The GOP Problem...in a Nutshell ( literally and figuratively)

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: The GOP Problem...in a Nutshell ( literally and figuratively)

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

    Geee..........I have a chart too



    Those replies were getting a little long :)

    No, my chart was meant to show that private sector job growth is as strong now as it was during the Bush years.  It's the public sector that's dragging us down.  

    If you believe that (and it's hard not to if you've seen the numbers) then it's tough to blame Obama for high unemployment.  Blame the states and cities that are not hiring to keep up with population growth, and blame the politicians that are making that spending impossible (i.e. Republicans).

    FYI, your 'real' unemployment rate was 14.2 the day Obama took office, and was as high as 17.1 in October 2009.  Just like everything else in the economy, it's slowly but steadily improving.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from tacobreath. Show tacobreath's posts

    Re: The GOP Problem...in a Nutshell ( literally and figuratively)

    " (i.e. Republicans)."

    LOL!  Yes, that slight majority in the House ONLY is to blame for all the problems.

    Could you attach or cut and paste the "Defend Obama`s Incompetence" handbook you get your MSNBC talking points from?  My Senior in High School would like to take it in to  government class for discussion. 

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: The GOP Problem...in a Nutshell ( literally and figuratively)

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

    " (i.e. Republicans)."

    LOL!  Yes, that slight majority in the House ONLY is to blame for all the problems.

    Could you attach or cut and paste the "Defend Obama`s Incompetence" handbook you get your MSNBC talking points from?  My Senior in High School would like to take it in to  government class for discussion. 



    Federal spending was up, so it's just state and local levels that have been dragging down the employment numbers.

    It's just like the gas prices - as soon as speculators overcame their initial fears, everything went back to normal.  Same with private sector employment - it's as strong now as it was in 2004.  It's public sector behavior that has changed. 

    I blame Republicans, because they're the ones screaming about debt and deficits wherever they go.  The Dems are saying we have to address these things, but let's get America back to work first.  And historically, as I've pointed out before - over the last 3+ decades, Republicans do not have the right to b1tch about debt and deficits.  They just don't.  It's like Newt Gingrich talking about traditional marriage.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from tacobreath. Show tacobreath's posts

    Re: The GOP Problem...in a Nutshell ( literally and figuratively)

    In response to slomag's comment:

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    " (i.e. Republicans)."

    LOL!  Yes, that slight majority in the House ONLY is to blame for all the problems.

    Could you attach or cut and paste the "Defend Obama`s Incompetence" handbook you get your MSNBC talking points from?  My Senior in High School would like to take it in to  government class for discussion. 

     



    Federal spending was up, so it's just state and local levels that have been dragging down the employment numbers.

     

    It's just like the gas prices - as soon as speculators overcame their initial fears, everything went back to normal.  Same with private sector employment - it's as strong now as it was in 2004.  It's public sector behavior that has changed. 

    I blame Republicans, because they're the ones screaming about debt and deficits wherever they go.  The Dems are saying we have to address these things, but let's get America back to work first.  And historically, as I've pointed out before - over the last 3+ decades, Republicans do not have the right to b1tch about debt and deficits.  They just don't.  It's like Newt Gingrich talking about traditional marriage.




    LOL

    Good analogy.  I respect your civility.  Apologies for being a wise a55 all the time.  I do appreciate your loyalty to your side and your always intelligent argument. 

    So, do we "get America back to work first" with tax increases?  Or, do we cut spending? I hear much raving here at BDC that "corporations have more earnings saved than ever before", so why aren`t they investing in America?  Why aren`t they hiring?  Why are they laying off more so than ever?

    I think it`s fear and doubt.  I think ACA will cost companies and they know it.  I think potential higher taxes with no spending cuts has them unsure and uneasy. I think much of the reason companies that could/should hire have no trust or faith in this president. Frankly, his record for the last 4 years doesn`t give them confidence.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: The GOP Problem...in a Nutshell ( literally and figuratively)

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

    In response to slomag's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    " (i.e. Republicans)."

    LOL!  Yes, that slight majority in the House ONLY is to blame for all the problems.

    Could you attach or cut and paste the "Defend Obama`s Incompetence" handbook you get your MSNBC talking points from?  My Senior in High School would like to take it in to  government class for discussion. 

     



    Federal spending was up, so it's just state and local levels that have been dragging down the employment numbers.

     

    It's just like the gas prices - as soon as speculators overcame their initial fears, everything went back to normal.  Same with private sector employment - it's as strong now as it was in 2004.  It's public sector behavior that has changed. 

    I blame Republicans, because they're the ones screaming about debt and deficits wherever they go.  The Dems are saying we have to address these things, but let's get America back to work first.  And historically, as I've pointed out before - over the last 3+ decades, Republicans do not have the right to b1tch about debt and deficits.  They just don't.  It's like Newt Gingrich talking about traditional marriage.

     




     

    LOL

    Good analogy.  I respect your civility.  Apologies for being a wise a55 all the time.  I do appreciate your loyalty to your side and your always intelligent argument. 

    So, do we "get America back to work first" with tax increases?  Or, do we cut spending? I hear much raving here at BDC that "corporations have more earnings saved than ever before", so why aren`t they investing in America?  Why aren`t they hiring?  Why are they laying off more so than ever?

    I think it`s fear and doubt.  I think ACA will cost companies and they know it.  I think potential higher taxes with no spending cuts has them unsure and uneasy. I think much of the reason companies that could/should hire have no trust or faith in this president. Frankly, his record for the last 4 years doesn`t give them confidence.



    Ideally, I'd hold off on all tax increases and spending cuts until the economy is a bit stronger.  But of the two, spending cuts are far more damaging, especially if the tax cuts are on the wealthy class.  Those cuts don't affect public consumption - nobody is tightening their belts or eating in more often.  If anything, it inspires more business investment, because you're getting hit at a higher rate if just keep it under your mattress.

    Spending cuts means job cuts - and job cuts means more people unemployed, more competition for the people already looking for work.

    If corporations are sitting on capital, it probably has more to do with recent behavior of banks.  When the financial melt-down occurred, even after the bailout the banks refused to lend money.  Large corporations started changing their payment cycles - they would decide to pay bills 90, 120, even 180 days after billed.  I own a small business - I had to actually drop a big client because I didn't have the cash flow to support working 40 hours for a client one month and being paid five months later.

    But all in all, I think corporations are hiring, and I think small businesses are hiring and growing.  At some point the states, counties, cities and towns have to follow suit.  When that happens, unemployment rates will quickly dip down to levels we find acceptable, and GDP in turn will grow at a faster rate.  

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from ComingLiberalCrackup. Show ComingLiberalCrackup's posts

    Re: The GOP Problem...in a Nutshell ( literally and figuratively)

    Yes, to Obama worshippers, the economic recovery is always just around the corner. Any time now.

    W o r s t  economic record since the Great Depression. Obama owns it. His policies have failed.

     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from tacobreath. Show tacobreath's posts

    Re: The GOP Problem...in a Nutshell ( literally and figuratively)

    In response to slomag's comment:

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to slomag's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    " (i.e. Republicans)."

    LOL!  Yes, that slight majority in the House ONLY is to blame for all the problems.

    Could you attach or cut and paste the "Defend Obama`s Incompetence" handbook you get your MSNBC talking points from?  My Senior in High School would like to take it in to  government class for discussion. 

     



    Federal spending was up, so it's just state and local levels that have been dragging down the employment numbers.

     

    It's just like the gas prices - as soon as speculators overcame their initial fears, everything went back to normal.  Same with private sector employment - it's as strong now as it was in 2004.  It's public sector behavior that has changed. 

    I blame Republicans, because they're the ones screaming about debt and deficits wherever they go.  The Dems are saying we have to address these things, but let's get America back to work first.  And historically, as I've pointed out before - over the last 3+ decades, Republicans do not have the right to b1tch about debt and deficits.  They just don't.  It's like Newt Gingrich talking about traditional marriage.

     




     

    LOL

    Good analogy.  I respect your civility.  Apologies for being a wise a55 all the time.  I do appreciate your loyalty to your side and your always intelligent argument. 

    So, do we "get America back to work first" with tax increases?  Or, do we cut spending? I hear much raving here at BDC that "corporations have more earnings saved than ever before", so why aren`t they investing in America?  Why aren`t they hiring?  Why are they laying off more so than ever?

    I think it`s fear and doubt.  I think ACA will cost companies and they know it.  I think potential higher taxes with no spending cuts has them unsure and uneasy. I think much of the reason companies that could/should hire have no trust or faith in this president. Frankly, his record for the last 4 years doesn`t give them confidence.

     



    Ideally, I'd hold off on all tax increases and spending cuts until the economy is a bit stronger.  But of the two, spending cuts are far more damaging, especially if the tax cuts are on the wealthy class.  Those cuts don't affect public consumption - nobody is tightening their belts or eating in more often.  If anything, it inspires more business investment, because you're getting hit at a higher rate if just keep it under your mattress.

     

    Spending cuts means job cuts - and job cuts means more people unemployed, more competition for the people already looking for work.

    If corporations are sitting on capital, it probably has more to do with recent behavior of banks.  When the financial melt-down occurred, even after the bailout the banks refused to lend money.  Large corporations started changing their payment cycles - they would decide to pay bills 90, 120, even 180 days after billed.  I own a small business - I had to actually drop a big client because I didn't have the cash flow to support working 40 hours for a client one month and being paid five months later.

    But all in all, I think corporations are hiring, and I think small businesses are hiring and growing.  At some point the states, counties, cities and towns have to follow suit.  When that happens, unemployment rates will quickly dip down to levels we find acceptable, and GDP in turn will grow at a faster rate.  




    Man.......I wish my industry was hiring.  We`re laying off daily and everyone is looking over their shoulder.  It`s no way to live.

     

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: The GOP Problem...in a Nutshell ( literally and figuratively)

    In response to ComingLiberalCrackup's comment:

    Yes, to Obama worshippers, the economic recovery is always just around the corner. Any time now.

    W o r s t  economic record since the Great Depression. Obama owns it. His policies have failed.



    It's slow but steady, and it would be faster if the public sector contributed, and the Republicans stopped filibustering jobs bills (and everything else that comes through the Senate).

    We've been riding one bubble to the next for 30 years.  You might have to adjust your expectations a bit.

     

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: The GOP Problem...in a Nutshell ( literally and figuratively)

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

    In response to slomag's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to slomag's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    " (i.e. Republicans)."

    LOL!  Yes, that slight majority in the House ONLY is to blame for all the problems.

    Could you attach or cut and paste the "Defend Obama`s Incompetence" handbook you get your MSNBC talking points from?  My Senior in High School would like to take it in to  government class for discussion. 

     



    Federal spending was up, so it's just state and local levels that have been dragging down the employment numbers.

     

    It's just like the gas prices - as soon as speculators overcame their initial fears, everything went back to normal.  Same with private sector employment - it's as strong now as it was in 2004.  It's public sector behavior that has changed. 

    I blame Republicans, because they're the ones screaming about debt and deficits wherever they go.  The Dems are saying we have to address these things, but let's get America back to work first.  And historically, as I've pointed out before - over the last 3+ decades, Republicans do not have the right to b1tch about debt and deficits.  They just don't.  It's like Newt Gingrich talking about traditional marriage.

     




     

    LOL

    Good analogy.  I respect your civility.  Apologies for being a wise a55 all the time.  I do appreciate your loyalty to your side and your always intelligent argument. 

    So, do we "get America back to work first" with tax increases?  Or, do we cut spending? I hear much raving here at BDC that "corporations have more earnings saved than ever before", so why aren`t they investing in America?  Why aren`t they hiring?  Why are they laying off more so than ever?

    I think it`s fear and doubt.  I think ACA will cost companies and they know it.  I think potential higher taxes with no spending cuts has them unsure and uneasy. I think much of the reason companies that could/should hire have no trust or faith in this president. Frankly, his record for the last 4 years doesn`t give them confidence.

     



    Ideally, I'd hold off on all tax increases and spending cuts until the economy is a bit stronger.  But of the two, spending cuts are far more damaging, especially if the tax cuts are on the wealthy class.  Those cuts don't affect public consumption - nobody is tightening their belts or eating in more often.  If anything, it inspires more business investment, because you're getting hit at a higher rate if just keep it under your mattress.

     

    Spending cuts means job cuts - and job cuts means more people unemployed, more competition for the people already looking for work.

    If corporations are sitting on capital, it probably has more to do with recent behavior of banks.  When the financial melt-down occurred, even after the bailout the banks refused to lend money.  Large corporations started changing their payment cycles - they would decide to pay bills 90, 120, even 180 days after billed.  I own a small business - I had to actually drop a big client because I didn't have the cash flow to support working 40 hours for a client one month and being paid five months later.

    But all in all, I think corporations are hiring, and I think small businesses are hiring and growing.  At some point the states, counties, cities and towns have to follow suit.  When that happens, unemployment rates will quickly dip down to levels we find acceptable, and GDP in turn will grow at a faster rate.  

     




     

    Man.......I wish my industry was hiring.  We`re laying off daily and everyone is looking over their shoulder.  It`s no way to live.

     



    What industry?  I googled "layoffs" in google news, and nearly everything that comes up is driven by cutbacks in government spending - police, construction on bridges and canals, local hospitals, staff of a suburb of Pittsburgh.  The only private layoffs mentioned were in media (Washington Post & New York Times) and Orbitz - those seem more related to changing consumer behavior than to the economy.

     

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from tacobreath. Show tacobreath's posts

    Re: The GOP Problem...in a Nutshell ( literally and figuratively)

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

    Man.......I wish my industry was hiring.  We`re laying off daily and everyone is looking over their shoulder.  It`s no way to live.



    My, you sound almost like you recognize it's not necessarily the employees' fault. Does this mean you've had a change of heart about extended unemployment benefits?

     


    Never in a million years.  99 weeks?  A Y F K M???  And then you can file for an extension?
    All the while you get an obamaphone, EBT card, food stamps?  No wonder unemployment is so high and we`re broke.  Nobody wants to go back to work, they don`t have to.

    The point is, my friend slomag is wrong.  Nobody is hiring. Look at the jobs created numbers every month. They are abysmal.

     

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from tacobreath. Show tacobreath's posts

    Re: The GOP Problem...in a Nutshell ( literally and figuratively)

    In response to slomag's comment:

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to slomag's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to slomag's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    " (i.e. Republicans)."

    LOL!  Yes, that slight majority in the House ONLY is to blame for all the problems.

    Could you attach or cut and paste the "Defend Obama`s Incompetence" handbook you get your MSNBC talking points from?  My Senior in High School would like to take it in to  government class for discussion. 

     



    Federal spending was up, so it's just state and local levels that have been dragging down the employment numbers.

     

    It's just like the gas prices - as soon as speculators overcame their initial fears, everything went back to normal.  Same with private sector employment - it's as strong now as it was in 2004.  It's public sector behavior that has changed. 

    I blame Republicans, because they're the ones screaming about debt and deficits wherever they go.  The Dems are saying we have to address these things, but let's get America back to work first.  And historically, as I've pointed out before - over the last 3+ decades, Republicans do not have the right to b1tch about debt and deficits.  They just don't.  It's like Newt Gingrich talking about traditional marriage.

     




     

    LOL

    Good analogy.  I respect your civility.  Apologies for being a wise a55 all the time.  I do appreciate your loyalty to your side and your always intelligent argument. 

    So, do we "get America back to work first" with tax increases?  Or, do we cut spending? I hear much raving here at BDC that "corporations have more earnings saved than ever before", so why aren`t they investing in America?  Why aren`t they hiring?  Why are they laying off more so than ever?

    I think it`s fear and doubt.  I think ACA will cost companies and they know it.  I think potential higher taxes with no spending cuts has them unsure and uneasy. I think much of the reason companies that could/should hire have no trust or faith in this president. Frankly, his record for the last 4 years doesn`t give them confidence.

     



    Ideally, I'd hold off on all tax increases and spending cuts until the economy is a bit stronger.  But of the two, spending cuts are far more damaging, especially if the tax cuts are on the wealthy class.  Those cuts don't affect public consumption - nobody is tightening their belts or eating in more often.  If anything, it inspires more business investment, because you're getting hit at a higher rate if just keep it under your mattress.

     

    Spending cuts means job cuts - and job cuts means more people unemployed, more competition for the people already looking for work.

    If corporations are sitting on capital, it probably has more to do with recent behavior of banks.  When the financial melt-down occurred, even after the bailout the banks refused to lend money.  Large corporations started changing their payment cycles - they would decide to pay bills 90, 120, even 180 days after billed.  I own a small business - I had to actually drop a big client because I didn't have the cash flow to support working 40 hours for a client one month and being paid five months later.

    But all in all, I think corporations are hiring, and I think small businesses are hiring and growing.  At some point the states, counties, cities and towns have to follow suit.  When that happens, unemployment rates will quickly dip down to levels we find acceptable, and GDP in turn will grow at a faster rate.  

     




     

    Man.......I wish my industry was hiring.  We`re laying off daily and everyone is looking over their shoulder.  It`s no way to live.

     

     



    What industry?  I googled "layoffs" in google news, and nearly everything that comes up is driven by cutbacks in government spending - police, construction on bridges and canals, local hospitals, staff of a suburb of Pittsburgh.  The only private layoffs mentioned were in media (Washington Post & New York Times) and Orbitz - those seem more related to changing consumer behavior than to the economy.

     

     




    You need to google Ford Mo co, Boeing, Hewlett Packard, Intel, Texas Instruments, Siemens, all of the medical instruments companies.  Anything Tech.  It`s falling apart daily.  And when the chip manufacturers suffer, the world suffers.

    Not for nothing but, where do you Libs live?  Fantasy land?

     

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from tacobreath. Show tacobreath's posts

    Re: The GOP Problem...in a Nutshell ( literally and figuratively)

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

    Man.......I wish my industry was hiring.  We`re laying off daily and everyone is looking over their shoulder.  It`s no way to live.



    My, you sound almost like you recognize it's not necessarily the employees' fault. Does this mean you've had a change of heart about extended unemployment benefits?

     

     


    Never in a million years.  99 weeks?  A Y F K M???  And then you can file for an extension?
    All the while you get an obamaphone, EBT card, food stamps?  No wonder unemployment is so high and we`re broke.  Nobody wants to go back to work, they don`t have to.

     

    The point is, my friend slomag is wrong.  Nobody is hiring. Look at the jobs created numbers every month. They are abysmal.

     

     




     

     

    Yeah ok. I wonder how many seconds it would take before your hand was out, were you to be layed off.




    Let me help you answer that................I was laid off many years ago. We had 1 child and 1 on the way.   My bride was working 4 nights a week so we could eat beans, tuna, and hamburger helper WITHOUT the hamburger.  I got 13 weeks of unemployment that I reluctantly signed up for.  13 weeks! There were no free phones, no fuel assistance, no food stamps, and no extensions of those 13 weeks.  I spent EVERY day interviewing, updating resumes, and begging for work.  I bartended, waitered, and did catering jobs on the weekends for a buddy that was starting his own restaurant gig.  9 weeks out I got hired (entry level) by the company I`m still with today and I`m at the top.  A "Top 5-percenter" to you.

    Hard freakin` work!  When they made an offer I didn`t say "it wasn`t enough", run off whining, and go occupy Wall St.  I took the job and worked to the top.

     

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: The GOP Problem...in a Nutshell ( literally and figuratively)

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

    In response to slomag's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to slomag's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to slomag's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    " (i.e. Republicans)."

    LOL!  Yes, that slight majority in the House ONLY is to blame for all the problems.

    Could you attach or cut and paste the "Defend Obama`s Incompetence" handbook you get your MSNBC talking points from?  My Senior in High School would like to take it in to  government class for discussion. 

     



    Federal spending was up, so it's just state and local levels that have been dragging down the employment numbers.

     

    It's just like the gas prices - as soon as speculators overcame their initial fears, everything went back to normal.  Same with private sector employment - it's as strong now as it was in 2004.  It's public sector behavior that has changed. 

    I blame Republicans, because they're the ones screaming about debt and deficits wherever they go.  The Dems are saying we have to address these things, but let's get America back to work first.  And historically, as I've pointed out before - over the last 3+ decades, Republicans do not have the right to b1tch about debt and deficits.  They just don't.  It's like Newt Gingrich talking about traditional marriage.

     




     

    LOL

    Good analogy.  I respect your civility.  Apologies for being a wise a55 all the time.  I do appreciate your loyalty to your side and your always intelligent argument. 

    So, do we "get America back to work first" with tax increases?  Or, do we cut spending? I hear much raving here at BDC that "corporations have more earnings saved than ever before", so why aren`t they investing in America?  Why aren`t they hiring?  Why are they laying off more so than ever?

    I think it`s fear and doubt.  I think ACA will cost companies and they know it.  I think potential higher taxes with no spending cuts has them unsure and uneasy. I think much of the reason companies that could/should hire have no trust or faith in this president. Frankly, his record for the last 4 years doesn`t give them confidence.

     



    Ideally, I'd hold off on all tax increases and spending cuts until the economy is a bit stronger.  But of the two, spending cuts are far more damaging, especially if the tax cuts are on the wealthy class.  Those cuts don't affect public consumption - nobody is tightening their belts or eating in more often.  If anything, it inspires more business investment, because you're getting hit at a higher rate if just keep it under your mattress.

     

    Spending cuts means job cuts - and job cuts means more people unemployed, more competition for the people already looking for work.

    If corporations are sitting on capital, it probably has more to do with recent behavior of banks.  When the financial melt-down occurred, even after the bailout the banks refused to lend money.  Large corporations started changing their payment cycles - they would decide to pay bills 90, 120, even 180 days after billed.  I own a small business - I had to actually drop a big client because I didn't have the cash flow to support working 40 hours for a client one month and being paid five months later.

    But all in all, I think corporations are hiring, and I think small businesses are hiring and growing.  At some point the states, counties, cities and towns have to follow suit.  When that happens, unemployment rates will quickly dip down to levels we find acceptable, and GDP in turn will grow at a faster rate.  

     




     

    Man.......I wish my industry was hiring.  We`re laying off daily and everyone is looking over their shoulder.  It`s no way to live.

     

     



    What industry?  I googled "layoffs" in google news, and nearly everything that comes up is driven by cutbacks in government spending - police, construction on bridges and canals, local hospitals, staff of a suburb of Pittsburgh.  The only private layoffs mentioned were in media (Washington Post & New York Times) and Orbitz - those seem more related to changing consumer behavior than to the economy.

     

     

     




     

    You need to google Ford Mo co, Boeing, Hewlett Packard, Intel, Texas Instruments, Siemens, all of the medical instruments companies.  Anything Tech.  It`s falling apart daily.  And when the chip manufacturers suffer, the world suffers.

    Not for nothing but, where do you Libs live?  Fantasy land?

     



    OK, I did some googling...

    Ford's layoffs are almost entirely in Europe

    Boeing's layoffs are in the defense division - directly related to government spending

    Siemens cites uncertainty over wind tax credit extensions - directly related to government spending

    There do seem to be quite a few tech companies laying off, but that could indicate a paradigm shift, or just bad products - Intel's layoffs are in the McAfee branch.  McAfee software is horrible - it may have just caught up with them.  The bottom line is as long as the unemployment rate continues to fall, we're on the right track.

     

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: The GOP Problem...in a Nutshell ( literally and figuratively)

    In response to airborne-rgr's comment:

    In response to ComingLiberalCrackup's comment:

     

    Yes, to Obama worshippers, the economic recovery is always just around the corner. Any time now.

    W o r s t  economic record since the Great Depression. Obama owns it. His policies have failed.

     

     




     

    Heh, heh, heh... The worst economic catastrophe since the Great Depression led by the neo-con wingnuts and they wonder why the recovery is so slow.

    Hey spanky, maybe if ya'll incompetents hadn't ran the country into a fiscal and financial ditch the likes of which hasn't been seen in almost a century then the fix wouldn't have had to be so long and painful.

    There's this thing in logic and reality called Cause and Effect.

    The wingnuts caused a financial meltdown and the effect has been the worst economic disaster in 80 yrs.

    You do realize that in order for the country to be in a recovery, there had to have been a recession to start it all. Apparently critical thinking is not your strong suit. Not the sharpest tool in the shed, are ya?



    You need to become post-partisan, like your emperor, and startto look for solutions instead of blame.

    I guess by your remarks the republicans are SOLEY to blame?

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: The GOP Problem...in a Nutshell ( literally and figuratively)

    In response to ComingLiberalCrackup's comment:

    Yes, to Obama worshippers, the economic recovery is always just around the corner. Any time now.

    W o r s t  economic record since the Great Depression. Obama owns it. His policies have failed.




    Everytime I go around that corner, I get mugged.  A new tax, a new fee, a new fine.

    Obama's around that corner, and that's not an obamaphone he's holding.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from miscricket. Show miscricket's posts

    Re: The GOP Problem...in a Nutshell ( literally and figuratively)

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

    Man.......I wish my industry was hiring.  We`re laying off daily and everyone is looking over their shoulder.  It`s no way to live.



    My, you sound almost like you recognize it's not necessarily the employees' fault. Does this mean you've had a change of heart about extended unemployment benefits?

     

     


    Never in a million years.  99 weeks?  A Y F K M???  And then you can file for an extension?
    All the while you get an obamaphone, EBT card, food stamps?  No wonder unemployment is so high and we`re broke.  Nobody wants to go back to work, they don`t have to.

     

    The point is, my friend slomag is wrong.  Nobody is hiring. Look at the jobs created numbers every month. They are abysmal.

     



    Do you even bother familiarizing yourself with the actual facts before you go off on these tangents..? First..the 99 weeks includes an extension...and in MA..that is gone anyhow.  You do know that people pay into the unemployment fund while they are working ..right..?  You do know that many people on unemployment are not also on food stamps..or receiving Reaganphones..or receiving EBT benefits..? You do get that..right..?

    BTW..Slomag is right. Many industries are hiring. In Massachusetts..the unemployment rate is low enough that people don't qualify for the federal unemployment extension. My agency alone has doubled in size in the last year..and will double again next year.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from ComingLiberalCrackup. Show ComingLiberalCrackup's posts

    Re: The GOP Problem...in a Nutshell ( literally and figuratively)

    'The worst economic catastrophe since the Great Depression led by the neo-con wingnuts and they wonder why the recovery is so slow..."

    airborne is ignorant of American history...The American historical record is that the worse the recession the stronger the recovery, as traditional, long-term, American prosperity has always been restored.

    Based on that historical record, we should be in the third year of an economic recovery boom right now.

    That is what we experienced under Reagan, which was the last time we recovered from a recession of similar magnitude.

    In the first 2 ½ years of the Reagan recovery, the American economy created 8 million new jobs, the unemployment rate fell by 3.6 percentage points, real wages and incomes were jumping, and poverty had reversed an upsurge started under Carter, beginning a long-term decline. While Obama crows about 227,000 jobs created last month, in September, 1983 the Reagan recovery less than a year after it began created 1.1 million jobs in that one month alone. In the second year of the Reagan recovery, real economic growth boomed by 6.8%, the highest in 50 years.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: The GOP Problem...in a Nutshell ( literally and figuratively)

    In response to ComingLiberalCrackup's comment:

     

    'The worst economic catastrophe since the Great Depression led by the neo-con wingnuts and they wonder why the recovery is so slow..."

    airborne is ignorant of American history...The American historical record is that the worse the recession the stronger the recovery, as traditional, long-term, American prosperity has always been restored.

    Based on that historical record, we should be in the third year of an economic recovery boom right now.

    That is what we experienced under Reagan, which was the last time we recovered from a recession of similar magnitude.

    In the first 2 ½ years of the Reagan recovery, the American economy created 8 million new jobs, the unemployment rate fell by 3.6 percentage points, real wages and incomes were jumping, and poverty had reversed an upsurge started under Carter, beginning a long-term decline. While Obama crows about 227,000 jobs created last month, in September, 1983 the Reagan recovery less than a year after it began created 1.1 million jobs in that one month alone. In the second year of the Reagan recovery, real economic growth boomed by 6.8%, the highest in 50 years.

     



    Your forgetting that housing led the Reagan recovery.  This recession was caused by housing.  If we had a federal funds rate near 20%, like Reagan did, we would just cut in half (like Reagan did) and sit back and let the good times roll.

     

    Unfortunately, we didn't have a federal funds rate near 20%.  What was that rate in January, 2009?  Oh yeah, zero.

    Sorry guys - I know you don't like me blaming Bush, but it's walking like a duck over here.  Interest rates were the single biggest tool we could have had to recover quickly.  Does it make sense to anybody that in 2004 - 2005, interest rates would be under 2%?  That's having the pedal to the economic metal, with nowhere to go but down.  The stimulus, quantitative easing - none of this would have been necessary if we had had interest rates to cut.

     

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from tacobreath. Show tacobreath's posts

    Re: The GOP Problem...in a Nutshell ( literally and figuratively)

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

    I got 13 weeks of unemployment that I reluctantly signed up for.  13 weeks! There were no free phones, no fuel assistance, no food stamps, and no extensions of those 13 weeks.  I spent EVERY day interviewing, updating resumes, and begging for work.



    Don't be so quick to assume those on extended unemployment weren't doing exactly the same thing.

     

    There are always bad apples. We're human. So I'm sure some were lazy.


    But most of the cases are people doing exactly what you did. For a year. For two years. Unless you are a lot older than I think, economic conditions were better when you were unemployed than in the present times.

    But you answered my question: You would accept unemployment if you found yourself in the same position. And if you sent out 2,000 resumes in 99 weeks, I am certain you would not conclude it was your fault when you didn't have a job on the 100th week.

     


    (QUOTE)

     

    Dumb argument.  In fact a ridiculous argument.  99 weeks, a 52 week extension, free phone, EBT card, food stamps, fuel assistance, and 47% of the electorate happy to accept it. And you`re comparing that to a 13 week unemployment benefit?  You`re comparing that to people that when laid off would take ANY FORM OF WORK AVAILABLE to feed their family?  Does this match up with that infamous Lib mantra, "they`re only taking the jobs Americans don`t want and won`t do"? 

    Get real man!

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from tacobreath. Show tacobreath's posts

    Re: The GOP Problem...in a Nutshell ( literally and figuratively)

    In response to slomag's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to slomag's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to slomag's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to slomag's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    " (i.e. Republicans)."

    LOL!  Yes, that slight majority in the House ONLY is to blame for all the problems.

    Could you attach or cut and paste the "Defend Obama`s Incompetence" handbook you get your MSNBC talking points from?  My Senior in High School would like to take it in to  government class for discussion. 

     



    Federal spending was up, so it's just state and local levels that have been dragging down the employment numbers.

     

    It's just like the gas prices - as soon as speculators overcame their initial fears, everything went back to normal.  Same with private sector employment - it's as strong now as it was in 2004.  It's public sector behavior that has changed. 

    I blame Republicans, because they're the ones screaming about debt and deficits wherever they go.  The Dems are saying we have to address these things, but let's get America back to work first.  And historically, as I've pointed out before - over the last 3+ decades, Republicans do not have the right to b1tch about debt and deficits.  They just don't.  It's like Newt Gingrich talking about traditional marriage.

     




     

    LOL

    Good analogy.  I respect your civility.  Apologies for being a wise a55 all the time.  I do appreciate your loyalty to your side and your always intelligent argument. 

    So, do we "get America back to work first" with tax increases?  Or, do we cut spending? I hear much raving here at BDC that "corporations have more earnings saved than ever before", so why aren`t they investing in America?  Why aren`t they hiring?  Why are they laying off more so than ever?

    I think it`s fear and doubt.  I think ACA will cost companies and they know it.  I think potential higher taxes with no spending cuts has them unsure and uneasy. I think much of the reason companies that could/should hire have no trust or faith in this president. Frankly, his record for the last 4 years doesn`t give them confidence.

     



    Ideally, I'd hold off on all tax increases and spending cuts until the economy is a bit stronger.  But of the two, spending cuts are far more damaging, especially if the tax cuts are on the wealthy class.  Those cuts don't affect public consumption - nobody is tightening their belts or eating in more often.  If anything, it inspires more business investment, because you're getting hit at a higher rate if just keep it under your mattress.

     

    Spending cuts means job cuts - and job cuts means more people unemployed, more competition for the people already looking for work.

    If corporations are sitting on capital, it probably has more to do with recent behavior of banks.  When the financial melt-down occurred, even after the bailout the banks refused to lend money.  Large corporations started changing their payment cycles - they would decide to pay bills 90, 120, even 180 days after billed.  I own a small business - I had to actually drop a big client because I didn't have the cash flow to support working 40 hours for a client one month and being paid five months later.

    But all in all, I think corporations are hiring, and I think small businesses are hiring and growing.  At some point the states, counties, cities and towns have to follow suit.  When that happens, unemployment rates will quickly dip down to levels we find acceptable, and GDP in turn will grow at a faster rate.  

     




     

    Man.......I wish my industry was hiring.  We`re laying off daily and everyone is looking over their shoulder.  It`s no way to live.

     

     



    What industry?  I googled "layoffs" in google news, and nearly everything that comes up is driven by cutbacks in government spending - police, construction on bridges and canals, local hospitals, staff of a suburb of Pittsburgh.  The only private layoffs mentioned were in media (Washington Post & New York Times) and Orbitz - those seem more related to changing consumer behavior than to the economy.

     

     

     




     

    You need to google Ford Mo co, Boeing, Hewlett Packard, Intel, Texas Instruments, Siemens, all of the medical instruments companies.  Anything Tech.  It`s falling apart daily.  And when the chip manufacturers suffer, the world suffers.

    Not for nothing but, where do you Libs live?  Fantasy land?

     

     



    OK, I did some googling...

     

    Ford's layoffs are almost entirely in Europe

    Boeing's layoffs are in the defense division - directly related to government spending

    Siemens cites uncertainty over wind tax credit extensions - directly related to government spending

    There do seem to be quite a few tech companies laying off, but that could indicate a paradigm shift, or just bad products - Intel's layoffs are in the McAfee branch.  McAfee software is horrible - it may have just caught up with them.  The bottom line is as long as the unemployment rate continues to fall, we're on the right track.

     

     

    (QUOTE)


     

    Ah....hem,,,,umm, the unemployment rate went up last couple months.  About 130,000 jobs are being created a month.  That is horrific and nowhere near enough to grow anything.  We`re in a recession and when the Q2 numbers come out we`re going to see more layoffs.

    "right track"?

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from tacobreath. Show tacobreath's posts

    Re: The GOP Problem...in a Nutshell ( literally and figuratively)

    In response to miscricket's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

    Man.......I wish my industry was hiring.  We`re laying off daily and everyone is looking over their shoulder.  It`s no way to live.



    My, you sound almost like you recognize it's not necessarily the employees' fault. Does this mean you've had a change of heart about extended unemployment benefits?

     

     


    Never in a million years.  99 weeks?  A Y F K M???  And then you can file for an extension?
    All the while you get an obamaphone, EBT card, food stamps?  No wonder unemployment is so high and we`re broke.  Nobody wants to go back to work, they don`t have to.

     

    The point is, my friend slomag is wrong.  Nobody is hiring. Look at the jobs created numbers every month. They are abysmal.

     

     



    Do you even bother familiarizing yourself with the actual facts before you go off on these tangents..? First..the 99 weeks includes an extension...and in MA..that is gone anyhow.  You do know that people pay into the unemployment fund while they are working ..right..?  You do know that many people on unemployment are not also on food stamps..or receiving Reaganphones..or receiving EBT benefits..? You do get that..right..?

     

    BTW..Slomag is right. Many industries are hiring. In Massachusetts..the unemployment rate is low enough that people don't qualify for the federal unemployment extension. My agency alone has doubled in size in the last year..and will double again next year.

     

    (QUOTE)


      You`re the one that needs to check facts. Talk about a freakin` tangent.  Unemployment in MA WENT UP!  Unemployment nationally went up!  We`re creating approximately HALF of the jobs needed per month to even sustain this rate.

    It`s 99 weeks and then a 52 week extension (the extension has been stopped). Most (go check the data before you spew) then file a disability claim.  With 101 million on government assistance and 51 million on food stamps it`s pretty safe to assume many take advantage of this system.

    A far cry from the 13 weeks. Dying to know who`s "hiring" in such large numbers?  You may want to tell our friend that graduated from college 4 years ago, got a job at State Street, got laid off in Dec after 4 years, and got 99 weeks unemployment.....IN MASSACHUSETTS!!!  She took off for 3 weeks in Florida a few days ago.  Great gig if you can get it.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from FaolanofEssex. Show FaolanofEssex's posts

    Re: The GOP Problem...in a Nutshell ( literally and figuratively)

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

    In response to miscricket's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

    Man.......I wish my industry was hiring.  We`re laying off daily and everyone is looking over their shoulder.  It`s no way to live.



    My, you sound almost like you recognize it's not necessarily the employees' fault. Does this mean you've had a change of heart about extended unemployment benefits?

     

     


    Never in a million years.  99 weeks?  A Y F K M???  And then you can file for an extension?
    All the while you get an obamaphone, EBT card, food stamps?  No wonder unemployment is so high and we`re broke.  Nobody wants to go back to work, they don`t have to.

     

    The point is, my friend slomag is wrong.  Nobody is hiring. Look at the jobs created numbers every month. They are abysmal.

     

     



    Do you even bother familiarizing yourself with the actual facts before you go off on these tangents..? First..the 99 weeks includes an extension...and in MA..that is gone anyhow.  You do know that people pay into the unemployment fund while they are working ..right..?  You do know that many people on unemployment are not also on food stamps..or receiving Reaganphones..or receiving EBT benefits..? You do get that..right..?

     

    BTW..Slomag is right. Many industries are hiring. In Massachusetts..the unemployment rate is low enough that people don't qualify for the federal unemployment extension. My agency alone has doubled in size in the last year..and will double again next year.

     

    (QUOTE)


      You`re the one that needs to check facts. Talk about a freakin` tangent.  Unemployment in MA WENT UP!  Unemployment nationally went up!  We`re creating approximately HALF of the jobs needed per month to even sustain this rate.

    It`s 99 weeks and then a 52 week extension (the extension has been stopped). Most (go check the data before you spew) then file a disability claim.  With 101 million on government assistance and 51 million on food stamps it`s pretty safe to assume many take advantage of this system.

    A far cry from the 13 weeks. Dying to know who`s "hiring" in such large numbers?  You may want to tell our friend that graduated from college 4 years ago, got a job at State Street, got laid off in Dec after 4 years, and got 99 weeks unemployment.....IN MASSACHUSETTS!!!  She took off for 3 weeks in Florida a few days ago.  Great gig if you can get it.




    Actually you are wrong and are the one who needs to check facts. I know this cause my gf is going through the same think.

    http://www.mass.gov/lwd/unemployment-insur/filing-a-claim/federal-extension-programs/

     

    Clearly states 26 weeks.

     

    EUC provides an additional 26 weeks

    and EB provided and additional 20 weeks but was triggered off when MA unemployment rate went up in 2012.

    where are the stats for your claim that most file a disablity claim?

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from FaolanofEssex. Show FaolanofEssex's posts

    Re: The GOP Problem...in a Nutshell ( literally and figuratively)

    In response to FaolanofEssex's comment:

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to miscricket's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

    Man.......I wish my industry was hiring.  We`re laying off daily and everyone is looking over their shoulder.  It`s no way to live.



    My, you sound almost like you recognize it's not necessarily the employees' fault. Does this mean you've had a change of heart about extended unemployment benefits?

     

     


    Never in a million years.  99 weeks?  A Y F K M???  And then you can file for an extension?
    All the while you get an obamaphone, EBT card, food stamps?  No wonder unemployment is so high and we`re broke.  Nobody wants to go back to work, they don`t have to.

     

    The point is, my friend slomag is wrong.  Nobody is hiring. Look at the jobs created numbers every month. They are abysmal.

     

     



    Do you even bother familiarizing yourself with the actual facts before you go off on these tangents..? First..the 99 weeks includes an extension...and in MA..that is gone anyhow.  You do know that people pay into the unemployment fund while they are working ..right..?  You do know that many people on unemployment are not also on food stamps..or receiving Reaganphones..or receiving EBT benefits..? You do get that..right..?

     

    BTW..Slomag is right. Many industries are hiring. In Massachusetts..the unemployment rate is low enough that people don't qualify for the federal unemployment extension. My agency alone has doubled in size in the last year..and will double again next year.

     

    (QUOTE)


      You`re the one that needs to check facts. Talk about a freakin` tangent.  Unemployment in MA WENT UP!  Unemployment nationally went up!  We`re creating approximately HALF of the jobs needed per month to even sustain this rate.

    It`s 99 weeks and then a 52 week extension (the extension has been stopped). Most (go check the data before you spew) then file a disability claim.  With 101 million on government assistance and 51 million on food stamps it`s pretty safe to assume many take advantage of this system.

    A far cry from the 13 weeks. Dying to know who`s "hiring" in such large numbers?  You may want to tell our friend that graduated from college 4 years ago, got a job at State Street, got laid off in Dec after 4 years, and got 99 weeks unemployment.....IN MASSACHUSETTS!!!  She took off for 3 weeks in Florida a few days ago.  Great gig if you can get it.

     




    Actually you are wrong and are the one who needs to check facts. I know this cause my gf is going through the same think.

     

    http://www.mass.gov/lwd/unemployment-insur/filing-a-claim/federal-extension-programs/

     

    Clearly states 26 weeks.

     

    EUC provides an additional 26 weeks

    and EB provided and additional 20 weeks but was triggered off when MA unemployment rate went up in 2012.

    where are the stats for your claim that most file a disablity claim?




    Also sounds like your friend is commiting fraud. You should report her.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from tacobreath. Show tacobreath's posts

    Re: The GOP Problem...in a Nutshell ( literally and figuratively)

    In response to FaolanofEssex's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to miscricket's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

    Man.......I wish my industry was hiring.  We`re laying off daily and everyone is looking over their shoulder.  It`s no way to live.



    My, you sound almost like you recognize it's not necessarily the employees' fault. Does this mean you've had a change of heart about extended unemployment benefits?

     

     


    Never in a million years.  99 weeks?  A Y F K M???  And then you can file for an extension?
    All the while you get an obamaphone, EBT card, food stamps?  No wonder unemployment is so high and we`re broke.  Nobody wants to go back to work, they don`t have to.

     

    The point is, my friend slomag is wrong.  Nobody is hiring. Look at the jobs created numbers every month. They are abysmal.

     

     



    Do you even bother familiarizing yourself with the actual facts before you go off on these tangents..? First..the 99 weeks includes an extension...and in MA..that is gone anyhow.  You do know that people pay into the unemployment fund while they are working ..right..?  You do know that many people on unemployment are not also on food stamps..or receiving Reaganphones..or receiving EBT benefits..? You do get that..right..?

     

    BTW..Slomag is right. Many industries are hiring. In Massachusetts..the unemployment rate is low enough that people don't qualify for the federal unemployment extension. My agency alone has doubled in size in the last year..and will double again next year.

     

    (QUOTE)


      You`re the one that needs to check facts. Talk about a freakin` tangent.  Unemployment in MA WENT UP!  Unemployment nationally went up!  We`re creating approximately HALF of the jobs needed per month to even sustain this rate.

    It`s 99 weeks and then a 52 week extension (the extension has been stopped). Most (go check the data before you spew) then file a disability claim.  With 101 million on government assistance and 51 million on food stamps it`s pretty safe to assume many take advantage of this system.

    A far cry from the 13 weeks. Dying to know who`s "hiring" in such large numbers?  You may want to tell our friend that graduated from college 4 years ago, got a job at State Street, got laid off in Dec after 4 years, and got 99 weeks unemployment.....IN MASSACHUSETTS!!!  She took off for 3 weeks in Florida a few days ago.  Great gig if you can get it.

     




    Actually you are wrong and are the one who needs to check facts. I know this cause my gf is going through the same think.

     

    http://www.mass.gov/lwd/unemployment-insur/filing-a-claim/federal-extension-programs/

     

    Clearly states 26 weeks.

     

    EUC provides an additional 26 weeks

    and EB provided and additional 20 weeks but was triggered off when MA unemployment rate went up in 2012.

    where are the stats for your claim that most file a disablity claim?

     

    (QUOTE)


     

    It`s 99 weeeks for a State Street employee laid off Dec/2012,after working there a mere 4 years.  Get your facts straight.

    "When state unemployment is high, Massachusetts residents may be eligible for up to 99 weeks of unemployment benefits:

    • up to 26 weeks of regular benefits from the Massachusetts unemployment program
    • up to 53 weeks of extended benefits from the Emergency Unemployment Compensation (EUC)
    • up to 20 weeks of extended benefits from the Extended Benefits (EB) program

    For more information about how to apply for extended benefits, see Information On Unemployment Insurance Extensions on the Division of Unemployment Assistance web site. You can file an extended benefit claim by calling the special toll-free number: 1-888-998-8418.

    For special filing requirements of the Extended Benefits program, see Federal-State Extended Benefits Program."

     

    You may want to do a little better job "helping" your "girlfriend"?

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share