Where is the US economy headed?

@revelette,

You havent been keeping up with the facts, have you?
According to the BLS, unemployment was at 7.8% in Jan of 2009, when Obama was sworn in.
It has been as high as 10.10%, and is now 8.3%

http://www.miseryindex.us/urbymonth.asp

So please explain how that equates to "Under Obama, the jobs situation and economy has slowly picked up,"?

There are more people out of work now then there ever were during the Bush admin.

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

How has Obama added jobs?
There are more people out of work now than there ever were under Bush.

The only way you can say he added any jobs is if you start with the 10% unemployment that it was in Sept of 2009.
If you look at actual numbers, more people are out of work now than there were when he was sworn in.
There is no way you can honestly claim he has added jobs.

1 Reply

@mysteryman,

I guess you never heard of the auto bailouts that saved over one million jobs.
Additionally, the increase in jobs after the job destruction by GW Bush after Obama took over the white house in 2009 is proof positive that Obama had some responsibility for adding jobs in this country.

You are a very ignorant poster on a2k, and will put you on Ignore.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

"Saving" jobs is not creating jobs.
I dont know how you are defining he "saved" jobs, but I will accept whatever criteria you are using.

But that does not show how the has added jobs when the unemployment is still higher then it was when he was sworn in.

IMHO,if he has "added" jobs, the unemployment would be lower than it was when he was sworn in.

2 Replies

@mysteryman,

MM --- CI has put you on Ignore. How will you sleep at night?

0 Replies

@mysteryman,

mysteryman wrote:

"... when he was sworn in."

In my mind it was disingenuous for the Repubs to declare that, at the moment Obama was sworn in, he instantly became responsible for the slumping U.S. economy that had begun a year or two earlier, and for the cost of the two wars we were entered into.
I found a pretty cool US Treasury graph, which I can probably get posted.
Individual income tax receipts: 2007: 1200Bn; 2009: 800Bn; 2011: 1100Bn.
Payroll taxes: 2007: 800Bn; 2009: 900Bn; 2011: 800Bn.

2 Replies

@realjohnboy,

I'd agree, but with the modification that it is disingenuous for anyone to make that claim (Republican, Democrat, Green, Independent or otherwise).

0 Replies

@realjohnboy,

realjohnboy wrote:

In my mind it was disingenuous for the Repubs to declare that, at the moment Obama was sworn in, he instantly became responsible for the slumping U.S. economy that had begun a year or two earlier, and for the cost of the two wars we were entered into.

Politicians of every stripe are quick to claim credit for good things that happen on their watch - even if they had nothing to do with them (for example Obama's bragging about a seven year high in domestic oil production - a result of decisions made about eight years ago). They are equally quick to point out that all the bad stuff was the fault of their predecessors of the other party. I don't think there is much basis to prefer either Democrats or republicans on this point. However, Obama has shown himself to be a particularly artful master of vaguery and deception in his many claims and promises.

2 Replies

@georgeob1,

That's putting it mildly George.

0 Replies

@georgeob1,

It's funny that you would mention this, because "all" of the GOP candidates are blaming Obama for the current high gas prices, and that one said he can bring it down to $2.50/gallon. The pundits who happens to understand energy production and prices seem to disagree with $2.50/gallon gas.

Obama did take office when unemployment rates were increasing, and reversed that trend after he took office. Obama also saved the US auto industry that "saved" over one million jobs. Saving over one million jobs also meant the saving of other jobs from the workers ability to earn income and spend at their local businesses. It also increased tax revenues for all levels of government.

On top of all that, I'm sure if any GOP became president in 2008, and our economy improved as it did under Obama, they would be bragging too!

Tell us it isn't so!

2 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

I cannot believe the enrollment in the applied sciences at my Unis. Im helping set up a new core faculty since the geology and geo engineering schools had been settling on programs like "museum studies" and environmental. I am seriosly not ever gonna go back to teaching again except for a seminar course or a lab course .
The newest oil exploration boom that Obama has been working so hard to "kill" (according to GOPers) seems to be growing despite all of Obamas efforts.

(irony button engaged)

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

Obama did take office when unemployment rates were increasing, and reversed that trend after he took office. Obama also saved the US auto industry that "saved" over one million jobs. Saving over one million jobs also meant the saving of other jobs from the workers ability to earn income and spend at their local businesses. It also increased tax revenues for all levels of government.

Do you really believe he "saved the auto industry"???? He clearly saved the UAW's pension and health care programs (at the expense of GM's bondholders) but the fact is that Ford and Chrysler were doing fine without the ministrations of the sainted one. GM could have gone through bankrupcy without missing a beat - just as have Continental, Delta and now American airlines. The government intervention was merely an effort to bail out the labor union that contributed so much to GM's failure and which are a reliable source of funding for the Democrat party.

You are quick to criticize others for their credulity and stupidity, but this one takes the cake. Did you enjoy the Kool Aid?

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

Quote:

Do you really believe he "saved the auto industry"???? He clearly saved the UAW's pension and health care programs (at the expense of GM's bondholders)

You keep repeating that tripe george and it still isn't true. Without the government stepping in, the bond holders would have received less because there was NO ONE with the cash to buy assets.

1 Reply

I am so sick of the right and their smug get a job attitude. It is the right that created the stagnation. The right is to blame for the fact that for 80% of the work force (I first published this info here as the "bottom four quintiles" and some rightie totally misunderstood the statement) real wages have remained the same since 1979.

What they don't realize is that most of us have two jobs already. They are poorly paid jobs. I work two, one of which gives me the title Professor and my income fluctuates between the top of the last (bottom) quintile and the lowest rungs of the fourth quintile. It fluctuates because I may not be able to secure a full teaching load and my wine shop job pays the minimum wage for MA.

Here is a piece by Crystal Zevon, widow of Warren (if you don't know who he was, you probably aren't interesting enough to talk to) that Michael Moore ran in place of his column. Crystal makes everything clear.

http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/mike-friends-blog/bail-out-america

1 Reply

@parados,

Georgeob seems to believe that saving jobs and pension plans are a bad thing. I must live in another universe where jobs and pensions are good.

1 Reply

@plainoldme,

A Professor moonlighting in a wine shop?? Whatever will they think of next?

Or it a shop assistant moonlighting as a Professor?

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

Georgeob seems to believe that saving jobs and pension plans are a bad thing. I must live in another universe where jobs and pensions are good.

The last strike by the UAW against GM occurred in 1994 when GM proposed to spend about $3 billion to modernize and automate two large assembly plants in Flint Michigan to raise productivity and improve quality, enabling them to better compete with similar Toyota plants in Kentucky. The modernization would reduce employment in the plants by about 30%, but would ensure the competitive status of the plants and the remaining jobs. To prevent this action, the UAW went on strike just at the start of the new model year, and a couple of months later GM gave up. Two years later the plants were closed forever, wiping out all the jobs there (but enabling Michael Moore to claim his moment of fame).

In nature an intelligent parasite doesn't kill its host.

1 Reply

@mysteryman,

mysteryman wrote:

I would think that if the economy added that many jobs, there would be an increase is tax revenues to the govt.

Why hasnt there been?

Your question implies a factual claim that you provide no evidence for. On what evidence, if any, are you claiming that there has been no increase in tax revenues?

0 Replies

@georgeob1,

It's up to the management of the company to ensure the survival of their company. If the company goes broke, it means management did not do their jobs properly. Demands by labor must be balanced against the interest of the company. These are simple concepts that many CEO's and officers of companies fail to understand.

It's the same with government; they have failed to control spending, and have increased their deficit while cutting back on services. They have failed their responsibilities also.

In all cases, it's called fiduciary responsibilities.

2 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

It's up to the management of the company to ensure the survival of their company

Even if that means laying people off or closing plants?

1 Reply

Where is the US economy headed?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know