Obama's job creation policies are working [W:865]

[Kane]

Re: Obama's job creation policies are working

Corp. media promotes their own myths about phony corp. candidates. Those creeps got Dubya and Reagan elected didn't they?

The idea that Reagan was EVER popular was a myth created by the media, in the first place.

Like Hillary was EVER qualified, look how much media time we wasted on her
NeoCon arse!

 

[Aberration]

Re: Obama's job creation policies are working

I would hope you mean even to the uber wealthy?

Hell yeah.

 

[Kane]

Re: Obama's job creation policies are working

It is pretty clear that powermad oligarchs and their minions seek
to control you 24-7. I wonder why a major newspaper editor had a picture of Reagan in his office when I visited him. Reagan was obviously a corrupt crook. Maybe he was hand picked to run the paper by the government. At any rate, the powermad oligarchs DO NOT want you to have any time to think and choose as an individual any original thought, at any time. They are only interested in mass conformity and subjugation. One newspaper got caught publishing a half-dozen fake letters to the editor in support of the Iraq war, a few years back. Stick to the independant blogosphere.

 

[Redress]

Re: Obama's job creation policies are working

:shrug: an unfalsifiable counterfactual. I will simply note that Since 1970, attempts at stimulus in industrialized nations that centered around government spending have been correlated with low growth, while those centered around tax cuts have seen high growth. Within the model, those attempts that focused on tax relief to businesses did the best.

We had an attempt at stimulus centered around massive government spending... and now we are seeing (just like all times previous) low growth. It would seem rather logical to conclude that we might study more successful stimulus attempts in years past to see what we could have done better.

That's a good point. This chart was made with assumptions of a stimulus package smaller than the one that actually passed.

Citing from your link:



According to PolitiFact, the CBO puts the cost at $814 Bn. If anything, given that the final Stimulus was larger, the effect should have been greater, and this chart undershoots what they would have predicted.

However, broadly speaking, this is still what the Keynesian effect of the Stimulus (if the assumptions they used were accurate) should have been. That they were not only inaccurate but extremely inaccurate demonstrates the failure of the hypothesis.

Nor was it all that terribly far off. Here is what the study claims to be projecting the effects of:



...that's pretty much what the Stimulus plan was supposed to do, all right.

:roll: but whatever. You have two basic MO's: denounce something as being written by a conservative, and claiming that anyone who disagrees with you is lying. You've gone the dishonesty route, now the only question is whether or not you'll double down on that, or switch back to arguing that if a conservative says it, it doesn't count.

Well that is interesting, you went from different spending and tax cuts have different effects to it is all about the size. You might be a hyper-partisan when you use different realities depending on what point you want to make.

 

[Redress]

Re: Obama's job creation policies are working

CP is correct. and you are wrong. This has been pointed out to you many times. The 8.0 number was what was used to sell the Stimulus. The graph was from the Obama Administation.

Further, we were told all about "shovel ready jobs". By Obama himself.

And we were sold the "Recovery Summer". What happenned wit dat ?

The truth is your archenemy. My condolences.

The grpah was from before Obama was even president, and for a different stimulus, and came with so many caveats it was silly. You quoted the link but clearly did not read it.

 

[iguanaman]

Re: Obama's job creation policies are working

This Just In: America is dying, and the "mainstream" news media is the one sticking in the poisoned dagger.'

Sorry, Charlie | The Smirking Chimp

Among the false reports by the Lamestream media to support the U.S. invasion (think Saddam/WMD)

1. Quaddafi used snipers on civillians
2. Quadaffi used jet strikes on civillians
3. Quadffi used viagra rapes on civillians

And this is a United States invasion. The token assistance from France and the UK is window dressing. Obama is using the NATO cover to deflect criticism of more war by making it appear as "international" as possible.

The most censorship by the Lamestream media on any particular subject in some time. All the liberal talk hosts hope to ignore the subject and then hope for a quick Obama victory. Then, they will all in unison boast a victory for the Party and defend this horrendous illegal invasion, saying "See - the Preznit made the right decision

This just in.......Quadaffi is still dead.....more to follow

 

[IndepCentristMA]

Re: Obama's job creation policies are working

That all depends on what chart or graph, and what data you chose to use, or chose to ignore...

The chart that shows the civilian participation in the workforce has consistently gone downward throughout the entire presidency of Obama... to points as low as the recession of 1980-1981...

As you can see... even at the time the recession ended in 2009, the civilian participation rate was still at about 65.5%... Then as the president's term continued... the percentage of people over 16 who are employed or actively looking for work dropped to 63.5% in a steady decline...

You can also see something else here worth noting... the size of the recession in the shaded areas... and it's obvious comparison to the one under Carter... Obama being a Carter protege', it's not all that surprising to see the same kind of stagnation appear with similar policies with Carter in place again...


Same data again, just charted for the last 5 years...

That illustrates the steady decline, despite briefs moments of addition that get celebrated... the trend is heavy decline...


Same data again, charted for the last 10 years...

Which illustrates that it wasn't the recession that caused it... workforce participation during the later Bush years, and the recession tended to be about the same, with a slight drop off... It's clearly the recoveryless recovery that we've had under Obama that has caused the massive decline in workforce participation... as the tend is continually dropping rapidly...

Okay..... It looks like point, game, set, match on this one... (or checkmate if you'd prefer)

No one can deny the obvious here... given the clear irrefutable evidence of Obama's negative affect on the job market...

Time to close the thread...

 

[iguanaman]

Re: Obama's job creation policies are working

Okay..... It looks like point, game, set, match on this one... (or checkmate if you'd prefer)

No one can deny the obvious here... given the clear irrefutable evidence of Obama's negative affect on the job market...

Time to close the thread...

I don't know.... things look pretty good here compared to the rest of the world. Our GDP is growing at more than twice the rate of Germany, the nearest competitor. Besides everyone knows it's crazy to change horses in the middle of a recovery. We might end up like Europe or worse if we rock the boat. Stick to the road we know, that's my motto. 4 MORE YEARS

 

[IndepCentristMA]

Re: Obama's job creation policies are working

I don't know.... things look pretty good here compared to the rest of the world. Our GDP is growing at more than twice the rate of Germany, the nearest competitor. Besides everyone knows it's crazy to change horses in the middle of a recovery. We might end up like Europe or worse if we rock the boat. Stick to the road we know, that's my motto. 4 MORE YEARS

Thread: Obama's job creation policies are working

Thought you might need a reminder of that... since none of your posts refer to the subject of this thread... (Hence why I suggested closing the thread before more useless distractions occur from trolls and flamers, like you...

Neither of these charts indicates that the US is doing better than the rest of the world at creating jobs in this current economic environment... in fact it consistently trails Australia, Canada, Netherlands, Norway, Switzerland, Austria, Hong Kong, Japan, Korea, Germany, etc...

http://www.bls.gov/fls/intl_unemployment_rates_monthly.htm

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2129.html

 

[cpwill]

Re: Obama's job creation policies are working

Neither of these charts indicates that the US is doing better than the rest of the world at creating jobs in this current economic environment... in fact it consistently trails Australia, Canada, Netherlands, Norway, Switzerland, Austria, Hong Kong, Japan, Korea, Germany, etc...

You know what strikes me about that list?

It seems to have significant overlap with this one:

2012 World Economic Freedom Index

 

[Gimmesometruth]

Re: Obama's job creation policies are working

That all depends on what chart or graph, and what data you chose to use, or chose to ignore...

The chart that shows the civilian participation in the workforce has consistently gone downward throughout the entire presidency of Obama... to points as low as the recession of 1980-1981...



As you can see... even at the time the recession ended in 2009, the civilian participation rate was still at about 65.5%... Then as the president's term continued... the percentage of people over 16 who are employed or actively looking for work dropped to 63.5% in a steady decline...

You can also see something else here worth noting... the size of the recession in the shaded areas... and it's obvious comparison to the one under Carter... Obama being a Carter protege', it's not all that surprising to see the same kind of stagnation appear with similar policies with Carter in place again...


Same data again, just charted for the last 5 years...



That illustrates the steady decline, despite briefs moments of addition that get celebrated... the trend is heavy decline...


Same data again, charted for the last 10 years...



Which illustrates that it wasn't the recession that caused it... workforce participation during the later Bush years, and the recession tended to be about the same, with a slight drop off... It's clearly the recoveryless recovery that we've had under Obama that has caused the massive decline in workforce participation... as the tend is continually dropping rapidly...

Wow, not only do you not understand the type of depression we are experiencing now (it is in no way comparable to the oil price shock of 78-81), you don't even understand the basic notion that unemployment is a lagging indicator, it is always slow to show in downturn and will remain when demand has dropped as we are now experiencing.

Hint: This is a credit market collapse, not an commodity price spike causing inflation.

Okay..... It looks like point, game, set, match on this one... (or checkmate if you'd prefer) No one can deny the obvious here... given the clear irrefutable evidence of Obama's negative affect on the job market...Time to close the thread...

:lamo

 

[Travis007]

Re: Obama's job creation policies are working

Funny all I remember on Bush's watch were terror attacks, real estate bubbles, a needless war, and huge deficits. If that is what you call a "great" economy you need to move to Mexico.

if this is what you call a good economy you need to take a class on economics..

 

[IndepCentristMA]

Re: Obama's job creation policies are working

Wow, not only do you not understand the type of depression we are experiencing now (it is in no way comparable to the oil price shock of 78-81), you don't even understand the basic notion that unemployment is a lagging indicator, it is always slow to show in downturn and will remain when demand has dropped as we are now experiencing.

Hint: This is a credit market collapse, not an commodity price spike causing inflation.

:lamo

It is quite hilarious, that this ridiculous tactic is repeated by the same kid who already failed when calling me a liar...

When did I ever say the cause of the economic slowdown was the same? I said the length or duration, and the persistent economic stagnation were about the same, because of the policies of the presidents at the time...

Again, you still can't refute the point I brough up, you just have to resort to failing at distracting the argument to something else, with the logical falacy setting up an argument I didn't make to then argue against... such an amature technique...

The high and lagging unemployment rate is 1 indicator, yes... but the biggest indicator of Obama's policies is still the drop off in the workforce participation rate... because under Obama, the extension of unemployment benefits has left many to feel no urgency to take the first offer that comes along... also, why try and find work, when you can do nothing and continue to collect... then you get stuck in the rut of saying "i was on unemployment for [however many months] and I couldn't find anything", so they give up... or just survive off food stamps, section 8, or some other form of assistance... Also, the excessive regulation, high fuel costs, and penalties to companies prevent hiring from occuring...

So yes, Obama's policies have a negative affect on the overall job market...

 

[IndepCentristMA]

Re: Obama's job creation policies are working

You know what strikes me about that list?

It seems to have significant overlap with this one:

2012 World Economic Freedom Index

Go figure... there's a correlation between economic freedom, and the ability to succeed in a bad economy? Wait until they find out about this at the White House, they'll be all for it!

 

[Gimmesometruth]

Re: Obama's job creation policies are working

It is quite hilarious, that this ridiculous tactic is repeated by the same kid who already failed when calling me a liar...

You did lie, and I'm much older and more experienced than you.

When did I ever say the cause of the economic slowdown was the same? I said the length or duration, and the persistent economic stagnation were about the same, because of the policies of the presidents at the time...

I said you are comparing apples to oranges, and the recovery times are not the same, the causes are not the same, the solutions are not the same. The idea that Carter "failed" and Obama is "failing" because they are of the same party is the most extreme partisan idiocy one could write.

Again, you still can't refute the point I brough up, you just have to resort to failing at distracting the argument to something else, with the logical falacy setting up an argument I didn't make to then argue against... such an amature technique...

Arguing that the "failures" are due to party affiliation is not something I have to refute.

The high and lagging unemployment rate is 1 indicator, yes... but the biggest indicator of Obama's policies is still the drop off in the workforce participation rate... because under Obama, the extension of unemployment benefits has left many to feel no urgency to take the first offer that comes along... also, why try and find work, when you can do nothing and continue to collect... then you get stuck in the rut of saying "i was on unemployment for [however many months] and I couldn't find anything", so they give up... or just survive off food stamps, section 8, or some other form of assistance... Also, the excessive regulation, high fuel costs, and penalties to companies prevent hiring from occuring...

So yes, Obama's policies have a negative affect on the overall job market...

This a silly argument, the idea of using the argument that unemployment benefits does have a very small negative effect upon some job seeking as being the MAIN reason for lowered participation has no standing. Over and over again it has been shown that the reason for lowered participation is due to people getting discouraged by NOT GETTING HIRED. There still are multiples of unemployed for every opening. That isn't due to UI. That is due to LOWERED DEMAND.

 

[IndepCentristMA]

Re: Obama's job creation policies are working

You did lie, and I'm much older and more experienced than you.

I didn't lie, and the fact that you still continue to argue this, when already proven wrong makes you really seem ignorant for lacking the mental capacity to grasp that... i simply quoted a small point you made, and then moved on to argue with the 2-3 posts which occured prior to your post... even quoting them within the text... but because I did the post quickly on break from work, and didn't go through the tedious process of block quoting all 3 of them into the same post, you falsely think it's "lying"... It's sad that you can't get that, really... (plus it was hilarious watching you throw a hissy-fit over it... truly it was)

I don't know or care about your age... but if your experience consists of getting throroughly thrashed as you have been so far, it really isn't serving you well...

I said you are comparing apples to oranges, and the recovery times are not the same, the causes are not the same, the solutions are not the same. The idea that Carter "failed" and Obama is "failing" because they are of the same party is the most extreme partisan idiocy one could write.

I'm not comparing apples, or any other fruit...

I'm displaying the clear drop in the workforce participation rate that's been occuring throughout most of Obama's presidency... which began after the recession had been recovered from...

So while Obama was going around parading small numbers of "job creation" and GDP growth... the workforce participation rate has been in a steady decline... because of his policies...

The change clearly came not with the recession... but right at the point where Obama signed ARRA (which included extensions to unemployment benefits), and made the auto-bailout... his policies...

Arguing that the "failures" are due to party affiliation is not something I have to refute.

LMFAO @ this insistence to continue to focus on the side distraction... that the stagnation under Obama and Carter were the same... then then falsely attributing yet another argument to me... that I said it had anything to do with political affiliation.... HAHAHAHAHA... are you really that out of ideas or arguments you can reach to?

I didn't say a thing about JFK, I admired much his presidency... I didn't say a thing about Clinton, who took a moderate approach with fiscal responsibility, passed welfare reform, and rode the positive economy from the technological advancements in PCs, internet technology, wireless technology, cellular technology, etc.

This is a direct corelation between Carter and Obama... because they've taken similar approaches... to similar results... (and since Obama is a Carter protege', having long admired him personally, and having studied at Columbia under Carter's National Security Advisor... )

You can quit advancing your fraudulent claims again and again, since you've been called on it each time...

But the argument that you can't refute, is that the huge decline in workforce participation rate has come as the result of Obama's policies... since it didn't occur in 2007, 2008, or 2009 until after Obama's policies went into place...

This a silly argument, the idea of using the argument that unemployment benefits does have a very small negative effect upon some job seeking as being the MAIN reason for lowered participation has no standing. Over and over again it has been shown that the reason for lowered participation is due to people getting discouraged by NOT GETTING HIRED. There still are multiples of unemployed for every opening. That isn't due to UI. That is due to LOWERED DEMAND.

I've gotten 4 jobs since 2009... in that very same time period we are discussing... and I have no degree, no marketable skills, and a criminal record... What that shows is if they couldn't find a job they were either looking too high for their market value and unwilling to settle for less... or that they just weren't looking hard enough at all...

Clearly the factors I outlined before contribute... Obama's policies specifically contribute to the lack of hiring... and the lower wages being offered...

 

[winston53660]

Re: Obama's job creation policies are working

I didn't lie, and the fact that you still continue to argue this,

Ya know you calling yourself a centrist IMHO is a lie:twocents:

 

[Gimmesometruth]

Re: Obama's job creation policies are working

I didn't lie, and the fact that you still continue to argue this, when already proven wrong makes you really seem ignorant for lacking the mental capacity to grasp that... i simply quoted a small point you made, and then moved on to argue with the 2-3 posts which occured prior to your post... even quoting them within the text... but because I did the post quickly on break from work, and didn't go through the tedious process of block quoting all 3 of them into the same post, you falsely think it's "lying"... It's sad that you can't get that, really... (plus it was hilarious watching you throw a hissy-fit over it... truly it was)

I don't know or care about your age... but if your experience consists of getting throroughly thrashed as you have been so far, it really isn't serving you well...

The argument ended here, If you want to carry it on there, let me know over there.

I'm not comparing apples, or any other fruit...I'm displaying the clear drop in the workforce participation rate that's been occuring throughout most of Obama's presidency... which began after the recession had been recovered from.So while Obama was going around parading small numbers of "job creation" and GDP growth... the workforce participation rate has been in a steady decline... because of his policies.The change clearly came not with the recession... but right at the point where Obama signed ARRA (which included extensions to unemployment benefits), and made the auto-bailout... his policies...

This called a correlation without causation: Obama enacted ARRA then participation lowered...but there is no there there. Your justification is that the levels of participation did not drop to the same levels under Bush in 01.But if you go back and look at your chart, we peaked in 99, Bush had nearly the same rate of decline as we are seeing in his first term. The decline started before the recession then as it did now. The signing of the ARRA did not change the level of participation 2000-05, I don't see how it caused the decline in 2008 since it was signed later.

LMFAO @ this insistence to continue to focus on the side distraction... that the stagnation under Obama and Carter were the same... then then falsely attributing yet another argument to me... that I said it had anything to do with political affiliation.... HAHAHAHAHA... are you really that out of ideas or arguments you can reach to? I didn't say a thing about JFK, I admired much his presidency... I didn't say a thing about Clinton, who took a moderate approach with fiscal responsibility, passed welfare reform, and rode the positive economy from the technological advancements in PCs, internet technology, wireless technology, cellular technology, etc. This is a direct corelation between Carter and Obama... because they've taken similar approaches... to similar results... (and since Obama is a Carter protege', having long admired him personally, and having studied at Columbia under Carter's National Security Advisor... )

Um, Carter had to deal with massive changes in oil prices, associated inflation...with price controls. We are in nearly an opposite condition, so how Obama has "taken a similar approach" is beyond me.

You can quit advancing your fraudulent claims again and again, since you've been called on it each time. But the argument that you can't refute, is that the huge decline in workforce participation rate has come as the result of Obama's policies... since it didn't occur in 2007, 2008, or 2009 until after Obama's policies went into place...

Again, I'll refer yo back to your chart, the declines occurred 2000 through 05, and from 2008 onward. This recession is much worse than 2001.

I've gotten 4 jobs since 2009... in that very same time period we are discussing... and I have no degree, no marketable skills, and a criminal record... What that shows is if they couldn't find a job they were either looking too high for their market value and unwilling to settle for less... or that they just weren't looking hard enough at all...

....or the fact that nearly 4 are unemployed for every job opening...on average.

Clearly the factors I outlined before contribute... Obama's policies specifically contribute to the lack of hiring... and the lower wages being offered...

Are you still clinging to the "Obama's UI caused participation declines"....even though declines started long ago?


Graph of US Civilian Labor Participation Rate from 1948 to 2011 by gender. Men are represented in light blue, women in pink, and the total in black.
File:US Labor Participation Rate 1948-2011 by gender.svg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Kane]

Re: Obama's job creation policies are working

This Just In: America is dying, and the "mainstream" news media is the one sticking in the poisoned dagger.'

Sorry, Charlie | The Smirking Chimp

Among the false reports by the Lamestream media to support the U.S. invasion (think Saddam/WMD)

1. Quaddafi used snipers on civillians
2. Quadaffi used jet strikes on civillians
3. Quadffi used viagra rapes on civillians

And this is a United States invasion. The token assistance from France and the UK is window dressing. Obama is using the NATO cover to deflect criticism of more war by making it appear as "international" as possible.

The most censorship by the Lamestream media on any particular subject in some time. All the liberal talk hosts hope to ignore the subject and then hope for a quick Obama victory. Then, they will all in unison boast a victory for the Party and defend this horrendous illegal invasion, saying "See - the Preznit made the right decision

This just in.......Quadaffi is still dead.....more to follow

Yeah, and asassinating a foreign head of state is a war crime under the U.N. Charter. Hillary Clinton knows that and still gave the order to kill Quadaffi anyway. That makes her and Preznit Obomber War Criminals. F**king NeoCon scumbags.:moon::thumbdown

 

[AdamT]

Re: Obama's job creation policies are working

Yeah, and asassinating a foreign head of state is a war crime under the U.N. Charter. Hillary Clinton knows that and still gave the order to kill Quadaffi anyway. That makes her and Preznit Obomber War Criminals. F**king NeoCon scumbags.:moon::thumbdown

Hillary gave the order to kill Gaddafi?! :lol:

 

[OpportunityCost]

Re: Obama's job creation policies are working

Once again, if all that participation drop is retirees, whose getting their jobs? That would mean tremendous job opportunities...except it doesn't.
Now, I'm expecting someone from the left side of the fence to argue, "But companies found they could function without those employees". That doesn't argue for a strong job market then, does it?

 

[Kane]

Re: Obama's job creation policies are working

Hillary gave the order to kill Gaddafi?! :lol:

Yeah or the WH i forget who. The story from the lamestream went like this ...

Quadaffi travelled in a huge motorcade because he had made a deal to surrender, and the motorcade being deliberately large and obvious to the American military. The order was instead given to the DoD to bomb him, as a double cross. Then, when captured only injured, the American military gave the order to the mercs to shoot him.

On top of that, the U.S. completely bombed Libya back to the stone age, destroyed the infrastructure, and slaughtered 10's of thousands of people.

 

[mertex]

Re: Obama's job creation policies are working

Hell yeah.

.........Figures!

 

[American]

Re: Obama's job creation policies are working

No, it's not $260,000 per job. To reach that number, you have to make the wrong assumption that 100% of the stimulus was spent on job creation when much of it was spent on infrastructure and investment; you also have to pretend that a big chunk of the stimulus was money spent and not tax cuts.

Investment? What the hell does that mean?

 

[cpwill]

Re: Obama's job creation policies are working

Investment? What the hell does that mean?

well.... my personal favorite was the study on Robot Bees.