I know - none of this has anything to do with GW - right?
Payrolls Fall, Unemployment Rate Climbs
- Thread starter Joeychgo
- Start date
I know - none of this has anything to do with GW - right?
taylor414ce2003
Dedicated LVC Member
the Armed forces are hiring
fossten
Dedicated LVC Member
Well, did all the previous months of growth have anything to do with GW, or do you just cherrypick the bad ones?
Marcus
Dedicated LVC Member
No, only when the economy is up.
No, only when the economy is up.
Exactly my point.
MonsterMark
Dedicated LVC Member
Come on Fossten, you know the liberals on this board only show up when the news is bad.
Look on the bright side...
"as an influx of students into the workforce drove the biggest jump in teenage joblessness since at least 1948."
At least all these kids can go work for free for the Obama campaign to get him elected because he has promised them all free tuition if they go overseas and work for free.
Look on the bright side...
"as an influx of students into the workforce drove the biggest jump in teenage joblessness since at least 1948."
At least all these kids can go work for free for the Obama campaign to get him elected because he has promised them all free tuition if they go overseas and work for free.
MonsterMark
Dedicated LVC Member
7 million new jobs since 2001. Keep lapping up the koolaid sheeple.
Can't wait for Obama to give everyone a job. The Messiah cometh.
Can't wait for Obama to give everyone a job. The Messiah cometh.
20.4 Million New Jobs Created Under the Clinton-Gore Administration.
92 Percent -- 18.8 Million -- of the New Jobs Have Been Created in the Private Sector.
http://clinton4.nara.gov/WH/New/html/20000112_1.html
Only 7 million under GW you say?
92 Percent -- 18.8 Million -- of the New Jobs Have Been Created in the Private Sector.
http://clinton4.nara.gov/WH/New/html/20000112_1.html
Only 7 million under GW you say?
MonsterMark
Dedicated LVC Member
LOL. I was waiting for that.
Now go figure out how many jobs were 'internet' related jobs and then calculate the number of jobs lost when the bubble burst and the internet melted down.
Lord knows I love the clinton years. Pure nirvana.
Then you should calculate the lost tax revenues for all the lost wages that were calculated to be this great 'surplus'.
You should know better Joey. You've been in business for yourself. The Clinton 'economic success' shouldn't have to be explained to you.
18 year old job interviewee during the Clinton years.
Employer: "You looking for a job? What kind of skills do you have?"
Employee: "Well, I have a Mac!"
Employer: "You're hired!"
Employee: "How much do you pay?"
Employer: "How 'bout we start you at $80K and all the pizza and mountain dew you can consume."
Employee: "Great! See you at 2:00 pm when I wake up."
Yup, the Clinton years were great.
fossten
Dedicated LVC Member
Sorry, Joey, that dog won't hunt. You're failing to address the fact that Bush has had a net gain of jobs. You just won't admit it. So in a lame dodge, you resort to using Clinton? Really, really lame, Joey. You're the first one to cry foul whenever someone uses this tactic, so I call shenanigans. BDS is your disease, Joey.
Its really not BDS Fossten. It's more that I am tired of people who defend bush at every cost and deny everything.
To hear some people talk, GW must be the messiah. He seemingly can do no wrong, and when things prove to be bad, then it's not GW's fault.
Some people do suffer from BDS -- Bush Denial Syndrome. Deny Bush's mistakes at all costs.
To hear some people talk, GW must be the messiah. He seemingly can do no wrong, and when things prove to be bad, then it's not GW's fault.
Some people do suffer from BDS -- Bush Denial Syndrome. Deny Bush's mistakes at all costs.
I'm tired of people who blame Bush for things irrationally, and fail to attribute blame to the right people.
With rare exception, the failures of the Bush administration occur when he leans LEFT not RIGHT. His biggest failures have been bipartisan.
Lay down some specifics.
What economic policy do you take issue with. Where has he failed on the economy. If you provide specifics, then you'll get a thoughtful discussion on the subject.
Fuel Prices. High oil prices are the partially the result of bad Democrat policy (embraced by a handful of Republican) that limits our access to domestic energy. Democrat policies that prevent us from drilling or mining in the most remote parts of our country. That prevent us from building refineries. That embrace ridiculous and expensive regional fuel blends that interfere with the supply of gas. Regulation and protests that prevent the construction of nuclear power plants based on 70s era propaganda. And it's the democrats who have embraced this "green" movement based on junk science, speculation, and actively pursued by socialists. The environmentalist movement is like a watermelon, green on the outside, red on the inside.
It also has to do with our countries tendency to overspend and expect the federal government to address all the problems in our life. Some think that the feds have the power to make the country a utopia, free of need and want. No surprise, the socialist philosophy is all about making a utopia as well...
Over taxing and over regulation are the reason industry leaves the U.S. Is that GWB's fault, or is that the legislative handiwork of the Democrats as well? Which party is actually beginning to talk about socializing the oil companies?
The gross lack of understanding that most people demonstrate when discussing these issues is very frustrating. "I just paid $4/gal, George Bush screwed up, he needs to do something fast!" Well, that's not the way government works. And the President can't directly do anything about it.
And on issues of security, Bush has been a phenomenal success. It's cliche now, but it's absolutely true, on 9/12, who here honestly thought we wouldn't suffer another large attack on American soil for seven years? I didn't. I expected to spend the rest of my adult life in that state of alert we lived in immediately following that attack.
However, one of Bush's greatest failures has been his inability to communicate, educate, and persuade though. That's very frustrating and unfortunate, an enormous missed opportunity. McCain's a better, but still not dynamic enough a spokesperson to elevate the debate ABOVE the MSM as Reagan uniquely was able to do.
With rare exception, the failures of the Bush administration occur when he leans LEFT not RIGHT. His biggest failures have been bipartisan.
Lay down some specifics.
What economic policy do you take issue with. Where has he failed on the economy. If you provide specifics, then you'll get a thoughtful discussion on the subject.
Fuel Prices. High oil prices are the partially the result of bad Democrat policy (embraced by a handful of Republican) that limits our access to domestic energy. Democrat policies that prevent us from drilling or mining in the most remote parts of our country. That prevent us from building refineries. That embrace ridiculous and expensive regional fuel blends that interfere with the supply of gas. Regulation and protests that prevent the construction of nuclear power plants based on 70s era propaganda. And it's the democrats who have embraced this "green" movement based on junk science, speculation, and actively pursued by socialists. The environmentalist movement is like a watermelon, green on the outside, red on the inside.
It also has to do with our countries tendency to overspend and expect the federal government to address all the problems in our life. Some think that the feds have the power to make the country a utopia, free of need and want. No surprise, the socialist philosophy is all about making a utopia as well...
Over taxing and over regulation are the reason industry leaves the U.S. Is that GWB's fault, or is that the legislative handiwork of the Democrats as well? Which party is actually beginning to talk about socializing the oil companies?
The gross lack of understanding that most people demonstrate when discussing these issues is very frustrating. "I just paid $4/gal, George Bush screwed up, he needs to do something fast!" Well, that's not the way government works. And the President can't directly do anything about it.
And on issues of security, Bush has been a phenomenal success. It's cliche now, but it's absolutely true, on 9/12, who here honestly thought we wouldn't suffer another large attack on American soil for seven years? I didn't. I expected to spend the rest of my adult life in that state of alert we lived in immediately following that attack.
However, one of Bush's greatest failures has been his inability to communicate, educate, and persuade though. That's very frustrating and unfortunate, an enormous missed opportunity. McCain's a better, but still not dynamic enough a spokesperson to elevate the debate ABOVE the MSM as Reagan uniquely was able to do.
Yeah yeah - its always the democratic congress thats "really" at fault. But when I point out that there was a republican congress for the first 6 years of GW's turn - well, that doesnt count either.
I have debunked that whole argument of "a republican congress" here, and you have yet to try to counter my argument. You simply keep asserting that Bush should be able to accomplish anything he wants with a republican congress. Can you say proof by assertion?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_by_assertion
Shall I go though the many posts of people giving Bush credit for a better economy a few years ago?
Not that things arent so well, its not his fault?
Please.
Not that things arent so well, its not his fault?
Please.
Go for it. Cite links, though, so we can put it in context and perspective (which you most likely won't do).
Contrary to what you are claiming about some of us here (who you seem unwilling to name), we have been consistent with Bush, giving credit where it is due, and putting blame where it is due.
Who has said (or implied) that? When Bush is culpable, we hold him to task. But making broad claims like "things are bad", or "the economy is bad" and blaming them on Bush, is a dishonest rhetorical tactic; what your are claiming is very hard to disprove because the burden of proof is made blurry. Be specific.
fossten
Dedicated LVC Member
Look at the OP in this thread. You are trying to flip this around when you're the one who started this, trying to tie the economy to Bush. Please show me where people have defended EVERYTHING Bush has ever done. All you ever do is assert, you never prove.
There isn't a soul on this forum who does what you claim.
You, on the other hand, still have yet to praise him for one single solitary thing.
So stop projecting your photographic negative on everyone else.
fossten
Dedicated LVC Member
I assume, since you're a member of this forum, that you drive a gas guzzling Lincoln as well. If you live in a glass house, don't throw stones.
Jayce 1971
Active LVC Member
I'm not sure where you people live, but the headlines around here have read nothing but "layoff's" the last few years. Jobs have been shipped to: China, Mexico, anywhere where products can be built for less. This is in a town of 10k people, where the average worker is making $12-$17/hr. I've watched friends get laid off, family lose their jobs. I'm moving to N.D. myself to work for the one industry that still pays a crooked buck, petroleum. I have an opportunity most don't. This didn't start in the Bush years, it started before that. But it has certainly escallated over the past 2. Layoffs are now 40-80 people at a time and happening almost weekly. People must drive further from home to find a "livable" wage. For the average factory worker, I think that the American dream is no longer achievable. "Wellfare" wages are becoming the norm.
MonsterMark
Dedicated LVC Member
I just had a customer service rep quit her job from a company I buy from so she could save 16 miles round trip daily. Figure she saves about $4/day.
What I love is that the people losing these jobs will run to the Democrats for salvation when they are the very people costing them their jobs. It all boils down to government intervention in every aspect of the workplace, from the DNR to the EPA and OSHA, much less the tax laws.
Keep running to the libs and the Dems and the slide will continue.
What I love is that the people losing these jobs will run to the Democrats for salvation when they are the very people costing them their jobs. It all boils down to government intervention in every aspect of the workplace, from the DNR to the EPA and OSHA, much less the tax laws.
Keep running to the libs and the Dems and the slide will continue.
Jayce 1971
Active LVC Member
The layoffs have been great for the employers locally. Why should they give out cost of living raises or pay decent wages when there is growing unemployment, people willing to work for less and less every day. As the work pool rises, the wages recede. Eventually it comes down to, "Do I stay here, and try to support a family on $35K (maybe less), or do I relocate to find better employment. Once the job pool stabilizes, wages may return to former levels, but that wont be for sometime yet. Most of our local unemployment can be directly attributed to two things: 1. Outsourcing jobs to low wage countries. 2. The current recession (depression) we're in. I'm including the high fuel cost in the latter, even though we have no one to blame but our own government for the sliding U.S. dollar's value.
But the good news. Apparently SaudiArabia is growing weary of oil profits, and is going to speak to the OPEC nations about boosting productivity. Apparently, they think too mucy money is a bad thing....go figure.
Oh well, I'll have secure employment for the next ten years regardless of how much oil is selling for.
But the good news. Apparently SaudiArabia is growing weary of oil profits, and is going to speak to the OPEC nations about boosting productivity. Apparently, they think too mucy money is a bad thing....go figure.
Oh well, I'll have secure employment for the next ten years regardless of how much oil is selling for.
ford nut
Local nut case
Ok I am going to have to bite on this one shag.
Please tell me what blame are you willing to pin on Bush ? :shifty:
Give me the short list.
Ok I am going to have to bite on this one shag.
Please tell me what blame are you willing to pin on Bush ? :shifty:
Give me the short list.
Off the top of my head?
Deficit spending/national debt
Immigration/amnesty
lousy rebuilding of Iraq
No Child Left Behind
E85 (Ethanol) sham
Loss of House and Senate in 2006 election (see the Immigration/Amnesty issue)
Those are all I can think of at the moment.