Job Creation posts blowout month in February 289,000 jobs added

[pinqy]

As the population grows so grows the labor force and it looks to me like 6 million working part time for economic reasons.

What does an increase in the labor force have to do with part time for economic reasons? The number has gone DOWN, not up. That refutes your claim that the ACA would cause an increase.

Are you telling me businesses aren't hiring part time to keep from paying the ACA taxes?

I'm sure some are...but clearly not in any significant numbers.

You're making a claim but have no data to back it up.

 

[Linc]

Ok, then you explain it to me, what generated the 21000 stock market, the massive job creation, and Obama losing the Congress?? I anxiously await your explanation since obviously it isn't the pro growth message, the EO's reducing the taxes on ACA and regulations from the EPA.

How has the stock market done in the 4 days this week?

How do you explain the explosion of the stock market under Obama since it bottomed out 8 years ago?

How about the 724,000 jobs we lost in 02/2009 and 799,000 jobs we lost in 03/2009 8 years ago because of your GOP, Conservative ?

 

[pinqy]

Why would you expect it to go up? It can go down and still be elevated relative to where it would have been without Obamacare.

How? How would you estimate "where it would have been?"

 

[Chomsky]

2 to 3 weeks in retail it goes without saying.

We're speaking in terms of the national economy, not local, specific sub-sectors, individual employers, or specific jobs themselves.

These are national aggregate numbers along the line of: "The GDP rises, then 2-3Q later we see a national rise in employment".

 

[Linc]

Brady has been in Congress for years and is on the House Ways and Means Committee drafting tax law. why does it matter who his opponent was?

Why can't you answer who your congressman Brady's opponent was, since you brought him into this discussion ?

 

[Chomsky]

Ok, then you explain it to me, what generated the 21000 stock market, the massive job creation, and Obama losing the Congress?? I anxiously await your explanation since obviously it isn't the pro growth message, the EO's reducing the taxes on ACA and regulations from the EPA.

You aren't going to provide citation supporting your OP content, are you?

 

[Conservative]

Why can't you answer who your congressman Brady's opponent was, since you brought him into this discussion ?

Why does that even matter? Irrelevant question. He was unopposed

 

[Conservative]

You aren't going to provide citation supporting your OP content, are you?

I gave you my statement, you didn't like it and cannot counter with anything better. You have no understanding of our economy at all and cannot explain why Obama lost the Congress. Guess the 9.4% U-6 and 1.6% GDP growth in 2016 had no affect on the results

 

[Conservative]

What does an increase in the labor force have to do with part time for economic reasons? The number has gone DOWN, not up. That refutes your claim that the ACA would cause an increase.


I'm sure some are...but clearly not in any significant numbers.

You're making a claim but have no data to back it up.

6 million people employed part time for economic reasons, why don't you explain it to me since obviously it had nothing to do with Obama policies

 

[Conservative]

How has the stock market done in the 4 days this week?

How do you explain the explosion of the stock market under Obama since it bottomed out 8 years ago?

How about the 724,000 jobs we lost in 02/2009 and 799,000 jobs we lost in 03/2009 8 years ago because of your GOP, Conservative ?

here we go again, explain to me with all those great Obama numbers why Democratic Congressional Representatives running on that record lost and Republicans took the Congress?

As explained to you and you ignored, discouraged workers grew to 1.3 million and aren't counted as unemployed. Is 1.3 million more or less than 800,000? Are those people unemployed? your economic ignorance is staggering

 

[Linc]

Why does that even matter? Irrelevant question. He was unopposed

Sounds like he's in one of those gerrymandered Texas CDs that the lying AG is no longer going after, is that the way you see it?

I see where he won by 78.64% in 2014. Brady can afford to take positions that moderate GOPs in the Tuesday Group can't.

And that Senators like Cotton can't take .

 

[Linc]

here we go again, explain to me with all those great Obama numbers why Democratic Congressional Representatives running on that record lost and Republicans took the Congress?

As explained to you and you ignored, discouraged workers grew to 1.3 million and aren't counted as unemployed. Is 1.3 million more or less than 800,000? Are those people unemployed? your economic ignorance is staggering

Same questions back to you on the 2006 and 2008 elections.

What goes around comes around and the party that stood for nothing but obstruction is in a deep state of hurt .

 

[Chomsky]

I gave you my statement, you didn't like it and cannot counter with anything better. You have no understanding of our economy at all and cannot explain why Obama lost the Congress. Guess the 9.4% U-6 and 1.6% GDP growth in 2016 had no affect on the results

It's your OP Conservative, and your content.

The problem here is you won't admit it's unsupported opinion, no different than Trump's made-up nonsense, and your content still remains unsupported while you fly around the thread on tangents and deflaction.

It's time to, you know, put up or ?

 

[pinqy]

6 million people employed part time for economic reasons, why don't you explain it to me since obviously it had nothing to do with Obama policies

Why do you think 6 million part time for economic reasons is due to the ACA? The number is 6 million because conditions are improving. When the ACA was passed, there were over 9 million working part time for economic reasons. Pre-recession, it was 4 million. Why is 6 million due to Obamacare, then?

 

[Conservative]

Sounds like he's in one of those gerrymandered Texas CDs that the lying AG is no longer going after, is that the way you see it?

I see where he won by 78.64% in 2014. Brady can afford to take positions that moderate GOPs in the Tuesday Group can't.

And that Senators like Cotton can't take .

yep, head of the Ways and Means Committee working on the new tax policies. Love it. Love that Gerrymandering that you claim is so prevalent. Amazing how that works with the Senate, right?

 

[Conservative]

Same questions back to you on the 2006 and 2008 elections.

What goes around comes around and the party that stood for nothing but obstruction is in a deep state of hurt .

Amazing how Democrats controlling the Congress in 06 and 08 allowed Bush to destroy the economy. Isn't that your spin?

 

[Conservative]

It's your OP Conservative, and your content.

The problem here is you won't admit it's unsupported opinion, no different than Trump's made-up nonsense, and your content still remains unsupported while you fly around the thread on tangents and deflaction.

It's time to, you know, put up or ?

My opinion is quite accurate, Obama lost the Congress which you cannot explain, the stock market went over 21000 which you cannot explain, you are going to see almost 300,000 jobs created in February tomorrow which you cannot explain, Obama had a 1.6 ^ GDP growth in 2016 which you cannot explain and he had a 9.4% U-6 rate agan you cannot explain. You simply cannot give Trump credit for the pro growth economic policies and enthusiasm created?

 

[Conservative]

Why do you think 6 million part time for economic reasons is due to the ACA? The number is 6 million because conditions are improving. When the ACA was passed, there were over 9 million working part time for economic reasons. Pre-recession, it was 4 million. Why is 6 million due to Obamacare, then?

Not only ACA but Obama in general there was no incentive for companies to hire people and that is changing. Absolutely stunning how the electorate just didn't get what you want to sell.

 

[bluesmoke]

Yes, it is employer generated because of economic policies created by the Obama Administration. Companies are in business to make a profit not employ people and when you tax them they are going to cut employees first which means reducing hours so they don't have to pay for the ACA expenses that Trump just eliminated.

As for the debt, here is the link you need to review, when Obama took office the debt was 10.6 trillion dollars, when the Bush spending authority ran out it was 11 trillion of which 350 billion was TARP expenditures which was repaid. There was NO 2009 budget until Obama signed it in March 2009. The country operated under continuing resolutions and Bush spending expired on March 31, 2009. Obama then spent the remainder of the fiscal year.

So study away

Debt to the Penny (Daily History Search Application)

Government - Historical Debt Outstanding - Annual 2000 - 2015

Government - Historical Debt Outstanding – Annual

US Federal Budget Spending Estimate vs. Actual for FY2015 - Charts

https://www.bea.gov/

https://www.bls.gov/

You said: “Yes, it is employer generated because of economic policies created by the Obama Administration.”

It is only employer generated as a strategy to deal with the economic environment, IMO. It is not employer generated, it is driven by economic conditions.

You said: “Companies are in business to make a profit…”

Under Obama, corporate after-tax profits, as a percentage of GDP, are the best they’ve been since 1928.

You said: “Companies are in business to make a profit not employ people…”

Absolutely true. They hire to make profit, not to help the unemployed get employed and feed their families. They fire people to make a profit, regardless of less food on the table for their ex-employees’ families.

“Bush spending expired on March 31, 2009….”

Which gives Obama control of the fiscal budget through September 30, 2009 of that fiscal year. All of half the fiscal year. Seems like a 50-50 shared responsibility to me. Maybe I’m being simplistic. After all, some stuff Obama took a grip on March 11, 2009. Now how much of whatever that stuff was equated to did it make in the balance? Of course, the 50-50 I mentioned was just by number of specific months. Maybe Obama’s months were weighted different than Bush’s? Where do you suggest we go from here?

You said: “So study away”

Did so before you were ever tucked into bed.

 

[Linc]

yep, head of the Ways and Means Committee working on the new tax policies. Love it. Love that Gerrymandering that you claim is so prevalent. Amazing how that works with the Senate, right?

You haven't noticed Cotton's change since his last time home; and as you already know, has nothing to do with GM; like GOP Inelligence Chair Rep. Nunes calling trump a neophyte; though Nunes has compromised himself multiple times .

 

[Linc]

Amazing how Democrats controlling the Congress in 06 and 08 allowed Bush to destroy the economy. Isn't that your spin?

I see the buck doesn't stop with the President with you when they are Republicans .

 

[Removable Mind]

I will be anxiously awaiting for you to prove me wrong on the total votes in the 2016 election results for all candidates? When can I expect you to post those numbers or are you going to do what most leftists do, run and never be heard from again.

Back to square one. The official outcome wasn't right or left. But that left nonsense seems to be your only excuse for everything. Sad....

 

[Deuce]

My opinion is quite accurate, Obama lost the Congress which you cannot explain, the stock market went over 21000 which you cannot explain, you are going to see almost 300,000 jobs created in February tomorrow which you cannot explain, Obama had a 1.6 ^ GDP growth in 2016 which you cannot explain and he had a 9.4% U-6 rate agan you cannot explain. You simply cannot give Trump credit for the pro growth economic policies and enthusiasm created?

What policy was implemented after January 20 and substantially affected February's hiring numbers?

 

[Puigb]

Here is the annual data from BEA.gov. Would you please explain to us where you came up with this statement?

Gross domestic product
2009--2.8
2010-2.5
2011-1.6
2012-2.2
2013-1.7
2014-2.4
2015-2.6
2016-1.6

Now for what the liberals call the worst President in modern history, the Bush results

Gross domestic product
2001-1.0
2002-1.8
2003-2.8
2004-3.8
2005-3.3
2006-2.7
2007-1.8
2008--0.3

Taking a look at the Bush numbers can you tell me the months that the Republicans and Democrats controlled the Congress and the purse strings?? Then do the same for Obama

It was actually President Trump who called Bush the worst president in history...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xHKbKu4wuLQ&t=79s

Bwuahaha!

 

[Mac77]

Are you Orly's sock?

Businesses hire because of business demands, NOT because of politics. Even Trump would tell you that.

No

Are you his jock strap?

Smart businessmen dont wait till its obvious to everyone

They succeed by staying ahead of the curve

But I wouldnt expect you to know that