|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 8/4/2007
Posts: 1,848
Location: tosa
|
Consensus estimates expected May job creation numbers to come in this morning at 155k, but the Dept of Labor just reported that actual new jobs created in May was less than half that estimate at only 69k. The unemployment rate also jumped, and it looks like the US economy is heading back into recession. Apparently, all those trillions of stimulus dollars did nothing because at the beginning of his term, we were $400 billion in debt, and the unemployment rate was 7.8%. Now, nearing the end of his term, we are closing fast on $1,600 billion* in debt and the unemployment rate is 8.3%. The President's vision of Keynsian socialism has been an epic failure. I'm just wondering if anyone would care to explain why President Obama deserves to be re-elected.
* for those who can't do math, that's nearly a 400% increase in less than 4 years. If he gets re-elected, and the debt continues to grow at this rate, we will be $6,400 billion in debt by the end of his second term. That works out to $560,000 of debt for each US taxpayer, assuming anyone still has a job and is paying taxes at that time.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 9/24/2008
Posts: 625
Location: Wauwatosa
|
He's in big trouble. He has nothing to run on for the most part. "Just because..." doesn't have the same ring to it that "Hope and Change" had the last time around.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 3/17/2008
Posts: 1,688
Location: tosa
|
Maybe that's why the federal government approved Walker's job numbers. It was the only good news out there.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 8/4/2007
Posts: 1,848
Location: tosa
|
This subject is so depressing, I think I need a drink. Here's a visual aid to help the math-impaired understand the mess we are in...
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 6/11/2007
Posts: 3,071
|
rubber wrote:Maybe that's why the federal government approved Walker's job numbers. It was the only good news out there. It's good to be the guv. You got a president for cover. If the numbers are good, you did it. If they're horrible, it's his fault.
In a completely rational society, the best of us would be teachers and the rest of us would have to settle for something less, because passing civilization along from one generation to the next ought to be the highest honor and the highest responsibility anyone could have. -Lee Iacocca
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 4/13/2007
Posts: 10,911
Location: East Side Wauwatosa
|
AndrewJ wrote:He's in big trouble. He has nothing to run on for the most part. "Just because..." doesn't have the same ring to it that "Hope and Change" had the last time around. Hope and Change met an economy in freefall. If you want to blame Obama for the stagnant job figures, then you also have to give him credit for stopping the plunge into depression. People forget that unemployment rose steadily over the course of 2008. It was at 8.1% in February of 2009-Obama's first full month in office. People also forget that economists were predicting a depression. It didn't happen, perhaps due to Obama's economic policy. If it had happened, we'd probably be looking at unemployment rates well in the double digits and praying for an 8.2% unemployment rate and the increase of 69,000 jobs that was just reported.
Hitchens’ Razor: What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 8/4/2007
Posts: 1,848
Location: tosa
|
@nancy
If is a big word, ma'am. Based on real outcomes, why does the President deserve a second term?
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 3/17/2008
Posts: 1,688
Location: tosa
|
izzie wrote:rubber wrote:Maybe that's why the federal government approved Walker's job numbers. It was the only good news out there. It's good to be the guv. You got a president for cover. If the numbers are good, you did it. If they're horrible, it's his fault. I don't understand how people can claim Walker's numbers are real and fantastic but these other data points are scary. Is there something I'm missing?
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 10/26/2007
Posts: 417
Location: Tosa
|
Nancy wrote:AndrewJ wrote:He's in big trouble. He has nothing to run on for the most part. "Just because..." doesn't have the same ring to it that "Hope and Change" had the last time around. Hope and Change met an economy in freefall. If you want to blame Obama for the stagnant job figures, then you also have to give him credit for stopping the plunge into depression. People forget that unemployment rose steadily over the course of 2008. It was at 8.1% in February of 2009-Obama's first full month in office. People also forget that economists were predicting a depression. It didn't happen, perhaps due to Obama's economic policy. If it had happened, we'd probably be looking at unemployment rates well in the double digits and praying for an 8.2% unemployment rate and the increase of 69,000 jobs that was just reported. I think at this point it is fair to remind you that Bush signed legislation for a $700 billion bailout in October of 2008, so significant action to prevent the 'depression' had already been taken before Obama took office. Obama deserves credit for the actions he took as well, but the extent of the economic downturn he may have prevented is the subject of great speculation. More important, I've seen economists on TV say that this is the slowest recovery on record. Even considering the condition of the economy when Obama took office, financial experts not tied to Obama's campaign are very concerned that unemployment is still at 8.1% (the same as when Obama took office, and with perhaps an additional 7%-8% who have stopped looking for work), and that that is a sign there are still serious problems with the economy. Should Obama have fixed them all? That's hard to say, but he's the guy in charge. There are many other issues that should factor into voting for Obama for President (international and domestics issues, for instance), but for the economy I'd have to give Obama a grade of only average. Perhaps things aren't as bad as they could have been, but they should be better than they are.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 4/13/2007
Posts: 10,911
Location: East Side Wauwatosa
|
rubber wrote:izzie wrote:rubber wrote:Maybe that's why the federal government approved Walker's job numbers. It was the only good news out there. It's good to be the guv. You got a president for cover. If the numbers are good, you did it. If they're horrible, it's his fault. I don't understand how people can claim Walker's numbers are real and fantastic but these other data points are scary. Is there something I'm missing? Good point. One of the "real and scary" numbers in the U.S.jobs report is the creation of 69,000 new jobs. The assessment that the economy is headed for another recession on the basis of an increase of a tenth of a percent in unemployment is pure hyperbole.
Hitchens’ Razor: What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 4/13/2007
Posts: 10,911
Location: East Side Wauwatosa
|
zephyr wrote:Nancy wrote:AndrewJ wrote:He's in big trouble. He has nothing to run on for the most part. "Just because..." doesn't have the same ring to it that "Hope and Change" had the last time around. Hope and Change met an economy in freefall. If you want to blame Obama for the stagnant job figures, then you also have to give him credit for stopping the plunge into depression. People forget that unemployment rose steadily over the course of 2008. It was at 8.1% in February of 2009-Obama's first full month in office. People also forget that economists were predicting a depression. It didn't happen, perhaps due to Obama's economic policy. If it had happened, we'd probably be looking at unemployment rates well in the double digits and praying for an 8.2% unemployment rate and the increase of 69,000 jobs that was just reported. I think at this point it is fair to remind you that Bush signed legislation for a $700 billion bailout in October of 2008, so significant action to prevent the 'depression' had already been taken before Obama took office. Obama deserves credit for the actions he took as well, but the extent of the economic downturn he may have prevented is the subject of great speculation. More important, I've seen economists on TV say that this is the slowest recovery on record. Even considering the condition of the economy when Obama took office, financial experts not tied to Obama's campaign are very concerned that unemployment is still at 8.1% (the same as when Obama took office, and with perhaps an additional 7%-8% who have stopped looking for work), and that that is a sign there are still serious problems with the economy. Should Obama have fixed them all? That's hard to say, but he's the guy in charge. There are many other issues that should factor into voting for Obama for President (international and domestics issues, for instance), but for the economy I'd have to give Obama a grade of only average. Perhaps things aren't as bad as they could have been, but they should be better than they are. Thanks for giving Bush credit for the bailouts. The Obama administration may have administered the bailouts, but Bush authorized them. Obama tried a different approach...stimulus. It seems to have worked, but it's no secret that he wanted a bigger stimulus and Congress wouldn't work with him on it. The jobs bill had elements of a stimulus. I wonder what would have happened if Congress hadn't blocked Obama's jobs bill. You can't say he didn't try. Congress has been dysfunctional and obstructive for at least four years. Obama seems to be doing what he can to work around them, but there are limits to a president's powers and he cannot appropriate the funds needed for a stimulus without Congress.
Hitchens’ Razor: What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 6/8/2009
Posts: 626
|
joeythelovesponge wrote:Consensus estimates expected May job creation numbers to come in this morning at 155k, but the Dept of Labor just reported that actual new jobs created in May was less than half that estimate at only 69k. The unemployment rate also jumped, and it looks like the US economy is heading back into recession. Apparently, all those trillions of stimulus dollars did nothing because at the beginning of his term, we were $400 billion in debt, and the unemployment rate was 7.8%. Now, nearing the end of his term, we are closing fast on $1,600 billion* in debt and the unemployment rate is 8.3%. The President's vision of Keynsian socialism has been an epic failure. I'm just wondering if anyone would care to explain why President Obama deserves to be re-elected.
* for those who can't do math, that's nearly a 400% increase in less than 4 years. If he gets re-elected, and the debt continues to grow at this rate, we will be $6,400 billion in debt by the end of his second term. That works out to $560,000 of debt for each US taxpayer, assuming anyone still has a job and is paying taxes at that time. Zorro tells this Joey to set aside the extra supply of sangria to survive the Great Recessiion!
Esta habitación ya está manchada de sangre ... un poco más no hará ninguna diffrence! - Don Diego
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 6/11/2007
Posts: 3,071
|
joeythelovesponge wrote:The President's vision of Keynsian socialism has been an epic failure. I'm just wondering if anyone would care to explain why President Obama deserves to be re-elected. I'm thinking Romney's got a secret plan to rebuild the middle class to its former glory. But he can't talk about it just yet. He'll form a consortium of his friends in the pyramid distribution groups: Melaleuca, Shaklee, Amway and a few more (some of whom are already financing his campaign). All Americans will be required to pick one and either become a distributor or at least be the poor fool that buys the stuff at retail. After all, somebody with a strong back has got to be part of the base of the pyramid. After reading this blog I went on the Melaleuca website - find it yourself - and discovered I could achieve "total financial freedom" by selling their highly concentrated (read: expensive) products. So, if sooner or later everybody's going to be in the distribution chain, you better reserve your place near the upper middle by signing up now . . .
In a completely rational society, the best of us would be teachers and the rest of us would have to settle for something less, because passing civilization along from one generation to the next ought to be the highest honor and the highest responsibility anyone could have. -Lee Iacocca
|
|
Rank: Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 10/2/2011
Posts: 13
Location: West Side
|
joeythelovesponge wrote:Consensus estimates expected May job creation numbers to come in this morning at 155k, but the Dept of Labor just reported that actual new jobs created in May was less than half that estimate at only 69k. The unemployment rate also jumped, and it looks like the US economy is heading back into recession. Apparently, all those trillions of stimulus dollars did nothing because at the beginning of his term, we were $400 billion in debt, and the unemployment rate was 7.8%. Now, nearing the end of his term, we are closing fast on $1,600 billion* in debt and the unemployment rate is 8.3%. The President's vision of Keynsian socialism has been an epic failure. I'm just wondering if anyone would care to explain why President Obama deserves to be re-elected. Recession? Have you got a clue Sherlock? The good news is that the US is poised to take off. First is the recall election tomorrow of Scott Walker. Even Democrats understand the need for reforms. I predict a Walker win setting the table for reform in other states. Second is the late Supreme Court ruling on Obamacare later this month. Government interference would signal further growth in government spending and regulation, killing entrepreneurial spirit and increasing uncertainty. I predict it will not go well for Obamacare. Third is the presidential election. Everyone will get to vote and send a message to roll back the size and scope of government. I predict a Romney win. Lastly, the scheduled tax hike on income, capital gains, and dividends in 2013. I predict this will not happen. If each of these steps happen (as I have predicted) our economy will take off like a rocket. Otherwise we are doomed to European stagnation.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 4/13/2007
Posts: 10,911
Location: East Side Wauwatosa
|
How do you explain the economic meltdown of 2008 given all the entrepreneurial freedom of the Bush administration? He even started a couple of wars...often a surefire economic boon because of all the jobs and money pouring into defense industries. Wars=profits, right?
Hitchens’ Razor: What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
|
|
|
Guest |