Where are the jobs, Mr. President?

[ScienceRocks]

It took until the early 50's for us to completely recover from the depression. Takes infrastructure, science, education and good policies.

This is the formula that works world ******* wide!

 

[edthecynic]

Bwahahahahahah!!!!

The day Bush left office unemployment was at 7.8%. It has never been below 8% during the Obama regime of terror (lowering it because people have given up and permanently left the job market because Obama has promised them permanent unemployment does not count chief. Any other lies you want to attempt??? Please note all of the accurate statistics below which outline where they were the day Obama was inaugurated:

But you DID count it for Bush's UE rate!!!!! 10 million dropped out of the labor force during the Bush Regime that YOU did not count as unemployed, and they were not Boomers retiring like under Obama.

Ed, where do you get that I "did" anything? Bush is your guy. Not ours. Bush was a hard core liberal who spent recklessly, grew government, bailed out the private sector, and pissed on the U.S. Constitution. In other words, step-by-step the exact same radical left-wing policies that Obama has given us (Obama just gives it to us in larger doses since he's in a rush to collapse America before the end of his final term).

I've slammed Bush relentlessly for being the liberal he is and you're inability to see he is the ultimate liberal god who you would worship had he had a little "d" next to his name is proof of what an absolutely blind partisan hack you are.

Bush has never been even remotely Liberal. He spent recklessly, grew government, bailed out the private sector, and pissed on the U.S. Constitution just like St Ronnie and every other CON$ervoFascist.

 

[ScienceRocks]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/files/2012/10/Screen-shot-2012-10-05-at-2.10.13-PM.png

Reagan had a congress that wanted to invest in America and had vision! Obama is doing what he's doing with his hands tied by people that hate government.

 

[edthecynic]

By not counting more and more workers.. by giving more and more of those not working government disability... the labor force participation rate is the lowest in 40+ years... the jobs that are allegedly 'gained' are less than the ones leaving the workforce... sounds like a loss to me and any other person who thinks logically

The labor participation rate will continue to decline over the next two decades

yet jobs lost to retirement outnumber those created or replacing them... as stated, negative employment... with more vacating jobs and less in the working age, employment numbers should be MUCH better.. it is not because of the governmental policies and things such as allowing more and more people to claim disability who are not disabled

Very few jobs are "lost to retirement." When someone retires, someone else usually fills that same job. Disability award rates grew at the same rate or greater during the Bush Regime, so it has nothing to do with Obama or changing the rules but only to the aging of the workforce.

 

[Jarhead]

It took until the early 50's for us to completely recover from the depression. Takes infrastructure, science, education and good policies.

This is the formula that works world ******* wide!

lol....

you truly ARE a child.

I wonder what Japan thinks about your theory.

LMFAO....the missing decade....likely before you were born.

You are truly clueless. An economic idiot who regurgitates what you hear on MSNBC

 

[Jarhead]

The labor participation rate will continue to decline over the next two decades

yet jobs lost to retirement outnumber those created or replacing them... as stated, negative employment... with more vacating jobs and less in the working age, employment numbers should be MUCH better.. it is not because of the governmental policies and things such as allowing more and more people to claim disability who are not disabled

Very few jobs are "lost to retirement." When someone retires, someone else usually fills that same job. Disability award rates grew at the same rate or greater during the Bush Regime, so it has nothing to do with Obama or changing the rules but only to the aging of the workforce.

few jobs are lost to retirement?

Wow.

Another one who makes shit up to try to win a debate.

Companies "buy out" people to retire early you ******* moron.

It is a way to decrease headcount without increasing unemployment liability you ******* idiot.

 

[ScienceRocks]

It took until the early 50's for us to completely recover from the depression. Takes infrastructure, science, education and good policies.

This is the formula that works world ******* wide!

lol....

you truly ARE a child.

I wonder what Japan thinks about your theory.

LMFAO....the missing decade....likely before you were born.

You are truly clueless. An economic idiot who regurgitates what you hear on MSNBC

Really, Tell that to any country including china you ******* retarded caveman. You want to insult? Oh'boy can I insult but it still isn't debate, asshole.

America 40's, 50's, 60's = investment and American first policies
China during the past 20 years. You think the government didn't invest?
Many African nations from Kenya to Nigeria? You think they didn't invest as they liberalist their economies.
India,
Britain
etc

America was made great not only because of the big corporations but because of wise American first policies. We lead the world in infrastructure, tech and education 40 years ago....Idiots like you only insult and fight to destroy the middle class as you don't understand that giving all the wealth to the upper nobility never works.

Have fun with your insults you dumb trailer trash!

 

[edthecynic]

yet jobs lost to retirement outnumber those created or replacing them... as stated, negative employment... with more vacating jobs and less in the working age, employment numbers should be MUCH better.. it is not because of the governmental policies and things such as allowing more and more people to claim disability who are not disabled

Very few jobs are "lost to retirement." When someone retires, someone else usually fills that same job. Disability award rates grew at the same rate or greater during the Bush Regime, so it has nothing to do with Obama or changing the rules but only to the aging of the workforce.

few jobs are lost to retirement?

Wow.

Another one who makes shit up to try to win a debate.

Companies "buy out" people to retire early you ******* moron.

It is a way to decrease headcount without increasing unemployment liability you ******* idiot.

And those are among the FEW that are lost to retirement. YOU are making shit up if you think that buying people out to retire early is the norm!

 

[P@triot]

It took until the early 50's for us to completely recover from the depression. Takes infrastructure, science, education and good policies.

This is the formula that works world ******* wide!

So much so that it has collapsed every nation in the world that has tried it (from the Soviet Union to Cuba to Greece).

There is one formula and only one formula that works: freedom and free markets.

You're failed policies don't work chief. Sorry.

 

[Harry Dresden]

You really are one dumb ****, aren't you?

Government/public sector jobs WENT UP during the REAGAN/BUSH years.

And DOWN during the OBAMA years.

No they did not.. state and local governmental jobs went down.. federal increased.. that is under Obama control

I nailed you on this lie in another thread a while ago, and all you have done is slink off and repeat the lie here.

As I pointed out to you there were 2,795,000 fed employees when Obama took office and 2,717,000 now. You then backtracked from your lie by saying it was not a big reduction. The fact remains that a reduction is not an "increase" and claiming fed workers increased is a lie.

much of that decrease was from the Post Office reducing their numbers and Obama had absolutely nothing to do with that......

 

[Harry Dresden]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/files/2012/10/Screen-shot-2012-10-05-at-2.10.13-PM.png

Reagan had a congress that wanted to invest in America and had vision! Obama is doing what he's doing with his hands tied by people that hate government.

sure they do Matt....just because someone does not agree with you does not mean they hate the country.....

 

[Papageorgio]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/files/2012/10/Screen-shot-2012-10-05-at-2.10.13-PM.png

Reagan had a congress that wanted to invest in America and had vision! Obama is doing what he's doing with his hands tied by people that hate government.

More drama from the left. We spend more on education than any other country. Why the hell are we not at the top in terms of education?

 

[Harry Dresden]

yet jobs lost to retirement outnumber those created or replacing them... as stated, negative employment... with more vacating jobs and less in the working age, employment numbers should be MUCH better.. it is not because of the governmental policies and things such as allowing more and more people to claim disability who are not disabled

Very few jobs are "lost to retirement." When someone retires, someone else usually fills that same job. Disability award rates grew at the same rate or greater during the Bush Regime, so it has nothing to do with Obama or changing the rules but only to the aging of the workforce.

few jobs are lost to retirement?

Wow.

Another one who makes shit up to try to win a debate.

Companies "buy out" people to retire early you ******* moron.

It is a way to decrease headcount without increasing unemployment liability you ******* idiot.

before i retired from the PO there were many people retiring,but the PO had not hired anyone in 7 years and they were short handed when i left as they had been for a few years....

 

[Politico]

It took until the early 50's for us to completely recover from the depression. Takes infrastructure, science, education and good policies.

This is the formula that works world ******* wide!

lol....

you truly ARE a child.

I wonder what Japan thinks about your theory.

LMFAO....the missing decade....likely before you were born.

You are truly clueless. An economic idiot who regurgitates what you hear on MSNBC

Aww be nice. The Leftytoons are sads right now. And medication is getting more expensive.

 

[edthecynic]

No they did not.. state and local governmental jobs went down.. federal increased.. that is under Obama control

I nailed you on this lie in another thread a while ago, and all you have done is slink off and repeat the lie here.

As I pointed out to you there were 2,795,000 fed employees when Obama took office and 2,717,000 now. You then backtracked from your lie by saying it was not a big reduction. The fact remains that a reduction is not an "increase" and claiming fed workers increased is a lie.

much of that decrease was from the Post Office reducing their numbers and Obama had absolutely nothing to do with that......

While it is true that the decrease is due to PO reductions, it still does not support the claim that fed jobs increased, whether you give Obama credit or not.

 

[boilermaker55]

boehner! Where are the jobs?
Liar!

 

[RoadVirus]

The jobs are waiting for a normal infrastructure/jobs act, dingbats.

Obama signed into law an $800B "stimulus" bill just for that purpose. And like everything else touched by Obama, it was a failure.

 

[RoadVirus]

Record corporate profits could create jobs if record corporate profits were spent on creating jobs.

Thanks to Obubble's EPA Gestapo, many corporations have to dole out millions to comply with additional environmental regs. Can't create jobs with bone-crushing overregulation.

 

[Geaux4it]

Obama's Presidency is caving right before our eyes and I applaud the horror. He is completley failing at everything he does.

We're winning

Good over evil

-Geaux

 

[ScienceRocks]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/files/2012/10/Screen-shot-2012-10-05-at-2.10.13-PM.png

Reagan had a congress that wanted to invest in America and had vision! Obama is doing what he's doing with his hands tied by people that hate government.

More drama from the left. We spend more on education than any other country. Why the hell are we not at the top in terms of education?

Because our system sucks. I could point out 16 other first world nations that have good educational systems that they invest in that are kicking our ass!