You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Bogus Job Growth under Obama
- Thread starter J Craft
- Start date
You are an idiot.
Lightbringer
Loves Me Some Souls
You are an idiot.
No, he's not an idiot. In fact his link doesn't even go far enough. Some of those new jobs weren't even new, they were due to people being laid off and having to go through temp agencies just to get their old jobs back.
No, he's not an idiot. In fact his link doesn't even go far enough. Some of those new jobs weren't even new, they were due to people being laid off and having to go through temp agencies just to get their old jobs back.
Another idiot?
Look at unemployment rates for a clue.
Lightbringer
Loves Me Some Souls
Another idiot?
Look at unemployment rates for a clue.
Are we trusting that the calculations include those who have stopped looking for work? Or are technically old enough to be considered retired whether they want to be or not? Or that the reported figures are reported honestly to begin with?
Here's a clue for you Rune, if we were truly at a point where unemployment was statistically nil then we should be growing like gang-busters but I'm looking at industrial parks throughout my area running on anywhere from 15% to 50% occupancy and average growth of 2%. Something's not right here Rune but you keep your head up Obama's ass, it's easier than actually employing critical thinking skills.
I may have posted the following over a dozen times on various current events BBS.
No body has ever refuted it.
No body has ever refuted it.
“... Reince Priebus, the Republican National Chairman today said that 300K jobs ... aught to be expected every month ... and just a historical perspective:
- during the 8 years of President Bush (younger) there were 2.1 million net jobs created in the United States. Of the 2.1 million, 1.8 million of them were in the public sector ... that means there were 300,000 jobs in the private sector in 8 months, in 8 years rather, net ...
more jobs have been created in the United States in the last 4 years than in Europe, Japan, all the industrialized modern world combined. ...
70 years since WWII. 36 years of Republican presidents, 34 years of Democratic presidents. In those 70 years, there were 36.7 million jobs created under Republican presidents ... a little over half the time. In 34 years there were 63.7 million created by Democrats. That's 29 million more. You know, perhaps it's an accident once, or twice or what. But I mean at some point the Democrats ought to be comfort in the fact that they have been better the economy and job creation than have been the opposition.
...
It's 15 years since we've had 10 consecutive months of over 200,000 [job growth]. Just 15 years ago there was a fella from Arkansas ... there were more jobs created in Bill Clinton's 8 years than there were in Ronald Reagan's 8 years, and the 12 years of both Bush's combined. I mean 6 million more jobs created in those 8 years, ... policy does kick in, & is reflected in the results.” Mark Shields
Lightbringer
Loves Me Some Souls
I may have posted the following over a dozen times on various current events BBS.
No body has ever refuted it.
What do you think there is to refute there?
"What do you think there is to refute there?" G #7
There's a tinge of presumption in your inquiry.
I do NOT know that there's ANYthing to refute there.
BUT !!
The title, the subject line of this thread is: Bogus Job Growth under Obama
So the quotation in number six asserts Obama's created more private sector jobs in about a month than President Bush (younger) did in 8 years.
And yet
and yet
and yet
the title to this thread is:
Bogus Job Growth under Obama
There's a tinge of presumption in your inquiry.
I do NOT know that there's ANYthing to refute there.
BUT !!
The title, the subject line of this thread is: Bogus Job Growth under Obama
So the quotation in number six asserts Obama's created more private sector jobs in about a month than President Bush (younger) did in 8 years.
And yet
and yet
and yet
the title to this thread is:
Bogus Job Growth under Obama
Really? I thought Trump won due to the idiosyncrasies of the electoral college. 77,000 votes in 3 states. Because, if you wish to use the ACTUAL vote as validation or not, his policies kicked Trump's ass.
No, he's not an idiot. In fact his link doesn't even go far enough. Some of those new jobs weren't even new, they were due to people being laid off and having to go through temp agencies just to get their old jobs back.
Yeah, he is an idiot. He's trying to equate an EC win with those policies. Popular vote says otherwise, doesn't it?
Yeah, he is an idiot. He's trying to equate an EC win with those policies. Popular vote says otherwise, doesn't it?
well first of if we were truly at full employment as has been claimed (5% or less unemployment) the vote wouldnt have been close whether in the EC or PV. Aside from the presidency a party who brought full employment to the people wouldnt have lost the house or senate as well.
well first of if we were truly at full employment as has been claimed (5% or less unemployment) the vote wouldnt have been close whether in the EC or PV. Aside from the presidency a party who brought full employment to the people wouldnt have lost the house or senate as well.
The vote wasn't close. That's the point.
Lightbringer
Loves Me Some Souls
"What do you think there is to refute there?" G #7
There's a tinge of presumption in your inquiry.
I do NOT know that there's ANYthing to refute there.
BUT !!
The title, the subject line of this thread is: Bogus Job Growth under Obama
So the quotation in number six asserts Obama's created more private sector jobs in about a month than President Bush (younger) did in 8 years.
And yet
and yet
and yet
the title to this thread is:
Bogus Job Growth under Obama
Your link doesn't address Obama or his policies, or even a couple of Dem Presidents but it does include the Bushes. It does seem to presume that policy is uniform among Democrats.
Are we trusting that the calculations include those who have stopped looking for work? Or are technically old enough to be considered retired whether they want to be or not? Or that the reported figures are reported honestly to begin with?
Here's a clue for you Rune, if we were truly at a point where unemployment was statistically nil then we should be growing like gang-busters but I'm looking at industrial parks throughout my area running on anywhere from 15% to 50% occupancy and average growth of 2%. Something's not right here Rune but you keep your head up Obama's ass, it's easier than actually employing critical thinking skills.
Yes something is wrong but blaming it on Obama is foolish.
Yes something is wrong but blaming it on Obama is foolish.
as always the leader gets the credit or the blame.
#13
I rarely post as a partisan.
My hierarchy of loyalty is:
- god / Nature first
- humanity second
- nation & People third
- etc
I rarely post as a partisan.
My hierarchy of loyalty is:
- god / Nature first
- humanity second
- nation & People third
- etc
"We have no eternal allies and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interest are eternal and perpetual, and these interest it is our duty to follow." Lord Palmerston 1848
well first of if we were truly at full employment as has been claimed (5% or less unemployment) the vote wouldnt have been close whether in the EC or PV. Aside from the presidency a party who brought full employment to the people wouldnt have lost the house or senate as well.
Whole lot of assumptions zero facts
as always the leader gets the credit or the blame.
The entire economy was collapsed when he took over fool.
Your link doesn't address Obama or his policies, or even a couple of Dem Presidents but it does include the Bushes. It does seem to presume that policy is uniform among Democrats.
The economy is always better under a Dem.
Trump is a lifelong Dem but more importantly, we are staged for growth.