Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
CrackAddict
Trad climber
Joshua Tree
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2011 - 11:58pm PT
|
Mangy,
That chart is utter bullsh#t.
You really think that the economic circumstances during Reagan's term were anywhere near as bad as they are now?
And are you seriously trying to claim that Reagan made government smaller?
Did you live during the seventies? I hate to date myself, but I did - and the economic conditions were actually much worse by most yardsticks - higher unemployment (14%), 23% interest rates and 13.5% INFLATION (Keynesians still can't figure that one out - inflation is only supposed to happen in a growth regime according to their academic drivel). The "misery index (inflation + unemployment) was as high as 27%!! (it is about 11% now, at least if you believe the government's stats). These are pretty well known facts, but you can read more here: http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrara/2011/05/05/reaganomics-vs-obamanomics-facts-and-figures/
And yes, Reagan did make government smaller - for a while. Then came the democratic congress which he made deals with - he allowed government to grow if they allowed the military to grow even larger.
That said, I would argue we now have latent, systemic problems in our economy that are worse than we experienced in the seventies - but these are exactly the problems that team Obama-Pelosi-Reid DID NOT SEE OR UNDERSTAND, and apparently STILL DO NOT SEE OR UNDERSTAND, let alone know how to deal with! If you agree that these problems exist, you also have to agree that the solutions they have posited are completely and utterly impotent.
Lastly, if you think the chart is "utter bullsh#t", feel free to post an alternative one that shows faster job growth during the Obama presidency. I don't care where you get it - even from Rachel Madcow.
*crickets*
I may not have a flawless knowledge of economic history - but I understand simple math and scientific reasoning. I don't make arguments like "that chart is bullsh#t" without showing why it is wrong. That is just me though, I guess I am disadvantaged by having a Ph.D. from Berkeley.
|
|
apogee
climber
|
|
|
Sep 13, 2011 - 01:47am PT
|
Jeebus, CrackAddict...you're really a kool-aid guzzling droid, aren't you?
|
|
CrackAddict
Trad climber
Joshua Tree
|
|
|
Sep 13, 2011 - 02:56am PT
|
Thanks LEB.
It seems like one side of this argument is short on facts and has to resort to derogatory one word responses and insults.
Am I drinking Cool Aid? No, I think for myself. I admire Reagan's record
on turning the economy around, but I also voted for Clinton twice, and I would defend many of his policies (but not his choice in women).
Look at the chart again. Research the numbers if you like. Look at GDP for example: In the seven quarters following the ’81–’82 recession, GDP growth averaged 7.1 percent (on an annual basis). If you subtract the printed money from our last three years of meager "growth", our GDP would have shrank.
If you still think we are in a recovery, and we are better off with Obama's anti business regulation, taxing and spending, bailouts and stimulus, etc., I have some news for you: you are the droid, because your mind is too small to accommodate facts that do not fit into your rather simple world view.
|
|
CrackAddict
Trad climber
Joshua Tree
|
|
|
Sep 13, 2011 - 03:16am PT
|
RokJox, Obama has had plenty of pep rallies, and over two years of games. So far none of the games have turned out the way they were promised in the pep rallies. The pep rallies promise the home team will win by 50 points. We lose every time.
But maybe, just maybe, this round of stimulus will kick start things? I have news for you: the last round was twice as big, and it produced zilch. 50% of zilch is still zilch, so don't hold your breath.
There are plenty of facts out there, but you are not going to like them, so I understand why you deny that they exist.
|
|
bookworm
Social climber
Falls Church, VA
|
|
|
Sep 13, 2011 - 06:57am PT
|
funny that barry adamantly declared that congress should "pass this bill now!" when he STILL hasn't sent the bill to congress...and won't until he returns from his tax-payer-funded campaign tour
i suggest you learn what's in the bill before you urge your congressman to pass it...despite what nancy might say
when barry talks about increasing taxes on "millionaires and billionaires", he includes those making $200,000/year and couples making $250,000/year...that's a long way from a million and includes many small business owners who even barry claims are the "real job producers"
barry's plan to "improve schools" can't begin for another 8 months when the kids are no longer in school--"not exactly...shovel ready"
i don't oppose extending the payroll tax break, but this has not created jobs in the past as people tend to save this money in times of economic uncertainty rather than spending it
|
|
apogee
climber
|
|
|
Sep 13, 2011 - 11:36am PT
|
"If you still think we are in a recovery, and we are better off with Obama's anti business regulation, taxing and spending, bailouts and stimulus, etc.,"
Whoever said that?
I don't know much of anyone, including D's, who thinks that those things are the case.
Tell ya what- I won't accuse you of kool-aid droid-ism if you don't make broad stereotypes. Deal?
|
|
CrackAddict
Trad climber
Joshua Tree
|
|
|
Sep 13, 2011 - 02:02pm PT
|
The only thing shovel ready is Obama's plan. Let's bury it Joe Pesci style.
|
|
August West
Trad climber
Where the wind blows strange
|
|
|
Sep 13, 2011 - 06:53pm PT
|
Look at the chart again. Research the numbers if you like. Look at GDP for example: In the seven quarters following the ’81–’82 recession, GDP growth averaged 7.1 percent (on an annual basis). If you subtract the printed money from our last three years of meager "growth", our GDP would have shrank.
Yea, since the 82 recession was deliberately caused by the Fed (in a reasonable, and successful attempt to break the inflation cycle) raising interest rates and, not surprisingly, the economy bounced back fairly quickly after interest rates were cut.
And the current recession was caused by a banking crises (a Big Thank You Reagan for getting government off our back) and massively overleveraged banks and consumers who have had to slash spending.
But obviously Clinton was superior to Reagan because the economy grew more and he left the budget in surplus. What you say, the economy was different then? What the hell does that have to do with it?
And good thing the government "printed" some money or even more Americans would be out of work...
|
|
apogee
climber
|
|
|
Sep 13, 2011 - 11:05pm PT
|
The Truth-O-Meter Says:
Perry: "The first round of stimulus ... it created zero jobs."
Rick Perry on Monday, September 12th, 2011 in the CNN/Tea Party Express debate
Rick Perry says the 2009 stimulus 'created zero jobs'
Pants on Fire!
Texas Gov. Rick Perry criticized President Barack Obama's new jobs plan during a Republican presidential debate Sept. 12, 2011, saying his previous effort "created zero jobs."
WOLF BLITZER: "Gov. Perry, the president in his new plan has a lot of tax cuts, payroll tax cuts, middle-class tax cuts, tax credits for hiring veterans, tax credits for hiring long-term unemployed people. Are those things you would support?"
RICK PERRY: "And he's going to pay for them all with raising your taxes. That is the issue. He had $800 billion worth of stimulus in the first round of stimulus. It created zero jobs, $400-plus billion dollars in this package. And I can do the math on that one. Half of zero jobs is going to be zero jobs."
PolitiFact has regularly checked job claims about the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, so this one caught our ears.
Zero?
Republican Sen. Scott Brown of Massachusetts said in February 2010 that the stimulus bill "didn't create one new job." He earned a Pants on Fire.
Florida Republican Gov. Rick Scott said in September 2010 during his successful campaign for governor that the stimulus bill had "not created one private sector job." We smelled smoke. (We even found Billy Weston, a Florida Republican who personally credited the stimulus for his new job with a private Riviera Beach pharmaceutical manufacturer.)
So, what's the evidence?
The White House has posted on its stimulus website a listing of jobs funded by the stimulus, breaking it down by state and congressional district. Just for the quarter April 1 to June 20, 2011, the country had a reported 555,029 full-time equivalent jobs funded by the Recovery Act.
As our colleagues at PolitiFact Virginia have pointed out, in a report released March 18, 2011, the president’s Council of Economic Advisers estimated that between 2.5 million and 3.6 million jobs were created or saved by the stimulus through the fourth quarter of 2010.
Separately, the council’s report cited four independent analyses by the Congressional Budget Office and three private economic analysis companies. Here’s what the groups found:
• CBO: Between 1.3 million and 3.6 million jobs saved or created.
• IHS/Global Insight: 2.45 million jobs saved or created.
• Macroeconomic Advisers: 2.3 million jobs saved or created.
• Moody’s Economy.com: 2.5 million jobs saved or created.
Note the language "created or saved," which means not every one of those more than a million jobs count as "created," as Perry said.
But certainly more than zero. Ask Billy Weston.
Perry said "the first round of stimulus ... created zero jobs." We say Pants on Fire.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/sep/12/rick-perry/rick-perry-says-2009-stimulus-created-zero-jobs/
|
|
Norton
Social climber
the Wastelands
|
|
|
Sep 13, 2011 - 11:08pm PT
|
facts are irrelevant
|
|
TGT
Social climber
So Cal
|
|
|
Sep 13, 2011 - 11:16pm PT
|
One little item Barry sneaked into his bill is a provision that being unemployed is an actionable EOC commission status, on a par with racial or sex discrimination.
Maybe that provision was to insure full employment for lawyers?
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, CA
|
|
|
Sep 13, 2011 - 11:20pm PT
|
between 2.5 million and 3.6 million jobs were created or saved by the stimulus through the fourth quarter of 2010.
This is liberal 'double-speak'. Saved or created?
WTF is that? Saved Fed jobs or union jobs by just giving them cash??
I wonder how many are legit private-sector jobs? Real jobs without a Federal pricetag.
|
|
Norton
Social climber
the Wastelands
|
|
|
Sep 13, 2011 - 11:20pm PT
|
No, more likely Barry snuck it in so that Acorn could bus the unemployed to the polls and pay them to vote Democrat.
Beside, employers SHOULD be able to refuse to consider hiring the unemployed.
It IS a free country after all.
We don't need no Nanny State to tell us to wear seat belts.
|
|
TGT
Social climber
So Cal
|
|
|
Sep 13, 2011 - 11:22pm PT
|
Well, at least they've advanced beyond producing dead Chicagoans at the polls.
But, the price tag for each "stimulus" job produced is north of a quarter million each.
Why didn't Nancy Harry and Barry just let us keep our money instead?
|
|
apogee
climber
|
|
|
Sep 13, 2011 - 11:23pm PT
|
I know, blue...facts are such annoying things. They really get in the way of one's droidism, don't they?
|
|
apogee
climber
|
|
|
Sep 13, 2011 - 11:40pm PT
|
Look! It's a shiny thing! It looks like an Acorn!
|
|
Klimmer
Mountain climber
San Diego
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 1, 2011 - 10:17am PT
|
President Obama to Republicans: On Jobs, What Are You for and Against?
Source: ABC News
In his weekly address, President Obama pressed Republicans in Congress to justify their opposition to his $447 billion jobs bill and reiterated his plea for them to “pass this jobs bill.”
“Some Republicans in Congress have said that they agree with certain parts of this jobs bill.” Obama said. “If so, it’s time for them to tell me what those proposals are. And if they’re opposed to this jobs bill, I’d like to know what exactly they’re against. Are they against putting teachers and police officers and firefighters back on the job? Are they against hiring construction workers to rebuild our roads and bridges and schools? Are they against giving tax cuts to virtually every worker and small business in America?”
(snip)
To make his case, Obama highlighted letters he has received from Americans struggling in this economy, including a small business owner, a young woman eager to go to college and a mom who worries about driving her children across a decaying bridge on their daily ride to school.
“These are the people who need a win, and I will be fighting for this jobs bill every day on their behalf,” he said. “It is time for the politics to end. Let’s pass this jobs bill.”
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/10/obama-to-republicans-on-jobs-what-are-you-for-and-against
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x5012445
|
|
Norton
Social climber
the Wastelands
|
|
There will not be a jobs bill.
There is not one Republican in either the Senate or House who would vote for it.
The unemployed are not their "base".
“This is an impressive crowd: the Have's and Have-more's. Some people call you the elites. I call you my base"
George W Bush
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!