Data prior to 2007 isn't relevant to whether growth was positive or negative during Obama's presidency. The data I posted proves that your statement was incorrect. You didn't say that growth was weak compared to historical data. You said that growth was stalled/non-existent. Which was clearly untrue. It increased in the months immediately following the election, but began to decline by the end of 2009. Did you mean "unemployment was soaring, until it stopped soaring and started to decline"? One of us is really bad at this. I kind of think it is the guy who doesn't get the facts right. barfo
I'm not gonig to get into semantics just because you have little man syndrome. The point is that the economy was not strong or robust compared to other recoveries or historic norms. The data supports that. It was soaring compared to historic norms at all times on the chart you posted. Just because something has declined doesn't mean it isn't still soaring... wittle guy. Agreed. You should really work on that.
Talking about the unemployment rate is a joke, especially the U3. The BLS has shrunk the labor pool, artificially lowering the U3. Economists have run the numbers under the former definitions and arrive at a U3 rate of over 11.5% and a U6 rate of over 20%. The politicization of this arm of the government is a huge unreported story. However, there are numbers that can't lie. The real numbers to look at are the total number of people employed and the labor participation rate. Both are at depression-like levels, and have dramatically worsened under the current Administration. It's not Bush's fault; this group needs to look at themselves in the mirror. They tried a full-blown Keynesian strategy and it failed spectacularly.
No, apparently you are going to get into ad hominem attacks. That might be your point now, but it wasn't your point earlier in the thread. Or perhaps it was your point, and you are just really bad at expressing your thoughts. I guess if you are talking aeronautics, then sure, you can soar lower. But the common meaning of soar, as applied to rates, is 'increase rapidly'. And something that is declining is not increasing. barfo
GDP and job growth that's lower than population growth isn't good enough. It's like making 1% interest while inflation is 2%. If you're on a fixed income, you're on the road to the poorhouse.
That would be another of your kind's policies. Pol Pot, Mao, Stalin... I'd prefer you all would make use of this kind of basic information to prosper and not burden the rest of us with your silly ideology.
I saw a great remix today of one of the creepiest videos ever, and this seemed like the appropriate place to put it Here's the original: [video=youtube;kTBq_ybkBmI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTBq_ybkBmI&feature=related[/video] and here's the remix that puts the first video in its proper context [video=youtube;i2naSzb1psU]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2naSzb1psU[/video]
Totally true. What we actually need are more pompous, grad-school participants that haven't experienced the real world yet, and are going to change the world with hope, dreams and grad degrees in religious studies, anthropology or linguistics.
if you are talking about the writer, he was ahead of his time, and was a good read for me around 13 years old or so, wrote about many things that werent even invented yet "To be matter-of-fact about the world is to blunder into fantasy - and dull fantasy at that, as the real world is strange and wonderful." robert a heinlein
...preventing the disastrous "Federal Reserve Act" in 1913 would have been the only point in which these "great depressions" could have been avoided. With the current monetary system these depressions are inevitable...and it is only going to get worse until Congress takes control of the money supply and puts this power back in the hands of the US, rather than the privately owned bankers of the world!
They tried the same tactic with the debt ceiling. Our debt is actually much worse than the CBO suggested. Underemployment and our epic debt are the end of us unless we get a different administration.
Right, because the economists are doing a great job. And hey, I never said I was trying to change the world. I am looking out for #1, something capitalist scumfucks can get behind. EDIT: I just can't get over this thing about not "experiencing the real world." What is the real world? American business culture? Given that the majority of the world lives in what we would describe as "poverty," what part of the real world haven't I experienced? It's the western industrialized nations living in a dream world.
I appreciate the fact that you have no fear of exposing your lack of knowledge on the subject. I would really love to hear more regurgitated paraphrases from your liberal arts professors about how we should be ashamed of American culture.
Sure don't. I appreciate the fact that you have no fear exposing your lack of knowledge on the subject.
