Forum Settings
       
« Previous 1 2
Reply To Thread

Where's the work?Follow

#1 Jan 08 2010 at 11:12 AM Rating: Sub-Default
Quote:
LEADING DEMS ATTACKED BUSH WHEN MILLIONS OF JOBS WERE BEING CREATED …

In 2003, Over 87,000 Jobs Were Created. (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, www.bls.gov, Accessed 1/6/10)

But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) Criticized 2003 Job Creation As “Far From Enough.” “The slight increase in jobs last month is wonderful news for 57,000 Americans. But the 2.1 million Americans who have been actively looking for work for more than two years … know that it is far from enough …” (Rep. Nancy Pelosi, “Pelosi: ‘Slight Jobs Increase Far From Enough -- We Must Do More to Create Jobs and Growth,’” Press Release, 10/3/03)


Obamas first year;

Quote:
More than 85,000 Americans lost their jobs in the month of December, meaning more than 2.8 million Americans have lost their jobs since the stimulus passed, and the national unemployment rate remains at 10 percent.


Quote:
In 2004, Over 2 Million Jobs Were Created. (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, www.bls.gov, Accessed 1/6/10)

But In 2004, Sen. **** Durbin (D-IL) Claimed Bush “Created A Climate … Where The Number of Jobs Is Not Growing.” “This President has created a climate in this country where the number of jobs is not growing. It did not have to be that way.” (Sen. **** Durbin, Congressional Record, 10/08/04, p. S10764)


Quote:
In 2006, Over 2.1 Million Jobs Were Created. (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, www.bls.gov, Accessed 1/6/10)

But Pelosi Claimed Bush Policies “Favored The Privileged Few At The Expense Of America’s Working Families.” (Rep. Nancy Pelosi, “Democrats Will Restore the Economic Security of America’s Working Families,” Press Release, 9/22/06)


Quote:
By 2007, 5.7 Million Jobs Had Been Created Under Bush. (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, www.bls.gov, Accessed 1/6/10)
But Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) Claimed Bush Had “Shameful History Of Losing American Jobs.” (Sen. Harry Reid, “Reid: As Unemployment Reaches Two-year High, American Jobs Are The Latest Casualty Of Bush’s Failed Economic Policies,” Press Release, 1/4/08)



Where's all the Democrats blasting Obama for not doing enough to help the economy?

http://www.gop.com/index.php/briefing/comments/the_democrats_job_standard/



Edited, Jan 8th 2010 12:19pm by publiusvarus
#2 Jan 08 2010 at 11:17 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,240 posts
Looks better than the Spanish unemployment rate.
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#3 Jan 08 2010 at 11:18 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
publiusvarus wrote:
Where's the work?
Why work?
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#4REDACTED, Posted: Jan 08 2010 at 11:20 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Timey,
#5REDACTED, Posted: Jan 08 2010 at 11:21 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Elinda,
#6 Jan 08 2010 at 11:21 AM Rating: Decent
***
1,416 posts
Bias opinions are biased..
#7 Jan 08 2010 at 11:24 AM Rating: Good
*****
15,952 posts
Oh gee, there are less jobs being created AFTER billions of money per nation around the world went poof! along with massive international banks and financial institutions? When banks have locked down on lending to one another? The humiliation!

Say it wasn't easier to hire workers while illusory money was still flooding the world's markets, into private pockets, credit cards, share protfolios, supperannuation and trust funds!

God, why do I even bother?

Edited, Jan 8th 2010 12:31pm by Aripyanfar
#8 Jan 08 2010 at 11:24 AM Rating: Good
My husband has a stimulus job.

Thank you, have a nice day.
#9 Jan 08 2010 at 11:27 AM Rating: Default
sixg,

Did you even look at the stats and statements by Demcorat leaders? Is your head shoved so far up your *** that you refuse to look at the stats?

Do you really want to talk about deficits? After one year Obama has more than doubled the deficit for any single year in the history of the republic.

Do you even give a sh*t that your Democrat leaders ran down the economy from the moment they took control of congress solely for the political purpose of having a Democrat president elected?

Of course not. You've been so brainwashed that all the stats and figures in the world don't mean sh*t if they show you exactly what the Democrats are about.

#10REDACTED, Posted: Jan 08 2010 at 11:31 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Aripya,
#11 Jan 08 2010 at 11:38 AM Rating: Good
@#%^
*****
15,953 posts
Quote:
Where's the work?


Good question. You should ask your boss.
____________________________
"I have lost my way
But I hear a tale
About a heaven in Alberta
Where they've got all hell for a basement"

#12 Jan 08 2010 at 11:42 AM Rating: Decent
***
1,416 posts
Quote:

Did you even look at the stats and statements by Demcorat leaders? Is your head shoved so far up your *** that you refuse to look at the stats?

Hmmm.. I believe in looking at all relevant factors. What good is creating 1 million jobs if the economy is unable to sustain them. I mean.. people might actually end up losing jobs later on down the line...

Quote:
Do you really want to talk about deficits? After one year Obama has more than doubled the deficit for any single year in the history of the republic.

Don't tell me that you honestly believe it has been entirely the fault of the dems and there was no ripple effect caused by the gop? ****, I'm new here. Scatch that.

Quote:
Do you even give a sh*t that your Democrat leaders ran down the economy from the moment they took control of congress solely for the political purpose of having a Democrat president elected?

Citation pls, and preferably one with credibility. Even if this was the case, I would call this a necessary evil.

Quote:
Of course not. You've been so brainwashed that all the stats and figures in the world don't mean sh*t if they show you exactly what the Democrats are about.

I know exactly what they are all about just like I know what the gop is about. I'm more of a centrist than anything else for this very reason!
#13 Jan 08 2010 at 11:42 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Quote:
Where's all the Democrats blasting Obama for not doing enough to help the economy?

It'd be even more embarrassing if the Democrats had been crowing for eight years about how Obama has created the bestest economy in America evah, huh? And then it completely collapsed? Yeah, they'd look pretty dumb then.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#14 Jan 08 2010 at 12:13 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,240 posts
#15 Jan 08 2010 at 12:25 PM Rating: Good
Prodigal Son
******
20,643 posts
You're comparing Bush's third year in office to Obama's first year in office with an economy that had already collapsed?

Hey look! I can find statistics that show how many jobs Bush lost in four years!
Quote:
The nation's economy has nearly 79,000 fewer private-sector jobs than when President George W. Bush took office.

During the last full month before Bush took office in January 2001, the unemployment rate was 3.9 percent. In March 2005, the official U.S. unemployment rate was 5.2 percent—representing 7.7 million unemployed workers. The manufacturing sector has lost nearly 3 million manufacturing jobs since January 2001.


http://money.cnn.com/2004/01/19/news/economy/election_sotu/index.htm
Quote:
When it comes to jobs, however, Bush will have to perform a careful dance, with 2.4 million jobs lost since Febuary 2001, a month after he took office.


____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#16REDACTED, Posted: Jan 08 2010 at 12:33 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Joph,
#17REDACTED, Posted: Jan 08 2010 at 12:36 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Debo,
#18 Jan 08 2010 at 12:49 PM Rating: Good
*****
15,952 posts
publiusvarus wrote:
Aripya,

Yet you didn't mind blaming the state of the economy on W those last 3yrs every single chance you got.

I know throw your hands up in frustration. Blame W. Blame everything except the man who's supposed to be in charge and the Democrat congress.

All Democrats know how to do is f*ck up the economy and blame it on someone else.


Actually, I blame the Global Finacial Crisis firmly on the private tertiary finacial system and the ratings agencies. I don't see how any government of whatever stripe could have foreseen the need to regulate what baroque idiocies the private money market companies were getting up to.

I don't blame W, I don't blame the democratic congress, and I don't blame my right wing government that was in power at the time in Australia either. The only government worldwide that was partially at fault was the idiotic behaviour of the Icelandic government, which dabbled in things it didn't ken.

Secondly, the ghastly (in size) stimulous package that was added to American debt was also a product of the GFC. No matter what side controlled congress or the Executive, after the GFC happened, massive additions to USA debt were unavoidable, one way or the other, stimulous package or not.

No matter what parties were/are in power after the GFC happened, for most countries a massive increase of national debt was unavoidable, either by Governments providing stimulus, or by lack of front-loaded stimulus leading to massive reductions in tax base and concomitant massive increases in structural revenue expenditure.

lastly, I may as well say this here. In Australia, the political party that wins power in our "congress" (parliament) also automatically wins the "Presidency" and "Secretaries of State" at the same time, because our Prime Minister and the other cabinet ministers are elected as part of the general parliamentory vote. There's certainly one thing to say for this system. It's efficient in that the Lower house and the executive have the same aims and policies for the life of the government. And this interminable, idiotic, senseless blame-shifting and dead-locking between the USA congress and Presidency just isn't possible here.

Edited, Jan 8th 2010 2:07pm by Aripyanfar
#19 Jan 08 2010 at 12:54 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
publiusvarus wrote:
So shouldn't these same Democrats be crowing about how the economy has only gotten worse under Obama

Well... no. That's just stupid.

Quote:
And now all the Dems and media can talk about is how the economy is getting better.

You and I obviously get our news from different places.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#20 Jan 08 2010 at 1:28 PM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
publiusvarus wrote:
Elinda,

Quote:
Why work?


Why not?
There are no jobs.

A separate but similar question:

I was reading a story about furniture manufacturing. Many jobs went to China. A Chinese woman working in one of a bazillion factories in a South China industrial town was making $0.70/hr. Worked long hours and only got two days off a month. But she considered herself fortunate to have the job. She had come from Sichuan Province where her family was subsistence farming - and struggled to provide.

A guy, one of many, that was laid-off from a Broyhill plant in North Carolina when his job went east, had been with the company for years and was making just over $15.00/hr.

Whats more right? Keeping the jobs at home and paying more for stuff, or sending them overseas and paying less for stuff.



____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#21REDACTED, Posted: Jan 08 2010 at 1:56 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Elinda,
#22 Jan 08 2010 at 2:00 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
You're not going to get workers in the U.S. to work for $.70/hour. Unless, of course, you provide food and housing for them on top of that wage.

Oh, and medical care.

____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#23 Jan 08 2010 at 2:07 PM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
catwho wrote:
My husband has a stimulus job.

How's that going for ya?
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#24 Jan 08 2010 at 2:32 PM Rating: Good
*****
15,512 posts
publiusvarus wrote:
Elinda,

Quote:
Whats more right? Keeping the jobs at home and paying more for stuff, or sending them overseas and paying less for stuff.


What's most right is jobs staying home and people paying less for stuff.
Lol, trust me, you can't beat China's prices.
#25 Jan 08 2010 at 2:33 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Samira wrote:
You're not going to get workers in the U.S. to work for $.70/hour. Unless, of course, you provide food and housing for them on top of that wage.

Do you get paid in script?
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#26 Jan 08 2010 at 2:57 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Samira wrote:
You're not going to get workers in the U.S. to work for $.70/hour. Unless, of course, you provide food and housing for them on top of that wage.

Do you get paid in script?


And shop at the company store, yep!

Cause that worked so well for the coal miners, doncha know.

____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

« Previous 1 2
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 137 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (137)