said he'd get it down to 6%? I know the usual wingnut response will be "participation rate". But were they going to change the way they calculated had Romney been elected? Have they changed the way they calculate in the last 30 years? Do we compare apples to apples? 70some straight months of private sector job growth. The economy has much room for improvement but how do you wingnuts now justify your claims that Obama's policies (and the stimulus) would ruin America? When will any of you give the man some credit?
Unemployment rate at 4.9%. Thanks Obama! Remeber when Romney...
- Thread starter RichardPeterJohnson
- Start date
Remember when Obama predicted it would be 5.3% a year into his term? 7 years in..... yay!
I'll give him credit when he EARNS it.
Perspective.....obviously he has ruined the economy
You don't want perspective. You want to think he's enacted policies to create some type roaring recovery.
I've acknowledged it's not a perfect economy. I've simply pointed out that what the kook fringe claimed would happen actually hasn't. The stock market has more than doubled. Unemployment rate is cut in half. 70some straight months of private sector job growth. 10 million new jobs created. Gas under $2 a gallon. Interest rates at all time lows. Budget deficits cut in half. You can point to a lot of weaknesses and make legitimate points. But people like you absolutely will not acknowledge that many things are much better since he took office. Ruined indeed.
I think the disconnect is that you are trying to give him credit for these things when most would agree they are all a byproduct of coming out of a recession.
There you have it. The economy has improved despite Obama. Big shock. Is there any intellectual honesty left among Republicans? We all know your party denies science-especially climate change and evolution. It looks as though the GOP now denies reality as well. Thanks for playing wingnuts.
Most rational people agree with you. But since he is the current POTUS, Obama gets the credit. That's just the way it works. Surprisingly, Doc missed the chance of hitting a double when he did not mention gas prices.
Last edited:
Broad brush is broad. There is a segment of our party that denies science. There is a segment of your party that denies reality. That doesn't mean all of you are idiots.
He has caused millions of workers to be laid off. These people don't even look for work any more. Their not even counted. Poor paying jobs took there place. The real % is around 10%. More smoke and mirrors from the worst president ever
I'm waiting for the list of policy initiatives that drove the economy. Initiatives of his making and design.
I will give him credit but the real credit goes to the American people who, inspite of terrible policies, managed to survive. His policies are anything but a negative for business. Cap and trade, Obamacare and the EPA are all a drag on business. You are right about room for improvement and he could have achieved that his policies do not promote business. If he had, the economy would be strong right now and he would be much more admired. People don't pay much attention to foreign policy as long as it doesn't impact them.
When you look at it. His first few years he got no budgets through. Pushed for no changes to the tax code aside from what the ACA did. Created no programs other than cash for clunkers. Oh... QE he would probably take credit for, but he shouldn't.
So you're proud that some loser replaced good paying jobs with minimum wage jobs? Wow, you really need an economics course or two because it's obvious you don't know what economics is. The man deserves no credit for anything but divisive rhetoric and mismanaged policies and practices.
Come back when you understand macro economics. And since the global cooling failed to materialize, why should I believe a bunch of liberals about global warming? They can't prove any of it so it's only opinion.
I understand economics pretty well and it's this simple; I'll take the economy under Obama instead of Bush any day of the week...and twice on Sundays.
I would take it under Bush in a heart beat pre-bubble burst. I imagine anyone who was trading at that time would agree as well.
There is no comparison in my industry between the mid-Bush years and the Obama years.
But I'm still waiting on that list of initiatives that Obama pushed through that drove the economy.
Mine either. We literally couldn't spend it fast enough to keep up with how much they were throwing at us. Now we're doing layoffs about once a quarter.
It's evident you don't. What you understand is simply govt handouts. You don't realize the consequences of those handouts and where the money comes from to pay for it.
I made money pre-bubble but made even more after when I was buying low and the market rose. But Obama has nothing to do with it so he gets no credit. But you're probably right in the fact that the pre-bubble was a steady, more predictable growth rate.
What do government handouts have to do with my post? I'll tell you what is relevant about government handouts: when people try to live off $8 an hour in rural and suburban areas and gas prices rise to almost $5 a gallon, even the less educated hilljacks that have been duped into voting Republican can figure out they can have a better living staying at home collecting a check rather than driving back and forth to work paying for that overpriced gasoline and food (because the high gas prices made everything else rise in cost, but you right wingers forgot about that, and it wasn't gradual, it was practically overnight).
Your post typifies the condescending right wing approach to the less fortunate.
That's a typical lying slant, "Obama has nothing to do with the recovery". His first order of business was saving the collapsing economy. We can debate all day about how effective his stimulus packages were, but he did something and he damn well gets credit for saving the economy.
The two biggest recessions in America occurred under Republican presidents. FACT!
The two recoveries in America occurred under Democratic presidents. FACT!
That's like saying the guy that was speeding right through all the red lights was making great time up until the time the accident occurred.
You'd take the speeding through red lights to make good time but you wouldn't take the crash that would inevitably results. When Bush left office the US was losing jobs at a rate of three quarters of a million per month. That part counts as the Bush economy too.
That part didn't affect my industry or my investments. Only my 401k took a hit. My industry has a taken a beating under this administration.
Truth be told, I made out like goddamn bandit with the housing market crash. Multiple places I was able to get in on at the bottom and turn 6 figures on. I've also been able to increase my portfolio exponentially in the last couple of years because of people with **** credit.
To be fair, the policies that led to that crash aren't all on Bush. Deregulation of banks, insurance and investment banks was an incremental thing. Bush touted the rate of home ownership a couple of years prior to the crash. What scares me more than anything is that we have done very little to correct the problems that led to the crash. Memories are short, and greed will trump common sense again in the future if we don't fix those things. Both parties are at fault for the lack of common sense changes.
Those hilljacks you speak of vote democrat because they want free stuff. How many of your brethren are voting for Bernie just to get free stuff? All of them, you included. And if you think Democrats are responsible for the recoveries, think again. Clinton gets credit but it was Bush's policies that gave us all those supposed great years under Clinton. And Obama did something alright, his stupid policies and inability to manage wasted billions of our tax dollars.
And Obama continued with his failed policies. The jobs that returned, and if Obama wants credit for it he can have it, were low paying part-time service jobs. It was inevitable jobs would return on their own but Obama did nothing to help business bring back higher paying jobs. If fact, he did everything he could to ensure a lot of good paying jobs never materialized through actions of the EPA and other agencies.
You're correct. Both parties are at fault and it's hard to distinguish between either party. And a lot of the same actions are still continuing.