I refuse to vote for Mitt Romney

[Conservative]

That isn't what the quote was addressing and wasn't what I was talking about and you know it. Here it
is again from the article



Saving a job has nothing to do with increasing employment

Actually here is the quote from Adam's post that I responded to, it wasn't the Romer Report but the CBO report Adam referenced although the Romer report under key findings doesn't mention saved jobs either as I posted above

"

the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office released a report in August [of 2010] that said the stimulus bill has "[l]owered the unemployment rate by between 0.7 percentage points and 1.8 percentage points" and "ncreased the number of people employed by between 1.4 million and 3.3 million."

I don't see saved jobs in that CBO report either just like it wasn't in the key findings

We reach several key preliminary findings:

• A package in the range that the President-Elect has discussed is expected to create between three and four million jobs by the end of 2010.

 

[Conservative]

Obama's job recovery is private sector jobs increasing while government jobs decrease. Here you are touting how Reagan's economy created jobs which was on the back of exploding the size of government.

So with over 4.5 trillion added to the debt we have a 1.2% GDP growth in 2011, 24 million unemployed/under employed in NOVEMBER 2011, and a net job loss from when he took office but that is a success to a liberal? There will be a reason that obama won't run on his record and there it is.

 

[Conservative]

I don't need massive central control, I think we need to cut spending by trillions and increase the tax rates for the wealthy by trillions, getting us closer back to the point we were before Reaganomics that created more debt than all the presidents before him. And don't try to give me that crap about how it was the Congress and not Reagan, as the conservative Cato Institute has documented that Reagan requested more spending than Congress approved. Just like with your man Bush!

And, according to BLS data (as posted previously in this thread), Reagan created way less manufacturing jobs per year than has Obama:

"Barack Obama: Increase of 157,368 manufacturing jobs per year in office
George W. Bush: Decrease of 434,143 manufacturing jobs per year in office
Bill Clinton: Increase of 37,143 manufacturing jobs per year in office
George H.W. Bush: Decrease of 336,000 manufacturing jobs per year in office
Ronald Reagan: Increase of 1,429 manufacturing jobs per year in office
Jimmy Carter: Increase of 15,333 manufacturing jobs per year in office"

Only massive control takes from one group to give to another. you don't seem to have a problem with that. i call that a failure on your part not being able to compete so that you became one of those evil rich people then you could do with your money whatever you want. Instead you want to create a bigger Federal Govt. that takes from the earners to give to people like you because your jealousy.

A govt. big enough to provide all that you want and need is also big enough to take it all away.

 

[upsideguy]

Rather weak on civics and economics I see. It has been three years since this empty suit took office and the employment/unemployment numbers are for NOVEMBER 2011. Seems the mess is still there after promises to clean up the mess.

Just goes to show you just how toxic a Republican administration can be to the American economy... it takes 3 years to begin to remove all the sludge. Meanwhile, the sludge creators continue to drag their feet and live in denial. Even with all that dead weight, the Dems are moving the ball down the field.

.... and once again, Conserv can offer no real argument, just insults. Debate is an adult occupation; calling people names is for school children incapable of adult discourse.....

BTW, I minored in economics (21 credits), so I know a little bit about subject... and, if you know something about the subject, you know their are several schools of macro-economic theory (bolded as that is what they are.... theories)

 

[Conservative]

Obama's job recovery is private sector jobs increasing while government jobs decrease. Here you are touting how Reagan's economy created jobs which was on the back of exploding the size of government.

Reagan economy created 17 million jobs, prove that it was due to exploding size of govt and those jobs were within the govt?

 

[Conservative]

Just goes to show you just how toxic a Republican administration can be to the American economy... it takes 3 years to begin to remove all the sludge. Meanwhile, the sludge creators continue to drag their feet and live in denial. Even with all that dead weight, the Dems are moving the ball down the field.

.... and once again, Conserv can offer no real argument, just insults. Debate is an adult occupation; calling people names is for school children incapable of adult discourse.

It only took Reagan two years to turn around the disastrous Carter economy

 

[Conservative]

Obama's job recovery is private sector jobs increasing while government jobs decrease. Here you are touting how Reagan's economy created jobs which was on the back of exploding the size of government.

To show again one more time that you have been brainwashed. Here are the private sector jobs from bls.gov. Feel free to try and prove them wrong

Year Jan
1980 74599
1981 74671
1982 74516
1983 72958
1984 76647
1985 80017
1986 81995
1987 83610
1988 86363
1989 89359

In January 1981 there were 74.7 million private sector jobs. In January 1989 when Reagan left office that was 89.4 million so 14.7 million of the 17 million jobs created during the Reagan years were private sector jobs. Let's see if a liberal can admit when proven wrong.

Employment, Hours, and Earnings from the Current Employment Statistics survey (National)
Original Data Value

Series Id: CES0500000001
Seasonally Adjusted
Super Sector: Total private
Industry: Total private
NAICS Code: -
Data Type: ALL EMPLOYEES, THOUSANDS
Years: 1980 to 2011

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1980 74599 74653 74695 74263 73961 73654 73414 73682 73875 74099 74350 74563
1981 74671 74752 74910 75016 75088 75323 75419 75448 75440 75302 75084 74811
1982 74516 74540 74398 74131 74093 73837 73620 73422 73248 72938 72793 72775
1983 72958 72899 73071 73362 73624 73987 74414 74101 75189 75516 75857 76202
1984 76647 77111 77381 77699 77979 78334 78601 78790 79070 79337 79649 79805
1985 80017 80128 80428 80588 80818 80939 81006 81200 81385 81556 81745 81893
1986 81995 82058 82155 82333 82433 82351 82669 82761 82997 83125 83275 83463
1987 83610 83851 84072 84365 84589 84748 85058 85216 85482 85840 86041 86287
1988 86363 86791 87009 87249 87447 87776 88020 88091 88341 88573 88836 89135
1989 89359 89579 89761 89916 89998 90079 90125 90088 90299 90404 90657 90734

 

[Conservative]

Your surrender is accepted.

FYI GM assembly plant Arlington Texas......Texas is a right to work state!

Think China is a right to work country? Obama continues to make a fool out of his supporters

Weasel Zippers » Blog Archive » Thanks For The Bailout: Government Motors To Move Chevy Volt Production To China…

 

[poweRob]

Reagan economy created 17 million jobs, prove that it was due to exploding size of govt and those jobs were within the govt?

During the Reagan years, federal employment grew by more than 60,000 (in contrast, government payrolls shrunk by 373,000 during Bill Clinton’s presidency). The gap between the amount of money the federal government took in and the amount it spent nearly tripled. The national debt soared from $700 billion to $3 trillion, and the U.S. transformed from the world’s largest international creditor to its largest debtor.​

Love how people keep changing the Reagan record to suit their beliefs.

 

[Catawba]

Only massive control takes from one group to give to another. you don't seem to have a problem with that.

I've had a problem with that for the last 30 years of Reaganomics when the country's wealth was being redistributed upward to the point that we can no longer support a consumer based economy because too much wealth has been concentrated at the top

Instead you want to create a bigger Federal Govt. that takes from the earners to give to people like you because your jealousy.

No, I don't. I've told you umpteen-jillion times that we must cut spending, as well as eliminate the tax breaks for the wealthy. When both sides worked together in the 90s to do that is the only time in the post Reaganomics era that a reduced deficit has been accomplished. How do you ignore that?

 

[Conservative]

During the Reagan years, federal employment grew by more than 60,000 (in contrast, government payrolls shrunk by 373,000 during Bill Clinton’s presidency). The gap between the amount of money the federal government took in and the amount it spent nearly tripled. The national debt soared from $700 billion to $3 trillion, and the U.S. transformed from the world’s largest international creditor to its largest debtor.​

Love how people keep changing the Reagan record to suit their beliefs.

Amazing how you ignored the bls data posted because it doesn't suirt your own beliefs.

By the way, Clinton has a peace dividend that Reagan never had.

 

[Conservative]

I've had a problem with that for the last 30 years of Reaganomics when the country's wealth was being redistributed upward to the point that we can no longer support a consumer based economy because too much wealth has been concentrated at the top



No, I don't. I've told you umpteen-jillion times that we must cut spending, as well as eliminate the tax breaks for the wealthy. When both sides worked together in the 90s to do that is the only time in the post Reaganomics era that a reduced deficit has been accomplished. How do you ignore that?

I agree some of that wealth was redistributed to me through hard work, risk taking, dedication, and innovation.

As I have told you "umpteen-zillion" times you can cannot get enough revenue from those evil rich people to make a dent in the deficit or the debt and why would you want to take someone else's money anyway? Is that what you were taught growing up? People should have the choice where to spend their money not be forced to give it to a federal bureaucrat to spend for them

 

[winston53660]

Think China is a right to work country? Obama continues to make a fool out of his supporters

Weasel Zippers » Blog Archive » Thanks For The Bailout: Government Motors To Move Chevy Volt Production To China…

So now we are shifting from commerce btwn the states to global comerece?

BTW The headline is a bit mis leading you might want to try reading the artcle:

Details of the plan were not provided, and GM has denied it will involve handing over intellectual property underlying the Volt.
GM Vice Chairman Steve Girsky, in a conference call from Shanghai, said that neither SAIC nor the Chinese government have demanded Volt technology. Any future EV would, of course, draw on GM’s Volt experience and technology. Under the deal, SAIC and GM will equally share the cost of developing a new all-electric vehicle, Girsky said.

 

[Sheik Yerbuti]

In January 1981 there were 74.7 million private sector jobs. In January 1989 when Reagan left office that was 89.4 million so 14.7 million of the 17 million jobs created during the Reagan years were private sector jobs. Let's see if a liberal can admit when proven wrong.

Damn!

Now you're comparing payroll data with household survey data???

:naughty

Oh wait, I know why ... because if you compared private sector payroll data with total payroll data, then it shows there were 16 million jobs created under Reagan, not 17 million (which comes from household survey data).

:roll:

 

[Conservative]

So now we are shifting from commerce btwn the states to global comerece?

BTW The headline is a bit mis leading you might want to try reading the artcle:

Details of the plan were not provided, and GM has denied it will involve handing over intellectual property underlying the Volt.
GM Vice Chairman Steve Girsky, in a conference call from Shanghai, said that neither SAIC nor the Chinese government have demanded Volt technology. Any future EV would, of course, draw on GM’s Volt experience and technology. Under the deal, SAIC and GM will equally share the cost of developing a new all-electric vehicle, Girsky said.

So production isn't being moved to China? Keep buying the Obama rhetoric. Cannot believe how he has so many here fooled. I can only believe that you believe in the direction he is taking this country and always buy his rhetoric while ignoring his results

 

[Conservative]

Damn!

Now you're comparing payroll data with household survey data???

:naughty

Oh wait, I know why ... because if you compared private sector payroll data with total payroll data, then it shows there were 16 million jobs created under Reagan, not 17 million (which comes from household survey data).

:roll:

Refute the chart posed

Total employment

Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey
Original Data Value

Series Id: LNS12000000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Seas) Employment Level
Labor force status: Employed
Type of data: Number in thousands
Age: 16 years and over
Years: 1980 to 2010

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
1980 99879 99995 99713 99233 98945 98682 98796 98824 99077 99317 99545 99634
1981 99955 100191 100571 101056 101048 100298 100693 100689 100064 100378 100207 99645
1982 99692 99762 99672 99576 100116 99543 99493 99633 99504 99215 99112 99032
1983 99161 99089 99179 99560 99642 100633 101208 101608 102016 102039 102729 102996
1984 103201 103824 103967 104336 105193 105591 105435 105163 105490 105638 105972 106223
1985 106302 106555 106989 106936 106932 106505 106807 107095 107657 107847 108007 108216
1986 108887 108480 108837 108952 109089 109576 109810 110015 110085 110273 110475 110728
1987 110953 111257 111408 111794 112434 112246 112634 113057 112909 113282 113505 113793
1988 114016 114227 114037 114650 114292 114927 115060 115282 115356 115638 116100 116104
1989 116708 116776 117022 117097 117099 117418 117472 117655 117354 117581 117912 117830

 

[winston53660]

So production isn't being moved to China?

The article doesn't say. And if it does so what. You are talking about a huge market! Just like Japanese auto makers saw here!

Keep buying the Obama rhetoric. Cannot believe how he has so many here fooled. I can only believe that you believe in the direction he is taking this country and always buy his rhetoric while ignoring his results

Obama is not even mentioned in the article, sheesh:roll:

 

[Conservative]

The article doesn't say. And if it does so what. You are talking about a huge market! Just like Japanese auto makers saw here!



Obama is not even mentioned in the article, sheesh:roll:

Wonder how long the daily commute will be for those workers in Arlington? Don't we need jobs in this country?

 

[winston53660]

Wonder how long the daily commute will be for those workers in Arlington? Don't we need jobs in this country?

Well then I guess you should be worried about people being employed in States other than the one you live in as per your post #1089:

As stated, you don't increase employment by saving jobs, try again. Please explain why it is the taxpayers of my state's responsibility to save jobs in your community?

 

[Conservative]

Well then I guess you should be worried about people being employed in States other than the one you live in as per your post #1089:

Since you want to jump in on that discussion then try to do what the other liberals couldn't do or admit they were wrong, how do you increase employment by saving jobs? An employed job is already counted thus saving it doesn't increase employment

 

[Sheik Yerbuti]

Refute the chart posed

Total employment

Refute what? Did you even have a point? And how do you make a point by mixing and matching household data with survey data??

 

[Catawba]

I agree some of that wealth was redistributed to me through hard work, risk taking, dedication, and innovation.

But not through that cut in capital gains tax rate from 33% under Reagan to 15% today??? And not through stagnant wages for labor???

What harder work has the rich done during the Recession that made their income soar while the middle class slid into poverty?

As I have told you "umpteen-zillion" times you can cannot get enough revenue from those evil rich people to make a dent in the deficit or the debt and why would you want to take someone else's money anyway? Is that what you were taught growing up? People should have the choice where to spend their money not be forced to give it to a federal bureaucrat to spend for them.

I've already told you I agree we need to cut spending. What the tea party conservatives like yourself insist on is that we can solve our deficit spending problem through spending cuts alone.

Tell me when the Republicans last stopped deficit spending, without raising taxes?

 

[pbrauer]

During the Reagan years, federal employment grew by more than 60,000 (in contrast, government payrolls shrunk by 373,000 during Bill Clinton’s presidency). The gap between the amount of money the federal government took in and the amount it spent nearly tripled. The national debt soared from $700 billion to $3 trillion, and the U.S. transformed from the world’s largest international creditor to its largest debtor.​

Love how people keep changing the Reagan record to suit their beliefs.

Here is how all government jobs grew during the Reagan presidency:

Series Id: CES9000000001 Seasonally Adjusted​ Super Sector: Government​ Industry: Government​ NAICS Code: -​ Data Type: ALL EMPLOYEES, THOUSANDS​

[TABLE="class: grid"]
[TR]
[TD]Year[/TD]
[TD]Jan[/TD]
[TD]Feb[/TD]
[TD]Mar[/TD]
[TD]Apr[/TD]
[TD]May[/TD]
[TD]Jun[/TD]
[TD]Jul[/TD]
[TD]Aug[/TD]
[TD]Sep[/TD]
[TD]Oct[/TD]
[TD]Nov[/TD]
[TD]Dec[/TD]
[TD]Total[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]1981[/TD]
[TD]-13[/TD]
[TD]-14[/TD]
[TD]-54[/TD]
[TD]-32[/TD]
[TD]-62[/TD]
[TD]-39[/TD]
[TD]16[/TD]
[TD]-65[/TD]
[TD]-79[/TD]
[TD]38[/TD]
[TD]9[/TD]
[TD]-5[/TD]
[TD]-300[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]1982[/TD]
[TD]-32[/TD]
[TD]-30[/TD]
[TD]13[/TD]
[TD]-14[/TD]
[TD]-7[/TD]
[TD]13[/TD]
[TD]-126[/TD]
[TD]40[/TD]
[TD]-7[/TD]
[TD]33[/TD]
[TD]21[/TD]
[TD]4[/TD]
[TD]-92[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]1983[/TD]
[TD]42[/TD]
[TD]-19[/TD]
[TD]1[/TD]
[TD]-15[/TD]
[TD]15[/TD]
[TD]15[/TD]
[TD]-9[/TD]
[TD]5[/TD]
[TD]26[/TD]
[TD]-56[/TD]
[TD]11[/TD]
[TD]11[/TD]
[TD]27[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]1984[/TD]
[TD]2[/TD]
[TD]15[/TD]
[TD]5[/TD]
[TD]45[/TD]
[TD]28[/TD]
[TD]24[/TD]
[TD]45[/TD]
[TD]52[/TD]
[TD]31[/TD]
[TD]19[/TD]
[TD]37[/TD]
[TD]-29[/TD]
[TD]274[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]1985[/TD]
[TD]54[/TD]
[TD]13[/TD]
[TD]46[/TD]
[TD]35[/TD]
[TD]44[/TD]
[TD]24[/TD]
[TD]122[/TD]
[TD]-1[/TD]
[TD]19[/TD]
[TD]16[/TD]
[TD]20[/TD]
[TD]20[/TD]
[TD]412[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]1986[/TD]
[TD]21[/TD]
[TD]44[/TD]
[TD]-4[/TD]
[TD]10[/TD]
[TD]25[/TD]
[TD]-11[/TD]
[TD]0[/TD]
[TD]21[/TD]
[TD]110[/TD]
[TD]59[/TD]
[TD]36[/TD]
[TD]16[/TD]
[TD]327[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]1987[/TD]
[TD]24[/TD]
[TD]-9[/TD]
[TD]28[/TD]
[TD]45[/TD]
[TD]3[/TD]
[TD]12[/TD]
[TD]36[/TD]
[TD]12[/TD]
[TD]-37[/TD]
[TD]134[/TD]
[TD]30[/TD]
[TD]48[/TD]
[TD]326[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]1988[/TD]
[TD]18[/TD]
[TD]24[/TD]
[TD]58[/TD]
[TD]5[/TD]
[TD]29[/TD]
[TD]34[/TD]
[TD]-21[/TD]
[TD]50[/TD]
[TD]90[/TD]
[TD]36[/TD]
[TD]76[/TD]
[TD]-10[/TD]
[TD]389[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Total[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[TD]1363[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

 

[Conservative]

But not through that cut in capital gains tax rate from 33% under Reagan to 15% today??? And not through stagnant wages for labor???

What harder work has the rich done during the Recession that made their income soar while the middle class slid into poverty?

As I have told you "umpteen-zillion" times you can cannot get enough revenue from those evil rich people to make a dent in the deficit or the debt and why would you want to take someone else's money anyway? Is that what you were taught growing up? People should have the choice where to spend their money not be forced to give it to a federal bureaucrat to spend for them.

I've already told you I agree we need to cut spending. What the tea party conservatives like yourself insist on is that we can solve our deficit spending problem through spending cuts alone.

Tell me when the Republicans last reduced stopped deficit spending, without raising taxes?

You sure are envious and jealous of what someone else has. Why aren't you doing the samething? Republicans haven't controlled Congress since 2007 and Republicans spent too much. Obama has taken GOP Spending and put it on steroids. You can never create prosperity by taking from someone who has earned the money and give it to someone else who didn't. That is class warfare and creates resentment plus isn't the foundation upon which this countryw as built.

 

[winston53660]

Since you want to jump in on that discussion then try to do what the other liberals couldn't do or admit they were wrong, how do you increase employment by saving jobs? An employed job is already counted thus saving it doesn't increase employment

And saving a job doesn't add to unemployment....now are you going some where with this or not?