, and they are not close to being finished if they win control of the White House and both houses of Congress. One of Romney and Republicans promises is to give corporations more tax cuts and leeway to outsource jobs and the only winners are the corporations and their wealthy investors like Willard Romney.

Rewarding companies that outsource American jobs is more than just enriching corporations, it is about ethics and moral responsibility to the American people who expect their representatives to look out for their interests.

Republicans Spread Despair by Blocking Bill to Bring Jobs Home

See how that works? You give a company subsidies for "expansion" but don't care whether it's here or overseas.

You guys don't really believe the Republicans are for the middle class. Come on. You know who your representatives represent. Be honest. Get out of the closet. Let everyone know who and what you stand for. Honesty is a good thing.

I'd like to believe democrats are against outsourcing but obama's been completing trade deals started by bush. He expects to sign Trans Pacific Parnership by October and he won't let anybody see what's in the treaty. When it comes to outsourcing both parties are guilty.

 

[Stephanie]

These were predominantly unskilled jobs that Bush and Republicans outsourced.

And most have gone on food stamps, while Republicans have blocked every Obama measure to create what Republicans call "burger flipping" jobs

... while Republicans have blocked an increase to the minimum wage.

But the President will get past this road block and create jobs for these folks.

Dems guilty of outsourcing also but throw some bones to the unemployed in the form of food stamps unlike the republican rats.

of course they are...

 

[Stephanie]

anyone notice all the trolls on the board are for the Democrat party?
they call them something, oh yeah, useful tools...or usefulidiots.... take your pick

 

[DiamondDave]

Show any bill that outsources jobs...

Show any 'Obama measure' that would create any private sector job in any way, shape, or form

Idiot troll

Republicans also support government subsidies for companies that send jobs overseas because they reap tax breaks and benefits written into the tax code for “expansion” regardless that it occurs in foreign countries.

The Republican focus on jobs since January 2009 has been killing them, not creating them. They voted against the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (stimulus), opposed the auto industry bailout, payroll tax cut and extension, all of the President’s jobs bills, and have blocked any new revenue sources that would fund rebuilding the nation’s infrastructure. All of the Republican job-killing measures have as their basis protection of the rich and keeping unemployment figures high, and they are not close to being finished if they win control of the White House and both houses of Congress. One of Romney and Republicans promises is to give corporations more tax cuts and leeway to outsource jobs and the only winners are the corporations and their wealthy investors like Willard Romney.

Rewarding companies that outsource American jobs is more than just enriching corporations, it is about ethics and moral responsibility to the American people who expect their representatives to look out for their interests.

Republicans Spread Despair by Blocking Bill to Bring Jobs Home

See how that works? You give a company subsidies for "expansion" but don't care whether it's here or overseas.

You guys don't really believe the Republicans are for the middle class. Come on. You know who your representatives represent. Be honest. Get out of the closet. Let everyone know who and what you stand for. Honesty is a good thing.

This lie again??

THERE IS NO SUBSIDY FOR OUTSOURCING

And if I actually stood for subsidies of any kind, you may have a minor point... but.. per usual.. YOU DON'T

 

[peach174]

Who was it that signed NAFTA?

oopsie...not Bushie

Who voted for NAFTA in 1993 signed by President Clinton?
Senate
27 Dems
34 Repubs
Dems had control of the Senate 56 Dems to 44 Repubs
House
102 Dems
132 Repubs

 

[Stephanie]

Who was it that signed NAFTA?

oopsie...not Bushie

Who voted for NAFTA in 1993 signed by President Clinton?
Senate
27 Dems
34 Repubs
Dems had control of the Senate 56 Dems to 44 Repubs
House
102 Dems
132 Repubs

both parties have dirty hands in all this

 

[peach174]

Who was it that signed NAFTA?

oopsie...not Bushie

Who voted for NAFTA in 1993 signed by President Clinton?
Senate
27 Dems
34 Repubs
Dems had control of the Senate 56 Dems to 44 Repubs
House
102 Dems
132 Repubs

both parties have dirty hands in all this

Yep!
If Dems were so against it like they are saying now, they had control of the House & Senate and could have easily voted it down.

 

[g5000]

Actually outsourcing jobs offshore did increase drastically during the Bush years but it wasn't 8 million jobs, it was much less and it wasn't "W" who was responsible, that would of been the companies who chose to ship the jobs to the sweat shops.
The trend has hurt America, there is no doubt about that. It has made America less competitive and has had a negative effect on wages for working Americans which has weakened our consumer driven economy. Less expendable income means less consumer purchases. Of course all this hurts the job market.

Big Companies, the Big Manufacturing Companies can take paying high wages.

They can NOT take work stoppages and government interference.

So they moved their operations overseas. So would I.

Because, as we all know, there is no government interference in China...

 

[g5000]

During 8 years of Clinton, about 25 million jobs were created.

During 8 years of Bush, about 3 million jobs were created. But much more than that were lost during the meltdown at the end.

During 5 years of Obama, job creation in America has completely sucked.

 

[peach174]

Who is really putting pressure on Food Stamps?
Bush 8 years.
10.9 million added to Food Stamps

Obama 4 1/2 years
19.5 million added to Food Stamps

 

[Stephanie]

Who voted for NAFTA in 1993 signed by President Clinton?
Senate
27 Dems
34 Repubs
Dems had control of the Senate 56 Dems to 44 Repubs
House
102 Dems
132 Repubs

both parties have dirty hands in all this

Yep!
If Dems were so against it like they are saying now, they had control of the House & Senate and could have easily voted it down.

yep, but you can't get that thought these Democrat followers heads...they are sheep plain and simple..I haven't seen it this bad as with them today...it's scary how little they know and just blindly follow what the party says...don't know where this is headed

 

[g5000]

http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/04-19-SNAP.pdf

The number of people receiving SNAP benefits increased
by almost 50 percent between fiscal years 2001 and 2005
and even more rapidly (by 70 percent) between fiscal
years 2007 and 2011. During that latter period, spending
on SNAP benefits grew by about 135 percent. The
increase in the number of people eligible for and receiving
benefits between 2007 and 2011 has been driven
primarily by the weak economy. That increase was
responsible for about 65 percent of the growth in
spending on benefits between 2007 and 2011. About
20 percent of the growth in spending can be attributed
to temporarily higher benefit amounts enacted in the
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
(ARRA). The remainder stemmed from other factors,
such as higher food prices and lower income among beneficiaries,
both of which boost benefits.

So there was a 50 percent increase in Bush's first term. Followed by a 70 percent increase for the period including his second term and the first two years of Obama's first term.

Between 1990 and 2011, the number of SNAP participants
increased during periods of relatively high
unemployment (see Figure 1). Even as the unemployment
rate began to decline from its 1992, 2003, and
2010 peaks, decreases in participation typically lagged
improvement in the economy by several years. For
example, the number of SNAP participants rose steadily
from about 20 million in the fall of 1989 to more than
27 million in April 1994—nearly two years after the
unemployment rate began to fall and a full three years
after the official end of the recession in March 1991. The
number of people receiving SNAP benefits began to
climb again in 2001 and continued to grow until 2006,
more than two years after the unemployment rate began
to decline and well after that recession ended (in November
2001). The number of participants temporarily
leveled off in 2006 and 2007 until the unemployment
rate began to rise sharply in 2008. Participation then
started to grow quickly and has continued to increase
since then.

So we find that is entirely normal for SNAP participation to increase for many years beyond the last recession.

The primary reason
for the increase in the number of participants was the
deep recession from December 2007 to June 2009 and
the subsequent slow recovery; there were no significant
legislative expansions of eligibility for the program during
that time.

Considering the Bush Recession was the greatest crash since the Great Depression, none of these figures being cited for the years following that crash should be the least bit surprising now that we have much more context in which to consider them.

 

[Edgetho]

dimocraps are as bad as the guy in Cleveland who kidnapped three girls and kept them chained in the basement.

They think that they can FORCE someone to love them and to not leave them.

Like the Soviets did. Remember the Iron Curtain?

Or Castro's Cuba.

Why is it that dimocrap scum, and communists (they're both the same -- And no, I'm really not being sarcastic)

Why is it that whenever they're faced with a problem of people or, in this case, Industry, leaving....

Their first inclination is the application of force.

"Build A Wall!!"

"Secure the wall with barbed wire and Security trained to shoot on sight!!!"

"Pass this Law!!"

"Pass that Law!!"

"Seig Heil!!"

"We can't allow businesses to move!!"

"Seig Heil!!"

"Force, Uber Alles. Seig Heil!!"

I hate dimocraps.

If you want businesses to stay, make it easy for them. If you want your wife to not leave you, show her some love.

If you want Industry to grow in America, don't kick them in the nuts every chance you get.

But dimocraps are what they are. They only understand force. And degradation of everything and everybody.

Just like their forebears, the Russian Socialists, the Cuban Socialists and the German National Socialists.

They're all the same.

 

[Stephanie]

http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/04-19-SNAP.pdf

The number of people receiving SNAP benefits increased
by almost 50 percent between fiscal years 2001 and 2005
and even more rapidly (by 70 percent) between fiscal
years 2007 and 2011. During that latter period, spending
on SNAP benefits grew by about 135 percent. The
increase in the number of people eligible for and receiving
benefits between 2007 and 2011 has been driven
primarily by the weak economy. That increase was
responsible for about 65 percent of the growth in
spending on benefits between 2007 and 2011. About
20 percent of the growth in spending can be attributed
to temporarily higher benefit amounts enacted in the
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
(ARRA). The remainder stemmed from other factors,
such as higher food prices and lower income among beneficiaries,
both of which boost benefits.

So there was a 50 percent increase in Bush's first term. Followed by a 70 percent increase for the period including his second term and the first two years of Obama's first term.

Between 1990 and 2011, the number of SNAP participants
increased during periods of relatively high
unemployment (see Figure 1). Even as the unemployment
rate began to decline from its 1992, 2003, and
2010 peaks, decreases in participation typically lagged
improvement in the economy by several years. For
example, the number of SNAP participants rose steadily
from about 20 million in the fall of 1989 to more than
27 million in April 1994—nearly two years after the
unemployment rate began to fall and a full three years
after the official end of the recession in March 1991. The
number of people receiving SNAP benefits began to
climb again in 2001 and continued to grow until 2006,
more than two years after the unemployment rate began
to decline and well after that recession ended (in November
2001). The number of participants temporarily
leveled off in 2006 and 2007 until the unemployment
rate began to rise sharply in 2008. Participation then
started to grow quickly and has continued to increase
since then.

So we find that is entirely normal for SNAP participation to increase for many years beyond the last recession.

The primary reason
for the increase in the number of participants was the
deep recession from December 2007 to June 2009 and
the subsequent slow recovery; there were no significant
legislative expansions of eligibility for the program during
that time.

Considering the Bush Recession was the greatest crash since the Great Depression, none of these figures being cited for the years following that crash should be the least bit surprising now that we have much more context in which to consider them.

you are really using the greatest crash since the Great Depression?
really

 

[drivebymedia]

Show any bill that outsources jobs...

Show any 'Obama measure' that would create any private sector job in any way, shape, or form

Idiot troll

Republicans also support government subsidies for companies that send jobs overseas because they reap tax breaks and benefits written into the tax code for “expansion” regardless that it occurs in foreign countries.

The Republican focus on jobs since January 2009 has been killing them, not creating them. They voted against the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (stimulus), opposed the auto industry bailout, payroll tax cut and extension, all of the President’s jobs bills, and have blocked any new revenue sources that would fund rebuilding the nation’s infrastructure. All of the Republican job-killing measures have as their basis protection of the rich and keeping unemployment figures high, and they are not close to being finished if they win control of the White House and both houses of Congress. One of Romney and Republicans promises is to give corporations more tax cuts and leeway to outsource jobs and the only winners are the corporations and their wealthy investors like Willard Romney.

Rewarding companies that outsource American jobs is more than just enriching corporations, it is about ethics and moral responsibility to the American people who expect their representatives to look out for their interests.

Republicans Spread Despair by Blocking Bill to Bring Jobs Home

See how that works? You give a company subsidies for "expansion" but don't care whether it's here or overseas.

You guys don't really believe the Republicans are for the middle class. Come on. You know who your representatives represent. Be honest. Get out of the closet. Let everyone know who and what you stand for. Honesty is a good thing.

This lie again??

THERE IS NO SUBSIDY FOR OUTSOURCING

And if I actually stood for subsidies of any kind, you may have a minor point... but.. per usual.. YOU DON'T

When Rush makes his statement, the ditto heads blindly follow, regardless of how wrong it is .....

Sorry ....

 

[drivebymedia]

Show any bill that outsources jobs...

Show any 'Obama measure' that would create any private sector job in any way, shape, or form

Idiot troll

Republicans also support government subsidies for companies that send jobs overseas because they reap tax breaks and benefits written into the tax code for “expansion” regardless that it occurs in foreign countries.

The Republican focus on jobs since January 2009 has been killing them, not creating them. They voted against the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (stimulus), opposed the auto industry bailout, payroll tax cut and extension, all of the President’s jobs bills, and have blocked any new revenue sources that would fund rebuilding the nation’s infrastructure. All of the Republican job-killing measures have as their basis protection of the rich and keeping unemployment figures high, and they are not close to being finished if they win control of the White House and both houses of Congress. One of Romney and Republicans promises is to give corporations more tax cuts and leeway to outsource jobs and the only winners are the corporations and their wealthy investors like Willard Romney.

Rewarding companies that outsource American jobs is more than just enriching corporations, it is about ethics and moral responsibility to the American people who expect their representatives to look out for their interests.

Republicans Spread Despair by Blocking Bill to Bring Jobs Home

See how that works? You give a company subsidies for "expansion" but don't care whether it's here or overseas.

You guys don't really believe the Republicans are for the middle class. Come on. You know who your representatives represent. Be honest. Get out of the closet. Let everyone know who and what you stand for. Honesty is a good thing.

This lie again??

THERE IS NO SUBSIDY FOR OUTSOURCING

And if I actually stood for subsidies of any kind, you may have a minor point... but.. per usual.. YOU DON'T

When Rush makes his statement, the ditto heads blindly follow, regardless of how wrong it is - and only Rush can change them ...

Sorry ....

 

[Stephanie]

troll is back, thread is dead