Unemployement Drops: Legitimate or Not? (1 Viewer)

[zimmer]

Just mentioning the Mid Terms send Libs into spasms...... the like to pretend that the Mid Terms ddint happen, and that Obama is an athlete..Obama has game like Kobe

LOL...
He's got game... really bad game.
4 years of his misery isn't enough for lads like Powerob.
They want more... they love his positive message for the country.
They want him to VOLT the nation.

 

[zimmer]

All talk, no proof. On top of admittedly being proud of ignoring proof. This is getting old.

What was that ad?
This is your brain on drugs?

Now there is proof... if you Bogart that doobie as a teenager it has long term effects.
4 years of misery just isn't enough.

 

[Travis007]

On the contrary, what you and your friends do not like is having your opponent take your own logic and use it against you. Clearly, you and them were never schooled in rhetoric. This is a standard first year debate tactic. Take your opponent's logic to the conclusion to show it is entirely absurd.

And you knew full well I was discussing the auto industry. Blatantly lying about what I said doesn't help your already very low credibility.

Oh My...

I see other obvious things..

 

[Conservative]

Did Obvious Child say "we have standards here"?
Obvious Child?
There might be standards, but nothing so low as the lying, deceiving, putting words in other mouths standard that is Obvious Child's.

The ignore functions works great in this forum, suggest you use it for I have found that OC is a waste of time and a legend in its own mind.

 

[Conservative]

You ignore, cut & paste... ignore, cut & paste. Look at you praying that the numbers had negatives in front of them ala the Bush years. Bush isn't in the election this year much to your chagrin I'm sure.

Bush isn't on the ballot, those numbers are today, refute them and then you will have some credibility. Those are numbers Bush never had

 

[TheGirlNextDoor]

Moderator's Warning:

This thread is a mess. Everyone needs to make a conscious effort to debate the topic andknock off with the personal flaming and baiting. Thanks.

 

[Travis007]

It's not my fault you don't have any debate skills. The concept of utilizing your opponent's logic against them is a standard first year tactic. There's nothing special about it. It is merely that you were never taught it. That is in no way my fault. Stop blaming me for your shortcomings. Furthermore, needling people who have a tendency to get angry, such as you generally causes them to slip up. It again is not my fault that you get angry. I just happen to see an opportunity. This is essentially judo. I take your traits, anger and hatred and use them against you. It's not my fault you have those traits and as a good debater, I'd be foolish not to use them.



FYI, you did melt down twice and got suspended twice over it. Please create your own meltdown thread. Preferably in the basement.

changed since TGND put up her post.. : )

 

[TurtleDude]

Your debate sklils are non existant.. your arrogance though is not logical..much like Obama amazingly..

You might want to edit that response given TGND's warning posted at the same time

just saying...............

 

[Fisher]

Your brother may not have been "willing to work those jobs in lieu of the welfare by another name", but Americans as a whole have been. Your brother is just on data point.

Even if he has been unwilling "to work those jobs in lieu of the welfare by another name" that certainly doesn't mean that other Americans have been as reluctant as he has.

You assume a lot of things such as there was a job available for which he qualified or or that he has not tried to find a job or that he is receiving an extended unemployment check. Extended unemployment is welfare by another name. I do not see how one could argue otherwise. You exhaust your benefits but keep on drawing money to which you are not entitled by virtue of your contributions.

Back to the original point though, that people are willing to take part-time jobs instead of continuing to receive extended unemployment is a sign that things are improving because we will create a lot more part-time jobs than full-time jobs at first because two 20 hour a week employees are cheaper to carry than 1 40 hour per week employee at the moment. I am happy with baby-steps.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

Seasonal I am heartened to see that people are now willing to work those jobs in lieu of the welfare by another name check.

You assume a lot of things such as there was a job available for which he qualified or or that he has not tried to find a job or that he is receiving an extended unemployment check.

I did not assume those things about him.
You appeared to be saying those things about him.
I am saying that Americans aren't like that as a nation.

Back to the original point though, that people are willing to take part-time jobs instead of continuing to receive extended unemployment is a sign that things are improving because we will create a lot more part-time jobs than full-time jobs at first because two 20 hour a week employees are cheaper to carry than 1 40 hour per week employee at the moment.

I am saying this does not indicate any change in conditions. People have been willing to take those sorts of jobs for years now. It's not new.

 

[TheGirlNextDoor]

Moderator's Warning:

zimmer is now thread banned from this topic. Any further transgressions by others will be met with the same consequence and possible infraction points. Consider this a last warning.

 

[Fisher]

I am saying this does not indicate any change in conditions. People have been willing to take those sorts of jobs for years now. It's not new.

In my area the availability of even part-time jobs would be a positive change of conditions. On any given day, the help wanted ads might total 5-6 with about half being garbage listings for a local paper with a circulation around 80K. On Sundays, it might jump up to 20 on a good week, but again most of which require very specific degrees/experience. Our local economy was destroyed by NAFTA/GATT long before this great recession hit.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

In my area the availability of even part-time jobs would be a positive change of conditions. On any given day, the help wanted ads might total 5-6 with about half being garbage listings for a local paper with a circulation around 80K. On Sundays, it might jump up to 20 on a good week, but again most of which require very specific degrees/experience. Our local economy was destroyed by NAFTA/GATT long before this great recession hit.

Sorry to hear that.
The data suggest that these really are tough times in a true historical sense.

 

[tererun]

They do when you have leadership.

Wrong. The wars we had going on do not just end because we get a new president. the money we borrowed to fight those wars does not just get forgiven because we got a new president. The recession and economic bubble bursting at the end of bush's term doesn't just go away. There is no one we could have elected that would have made those problems dissapear, but Obama has gotten us out of one of those wars, and has put our economy back into improving within 4 years.

Your idea that the problems we have magically will go away if we do not have obama is just plain fantasy. We will have a deficit next year even under Romney. We will still have unemployment above 7 percent when Romney takes office and for months after. We will still owe all that money we owed before if we elect romney. We will sti,ll have a war in afganistan if we elect Romney. We will still have iran going for nuclear weaponsif we elect romney. We will still have unrest in the middle east if we elect romney. We will still have illegal immigrants in the US if we elect romney. We will still have crime if we elect romney. e will still have a broken health care system if we elect romney. Romney seems to think if we elect him everything will magically get better, and this is why he has made no plans to improve things. All we have to do is take the magic pill and vote for him and things get better in fantasy land. Too ad this is reality and voting for romney won't solve anything. You actually have to do something romney has never had to do in his entire life, and that is work hard to fix the problem and make sacrifices.

Reagan provided leadership and brought us out of a worse recession than this one in two years. Obama has had four years and has failed. He showed that failure on Wednesday night and with all the results Romney stated. Results matter except to Obama supporters who always buy what the teleprompter tells them.

You mean the reagan recession that lasted until clinton? That was still going on when Bush Sr. was president. Take from a person old enough to live through it.

Romney may not have a magic wand but Obama has failed and doesn't deserve four more years. If Romney doesn't deliver he too will be a one term President. How anyone can vote for Obama with the results generated is beyond comprehension. What makes you think the next four years under Obama will be any better than the last four? What has he offered that you believe will generate better results?

Yes, Romney has promised to change everything the day he takes office. unfortunately that is not possible, and I am not going to vote for him in hopes that faith can overcome reality. There may be better ways that obama which cdould improve things faster than he has, but it certainly is not to pray and wish for recovery like Romney thinks will work. Save that fantasy for church because the rest of us have work to do.

 

[tererun]

His name is Obama. He's in way over his head. Time for him to go. The guy thought he'd spend a trillion dollars and the economy would come roaring back. On to healthcare he thought.

You do forget, that money did bring the economy back within one term. I did not think he could do it, but in less than 3 years he pulled us out of what many call the worst recession/depression since before ww2. Of course, we know the only time mittens governed anmyplace it was resistant to the growth that effected the rest of the country.

 

[Conservative]

tererun;1060997076]Wrong. The wars we had going on do not just end because we get a new president. the money we borrowed to fight those wars does not just get forgiven because we got a new president. The recession and economic bubble bursting at the end of bush's term doesn't just go away. There is no one we could have elected that would have made those problems dissapear, but Obama has gotten us out of one of those wars, and has put our economy back into improving within 4 years.

That simply isn't true at all, deficits are yearly and debt is cumulative. The only thing Obama inherited was the debt service on the 10.6 trillion dollar debt he inherited. Obama trillion dollar deficits each year added to that debt. To claim differently shows you poorly informed. What you also ignore is that the Defense budget funds our troops and the Defense Department so some of the cost of the wars were in the budgeted amount.

You call the economy improving? Looks to me like declining growth isn't an improvement at all

Your idea that the problems we have magically will go away if we do not have obama is just plain fantasy. We will have a deficit next year even under Romney. We will still have unemployment above 7 percent when Romney takes office and for months after. We will still owe all that money we owed before if we elect romney. We will sti,ll have a war in afganistan if we elect Romney. We will still have iran going for nuclear weaponsif we elect romney. We will still have unrest in the middle east if we elect romney. We will still have illegal immigrants in the US if we elect romney. We will still have crime if we elect romney. e will still have a broken health care system if we elect romney. Romney seems to think if we elect him everything will magically get better, and this is why he has made no plans to improve things. All we have to do is take the magic pill and vote for him and things get better in fantasy land. Too ad this is reality and voting for romney won't solve anything. You actually have to do something romney has never had to do in his entire life, and that is work hard to fix the problem and make sacrifices.

I have posted the data behind that Unemployment rate and 22.7 million Americans unemployed/under employed/discouraged workers after adding 5.4 trillion to the debt doesn't show an improvement at all. You really are a true partisan who Obama loves using and then will move on to someone else when he is done using you.

It takes leadership and no leader divides people but rather unites people. Obama doesn't understand the concept nor do you

You mean the reagan recession that lasted until clinton? That was still going on when Bush Sr. was president. Take from a person old enough to live through it.

That statements shows why you cannot be taken seriously. You obviousl have no concept of a recession. Reagan economy created 16 million new jobs and that isn't a recession. You show how easily you can be brainwashed

Yes, Romney has promised to change everything the day he takes office. unfortunately that is not possible, and I am not going to vote for him in hopes that faith can overcome reality. There may be better ways that obama which cdould improve things faster than he has, but it certainly is not to pray and wish for recovery like Romney thinks will work. Save that fantasy for church because the rest of us have work to do.

Your opinion noted but you voted for Obama because of his rhetoric ignoring his record and lack of experience. Now you would vote for four more years of the same economic policies that generated the results you want to ignore. You have shown that you have no understanding of resumes or even a record. Obama loves having people like you supporting him

 

[Sheik Yerbuti]

The largest one month jump in total employment in the last 29 years. And it just happens to occur 4 weeks before a tightly contested presidential election.

Either Obama is incredibly lucky or some numbers got fudged. (either option is a possibility.....)

You're leaving out the option that you (or where ever you got your info from) are simply wrong about this being the biggest jump in 29 years.

January, 2003 ... 991,000

http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12000000?output_view=net_1mth

I guess those civil servants who "cooked the books" for Obama did the same for Bush too, huh?

 

[The Barbarian]

Ah Sir, burrying your head in the sand is not an effective way to argue. Perhaps an analogy would help. For example, let's say you have a really bad case of the flu. When you first start getting sick you may have a 100 degree temperature, but it's on its way to a life-threatening 104 degrees. But you persevere, and with appropriate treatment the fever breaks and starts falling. On its way down it once again passes through 100 degrees. Yes, 100 degrees = 100 degrees, but on the way down it is a hopeful sign and you feel relieved even if you aren't yet fully well.

That's what's going on here. When Obama took over the reins the economy was in freefall. Four years later it is recovering.

Perhaps sir you should have followed the entire back and forth..... what started the entire thing was this line she posted ..

It is terrible news for Romney because in the final month of the campaigning Obama has great employment news.

I simply said that it wasn't a great number ... and that we were just back where we started from. I "NEVER" said things weren't improving or even debated that. In fact in one post I even pointed out that I wasn't referring to trends .... simply stating a fact .. that Unemployment was at 7.8% when Obama took over ... and this latest "decrease" in unemployment has gotten it down to what it was when he took over .. 7.8%

So I'll ask you the same question, is the new unemployment rate of 7.8% the same number as when Obama took office .. yes or no ??

 

[AdamT]

Perhaps sir you should have followed the entire back and forth..... what started the entire thing was this line she posted ..

It is terrible news for Romney because in the final month of the campaigning Obama has great employment news.

I simply said that it wasn't a great number ... and that we were just back where we started from. I "NEVER" said things weren't improving or even debated that. In fact in one post I even pointed out that I wasn't referring to trends .... simply stating a fact .. that Unemployment was at 7.8% when Obama took over ... and this latest "decrease" in unemployment has gotten it down to what it was when he took over .. 7.8%

So I'll ask you the same question, is the new unemployment rate of 7.8% the same number as when Obama took office .. yes or no ??

Asked and answered. I think we can all agree that P = P, that being the logical definition of a tautology.

 

[BCR]

Of course the numbers are legitimate. The BLS doesn't dabble in politics, and it's ridiculous to think otherwise. The numbers were good too. The work forced increased coupled with an increase in full-time workers. However, if congress remains flat footed, the economy will stagnate, and unemployment will remain idle or even rise again.

 

[j-mac]

On the contrary, what you and your friends do not like is having your opponent take your own logic and use it against you. Clearly, you and them were never schooled in rhetoric. This is a standard first year debate tactic. Take your opponent's logic to the conclusion to show it is entirely absurd.

And you knew full well I was discussing the auto industry. Blatantly lying about what I said doesn't help your already very low credibility.

Hmmmm....I was being funny....Guess you need the obligatory smilies to highlight that. Not every thing has to be contentious does it?