11
   

These are the FACTS, do you contest them?

 
 
DrewDad
 
  2  
Reply Thu 13 Oct, 2016 08:02 am
@McGentrix,
McGentrix wrote:

2007, yep. That's what I said. At the beginning of his term.

Uh... that's two years before Obama's term. He was sworn in on January 20, 2009.

This does not engender any confidence that anything else you say is reasonable or fact-based.
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  3  
Reply Thu 13 Oct, 2016 08:34 am
@McGentrix,
McGentrix wrote:

Looks EXACTLY like a claim you made. Please go ahead and show evidence of this. We'd all like to see it.

As I said, it was an observation based on personal experience. The evidence, therefore, is my personal experience. Would you like me to go into detail about my personal experiences prior to 2010, or would a summary suffice?

McGentrix wrote:
I answered your question already.

Not really. You wrote:
earlier, McGentrix wrote:
He is responsible for making policies and regulations that stifle economic development. Companies have stopped growing as a result of Obamacare and started hiring part-time instead of full time workers. His "shovel ready" jobs program was an utter failure. These and other programs that Obama sponsored have hurt the American economy.

But those are just bare assertions, not backed up by any facts. And none of that answers the question that I actually posed, which was: what part of the labor participation rate is Obama's fault? Even you concede that it isn't 100% - your source, the St. Louis Federal Reserve Bank, said as much. So it must be some percentage smaller than 100%. So what is that percentage?

McGentrix wrote:
Your question is really just a bunch of bullshit, but I answered your intent anyways.

No, you didn't. But I'd be obliged if you stuck with the question itself rather than worrying about the intent.
McGentrix
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 13 Oct, 2016 08:50 am
@joefromchicago,
joefromchicago wrote:
So the question is: which part of this is Obama's fault?


The part where his administration has done nothing to improve the numbers.

joefromchicago wrote:
Is he responsible for workers aging faster?


No, that's a stupid question.

joefromchicago wrote:
Do you blame him for young adults going to college?


No, that is also a stupid question.

joefromchicago wrote:
And the decline has been going on since approximately 1965. So was Obama responsible for that as well?


No, that is a stupid question.

joefromchicago wrote:
That would be a neat trick, of course, given that he was a four-year-old in Kenya at the time, but I suppose anything is possible.


No that would not be possible and again, a stupid statement.

You still have failed to disprove a single fact. Do you have more stupid questions?
DrewDad
 
  3  
Reply Thu 13 Oct, 2016 08:56 am
@McGentrix,
The problem with these FACTS is that you're trying to imply that they are somehow the Obama administration's fault.

Let's take one fact you mention:

Quote:
* We have the lowest home ownership rate in 51 years.


Let's think about that for a moment. What kind of crisis did we have starting in 2007? A mortgage/housing crisis. A bunch of people lost their homes. Requirements for mortgages were tightened up. Housing sales dropped for several years, especially as we tried to climb out of a recession.

Should we be surprised that home ownership dropped? Probably not.

Is it Obama's fault? Definitely not.

Are you a dishonest shill? Definitely yes.


Now then... as for it being a FACT:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Home-ownership_in_the_United_States

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/de/Historic_U.S._Homeownership_Rate%2C_as_of_2014.svg/900px-Historic_U.S._Homeownership_Rate%2C_as_of_2014.svg.png

Home ownership rates have fluctuated by about 4-5%. Shall we panic? Or are rates just returning to their historic norms, now that mortgage lenders aren't handing out debt left and right?

Also, the decline actually started around 2005... Another case of Obama using his time machine to sabotage his own presidency.
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Thu 13 Oct, 2016 09:05 am
@DrewDad,
ugh, I'm sure I will come to regret this interaction, but...

Why is home ownership at the lowest rate in 51 years then? You're so smart, how is that after almost 8 years, nothing has been done to turn that around?

Your graph shows that it has been in a steady decline for the entirety of Obama's Presidency.

Do you consider that a positive thing for him? Do you deny the fact that we have the lowest home ownership rate in 51 years? Is that somehow untrue?

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/wqpajtzFR_vEEAPEwobvZU-aZoXhjc1jjkQp6WPwtYQ5b6HDRH1wHtbDSlpQY13gUW_MzOjw0ZSjbs6sH6eo0IIpOO84JICM7dwVGuXZysXX2VKYcnCHGCmdhzOipXPPHucx6_6E
joefromchicago
 
  2  
Reply Thu 13 Oct, 2016 09:10 am
@McGentrix,
McGentrix wrote:

joefromchicago wrote:
So the question is: which part of this is Obama's fault?

The part where his administration has done nothing to improve the numbers.

Laughing OK, I'll accept that Obama and his policies were responsible for between 1% and 99% of the current labor participation rate.

McGentrix wrote:
You still have failed to disprove a single fact. Do you have more stupid questions?

You seem to forget: I accepted all your stated facts as true. I have no interest in disproving any of them. My point here is that those facts are meaningless without any context. Your earnest, albeit ultimately unsuccessful, attempts to provide that context merely confirm that point. Thanks for playing along!
McGentrix
 
  0  
Reply Thu 13 Oct, 2016 09:15 am
@joefromchicago,
joefromchicago wrote:

You seem to forget: I accepted all your stated facts as true. I have no interest in disproving any of them. My point here is that those facts are meaningless without any context. Your earnest, albeit ultimately unsuccessful, attempts to provide that context merely confirm that point. Thanks for playing along!


Unsuccessful? nonsense. You're just incapable of answering questions without using the bullshit rhetorical device of diversion by answering questions with questions.

The facts and the context of the facts are quite obvious. Do we want more of the same failure that we have had for the last 8 years? I sure don't and that's what we are going to get with Hillary. So, if you are fine with a part time job and renting a home instead of owning one while you slave away trying to afford your mandated health insurance, please vote for Hillary.
0 Replies
 
maporsche
 
  4  
Reply Thu 13 Oct, 2016 09:24 am
I've got a couple facts

- Since 2010 Obama has broken records for the USA's GDP for 6 years running!! Greatest GDP ever, every year since.

- The stock market has been reaching record highs under Obama's term.
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  2  
Reply Thu 13 Oct, 2016 09:27 am
@McGentrix,
I would argue that the problem is not the decline starting in 2005, but the rise starting in 1995. It's a classic financial bubble, and it's completely unrelated to who is president.

http://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/publications/economic-letter/2006/november/the-rise-in-homeownership/

Quote:
As this Economic Letter suggests, some of the explanation likely stems from innovations in the mortgage market that resulted in greater access to credit, lower down payment requirements, and easy and low-cost access to the equity in a house, which makes homeownership more attractive.


http://prospect.org/article/whats-behind-sub-prime-disaster

Quote:
The mortgage business has long been a tug of war between a social commitment to broad homeownership and the schemes of private financial operators looking to make a quick buck. In the wake of the Great Depression, the U.S. government devised a strikingly effective system for bringing homeownership to the masses. Since the late 1970s, however, this system has been dismantled in the name of deregulation, causing a string of disastrous results.






People consider a house to be a magic investment, but it really isn't.

Home ownership is correlated to higher wealth, but which comes first? Or are they both a product of a person making good financial choices?
maporsche
 
  3  
Reply Thu 13 Oct, 2016 09:31 am
@DrewDad,
I owned 2 houses during the housing bubble and had lost well over $150,000 in those investments. It's made me EXTREMELY wary of buying another home, and I still haven't. Nothing Obama could have done would have made me want to own another home in the last 7 years.

Anecdotal for sure.
DrewDad
 
  2  
Reply Thu 13 Oct, 2016 09:35 am
@maporsche,
Commentary: Millennials are walking away from homeownership. And that's a good thing.

Quote:
In short: Millennials want to buy houses, but they simply can't afford to.

And unlike during the mid-2000s, there's no credit bubble to paper over their pathetic earnings so they can buy that humble bungalow or huge McMansion.

0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  2  
Reply Thu 13 Oct, 2016 09:39 am
@McGentrix,
McGentrix wrote:
Do you consider that a positive thing for him?

I don't think it's a positive or negative thing for Obama. He's had little to nothing to do with it.

Whether it's positive or negative for our country is another question....

McGentrix wrote:
Do you deny the fact that we have the lowest home ownership rate in 51 years? Is that somehow untrue?

The question I would ask you is, what is the relevance? What do you mean to say by quoting the statistic?

Do you want a discussion about housing and lending policies?

Do you want to sling mud, hoping some will stick to Obama?

Do you want to sling mud, hoping some will stick to Bush?

Something else???
0 Replies
 
InfraBlue
 
  2  
Reply Thu 13 Oct, 2016 10:28 am
@woiyo,
woiyo wrote:

So no one is disputing or contesting the facts, just whining that the facts exist./quote]

Actually, joefromchicago pointed out the FACT that two of McGentrix's points are opinions and four of his points are questions, making them non-points.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 13 Oct, 2016 10:47 am
@maporsche,
It's always about location, location, and location. Here in Silicon Valley, home buying is limited to the very wealthy. Our home, if it ever goes on sale, will be about $1.5 million, if not more. Cost of living is also very high in this area. We just had some plumbing work done in our guest bathroom, and it cost close to $3,000. I had some dental work done; closing the space between three teeth; $800.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Thu 13 Oct, 2016 03:03 pm
@McGentrix,
I believe the word you wanted was "tout." I have not noted any such campaign technique on her part. Are you alleging that that is a FACT?` Mr. Obama was not responsible for the subprime mortgage crisis, and he was not responsible for the rise of Islamic State--these are just examples of the Big Lie technique which the Republicans and other conservatives have been using in recent years. If you think Mrs. Clinton needs to appeal to some Obama legacy to get the black vote, you must know little about the Clintons and their decades long good relations with black Americans. Even without that, the loon on the Republican ticket has alienated enough people by his racism and his anti-muslim and anti-women rhetoric, that Mrs. Clinton doesn't need to appeal to some chimerical Obama legacy.
bobsal u1553115
 
  2  
Reply Fri 14 Oct, 2016 01:52 pm
@Krumple,
Quote:
sjw


Nice reference there, Mrs Hawkeye!

Social justice warrior - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"Social justice warrior" (commonly abbreviated SJW) is a pejorative term for an individual promoting socially progressive views; including feminism, civil rights, ...
[Search domain en.wikipedia.org] en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SJW
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Reply Fri 14 Oct, 2016 02:39 pm
@Setanta,
What amazes me in today's politics is the fact that Trump still gets support from Blacks, Muslims, Hispanics and minorities. This guy with a history of racial bigotry. I don't get it.
Frugal1
 
  -3  
Reply Fri 2 Dec, 2016 09:05 am
Trump won - deal with it.
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  2  
Reply Fri 2 Dec, 2016 01:55 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Maybe because you guys have cried wolf so much about every GOP candidate, that the villagers are not longer listening to cry's of wolf.
0 Replies
 
Frugal1
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 2 Dec, 2016 02:47 pm
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2016/12/02/what_make_america_great_again_means_to_an_insane_democrat_on_cnn
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 10/16/2019 at 04:06:40