Unemployment at a 44 month low

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

    Re: Unemployment at a 44 month low

    In response to 12-Angry-Men's comment:

    In response to GreginMeffa's comment:

     

    Tax revenues increased every year under those Bush tax cuts that were so horrible that Obambi extends them every year.




    Not only did the tax cuts reduce revenue significantly, the whacko wingnut predictions were laughable and so wrong as to be categorized as outright lies.

     

     

    The Heritage Foundation predicted the cuts would result in the complete elimination of the U.S. national debt by fiscal year 2010. However, the cuts have resulted in a massive explosion in the U.S. national debt and recorded deficits every year since its inception.



    Well, no, the cuts didn't add one dime to  the debt.  Spending did.

    This crazy notion that cuts add to debt is absurd on its face.

    Though I will admit that no one has done a thoughtful analysis about at what level do tax rates start to dip into negative results.   that would be interesting.  I liberals answer this way: NEVER!!!  Because the liberals are not about funding the necessities of government, they want the tax system to be about fairness, regardless of the consequences.  Just ask Obama, who has stated as much several times.

    When the liberals are ready to have an honest discussion about how to fund the necessities of government, we conservatives are here to show them how.

     
  2. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Unemployment at a 44 month low

    In response to jmel's comment:

    In response to DirtyWaterLover's comment:

    In response to jmel's comment:

    In response to AlleyCatBruin's comment:

    In response to UserName99's comment:

    After inheriting the worst recession in 70 years, President Obama has managed to stabilize the economy in a relatively short period of time.  The President is doing very well in spite of a Congress that is seditionist and has no regard for country, patriotism or doing the right thing.  Republicans are party first.

    Imagine how well we'd be doing if he had a Congress he could work with.

    -------------

    WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. unemployment rate fell to 7.8 percent last month, dropping below 8 percent for the first time in nearly four years. The rate declined because more people found work, a trend that could have an impact on undecided voters in the final month before the presidential election.

    The Labor Department said Friday that employers added 114,000 jobs in September. The economy also created 86,000 more jobs in July and August than first estimated. Wages rose in September and more people started looking for work.

     




    Yes, imagine if we didn't have a do-nothing republican majority in the House of Reps?



    Or, imagine if the first 2 years of OBummer`s reign of terror he had Dem majorities in  all 3 chambers........oooops.  And, imagine if he had a Senate majority and just a thin Rep majority in the House for the last 2 years, all those budgets he could pass.........oooops.

    STFU you freakin` dope!



    During obama's first 2 years, he got HCR, reformed student loan regs, stimulous bill, saved the economy from depression, saved the auto industry, new regs for finance.

    once he lst the house, the economic recovery ground to a near halt.  If he'd done a better job selling HCR, he would have kept the house, and maybe the UR would by under 7%.

    so put the in your pipe and smoke it you freakin' moron.

    if it weren't for the repubs, we'd have a good economy.  



    Hey DooooshDrinker,  Obamacare=$1.8 TRILLION and 60% of the country doesn`t want it.  $1 TRILLION stimulus FAILED MISERABLY, stop the lies and the Lib talking points. The auto industry is a failure and hasn`t paid back the money they owe me (not you cuz you don`t pay taxes from your mommies basement)

    A 17 seat majority in the House only is not the problem in America stupid.  It`s uneducated, misinformed, incompetent, lazy, Democrats.

    Get your head out!



    That 17 seat majority is the only thing that stands between us and the progressives brave new world.  That scares me, particularly since many of those republicans are part of the problem as well.

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

    Re: Unemployment at a 44 month low

    In response to jmel's comment:

    In response to DirtyWaterLover's comment:

    In response to jmel's comment:

    In response to AlleyCatBruin's comment:

    In response to UserName99's comment:

    After inheriting the worst recession in 70 years, President Obama has managed to stabilize the economy in a relatively short period of time.  The President is doing very well in spite of a Congress that is seditionist and has no regard for country, patriotism or doing the right thing.  Republicans are party first.

    Imagine how well we'd be doing if he had a Congress he could work with.

    -------------

    WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. unemployment rate fell to 7.8 percent last month, dropping below 8 percent for the first time in nearly four years. The rate declined because more people found work, a trend that could have an impact on undecided voters in the final month before the presidential election.

    The Labor Department said Friday that employers added 114,000 jobs in September. The economy also created 86,000 more jobs in July and August than first estimated. Wages rose in September and more people started looking for work.

     




    Yes, imagine if we didn't have a do-nothing republican majority in the House of Reps?



    Or, imagine if the first 2 years of OBummer`s reign of terror he had Dem majorities in  all 3 chambers........oooops.  And, imagine if he had a Senate majority and just a thin Rep majority in the House for the last 2 years, all those budgets he could pass.........oooops.

    STFU you freakin` dope!



    During obama's first 2 years, he got HCR, reformed student loan regs, stimulous bill, saved the economy from depression, saved the auto industry, new regs for finance.

    once he lst the house, the economic recovery ground to a near halt.  If he'd done a better job selling HCR, he would have kept the house, and maybe the UR would by under 7%.

    so put the in your pipe and smoke it you freakin' moron.

    if it weren't for the repubs, we'd have a good economy.  



    Hey DooooshDrinker,  Obamacare=$1.8 TRILLION and 60% of the country doesn`t want it.  $1 TRILLION stimulus FAILED MISERABLY, stop the lies and the Lib talking points. The auto industry is a failure and hasn`t paid back the money they owe me (not you cuz you don`t pay taxes from your mommies basement)

    A 17 seat majority in the House only is not the problem in America stupid.  It`s uneducated, misinformed, incompetent, lazy, Democrats.

    Get your head out!



    That 17 seat majority is the only thing that stands between us and the progressives brave new world.  That scares me, particularly since many of those republicans are part of the problem as well.

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

    Re: Unemployment at a 44 month low

    In response to 12-Angry-Men's comment:

    From the Samuelson article;

    The trouble is that there's a major snag (in Mittens tax plan), argued the TPC in an August report. In practice, the tax breaks affecting the rich (generally, those with incomes exceeding $200,000) aren't sufficient to offset all their tax savings from lower rates. Achieving revenue neutrality would compel Romney to raise taxes on the middle class – something he has also vowed not to do.



    Yest another economist says that Romney's  plan actually could work:

     

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/princeton-economist-obama-campaign-misrepresenting-my-study-romneys-tax-plan_653917.html

     

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from cookie-rojas. Show cookie-rojas's posts

    Re: Unemployment at a 44 month low

    In response to WhichOnesPink2's comment:

    In response to DirtyWaterLover's comment:

    I don't know what's more enjoyable - The unemployment rate falling or the fits being thrown by the righties.

    By the way, Obama's approval number rose to 54% yesterday - it's highest level since the end of 2009.  I expect to see a slight drop today and then rise early next week.

    I can hear the ghost of Dan Meredith singing, "turn out the lights, the party's over".



    That would be Don



    TFF, shows us something, doesn't it?

    DWL is obviously under 25.......

     
  7. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Unemployment at a 44 month low

    In response to NO MO O's comment:

    Obamas version of fuzzt math.. coincindently just before the election.

    The adjustment numbers will be monster.

    Sign of desperation?




    The left fixates on the number, without examing WHY i went to 7.8%, despite there being as many unemployed as last month.

    the unemployed are being shifted onto diasbility, put into the not working side of the workforce participation numbers.  Is Obama fudging the number?  Well, not directly.  The math still works, it is just the inputs into the formular that are suspect.

    The U-3 is like pouring water into a bucket of water with a slow leak in it.  Month to month, the leak is not that noticable.  Over 44 months, the leak makes measuring the quantity of water going into the bucket meaningless.  Use the U-6, or reset the workforce participation rate to 2009.  That is as accurate as you can get.

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

    Re: Unemployment at a 44 month low

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    In response to 12-Angry-Men's comment:

    In response to GreginMeffa's comment:

     

    Tax revenues increased every year under those Bush tax cuts that were so horrible that Obambi extends them every year.




    Not only did the tax cuts reduce revenue significantly, the whacko wingnut predictions were laughable and so wrong as to be categorized as outright lies.

     

     

    The Heritage Foundation predicted the cuts would result in the complete elimination of the U.S. national debt by fiscal year 2010. However, the cuts have resulted in a massive explosion in the U.S. national debt and recorded deficits every year since its inception.



    Well, no, the cuts didn't add one dime to  the debt.  Spending did.

    This crazy notion that cuts add to debt is absurd on its face.

    Though I will admit that no one has done a thoughtful analysis about at what level do tax rates start to dip into negative results.   that would be interesting.  I liberals answer this way: NEVER!!!  Because the liberals are not about funding the necessities of government, they want the tax system to be about fairness, regardless of the consequences.  Just ask Obama, who has stated as much several times.

    When the liberals are ready to have an honest discussion about how to fund the necessities of government, we conservatives are here to show them how.




    Of course the Bush era tax cuts added to the national debt. At no time in history had a government ever cut taxes while fighting not  1 but 2 wars. Add to that there were no cuts in the budget expenditures and the $$ to pay for the tax cut has to go somewhere -  in this case the national debt.

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

    Re: Unemployment at a 44 month low

    In response to UserName99's comment:

    In response to xXR3S1NXx's comment:

    Better but still not at what obama promised unemployment would be now. He said it would be under 6 percent now and its just getting under 8.




    Stop lying.  The president never promised 6% unemployment.




    You are right.  He promised 5.8% unemployment by this time, as a result of his sitmulus.

    http://blogs.investors.com/capitalhill/index.php/home/35-politicsinvesting/7176-obamas-team-promised-58-unemployment-by-now

     

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

    Re: Unemployment at a 44 month low

    In response to FaolanofEssex's comment:

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    In response to 12-Angry-Men's comment:

    In response to GreginMeffa's comment:

     

    Tax revenues increased every year under those Bush tax cuts that were so horrible that Obambi extends them every year.




    Not only did the tax cuts reduce revenue significantly, the whacko wingnut predictions were laughable and so wrong as to be categorized as outright lies.

     

     

    The Heritage Foundation predicted the cuts would result in the complete elimination of the U.S. national debt by fiscal year 2010. However, the cuts have resulted in a massive explosion in the U.S. national debt and recorded deficits every year since its inception.



    Well, no, the cuts didn't add one dime to  the debt.  Spending did.

    This crazy notion that cuts add to debt is absurd on its face.

    Though I will admit that no one has done a thoughtful analysis about at what level do tax rates start to dip into negative results.   that would be interesting.  I liberals answer this way: NEVER!!!  Because the liberals are not about funding the necessities of government, they want the tax system to be about fairness, regardless of the consequences.  Just ask Obama, who has stated as much several times.

    When the liberals are ready to have an honest discussion about how to fund the necessities of government, we conservatives are here to show them how.




    Of course the Bush era tax cuts added to the national debt. At no time in history had a government ever cut taxes while fighting not  1 but 2 wars. Add to that there were no cuts in the budget expenditures and the $$ to pay for the tax cut has to go somewhere -  in this case the national debt.




    Tax cuts NEVER add to the debt, spending adds to the debt.  Stop it with this constant lying.

    Bottom line, entitlements, spending that is neither supportable not a function of government are crippling us.  No tax cut contributed to a single dollar being spent on these items. 

     

    If we have to borrow to pay for it, cut it.  That simple.

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

    Re: Unemployment at a 44 month low

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    In response to FaolanofEssex's comment:

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    In response to 12-Angry-Men's comment:

    In response to GreginMeffa's comment:

     

    Tax revenues increased every year under those Bush tax cuts that were so horrible that Obambi extends them every year.




    Not only did the tax cuts reduce revenue significantly, the whacko wingnut predictions were laughable and so wrong as to be categorized as outright lies.

     

     

    The Heritage Foundation predicted the cuts would result in the complete elimination of the U.S. national debt by fiscal year 2010. However, the cuts have resulted in a massive explosion in the U.S. national debt and recorded deficits every year since its inception.



    Well, no, the cuts didn't add one dime to  the debt.  Spending did.

    This crazy notion that cuts add to debt is absurd on its face.

    Though I will admit that no one has done a thoughtful analysis about at what level do tax rates start to dip into negative results.   that would be interesting.  I liberals answer this way: NEVER!!!  Because the liberals are not about funding the necessities of government, they want the tax system to be about fairness, regardless of the consequences.  Just ask Obama, who has stated as much several times.

    When the liberals are ready to have an honest discussion about how to fund the necessities of government, we conservatives are here to show them how.




    Of course the Bush era tax cuts added to the national debt. At no time in history had a government ever cut taxes while fighting not  1 but 2 wars. Add to that there were no cuts in the budget expenditures and the $$ to pay for the tax cut has to go somewhere -  in this case the national debt.




    Tax cuts NEVER add to the debt, spending adds to the debt.  Stop it with this constant lying.

    Bottom line, entitlements, spending that is neither supportable not a function of government are crippling us.  No tax cut contributed to a single dollar being spent on these items. 

     

    If we have to borrow to pay for it, cut it.  That simple.




    So your saying the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq should not have happened? Both being paid for on a credit card called the Bank of China.

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

    Re: Unemployment at a 44 month low

    In response to FaolanofEssex's comment:

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    In response to FaolanofEssex's comment:

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    In response to 12-Angry-Men's comment:

    In response to GreginMeffa's comment:

     

    Tax revenues increased every year under those Bush tax cuts that were so horrible that Obambi extends them every year.




    Not only did the tax cuts reduce revenue significantly, the whacko wingnut predictions were laughable and so wrong as to be categorized as outright lies.

     

     

    The Heritage Foundation predicted the cuts would result in the complete elimination of the U.S. national debt by fiscal year 2010. However, the cuts have resulted in a massive explosion in the U.S. national debt and recorded deficits every year since its inception.



    Well, no, the cuts didn't add one dime to  the debt.  Spending did.

    This crazy notion that cuts add to debt is absurd on its face.

    Though I will admit that no one has done a thoughtful analysis about at what level do tax rates start to dip into negative results.   that would be interesting.  I liberals answer this way: NEVER!!!  Because the liberals are not about funding the necessities of government, they want the tax system to be about fairness, regardless of the consequences.  Just ask Obama, who has stated as much several times.

    When the liberals are ready to have an honest discussion about how to fund the necessities of government, we conservatives are here to show them how.




    Of course the Bush era tax cuts added to the national debt. At no time in history had a government ever cut taxes while fighting not  1 but 2 wars. Add to that there were no cuts in the budget expenditures and the $$ to pay for the tax cut has to go somewhere -  in this case the national debt.




    Tax cuts NEVER add to the debt, spending adds to the debt.  Stop it with this constant lying.

    Bottom line, entitlements, spending that is neither supportable not a function of government are crippling us.  No tax cut contributed to a single dollar being spent on these items. 

     

    If we have to borrow to pay for it, cut it.  That simple.




    So your saying the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq should not have happened? Both being paid for on a credit card called the Bank of China.



    Simplistic mind you have.

    Defence needs to come before entitlements.  Bush did not understand this.

    If you consider the wars wars of choice, then you are correct.

    If you consider them wars of necessity, then you need to not only borrow money to pay for them, but you need to condem the years of liberal entitlement policies that put our country in a position where we need to borrow money to defend ourselves.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share