Does the GOP wish Obama left the country the way Bush left it.

[Ray From Cleveland]

They did their damnedest to make it so. Unfortunately for them Obama cares more about the country than Bush ever did.

 

[Faun]

That's old news. We've added another 2.7 million jobs since then.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

You could, COULD be correct on the above...and that is why (at least for me) republicans are usually better at fiscal oversight....
HOWEVER, how do you explain the absence of war costs and Medicare Advantage expenditures from GWB's budget.???

Have any evidence of that?

Did George W. Bush 'borrow' from Social Security to fund the war in Iraq and tax cuts?

 

[Faun]

Look at that surplus under Clinton. Perhaps we need another Clinton in the white House.
Course, the biggest debt has always been under Republicans. And if you look it, it's really way worse. All the way to the Tippy Top of the surplus under Clinton all the way down the rock bottom under Bush and the GOP. Talk about a fall.

The real fall is people that think it's the President that spends our money.

Clinton presided under a Republican led Congress, and a pretty conservative Congress as well. Look at your chart one more time and take note of when Republicans held leadership of Congress. See how the deficits began to shrink in the 90's? See how we find the same pattern once again when they took leadership in 2010?

You're fucking deranged. That "pattern" of shrinking deficits began years before Republicans took control of the Congress and it ended when Clinton left office while Republicans still controlled Congress.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

You're fucking deranged. That "pattern" of shrinking deficits began years before Republicans took control of the Congress and it ended when Clinton left office while Republicans still controlled Congress.

Try getting the right pair of reading glasses on this time and look at that chart again. The Republicans took over leadership of Congress in 1992.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The last major change to payroll tax rates was signed into law by Ronald Reagan....

Right, so what was with the posters claim that Republicans are 'always" raising payroll taxes?

 

[Faun]

The real fall is people that think it's the President that spends our money.

Clinton presided under a Republican led Congress, and a pretty conservative Congress as well. Look at your chart one more time and take note of when Republicans held leadership of Congress. See how the deficits began to shrink in the 90's? See how we find the same pattern once again when they took leadership in 2010?

You could, COULD be correct on the above...and that is why (at least for me) republicans are usually better at fiscal oversight....
HOWEVER, how do you explain the absence of war costs and Medicare Advantage expenditures from GWB's budget.???

No, he can't be correct. The figures are already etched in the books. We know the deficit began falling in 1993 and continued falling until 2001. Republicans controlled both chambers of Congress from 1995 until 2007 with the exception of 1½ years from mid-2001 through 2003 where Democrats controlled the Senate after Jim Jeffords switched parties in mid session.

 

[Faun]

You're fucking deranged. That "pattern" of shrinking deficits began years before Republicans took control of the Congress and it ended when Clinton left office while Republicans still controlled Congress.

Try getting the right pair of reading glasses on this time and look at that chart again. The Republicans took over leadership of Congress in 1992.

Like I said, you're fucking deranged.

U.S. Senate: Party Division

Party Divisions of the House of Representatives* | US House of Representatives: History, Art & Archives

Republicans took control of both Chambers of Congress in 1995.

I knew you were crazy, but dayam ... you're Flush crazy.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Until one employer pays more and then they can get the best the market offers while prompting others to offer more in order to compete thereby creating demand. But employers never seem to do that do they?

Employers don't sit at a coffee shop making some sort of nefarious plans on how to screw workers.

Employers only pay what they need to pay to get the labor needed. If one employer of a said industry decides he's going to overpay his workers, then it won''t be long before his competition comes in and starts taking away his customers. They can produce products or services at a lower price than the company that overpays their workers. This is what happened in the outsourcing days in the early 2000's. Americans and American companies had no desire to leave, but they had no choice. Their competition moved overseas and began stealing their customers. This was especially true of union shops.

 

[Pumpkin Row]

In the past employees were a valued partner in the enterprise. Now they're seen simply as a cost to be cut when they become too costly.

Republicans are the reason US employees become too costly. Repubtards keep adding payroll taxes to workers & cutting income & corp taxes for the wealthy. US workers are taxed out of a job. Tax cuts should only be given to workers & employers who hire US workers, not the ones who fire the tax burdened workers & ship jobs out.

So, you think that Businesses paying MORE taxes would help them afford employees, and you think that the influx of illegal but cheap labor across the boarder is the doing of Republicans? I never thought about it like that... because I don't typically abandon all logic in the pursuit of an irrational explanation. Last I checked, the recent taxes and increased expenses all came from our current president, who happens to be a Democrat.

There is currently no "influx" of "illegal but cheap labor across the boarder [sic]".....

Oh please, everyone is fully aware of the Mexicans boarder-hopping and being hired by businesses. The Obama Administration has been trying its hardest to allow illegals across and to allow them to stay.

Net immigration from Mexico has been negative since 2007.....

And that changes that it's still happening, how? It leveled off, but it's still happening. I guess Obama hasn't destroyed the economy enough to stop it~

 

[nat4900]

Republicans controlled both chambers of Congress from 1995 until 2007 with the exception of 1½ years from mid-2001 through 2003 where Democrats controlled the Senate after Jim Jeffords switched parties in mid session.

Actually forgot about that....THANKS !!

 

[Pumpkin Row]

In the past employees were a valued partner in the enterprise. Now they're seen simply as a cost to be cut when they become too costly.

Republicans are the reason US employees become too costly. Repubtards keep adding payroll taxes to workers & cutting income & corp taxes for the wealthy. US workers are taxed out of a job. Tax cuts should only be given to workers & employers who hire US workers, not the ones who fire the tax burdened workers & ship jobs out.

So, you think that Businesses paying MORE taxes would help them afford employees, and you think that the influx of illegal but cheap labor across the boarder is the doing of Republicans? I never thought about it like that... because I don't typically abandon all logic in the pursuit of an irrational explanation. Last I checked, the recent taxes and increased expenses all came from our current president, who happens to be a Democrat.

There is currently no "influx" of "illegal but cheap labor across the boarder [sic]".....

Oh please, everyone is fully aware of the Mexicans boarder-hopping and being hired by businesses. The Obama Administration has been trying its hardest to allow illegals across and to allow them to stay.

He's doing that with a record number of deportations, is he?

Obama has been taking executive action to prevent the enforcement of boarder laws. Unless he's actually driving around in his truck, deporting illegals personally, or has issued orders to deport more illegals, crediting Obama with the 'record numbers' of deportations is idiotic.

 

[kaz]

People giving up looking for work is different than a mother staying home with her kids, Larry

Is it? Why? How is it counted or reported differently?

They are counted and reported the same, that's my point, Kenneth. However, the former wants a job and the second isn't getting a job (right now) no matter what. Hence my point that entirely different economic circumstances are treated the same. They are both considered part of the labor force, neither is considered unemployed even though the guy who gave up looking for work wants one.

I mean duh

So you're saying the participation rate is down simply because people who wish to work are unable to find a job?

Ding, ding, ding, we have a winner! Actually economists are the ones saying that, but I did repeat them so I'll accept that answer

You're full of shit per usual. Please provide a link.

I'm not showing you that labor participation is going down because people can't find jobs. I don't do research for lazy asses like you, particularly ones who aren't debating in good faith., If you cared, you'd Google it yourself like I do all the time. I always have two tabs open when I post, the second is to do research before posting anything like you just did

 

[Faun]

Republicans are the reason US employees become too costly. Repubtards keep adding payroll taxes to workers & cutting income & corp taxes for the wealthy. US workers are taxed out of a job. Tax cuts should only be given to workers & employers who hire US workers, not the ones who fire the tax burdened workers & ship jobs out.

So, you think that Businesses paying MORE taxes would help them afford employees, and you think that the influx of illegal but cheap labor across the boarder is the doing of Republicans? I never thought about it like that... because I don't typically abandon all logic in the pursuit of an irrational explanation. Last I checked, the recent taxes and increased expenses all came from our current president, who happens to be a Democrat.

There is currently no "influx" of "illegal but cheap labor across the boarder [sic]".....

Oh please, everyone is fully aware of the Mexicans boarder-hopping and being hired by businesses. The Obama Administration has been trying its hardest to allow illegals across and to allow them to stay.

He's doing that with a record number of deportations, is he?

Obama has been taking executive action to prevent the enforcement of boarder laws. Unless he's actually driving around in his truck, deporting illegals personally, or has issued orders to deport more illegals, crediting Obama with the 'record numbers' of deportations is idiotic.

Bullshit. Sadly, all you know are rightwing talking points.

Yes, Obama has taken great effort to allow law-abiding illegal immigrants to stay in the U.S. to gain lawful residence. That is to say illegal immigrants who commit no crimes other than their immigration status.

That in no way extends to border jumpers who have neither been in this country long enough nor have established roots.

And again, the point which decimates yours -- deportations have been at an all-time high under the Obama administration.

Reality sucks for you brain-dead rightwingers, huh?

 

[Flash]

Until one employer pays more and then they can get the best the market offers while prompting others to offer more in order to compete thereby creating demand. But employers never seem to do that do they?

Employers don't sit at a coffee shop making some sort of nefarious plans on how to screw workers.

Employers only pay what they need to pay to get the labor needed. If one employer of a said industry decides he's going to overpay his workers, then it won''t be long before his competition comes in and starts taking away his customers. They can produce products or services at a lower price than the company that overpays their workers. This is what happened in the outsourcing days in the early 2000's. Americans and American companies had no desire to leave, but they had no choice. Their competition moved overseas and began stealing their customers. This was especially true of union shops.

Libtards think that life is unfair and everybody is out to screw them but government will somehow make everything fair. The dumbasses.

 

[kaz]

You really think out of the goodness of their hearts they will give every one a raise?

Not at all. That's why MW needs to be more realistic with future increases indexed to inflation.
It's a shame that is the case. In the past employees were a valued partner in the enterprise. Now they're seen simply as a cost to be cut when they become too costly.

It's not a "shame" that companies don't pay their employees higher than market wages, Kenneth. It's why their employees have jobs

Again professor, what market remains nearly flat for three decades? What market forces act on wages?

The US from 1929 until the 1950s for one. Again, repeating your lie that it's been "three decades" doesn't make it so. It started in the late 90s when the dot com bubble burst. That isn't "nearly three decades" it's a little over 1 and a half

You didn't answer the question in any way.

It's an ambiguous question. A lot of forces act on wages

 

[Faun]

Is it? Why? How is it counted or reported differently?

They are counted and reported the same, that's my point, Kenneth. However, the former wants a job and the second isn't getting a job (right now) no matter what. Hence my point that entirely different economic circumstances are treated the same. They are both considered part of the labor force, neither is considered unemployed even though the guy who gave up looking for work wants one.

I mean duh

So you're saying the participation rate is down simply because people who wish to work are unable to find a job?

Ding, ding, ding, we have a winner! Actually economists are the ones saying that, but I did repeat them so I'll accept that answer

You're full of shit per usual. Please provide a link.

I'm not showing you that labor participation is going down because people can't find jobs. I don't do research for lazy asses like you, particularly ones who aren't debating in good faith., If you cared, you'd Google it yourself like I do all the time. I always have two tabs open when I post, the second is to do research before posting anything like you just did

Actually, you weren't challenged to show that. That's your strawman hoping to avoid having to meet the actual challenge laid down upon you....

You claimed economists are saying the labor force participation rate is down because people can't find work. You were challenged to prove that economists said that.

Sucks when you get caught kazzing, dudn't it?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Bullshit. Sadly, all you know are rightwing talking points.

Yes, Obama has taken great effort to allow law-abiding illegal immigrants to stay in the U.S. to gain lawful residence. That is to say illegal immigrants who commit no crimes other than their immigration status.

That in no way extends to border jumpers who have neither been in this country long enough nor have established roots.

And again, the point which decimates yours -- deportations have been at an all-time high under the Obama administration.

High deportation figures are misleading

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/17/u...in-last-five-years.html?ref=juliapreston&_r=1

Illegal immigrant border crossings surge to highest level in nearly two years

 

[kaz]

Many companies were afraid to invest thanks to Commie Care. There are so many if's, but's and maybe's in the bill that nobody knew what to expect from the federal government.

Businesses like to plan well in advance before making any financial moves. You can't do that with uncertainties like Obama Care.

Another thing is all this talk from the left giving DumBama credit for any advances we made in our economy. They fail to acknowledge that our numbers didn't start to really improve until after the cost of our fuel went down thanks to fracking which the Democrats fought (and are still fighting).

Some households are saving hundreds of dollars a month in energy costs between gasoline and natural gas. This is a widespread savings that gave most everybody more residual income at the end of each month. People used that extra money to pay down other bills, invest, or otherwise spend in our economy.

Obamacare is a cost attached to Labor.........employment growth since the passage of ACA has been stronger than it was during any time between 2001 and 2009....

They fail to acknowledge that our numbers didn't start to really improve until after the cost of our fuel went down thanks to fracking which the Democrats fought (and are still fighting).


This is nonsense........Gas prices started falling at the end of 2014....

Fallacy of the single cause

Bray that mantra to the idiot arguing such "single causes".....

It ain't me...

It is you, donkey, "Obamacare is a cost attached to Labor.........employment growth since the passage of ACA has been stronger than it was during any time between 2001 and 2009...."

Textbook single cause fallacy. Jesus, it was in your quote. I know you're not reading other people's quotes, but you aren't even reading your own?

It was in response to THIS

Businesses like to plan well in advance before making any financial moves. You can't do that with uncertainties like Obama Care.

I was REFUTING Ray's "single cause" assertion......

One of us isn't reading........I, on the other hand, sport a magnificent conk....

Ray said "with uncertainties like Obama Care"

On the other hand, you said "employment growth since the passage of ACA has been stronger than it was during any time between 2001 and 2009"

Ray made clear Obamacare was ONE of the uncertainties facing business, you on the other hand said the ACA was the ONLY factor affecting job growth.

You're a fail, Larry

 

[Faun]

Bullshit. Sadly, all you know are rightwing talking points.

Yes, Obama has taken great effort to allow law-abiding illegal immigrants to stay in the U.S. to gain lawful residence. That is to say illegal immigrants who commit no crimes other than their immigration status.

That in no way extends to border jumpers who have neither been in this country long enough nor have established roots.

And again, the point which decimates yours -- deportations have been at an all-time high under the Obama administration.

High deportation figures are misleading

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/17/u...in-last-five-years.html?ref=juliapreston&_r=1

Illegal immigrant border crossings surge to highest level in nearly two years

How many times must I say this until you believe me...? You're fucking deranged.

Your links said the same thing I just said. Deportations are at record highs and they're mostly among the border jumpers as the Obama administration has taken effort to allow "law-abiding" illegal immigrants stay.

Stick to things you know about ... like party leadership in Congress.