Total nonfarm payroll employment increased by 304,000 in January

[Conservative]

Yep, never mind the actual 'budget' bills signed into law - the fictional 'budget' proposed is what should count.

so then the fictional Trump budget of 2019 that has actual department cuts should matter? How can Trump be held accountable for the deficit with no spending authority and are you willing to admit that this 2019 budget proposal actually addresses the deficit?

 

[Vern]

Very simple, the facts support me but facts get in the way of your partisanship and ignorance

Here is what you want to ignore

https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/368904-economists-agree-trump-not-obama-gets-credit-for-economy

Understand completely this is an opinion piece and of course none of the data in the piece matters, right?

So tell me Vern, is a part time job for economic reasons as good as a full time job and what affect do those part time jobs have on employment and unemployment numbers?

You know you got Con rattled when he resorts to "double spaced random blurt and in question format" posts. the only thing that would have made it better if he said "official treasury tables" or "shovel ready". Anyhoo Con, why do you think I should answer your questions?

 

[Conservative]

You know you got Con rattled when he resorts to "double spaced random blurt and in question format" posts. the only thing that would have made it better if he said "official treasury tables" or "shovel ready". Anyhoo Con, why do you think I should answer your questions?

Keep diverting from reality, Vern, and ignoring actual questions which I don't blame you for not answering because they destroy your narrative and prove exactly who you are, a partisan leftwing uninformed radical liberal who is incapable of admitting when wrong

 

[ttwtt78640]

so then the fictional Trump budget of 2019 that has actual department cuts should matter? How can Trump be held accountable for the deficit with no spending authority and are you willing to admit that this 2019 budget proposal actually addresses the deficit?

The same way any other POTUS can be held accountable - the deficit is simply assigned to them based on them being POTUS when it occurred. Trump had no difficulty demanding that $5.7B of additional deficit spending be added for the Great Wall Of Trump - he may now end up repurposing existing funding (declare a national emergency?) to git-r-done.

 

[noonereal]

Yes, couldn't agree more which is why I supported the 2019 Trump budget and continue to point out that the President has zero spending authority without Congress's approval yet is blamed for the deficits generated during his term. Trump actually cut his executive branch budget and has submitted actual department cuts for fiscal year 2019 but that budget hasn't been approved.

Seems to me under these economic conditions it is timely to allow people to keep more of what they earn, shift responsibilities back to the states due to record revenue generation at the state level and actually cut the federal spending! Not going to happen as bureaucrats want people dependent and will keep buying votes

OMG!

What else can one say.

You need to get the name Conservative off. You are an excuse maker not a conservative.

A fiscal conservative like myself makes no excuses for blowing up the deficit as Trump did.

He shut down the government over a useless wall but merrily signed to go into so much more debt?

and you make excesses calling yourself conservative?

maybe you just mean you are a social conservative. A homophobic. Isn't "conservative" the preferred label to "homophobic" in red hat land?

 

[Conservative]

The same way any other POTUS can be held accountable - the deficit is simply assigned to them based on them being POTUS when it occurred. Trump had no difficulty demanding that $5.7B of additional deficit spending be added for the Great Wall Of Trump - he may now end up repurposing existing funding (declare a national emergency?) to git-r-done.

Except for the very basic misunderstanding, the 2009 budget was passed by the Democratic Congress and signed by Obama in March 2009. 5.8 billion dollars is a drop in the budget and is more than covered in the Trump budget proposals with actual department cuts as well as projected savings from reductions in illegal immigration costs. I don't see 5.8 trillion as deficit spending when there are actual budget cuts to cover that cost including State Department budget cuts

 

[Vern]

Keep diverting from reality, Vern, and ignoring actual questions which I don't blame you for not answering because they destroy your narrative and prove exactly who you are, a partisan leftwing uninformed radical liberal who is incapable of admitting when wrong

I don't think me answering silly questions about your "editorial" would "destroy" anything. I do think you answering my questions would "destroy" your narratives. Why are you so afraid to explain why I should answer them?

 

[Conservative]

OMG!

What else can one say.

You need to get the name Conservative off. You are an excuse maker not a conservative.

A fiscal conservative like myself makes no excuses for blowing up the deficit as Trump did.

He shut down the government over a useless wall but merrily signed to go into so much more debt?

and you make excesses calling yourself conservative?

maybe you just mean you are a social conservative. A homophobic. Isn't "conservative" the preferred label to "homophobic" in red hat land?

A true conservative does research before spouting rhetoric thus you are no conservative as you have no idea what line items caused the 2018 fiscal year deficit so you jump on Trump. That is what radicals do so change your lean. It wasn't Trump that created the 2018 deficit and you ought to know that if you were a conservative, it was entitlement spending increases and rising interest rates causing debt service to increase. Revenue growth in 2018 also doesn't cause deficits but you are so anxious to blame Trump without data to support you, and that is typical liberalism

 

[Conservative]

I don't think me answering silly questions about your "editorial" would "destroy" anything. I do think you answering my questions would "destroy" your narratives. Why are you so afraid to explain why I should answer them?

"my" editorial? Amazing how the messenger is the issue with you and not the message. You always ignore the data in the message so without proving the data wrong or even addressing it shows nothing but partisan ignorance.

Always knew you wouldn't answer direct questions and explained why, the answer proves exactly who you are and you refuse to admit you have a problem with data and actual results

 

[Kushinator]

Were you saying that during the Obama years?

When we're we at full employment during the Obama administration? You're clearly not too good at this.

 

[pinqy]

Yes, used the Bureau of Labor Statistics News Release this time because of the govt. shutdown and the temporary unemployed numbers for the shutdown.

And not because, due to population adjustments, the household survey shows a drop in total employment? (-251,000)

 

[ttwtt78640]

Except for the very basic misunderstanding, the 2009 budget was passed by the Democratic Congress and signed by Obama in March 2009. 5.8 billion dollars is a drop in the budget and is more than covered in the Trump budget proposals with actual department cuts as well as projected savings from reductions in illegal immigration costs. I don't see 5.8 trillion as deficit spending when there are actual budget cuts to cover that cost including State Department budget cuts

You have some amazing double standards as to what you "see". You want us to look at "actual Treasury data" when you tout "Trump's" increased federal tax revenue yet want us to ignore that (actual spending data) and use "Trump 'budget' proposals" instead.

 

[noonereal]

A true conservative does research before spouting rhetoric thus you are no conservative as you have no idea what line items caused the 2018 fiscal year deficit so you jump on Trump. That is what radicals do so change your lean. It wasn't Trump that created the 2018 deficit and you ought to know that if you were a conservative, it was entitlement spending increases and rising interest rates causing debt service to increase. Revenue growth in 2018 also doesn't cause deficits but you are so anxious to blame Trump without data to support you, and that is typical liberalism

He signed it! He did not shut down government in protest. In fact, his policies, which he celebrated, are what blew it up.

He did not challenge entitlements. Not a peep.

Fair enough if he did not want to roll back entitlements , but he then did not look to raise taxes to pay for it!

conservative has to do one or the other.

Being a conservative does not mean we just cut taxes, it means we pay for what we use. However that is accomplished is fine. Tax increases or spending cuts. Obviously the ansewer to a conservative is to do both. Trump did neither.

Increase in the military? WTF?????? while lowering taxes. How about that one?

Sorry, your label is a sham. You are an excuse maker not a reasoned conservative.

 

[Conservative]

You know you got Con rattled when he resorts to "double spaced random blurt and in question format" posts. the only thing that would have made it better if he said "official treasury tables" or "shovel ready". Anyhoo Con, why do you think I should answer your questions?

Here is the perfect example of the problem you have and why you have zero credibility. the following are the spreadsheets for employment and part time employment for economic reasons. You see, Vern, those employment numbers listed in the first spreadsheet INCLUDE those from the second spreadsheet showing that when Obama increased employment it was done with part time jobs for economic reasons, Example

Recession beings 146 million employed of which 4.8 million were part time for economic reasons. Obama takes office and 142 million employed with 8 million part time for economic reasons. Stimulus passed and signed and in 2010, Employment was 138 million with 8.5 million part time for economic reasons. Let's see if you can now figure out why the Obama results are skewed giving the wrong impression of job creation

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: 2008 to 2018

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2008 146378 146156 146086 146132 145908 145737 145532 145203 145076 144802 144100 143369
2009 142152 141640 140707 140656 140248 140009 139901 139492 138818 138432 138659 138013
2010 138438 138581 138751 139297 139241 139141 139179 139438 139396 139119 139044 139301
2011 139250 139394 139639 139586 139624 139384 139524 139942 140183 140368 140826 140902
2012 141584 141858 142036 141899 142206 142391 142292 142291 143044 143431 143333 143330
2013 143292 143362 143316 143635 143882 143999 144264 144326 144418 143537 144479 144778
2014 145150 145134 145648 145667 145825 146247 146399 146530 146778 147427 147404 147615
2015 148150 148053 148122 148491 148802 148765 148815 149175 148853 149270 149506 150164
2016 150622 150934 151146 150963 151074 151104 151450 151766 151877 151949 152150 152276
2017 152128 152417 152958 153150 152920 153176 153456 153591 154399 153847 153945 154065
2018 154482 155213 155160 155216 155539 155592 155964 155604 156069 156582 156803 156945

Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey
Original Data Value

Series Id: LNS12032194
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Seas) Employment Level - Part-Time for Economic Reasons, All Industries
Labor force status: Employed
Type of data: Number in thousands
Age: 16 years and over
Hours at work: 1 to 34 hours
Reasons work not as scheduled: Economic reasons
Worker status/schedules: At work part time
Years: 2008 to 2018

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2008 4846 4902 4904 5220 5286 5540 5930 5851 6148 6690 7311 8029
2009 8046 8796 9145 8908 9113 9024 8891 9029 8847 8979 9114 9098
2010 8530 8936 9233 9178 8845 8577 8500 8800 9246 8837 8873 8935
2011 8470 8464 8645 8652 8576 8427 8281 8788 9166 8657 8447 8171
2012 8305 8238 7775 7913 8101 8072 8082 7974 8671 8203 8166 7943
2013 8151 8178 7722 7964 7937 8103 8099 7816 7764 7936 7718 7827
2014 7302 7304 7451 7516 7260 7425 7400 7169 7007 7031 6885 6817
2015 6820 6693 6653 6622 6643 6386 6234 6411 6025 5807 6159 6027
2016 5960 6021 6099 6027 6491 5751 5898 5977 5893 5955 5719 5554
2017 5776 5670 5500 5309 5268 5264 5236 5209 5148 4880 4851 4915
2018 4989 5160 5019 4985 4948 4743 4567 4379 4642 4621 4802

 

[noonereal]

You have some amazing double standards as to what you "see". You want us to look at "actual Treasury data" when you tout "Trump's" increased federal tax revenue yet want us to ignore that (actual spending data) and use "Trump 'budget' proposals" instead.

The guy is an excuse maker not a conservative

That is well established.

Somehow he fancies the title of others. What can you do,.

 

[Conservative]

He signed it! He did not shut down government in protest. In fact, his policies, which he celebrated, are what blew it up.

He did not challenge entitlements. Not a peep.

Fair enough if he did not want to roll back entitlements , but he then did not look to raise taxes to pay for it!

conservative has to do one or the other.

Being a conservative does not mean we just cut taxes, it means we pay for what we use. However that is accomplished is fine. Tax increases or spending cuts. Obviously the ansewer to a conservative is to do both. Trump did neither.

Increase in the military? WTF?????? while lowering taxes. How about that one?

Sorry, your label is a sham. You are an excuse maker not a reasoned conservative.

No, he didn't sign anything as nothing was put on his desk to sign. Are you this poorly informed like most liberals. Why don't you post Treasury data supporting your claims?? Got it, Treasury data doesn't!!!

 

[Conservative]

You have some amazing double standards as to what you "see". You want us to look at "actual Treasury data" when you tout "Trump's" increased federal tax revenue yet want us to ignore that (actual spending data) and use "Trump 'budget' proposals" instead.

I look at Treasury data with revenue and expenses, suggest you do the same thing but you won't. I used the Trump budget proposals as an example of a President who wants to do something about the deficit. You don't seem to grasp the difference between actual and budget

 

[Kushinator]

A true conservative does research before spouting rhetoric thus you are no conservative as you have no idea what line items caused the 2018 fiscal year deficit so you jump on Trump. That is what radicals do so change your lean. It wasn't Trump that created the 2018 deficit and you ought to know that if you were a conservative, it was entitlement spending increases and rising interest rates causing debt service to increase. Revenue growth in 2018 also doesn't cause deficits but you are so anxious to blame Trump without data to support you, and that is typical liberalism

Trump campaigned with the promise that the federal government wouldn't have another $400 billion deficit.

He also claimed he would cut taxes and balance the budget in 8 years. Now you want to make excuses for his failure to live up to said promises.

Typical Trump supporters fell for that line. Now they are compelled to make excuses.

 

[eohrnberger]

But we are still having a deficit issue, and a serious debt issue, which will smack us on side the head one day unless we reign it in.

I am happy about the jobs numbers though.

Agreed.

The least painful way to deal with the debt issue is to grow the economy, as we are now, and even greater economic growth, if possible.

Now consider the proposed massive social spending plans each with multi-trillion 10 year impact, each with probable reduction in economic growth (as has been witnessed in earlier years), and what does that set the stage for?
Federal government Bankruptcy.

The need to control and reduce (if possible) the social spending has never been greater, if we want to avoid the federal debt problem on the horizon, approaching quickly.

 

[Conservative]

And not because, due to population adjustments, the household survey shows a drop in total employment? (-251,000)

As stated, the January numbers are skewed by the shutdown which is why I used the bls release. February will be have data back in line

 

[ttwtt78640]

I look at Treasury data with revenue and expenses, suggest you do the same thing but you won't. I used the Trump budget proposals as an example of a President who wants to do something about the deficit. You don't seem to grasp the difference between actual and budget

Trump had absolutely no problem stating that he would not sign a 'budget' bill that denied funding for the Great Wall Of Trump - he made no such statement regarding increased deficit spending bills. You can't have it both ways - Trump either is, or is not, responsible for the 'budget' bills that he signs into law.

 

[noonereal]

No, he didn't sign anything as nothing was put on his desk to sign. Are you this poorly informed like most liberals. Why don't you post Treasury data supporting your claims?? Got it, Treasury data doesn't!!!

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/po...ax-cut-bill-first-big-legislative-win-n832141

and how about the rest of my post?

Conservative, what a joke.

 

[Conservative]

Trump campaigned with the promise that the federal government wouldn't have another $400 billion deficit.

He also claimed he would cut taxes and balance the budget in 8 years. Now you want to make excuses for his failure to live up to said promises.

Trump has very little to do with the 2018 budget deficit and you know it. It has been 2 years not 8 so will hold him accountable at the end of 8. In the meantime his budget proposals as well as actual results are ignored by you

 

[Conservative]

Do you live in outer space?

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/po...ax-cut-bill-first-big-legislative-win-n832141

and how about the rest of my post?

Conservative, what a joke.

I prefer Treasury data to news reports but then again liberals like you respond to what you want to believe

 

[Kushinator]

Yes, used the Bureau of Labor Statistics News Release this time because of the govt. shutdown and the temporary unemployed numbers for the shutdown.

Because they look better huh?

:lamo