AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Jun 21, 2011 11:01:23 GMT -5
...and then some. And those silly, ignorant Fox News watchers think the stimulus has failed. Where do they get these ideas?
|
|
ugonow
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:15:55 GMT -5
Posts: 3,397
|
Post by ugonow on Jun 21, 2011 11:11:19 GMT -5
It is Obamas fault that every job since 2000 was wiped out by 2009?
|
|
ugonow
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:15:55 GMT -5
Posts: 3,397
|
Post by ugonow on Jun 21, 2011 11:27:51 GMT -5
And to be fair...you should point out when it was we reached the point of losing every job created since 2000 and when private sector job creation started up again.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Jun 21, 2011 12:38:00 GMT -5
It is Obamas fault that every job since 2000 was wiped out by 2009? Yes. Under Obama ONLY part-time jobs have been added. Numerous people have given up. This is Obamanomics-- that's why... This means Obama has accomplished the impossible: He's actually got a record WORSE than Jimmy Carter.
|
|
ugonow
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:15:55 GMT -5
Posts: 3,397
|
Post by ugonow on Jun 21, 2011 13:17:26 GMT -5
Obama came into office in late Jan of 2009.By that time every job created since 2000 had been lost and it was his fault.
|
|
ugonow
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:15:55 GMT -5
Posts: 3,397
|
Post by ugonow on Jun 21, 2011 13:19:39 GMT -5
Job growth under Bush was worst since WWII Jacksonville Business Journal - by G. Scott Thomas Date: Tuesday, January 20, 2009, 10:01am EST President George W. Bush will leave office Tuesday with the worst employment-growth record of any president since World War II, according to a new analysis by Bizjournals.
The nation’s job base grew at an annual rate of 0.28 percent during Bush’s eight years as president – by far the slowest pace for any of the 11 presidents in the postwar era, according to Bizjournals. Bizjournals is the online media arm of American City Business Journals American City Business Journals Follow this company , The Business Review's parent company.
The previous low had been set by Bush’s father, George H.W. Bush, with an annual job-growth rate of 0.59 percent. The elder Bush served between 1989 and 1993.
Bizjournals used seasonally adjusted data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics to calculate employment-growth rates for the administrations of all presidents since Harry Truman. Each president’s record was based on a comparison of job totals in the final full month served by his predecessor and his own final month. George W. Bush’s span ran from December 2000, when nonfarm employment totaled 132.5 million, to December 2008, when it reached 135.5 million.
The administration with the strongest growth rate since World War II was that of Lyndon Johnson, who served between November 1963 and January 1969. Employment increased at an annual pace of 3.74 percent during that period.
Bizjournals also looked at five subsets of job growth, with the younger President Bush finishing
|
|
ugonow
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:15:55 GMT -5
Posts: 3,397
|
Post by ugonow on Jun 21, 2011 13:20:54 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 28, 2024 21:31:17 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2011 13:21:15 GMT -5
Obama came into office in late Jan of 2009.By that time every job created since 2000 had been lost and it was his fault. Who didn't know that Bush's inability to effect a positive net job growth was Obama's fault? No net job growth under Bush... oh wait, sorry, that should read NO private sector job growth under Bush... he did manage a few public sector jobs...
|
|
|
Post by Mkitty is pro kitty on Jun 21, 2011 14:44:01 GMT -5
LOL, I'm a liberal, and I know the difference between net and gross. Obama created more jobs in one year than Bush did 8. "WHEN ONE YEAR BEATS EIGHT" www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2011_01/027440.phpLike how Perry used his to plug up the deficit? Is that a success or failure? I'd love to hear a Conservative talk his way out of that one. It was a success! ... so what Obama did was successful? It was a failure! ... so what Rick Perry the Conservative hero from Texas did was a failure?
|
|
ugonow
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:15:55 GMT -5
Posts: 3,397
|
Post by ugonow on Jun 21, 2011 14:51:53 GMT -5
Can you imagine what Perry's deficit would be without all those stimulus funds he used to shore it up? More than the 27 BILLION it is now.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,114
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jun 21, 2011 20:31:19 GMT -5
...and then some. And those silly, ignorant Fox News watchers think the stimulus has failed. Where do they get these ideas? given that only 1.1M jobs were created under Bush, the worst job growth record since Hoover, this was a fairly low hurdle to clear.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,114
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jun 21, 2011 20:32:57 GMT -5
It is Obamas fault that every job since 2000 was wiped out by 2009? Yes. Under Obama ONLY part-time jobs have been added. Numerous people have given up. This is Obamanomics-- that's why... This means Obama has accomplished the impossible: He's actually got a record WORSE than Jimmy Carter. Carter's economic record was actually pretty good, compared to Bush. and yes, so far, Obama's record is worse than Bush.
|
|
|
Post by ed1066 on Jun 21, 2011 20:56:00 GMT -5
Yes. Under Obama ONLY part-time jobs have been added. Numerous people have given up. This is Obamanomics-- that's why... This means Obama has accomplished the impossible: He's actually got a record WORSE than Jimmy Carter. Carter's economic record was actually pretty good, compared to Bush. and yes, so far, Obama's record is worse than Bush. Ah, macro (may I still call you macro?), I should tell you that the "blame Bush" strategy is no longer de rigueur these days. In other words, it's been too long and that dog won't hunt. Suggest you change it up or risk looking like Lakhota, or worse, Warsaw...
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,114
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jun 21, 2011 21:14:31 GMT -5
Carter's economic record was actually pretty good, compared to Bush. and yes, so far, Obama's record is worse than Bush. Ah, macro (may I still call you macro?), I should tell you that the "blame Bush" strategy is no longer de rigueur these days. In other words, it's been too long and that dog won't hunt. Suggest you change it up or risk looking like Lakhota, or worse, Warsaw... sorry, Ed. i have always placed blame where it is due, and will continue to do so. i criticized Clinton, now Bush. i also criticize Obama, for the record. i will do so now. i think he was an IDIOT to put tax breaks in the stimulus package. i think he was really lame for not running the gauntlet on taxes with the GOP when he had the votes to sustain it. i think his foreign policy stinks every bit as bad as Bush's- maybe worse because he is more wordly and should understand the criminality of his actions. but as far as the stink that likes thick on the economy right now, i hold Bush mostly responsible, and i think i have ample justification for it. good to see you, btw, Ed.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,114
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jun 21, 2011 21:15:34 GMT -5
PS- do you deny that Bush, not Carter had the worst job creation record since Hoover?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 28, 2024 21:31:17 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2011 21:24:25 GMT -5
"I think he was an IDIOT to put tax breaks in the stimulus package. i think he was really lame for not running the gauntlet on taxes with the GOP when he had the votes to sustain it."
|
|
|
Post by lakhota on Jun 21, 2011 21:41:28 GMT -5
Although I'm not an Obama fan, I'm confused how anyone can say he hasn't created "any" jobs. Also, it's hard to calculate how many he may have saved. www.newinstinct.com/?cat=49
|
|
|
Post by ed1066 on Jun 21, 2011 21:43:58 GMT -5
Ah, macro (may I still call you macro?), I should tell you that the "blame Bush" strategy is no longer de rigueur these days. In other words, it's been too long and that dog won't hunt. Suggest you change it up or risk looking like Lakhota, or worse, Warsaw... sorry, Ed. i have always placed blame where it is due, and will continue to do so. i criticized Clinton, now Bush. i also criticize Obama, for the record. i will do so now. i think he was an IDIOT to put tax breaks in the stimulus package. i think he was really lame for not running the gauntlet on taxes with the GOP when he had the votes to sustain it. i think his foreign policy stinks every bit as bad as Bush's- maybe worse because he is more wordly and should understand the criminality of his actions. but as far as the stink that likes thick on the economy right now, i hold Bush mostly responsible, and i think i have ample justification for it. good to see you, btw, Ed. Good to see you here, too, old buddy!
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,114
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jun 21, 2011 21:50:35 GMT -5
Although I'm not an Obama fan, I'm confused how anyone can say he hasn't created "any" jobs. Also, it's hard to calculate how many he may have saved. www.newinstinct.com/?cat=49saving is not the same as creating, Lakhota. but i think he has a legitimate chance of breaking Bush's (horrific) first term jobs record, still.
|
|
|
Post by lakhota on Jun 21, 2011 21:56:48 GMT -5
I disagree...
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,114
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jun 21, 2011 21:58:39 GMT -5
disagree with it all you like: it won't change the definitions. i might save my son's life tomorrow, but i won't create it.
|
|
|
Post by lakhota on Jun 21, 2011 22:00:39 GMT -5
If you actually save his life tomorrow - you have created him - otherwise he would no longer be here.
|
|
hello fromWarsaw
Senior Member
Hiya! Wake UP!!
Joined: Feb 13, 2011 1:24:04 GMT -5
Posts: 2,044
|
Post by hello fromWarsaw on Jun 21, 2011 22:00:39 GMT -5
Economists (not bought off) agree the stimulus worked. What doesn't work is Pub obstruction, paralysis, and nonstop gloom and doom- not to mention the Pub hoarding of corporations and banks. We can blame Bush for years- check the housing market and his STUPID wars... And here's PBP blaming Obama for what obviously happened under Bush. Link for Zuckerman?
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,114
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jun 21, 2011 22:03:40 GMT -5
If you actually save his life tomorrow - you have created him - otherwise he would no longer be here. if you can't see the difference between saving and creating then you are as bad as those folks that said Al Gore said he invented the internet. please don't waste any more time with me on this.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 28, 2024 21:31:17 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2011 22:04:35 GMT -5
Saving impacts net totals. So it certainly counts mathematically.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,114
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jun 21, 2011 22:06:05 GMT -5
Economists (not bought off) agree the stimulus worked. What doesn't work is Pub obstruction, paralysis, and nonstop gloom and doom- not to mention the Pub hoarding of corporations and banks. We can blame Bush for years- check the housing market and his STUPID wars... And here's PBP blaming Obama for what obviously happened under Bush. Link for Zuckerman? i am not arguing that the stimulus didn't work. the OMB claims that at least 3M jobs were saved. unfortunately, 4M were lost during the same stretch (no fault of the stimulus- just an "overshoot" of 2008). that is what people care about, and what affects consumption. what happened last fall could rightly be called Stimulus II, btw. and the GOP was 100% behind it. they just call it something else.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,114
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jun 21, 2011 22:07:38 GMT -5
Saving impacts net totals. So it certainly counts mathematically. shifting the goalposts is beneath a good liberal. stop it. i never said anything about whether it "counted" or not, i said that creating is not the same as saving. if you disagree, then go hang with Lakhota and leave me out of it. i have no time for these small arguments.
|
|
|
Post by lakhota on Jun 21, 2011 22:14:45 GMT -5
If something Obama did actually saved jobs that would otherwise have been lost - then those jobs were created by Obama. Here is another way to look at it: One minute after an employee is terminated, Obama's stimulus kicks in and s/he is rehired. Then the only thing separating created from saved is one minute...
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Apr 28, 2024 21:31:17 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2011 22:19:32 GMT -5
I understand what you are getting at, and actually, I would have preferred if less of the stimulus went to shoring up existing state jobs, and more of it went to create infrastructure jobs, (and on works jobs rather than unemployment) ... I feel like a lot of it was wasted band-aiding... and not really making necessary improvments...
But mathematically... well... you know...
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,114
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jun 21, 2011 22:23:13 GMT -5
If something Obama did actually saved jobs that would otherwise have been lost - then those jobs were created by Obama. Here is another way to look at it: One minute after an employee is terminated, Obama's stimulus kicks in and s/he is rehired. Then the only thing separating created from saved is one minute... yes, that is certainly A way of looking at it. it is just a way i happen to disagree with. if a doctor saves my limb, it is absolutely, in no way, whatsoever, the same as him creating it. if you are thinking that i am going to criticize the doc for saving my limb, you would be just as wrong as thinking i am criticizing Obama and the simulus for saving jobs.
|
|