Obama: A year to Election Day, numbers good and bad

[pbrauer]

Me in South Korea 1964:

 

[Conservative]

Celebrating, and working to recall Gov. Scott Walker in Wisconsin.

Looks like the people of Oregon have a lot of work to do in Wisconsin and the more economic results appear the less likelihood of the people of Oregon getting their way

Poll: Democrats’ recall effort against Scott Walker looking mighty weak « Hot Air

 

[Donc]

First, I agree. Context is everything and the more context the better. He uses absolutely zero context. Also, he often uses numbers that need to be put in ratio form or that need to be accumulated or discounted to match. For instance, unemployment numbers are put into ratios because population and the number of workers grows every year and GDP grows regardless of actual growth due to inflation.

Second, that's awesome about the tutoring and research projects. I have never tutored but I am doing my first research project on the use of binomial distributions to calculate option prices on derivatives - it's boring as **** lol. I must also rephrase my opening statement from the previous post: clearly I am not majoring in all of those subjects (I am not Doogie Howser). I am a math major, but I have taken upper level courses in stats, probability, finance, and risk calculations (risk calculations are horrible and making me consider a career change!). But honestly, I know he's a right-wing hack, but I'd rather argue with a right-wing hack who can produce valid numbers and actually provide a challenge rather than someone whose only goal seems to be trolling and annoying everyone with a basic misunderstanding of numbers.

That’s why I contend that he must have a random numbers hotkey.

 

[Conservative]

That’s why I contend that he must have a random numbers hotkey.

So tell me, do you think percentage change is going to influence anyone's vote? Or do real numbers affecting real people affect votes? Let's see if this means anything to you

Bush took office with a 5.7 trillion dollar debt and left it at 10.6 trillion dollars or a 85% increase in the debt
Obama takes office with that 10.6 trillion debt that is now 14.9 trillion which is 40% increase in the debt

Liberals claim that is better performance because the percentage change is lower.

Ok, let's try it this way

Bush added 4.9 trillion in 8 years or 600 billion a year or 51 billion per month

Obama has added 4.3 trillion in 3 years which is 1.4 trillion dollars per year or 119 billion per month

Which President has the higher percentage increase in monthly debt, Bush or Obama?

Does percentage change really matter?

 

[rocket88]

Making an appearance for political purposes? Love the liberal hypocrisy as if liberals care about our service people. Here is who our service people respect

Uh huh. Bush never did anything for political purposes. :roll:

I'm sure that once they got back home and had to deal with the VA in '05 or '06, they were all saying how awesome Bush was :lamo

 

[rocket88]

Looks like the people of Oregon have a lot of work to do in Wisconsin and the more economic results appear the less likelihood of the people of Oregon getting their way

Poll: Democrats’ recall effort against Scott Walker looking mighty weak « Hot Air

I'm sure they do. I know some people in Wisconsin who voted for Walker.

Why is it that when Republicans win it's " a sign of a great electoral sweep coming up" but when Democrats win, it's a fluke?

 

[Donc]

So tell me, do you think percentage change is going to influence anyone's vote? Or do real numbers affecting real people affect votes? Let's see if this means anything to you

Bush took office with a 5.7 trillion dollar debt and left it at 10.6 trillion dollars or a 85% increase in the debt
Obama takes office with that 10.6 trillion debt that is now 14.9 trillion which is 40% increase in the debt

Liberals claim that is better performance because the percentage change is lower.

Ok, let's try it this way

Bush added 4.9 trillion in 8 years or 600 billion a year or 51 billion per month

Obama has added 4.3 trillion in 3 years which is 1.4 trillion dollars per year or 119 billion per month

Which President has the higher percentage increase in monthly debt, Bush or Obama?

Does percentage change really matter?

Do you plan on taking whysoserious up on his kind offer of tutoring you in the proper way of interpreting numbers? are you going to continue slapping random number from your hotkey?:2wave:

 

[Conservative]

Uh huh. Bush never did anything for political purposes. :roll:

I'm sure that once they got back home and had to deal with the VA in '05 or '06, they were all saying how awesome Bush was :lamo

Here we are three years after Bush left office and you along with other liberas simply cannot get over your BDS. what purpose does that serve? Bush in the liberal world was the devil but what does that have to do with the problems we have today and the Obama results generated. He was in that Congress that helped create the results he says he inherited that we so bad. How could the "smartest" man ever to hold the Presidency not know what was going on?

 

[Conservative]

Do you plan on taking whysoserious up on his kind offer of tutoring you in the proper way of interpreting numbers? are you going to continue slapping random number from your hotkey?:2wave:

Won't be taking why up on his offer as actual numbers mean something to real people not percentage change. As I showed you Bush had a lower monthly deficit than Obama and Bush had a lower yearly deficit than Obama yet that doesn't matter to liberals because the yearly deficit was a higher percentage increase during the Bush 8 years than Obama's three. Give Obama another four years and see what happens but then that won't matter either.

 

[Conservative]

I'm sure they do. I know some people in Wisconsin who voted for Walker.

Why is it that when Republicans win it's " a sign of a great electoral sweep coming up" but when Democrats win, it's a fluke?

What did the Democrats win? Was there a "D" or "R" after the referendum item on the ballot in Ohio? Are any union members Republican? In Va it was Democrat vs. Republican but of course that doesn't matter to you just like the 2010 elections didn't matter either?

 

[winston53660]

Won't be taking why up on his offer as actual numbers mean something to real people not percentage change. As I showed you Bush had a lower monthly deficit than Obama and Bush had a lower yearly deficit than Obama yet that doesn't matter to liberals because the yearly deficit was a higher percentage increase during the Bush 8 years than Obama's three. Give Obama another four years and see what happens but then that won't matter either.

FDR had lower deficit numbers too.

But then again he started out with 4.7 billion in debt and ended with roughly 270 billion in debt.

 

[Conservative]

FDR had lower deficit numbers too.

But then again he started out with 4.7 billion in debt and ended with roughly 270 billion in debt.

Is FDR going to be on the ballot in 2012?

 

[rocket88]

Here we are three years after Bush left office and you along with other liberas simply cannot get over your BDS. what purpose does that serve? Bush in the liberal world was the devil but what does that have to do with the problems we have today and the Obama results generated. He was in that Congress that helped create the results he says he inherited that we so bad. How could the "smartest" man ever to hold the Presidency not know what was going on?

a) You're the one who brought up Bush by posting a picture of him

b) I didn't blame him for anything, just said that he was a politician. Which he was.

Read first. Do you just see the name "Bush" and copy and paste your previous rants? YOU put up a picture of him talking about scoring political points. I pointed out that he was also quite fond of the political photo op. That's it. Next time read what I said.

 

[winston53660]

Is FDR going to be on the ballot in 2012?

No

Are you going to dodge points made 9 out of ten times?

Yes

 

[Donc]

Won't be taking why up on his offer as actual numbers mean something to real people not percentage change.

Why not take him up on it? Just might add some credibility to some of your lame ass post.:2wave:

 

[Conservative]

a) You're the one who brought up Bush by posting a picture of him

b) I didn't blame him for anything, just said that he was a politician. Which he was.

Read first. Do you just see the name "Bush" and copy and paste your previous rants? YOU put up a picture of him talking about scoring political points. I pointed out that he was also quite fond of the political photo op. That's it. Next time read what I said.

Bush was one of the worst politicians in the history of the country by definition. You have no idea how many visits he made to families of fallen troops and families affected by tragedies or his visit to returning troops from Iraq where the media was prevented from taking pictures. Yes, that is an example of a politician.

 

[Far right dem]

a) You're the one who brought up Bush by posting a picture of him

b) I didn't blame him for anything, just said that he was a politician. Which he was.

Read first. Do you just see the name "Bush" and copy and paste your previous rants? YOU put up a picture of him talking about scoring political points. I pointed out that he was also quite fond of the political photo op. That's it. Next time read what I said.

He is good at copy and pasting. In before he pastes his "results"

 

[Conservative]

Why not take him up on it? Just might add some credibility to some of your lame ass post.:2wave:

because percentage change means nothing to me but they do to liberals because with percentage change there are no faces to the numbers. Easy for a liberal to have so little compassion for percentage change but when you put a human face on those numbers liberals will ignore it as that makes them uncomfortable.

 

[pbrauer]

Here we are three years after Bush left office and you along with other liberas simply cannot get over your BDS. what purpose does that serve? Bush in the liberal world was the devil but what does that have to do with the problems we have today and the Obama results generated. He was in that Congress that helped create the results he says he inherited that we so bad. How could the "smartest" man ever to hold the Presidency not know what was going on?

Deal with this con:

And what about those facts? To be clear, no single issue was the cause. Our economy is a complex and intricate system. What caused the crisis? Look:

●Fed Chair Alan Greenspan dropped rates to 1 percent — levels not seen for half a century — and kept them there for an unprecedentedly long period. This caused a spiral in anything priced in dollars (i.e., oil, gold) or credit (i.e., housing) or liquidity driven (i.e., stocks).

●Low rates meant asset managers could no longer get decent yields from municipal bonds or Treasurys. Instead, they turned to high-yield mortgage-backed securities. Nearly all of them failed to do adequate due diligence before buying them, did not understand these instruments or the risk involved. They violated one of the most important rules of investing: Know what you own.

●Fund managers made this error because they relied on the credit ratings agencies — Moody’s, S&P and Fitch. They had placed an AAA rating on these junk securities, claiming they were as safe as U.S. Treasurys.

4 Derivatives had become a uniquely unregulated financial instrument. They are exempt from all oversight, counter-party disclosure, exchange listing requirements, state insurance supervision and, most important, reserve requirements. This allowed AIG to write $3 trillion in derivatives while reserving precisely zero dollars against future claims.

5 The Securities and Exchange Commission changed the leverage rules for just five Wall Street banks in 2004. The “Bear Stearns exemption” replaced the 1977 net capitalization rule’s 12-to-1 leverage limit. In its place, it allowed unlimited leverage for Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Merrill Lynch, Lehman Brothers and Bear Stearns. These banks ramped leverage to 20-, 30-, even 40-to-1. Extreme leverage leaves very little room for error.

6Wall Street’s compensation system was skewed toward short-term performance. It gives traders lots of upside and none of the downside. This creates incentives to take excessive risks.

7 The demand for higher-yielding paper led Wall Street to begin bundling mortgages. The highest yielding were subprime mortgages. This market was dominated by non-bank originators exempt from most regulations. The Fed could have supervised them, but Greenspan did not.

8 These mortgage originators’ lend-to-sell-to-securitizers model had them holding mortgages for a very short period. This allowed them to get creative with underwriting standards, abdicating traditional lending metrics such as income, credit rating, debt-service history and loan-to-value.

9 “Innovative” mortgage products were developed to reach more subprime borrowers. These include 2/28 adjustable-rate mortgages, interest-only loans, piggy-bank mortgages (simultaneous underlying mortgage and home-equity lines) and the notorious negative amortization loans (borrower’s indebtedness goes up each month). These mortgages defaulted in vastly disproportionate numbers to traditional 30-year fixed mortgages.

●To keep up with these newfangled originators, traditional banks developed automated underwriting systems. The software was gamed by employees paid on loan volume, not quality.

●Glass-Steagall legislation, which kept Wall Street and Main Street banks walled off from each other, was repealed in 1998. This allowed FDIC-insured banks, whose deposits were guaranteed by the government, to engage in highly risky business. It also allowed the banks to bulk up, becoming bigger, more complex and unwieldy.

●Many states had anti-predatory lending laws on their books (along with lower defaults and foreclosure rates). In 2004, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency federally preempted state laws regulating mortgage credit and national banks. Following this change, national lenders sold increasingly risky loan products in those states. Shortly after, their default and foreclosure rates skyrocketed.

What caused the financial crisis? The Big Lie goes viral - The Washington Post​

 

[randel]

Making an appearance for political purposes? Love the liberal hypocrisy as if liberals care about our service people. Here is who our service people respect

hmmmm...i suppose conservatives are the only ones who care about our service people, right?:roll:

 

[Conservative]

Deal with this con:

And what about those facts? To be clear, no single issue was the cause. Our economy is a complex and intricate system. What caused the crisis? Look:

●Fed Chair Alan Greenspan dropped rates to 1 percent — levels not seen for half a century — and kept them there for an unprecedentedly long period. This caused a spiral in anything priced in dollars (i.e., oil, gold) or credit (i.e., housing) or liquidity driven (i.e., stocks).

●Low rates meant asset managers could no longer get decent yields from municipal bonds or Treasurys. Instead, they turned to high-yield mortgage-backed securities. Nearly all of them failed to do adequate due diligence before buying them, did not understand these instruments or the risk involved. They violated one of the most important rules of investing: Know what you own.

●Fund managers made this error because they relied on the credit ratings agencies — Moody’s, S&P and Fitch. They had placed an AAA rating on these junk securities, claiming they were as safe as U.S. Treasurys.

4 Derivatives had become a uniquely unregulated financial instrument. They are exempt from all oversight, counter-party disclosure, exchange listing requirements, state insurance supervision and, most important, reserve requirements. This allowed AIG to write $3 trillion in derivatives while reserving precisely zero dollars against future claims.

5 The Securities and Exchange Commission changed the leverage rules for just five Wall Street banks in 2004. The “Bear Stearns exemption” replaced the 1977 net capitalization rule’s 12-to-1 leverage limit. In its place, it allowed unlimited leverage for Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Merrill Lynch, Lehman Brothers and Bear Stearns. These banks ramped leverage to 20-, 30-, even 40-to-1. Extreme leverage leaves very little room for error.

6Wall Street’s compensation system was skewed toward short-term performance. It gives traders lots of upside and none of the downside. This creates incentives to take excessive risks.

7 The demand for higher-yielding paper led Wall Street to begin bundling mortgages. The highest yielding were subprime mortgages. This market was dominated by non-bank originators exempt from most regulations. The Fed could have supervised them, but Greenspan did not.

8 These mortgage originators’ lend-to-sell-to-securitizers model had them holding mortgages for a very short period. This allowed them to get creative with underwriting standards, abdicating traditional lending metrics such as income, credit rating, debt-service history and loan-to-value.

9 “Innovative” mortgage products were developed to reach more subprime borrowers. These include 2/28 adjustable-rate mortgages, interest-only loans, piggy-bank mortgages (simultaneous underlying mortgage and home-equity lines) and the notorious negative amortization loans (borrower’s indebtedness goes up each month). These mortgages defaulted in vastly disproportionate numbers to traditional 30-year fixed mortgages.

●To keep up with these newfangled originators, traditional banks developed automated underwriting systems. The software was gamed by employees paid on loan volume, not quality.

●Glass-Steagall legislation, which kept Wall Street and Main Street banks walled off from each other, was repealed in 1998. This allowed FDIC-insured banks, whose deposits were guaranteed by the government, to engage in highly risky business. It also allowed the banks to bulk up, becoming bigger, more complex and unwieldy.

●Many states had anti-predatory lending laws on their books (along with lower defaults and foreclosure rates). In 2004, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency federally preempted state laws regulating mortgage credit and national banks. Following this change, national lenders sold increasingly risky loan products in those states. Shortly after, their default and foreclosure rates skyrocketed.

What caused the financial crisis? The Big Lie goes viral - The Washington Post​

Deal with this Pete, none of what you posted has any relevance today to these numbers. When are you going to hold Obama to the same standards as any Republican

25 million unemployed or under employed Americans in 2011(bls.gov)154.1 X 16.2% Top Picks (Most Requested Statistics) : U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
14.8 million unemployed PLUS Discouraged workers Top Picks (Most Requested Statistics) : U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
2.2 million fewer jobs(bls.gov) Top Picks (Most Requested Statistics) : U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
4.3 trillion added to the debt in less than 3 years(U.S. Treasury Site) Government - Historical Debt Outstanding – Annual
rating(S&P)
Rising Misery index 7.83 to 12.97 (The United States Misery Index By Year)
38-44% JAR and well over 50-55% disapproval ratings(Gallup)
US Poverty Hits Record High: 1 in 6 Americans Living Below Poverty Line | Economy Watch
“Fast and Furious”, “Wide Receiver”
Solyndra, Fisker, and Crony Capitalism Jobs Panel Member Whose Solar Firm Won Loan Guarantees Raises 'Conflict Of Interest' Concerns | Fox News
Videos | Solyndra

Solyndra solar power company shuts down 15 months after Obama visit

The Tonopah Solar company in Harry Reid's Nevada is getting a $737 million loan from Obama's DOE.
The project will produce a 110 megawatt power system and employ 45 permanent workers.
That's costing us just $16 million per job.

One of the investment partners in this endeavor is Pacific Corporate Group (PCG).
The PCG executive director is Ron Pelosi who is the brother of Nancy's husband.
But there is nothing wrong here, is there?

U.S. Bridges, Roads Being Built by Chinese Firms | Video - ABC News

Stimulus failure
Review & Outlook:Why the Stimulus Failed - WSJ.com

 

[Donc]

because percentage change means nothing to me but they do to liberals because with percentage change there are no faces to the numbers.

Hhmm…I detect a problem here, maybe you feel some tribulation about asking whysoserious for help with your ciphering.

Perhaps we could prevail upon the Cap to clear some of the mud out of your eyes, after all he, unlike you, did manage to add 2+2 and came up with the correct answer.

 

[Sheik Yerbuti]

Won't be taking why up on his offer as actual numbers mean something to real people not percentage change. As I showed you Bush had a lower monthly deficit than Obama and Bush had a lower yearly deficit than Obama yet that doesn't matter to liberals because the yearly deficit was a higher percentage increase during the Bush 8 years than Obama's three. Give Obama another four years and see what happens but then that won't matter either.

Of course Bush had a lower monthly deficit than Obama. Forget inflation, which is a small factor, When Bush took over, the public debt was falling and the total debt growth was close to eradicated. By the time Obama took over, debt growth was a staggering $1.4 trillion a year. Compare that annual $1.4 trillion growth in total debt that Bush handed Obama with the $21 billion Clinton handed Bush and right there's your explanation for why Bush had a lower monthly deficit than Obama.

 

[Conservative]

Of course Bush had a lower monthly deficit than Obama. Forget inflation, which is a small factor, When Bush took over, the public debt was falling and the total debt growth was close to eradicated. By the time Obama took over, debt growth was a staggering $1.4 trillion a year. Compare that annual $1.4 trillion growth in total debt that Bush handed Obama with the $21 billion Clinton handed Bush and right there's your explanation for why Bush had a lower monthly deficit than Obama.

25 million unemployed or under employed Americans in 2011(bls.gov)154.1 X 16.2% Top Picks (Most Requested Statistics) : U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
14.8 million unemployed PLUS Discouraged workers Top Picks (Most Requested Statistics) : U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
2.2 million fewer jobs(bls.gov) Top Picks (Most Requested Statistics) : U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
4.3 trillion added to the debt in less than 3 years(U.S. Treasury Site) Government - Historical Debt Outstanding – Annual
rating(S&P)
Rising Misery index 7.83 to 12.97 (The United States Misery Index By Year)
38-44% JAR and well over 50-55% disapproval ratings(Gallup)
US Poverty Hits Record High: 1 in 6 Americans Living Below Poverty Line | Economy Watch
“Fast and Furious”, “Wide Receiver”
Solyndra, Fisker, and Crony Capitalism Jobs Panel Member Whose Solar Firm Won Loan Guarantees Raises 'Conflict Of Interest' Concerns | Fox News
Videos | Solyndra

Solyndra solar power company shuts down 15 months after Obama visit

The Tonopah Solar company in Harry Reid's Nevada is getting a $737 million loan from Obama's DOE.
The project will produce a 110 megawatt power system and employ 45 permanent workers.
That's costing us just $16 million per job.

One of the investment partners in this endeavor is Pacific Corporate Group (PCG).
The PCG executive director is Ron Pelosi who is the brother of Nancy's husband.
But there is nothing wrong here, is there?

U.S. Bridges, Roads Being Built by Chinese Firms | Video - ABC News

Stimulus failure
Review & Outlook:Why the Stimulus Failed - WSJ.com

 

[pbrauer]

Deal with this Pete, none of what you posted has any relevance today to these numbers. When are you going to hold Obama to the same standards as any Republican

25 million unemployed or under employed Americans in 2011(bls.gov)154.1 X 16.2% Top Picks (Most Requested Statistics) : U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
14.8 million unemployed PLUS Discouraged workers Top Picks (Most Requested Statistics) : U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
2.2 million fewer jobs(bls.gov) Top Picks (Most Requested Statistics) : U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
4.3 trillion added to the debt in less than 3 years(U.S. Treasury Site) Government - Historical Debt Outstanding – Annual
rating(S&P)
Rising Misery index 7.83 to 12.97 (The United States Misery Index By Year)
38-44% JAR and well over 50-55% disapproval ratings(Gallup)
US Poverty Hits Record High: 1 in 6 Americans Living Below Poverty Line | Economy Watch
“Fast and Furious”, “Wide Receiver”
Solyndra, Fisker, and Crony Capitalism Jobs Panel Member Whose Solar Firm Won Loan Guarantees Raises 'Conflict Of Interest' Concerns | Fox News
Videos | Solyndra

Solyndra solar power company shuts down 15 months after Obama visit

The Tonopah Solar company in Harry Reid's Nevada is getting a $737 million loan from Obama's DOE.
The project will produce a 110 megawatt power system and employ 45 permanent workers.
That's costing us just $16 million per job.

One of the investment partners in this endeavor is Pacific Corporate Group (PCG).
The PCG executive director is Ron Pelosi who is the brother of Nancy's husband.
But there is nothing wrong here, is there?

U.S. Bridges, Roads Being Built by Chinese Firms | Video - ABC News

Stimulus failure
Review & Outlook:Why the Stimulus Failed - WSJ.com

25 million unemployed or under employed Americans in 2011(bls.gov)154.1 X 16.2% Top Picks (Most Requested Statistics) : U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
14.8 million unemployed PLUS Discouraged workers Top Picks (Most Requested Statistics) : U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
2.2 million fewer jobs(bls.gov) Top Picks (Most Requested Statistics) : U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
4.3 trillion added to the debt in less than 3 years(U.S. Treasury Site) Government - Historical Debt Outstanding – Annual
rating(S&P)
Rising Misery index 7.83 to 12.97 (The United States Misery Index By Year)
38-44% JAR and well over 50-55% disapproval ratings(Gallup)
US Poverty Hits Record High: 1 in 6 Americans Living Below Poverty Line | Economy Watch
“Fast and Furious”, “Wide Receiver”
Solyndra, Fisker, and Crony Capitalism Jobs Panel Member Whose Solar Firm Won Loan Guarantees Raises 'Conflict Of Interest' Concerns | Fox News
Videos | Solyndra

Solyndra solar power company shuts down 15 months after Obama visit

The Tonopah Solar company in Harry Reid's Nevada is getting a $737 million loan from Obama's DOE.
The project will produce a 110 megawatt power system and employ 45 permanent workers.
That's costing us just $16 million per job.

One of the investment partners in this endeavor is Pacific Corporate Group (PCG).
The PCG executive director is Ron Pelosi who is the brother of Nancy's husband.
But there is nothing wrong here, is there?

U.S. Bridges, Roads Being Built by Chinese Firms | Video - ABC News

Stimulus failure
Review & Outlook:Why the Stimulus Failed - WSJ.com

Is that all you've got, Con?
:lamo :lamo :lamo