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

[IcebergSlim]

That's right. It's so simplistic but you are unable to give a brief summary. I believe you're dodging and really have no idea or no good answer.

I said your question was simplistic, can't you even read? Government schools, huh?

I see now. You get yourself cornered and rather than just drop it or find a solid answer, you hem and haw and argue. In other words, "Kazzing". It's a very apt description.

OK, so here's how my ignore list works. My birthday is in April. Every April I review my ignore list and decide who to give another shot. So there is no way to come off before April. And there is no guarantee you will in April. If you don't, you get reconsidered the next April and so on. Given how quickly you decided to go with the pre-pubescent playground chant, I'm guessing you won't be coming off any time soon. Life is to good to waste it on pubies who never grow up.

Have a good one. Hope you have a good elementary school teacher this year

You're ruthless!

It's informational, not intended to be. Congratulations, you have ... uncovered ... the obvious ... For liberals, not an easy feat

It's informational, not intended to be. Congratulations, you have ... uncovered ... the obvious ... For liberals, not an easy feat


WTF is this gibberish supposed to convey?

 

[Faun]

I don't Google what is in the news every day for people just because you don't like it because it doesn't help Democrats. People are dropping out of the work force and labor participation is low. Here's what you do. Open a tab and Google. Again, I keep a tab open all the time for that reason. I've never asked a question like you did without searching myself first, ever.

But that's why I'm a self supporting libertarian and you're a greedy collectivist

Then link from your open tab dope. You make dumb assertions and never cite a source when called on it. That means you have no credibility.

Bull. There is no reason I have to link to basic news. That's just stupid

That's how it works dope. It's up to you to prove your own points lest they and you be ridiculed.

That just ain't how Kazzie rolls, brah!

Agreed. I do my own research always first, then only ask if I can't validate someone's claim or what I find is contradictory. So really, you're not aware that people have been leaving the labor force? Seriously?

When haven't folks been leaving the labor force?

 

[Faun]

I still just want to see him leave the country, period.

Or.... you can leave and achieve the same effect.

 

[Wyatt earp]

In the last 55 years there have been 7 recessions. The 6 worst recessions were caused by Republicans. One minor one caused by Carter. Democrats have beaten Republicans hands down on job creation!

It's even worse than that. In the entire history of our country, there's never been a Republican president who hasn't had a resession while he served.

So did they start it? Or did the voters elect a republican to clean up a democrat mess?

 

[Wyatt earp]

Then link from your open tab dope. You make dumb assertions and never cite a source when called on it. That means you have no credibility.

Bull. There is no reason I have to link to basic news. That's just stupid

That's how it works dope. It's up to you to prove your own points lest they and you be ridiculed.

That just ain't how Kazzie rolls, brah!

Agreed. I do my own research always first, then only ask if I can't validate someone's claim or what I find is contradictory. So really, you're not aware that people have been leaving the labor force? Seriously?

When haven't folks been leaving the labor force?

But we are inv a new phenomenon now where partime jobs is the New norm along with working males 20~50 who see how easy it is under obama not to work and get disability instead.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Deregulations has always led to recessions and depressions
-Long depression of the 19th century
-Great depression
-Great recession

All have one thing common = deregulations. It is a very bad idea but here we have the republicans wanting more of it.

 

[easyt65]

Choking businesses under massive govt regulation doesn't help either.

 

[IcebergSlim]

It's done even better since then. 78 straight months of growth.

Do Republicans remember how the country was when Obama became president. The economy, the stock market, the wars, employment and so on? The car industry, the steel industry, the rubber industry and so on?

Credit card companies? Health care?

Do they wish he had done nothing?

How would things be different?

Do you remember that Pelosi and Reid ran congress ?

Can you remember that you are not supposed to reveal that you never graduated from the 5th grade ?

So tell me what you believe the 109th Congress contributed to The Wages of Supply Side Idiocy, Parte Deux....

As much as Bush.

BTW: Part 1 actually made some sense at the time.

Bush was a moron.

But blaming him for the whole mess makes rdean just as big a moron.

I asked "what", not "how much".....

You're a fraud......run along....

Now for a little truth about the economy under Big Ears.

Should The Donald win, leftists everywhere will condemn him for the bad economy and the rich getting richer, the day he walks into the oval office...and millions of Americans will get duped again.

95% Of Income Gains Since 2009 Went To The Top 1% — Here's What That Really Means
Berkeley economics professor Emmanuel Saez put out an update to his estimates of income inequality, and the headline figure has everybody outraged: 95% of income gains since 2009 have accrued to the top 1%.
95% Of Income Gains Since 2009 Went To The Top 1% — Here's What That Really Means

Labor Day Summary: Wage Earners Have Taken a Beating
Do the math, people: annual wage increases once real-world inflation is factored in (roughly 7% to 10% annually for those who rent, have significant healthcare expenses or buy higher education) are either negative or are measured in the hundreds of dollars–in other words, trivial increases for all but the very top echelon of wage earners.

Increases in wealth for those with central bank-supplied free money for financiers are measured in the millions of dollars. Even small-fry with capital invested in bubble markets have experienced gains in the hundreds of thousands of dollars–entire lifetimes of earned income for those earning $25,000 to $35,000 annually.

There are forces at work that are beyond the power of central banks: the technologies of automation, robotics and software are replacing human labor not just in low-skill sectors but increasingly in sectors that provided the bulk of middle class jobs.

One reason why automation is gaining ground is the soaring cost of healthcare (paid by the employers and employees in America, except for those on federally funded Medicaid). Healthcare expenses are labor overhead–employers don’t pay labor overhead on robots or software.

While wage earners see their tiny raises wiped out by inflation, employers see theirtotal compensation costs skyrocketing due to employee healthcare expenses.

Then there’s globalization. Capital and technology are mobile, labor is not. Capital and technology can chase higher returns anywhere on the planet, but most workers cannot easily move to another country, and then move again a year later, and so on in an endlessly disruptive search for higher returns.
Labor Day Summary: Wage Earners Have Taken a Beating

Now for a little truth about the economy under Big Ears.

95% Of Income Gains Since 2009 Went To The Top 1% — Here's What That Really Means
​

That was true 3 years ago......as could be expected given that between 2/2001 and 2/2009 job growth trailed labor force growth by nearly 8 million.......private sector payrolls had actually CONTRACTED.

Labor, in that circumstance, had absolutely no bargaining power......Fortunately, since 2012, the economy has generated roughly 2.5 jobs for every new entrant into the labor force......in the last couple of years real median household income has risen at a healthy clip

as this illustration makes clear, it has done so for longer, and at a higher rate than at any time during the Pretzelduncy of Obama's predecessor....

Over the past year, the trend is even stronger...

Last week the Washington Center for Equitable Growth reported that 2015 was the best year for real income growth for the bottom 99 percent of income earners since 1998, as the impact of a tightening labor market and deflationary forces from abroad flowed through to workers. Wage data from the first-quarter GDP report suggests that 2016 will continue this trend: Wages and salary accruals as a percentage of GDP reached a seven-year high, and stands higher than at any point during the credit boom years of 2005-6.

What's Good for Workers Is Terrible for Investors
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-07-07/what-s-good-for-workers-is-terrible-for-investors


The pathologies described in this

Labor Day Summary: Wage Earners Have Taken a Beating


are beyond the power of ANY POTUS to reverse.......they have absolutely nothing to do with Obama....

 

[IcebergSlim]

Choking businesses under massive govt regulation doesn't help either.

WORDS!
SLOGANS!
MEANING!

 

[IcebergSlim]

Bull. There is no reason I have to link to basic news. That's just stupid

That's how it works dope. It's up to you to prove your own points lest they and you be ridiculed.

That just ain't how Kazzie rolls, brah!

Agreed. I do my own research always first, then only ask if I can't validate someone's claim or what I find is contradictory. So really, you're not aware that people have been leaving the labor force? Seriously?

When haven't folks been leaving the labor force?

But we are inv a new phenomenon now where partime jobs is the New norm along with working males 20~50 who see how easy it is under obama not to work and get disability instead.

Then why has the number of people working part time DECREASED?

 

[IcebergSlim]

I still just want to see him leave the country, period.

Level with me, Eaz...did you cast two votes for Obama's predecessor?

 

[easyt65]

As I pointed out, Obama has betrayed this nation...several times. The worst was probably siding with Al Qaeida, perpetrators of 9/11/01, and dragging the US into his own unauthorized war to help them take over Libya. Hillary was part of that.

The Muslim Brotherhood, Mexican Drug Cartels, ISIS...he has had quite a list of 'allies' he has financed, trained, armed, and even protected.

 

[easyt65]

Obama has refused to enforce existing immigration laws, protected / released violent criminal illegals so they can continue to prey on Americans, protected human traffickers, engaged in human trafficking, disobeyed court orders, is STILL disobeying court orders, has been held in contempt TWICE, and is illegally protecting federal law-violating Sanctuary Cities.

Yeah, that's a real impressive Resume...for an IMPEACHED President. (Good thing for Barry GOP politicians are gutless cowards and/or corrupt as well and have refused to do anything).

 

[Faun]

In the last 55 years there have been 7 recessions. The 6 worst recessions were caused by Republicans. One minor one caused by Carter. Democrats have beaten Republicans hands down on job creation!

It's even worse than that. In the entire history of our country, there's never been a Republican president who hasn't had a resession while he served.

So did they start it? Or did the voters elect a republican to clean up a democrat mess?

2 were started by Democrats
23 were started by Republicans.

And both Republican presidents who inherited a recession from a Democrat went on to start one of their own.

And one correction ... I erroneously stated that every Republican president had a recession while serving and that's not accurate... James Garfield is one who didn't. But he served only 6 months and not long enough to start one -- though his VP did not long after Garfield's death.

http://www.nber.org/cycles.html

 

[easyt65]

Presidents don't start recessions - Congresses, who control the budget / spending / the economy, do.

 

[Faun]

Bull. There is no reason I have to link to basic news. That's just stupid

That's how it works dope. It's up to you to prove your own points lest they and you be ridiculed.

That just ain't how Kazzie rolls, brah!

Agreed. I do my own research always first, then only ask if I can't validate someone's claim or what I find is contradictory. So really, you're not aware that people have been leaving the labor force? Seriously?

When haven't folks been leaving the labor force?

But we are inv a new phenomenon now where partime jobs is the New norm along with working males 20~50 who see how easy it is under obama not to work and get disability instead.

Seems you have Obama confused with Bush. Part timers, aged 20-55, dramatically increased under Bush and decreased under Obama...

1/2001: 11,481,000
1/2009: 12,897,000
8/2016: 11,315,000

Bush ...... +1,416,000
Obama ... -1,582,000

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data
Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

 

[Faun]

Presidents don't start recessions - Congresses, who control the budget / spending / the economy, do.

But don't you believe we're still in a recession? And haven't Republicans controlled the House, where all spending bills originate, for the last 5½ years.

 

[KissMy]

Presidents don't start recessions - Congresses, who control the budget / spending / the economy, do.

Wrong again dip-shit. The President runs the show unless congress stops him. Ever here of the Presidents Working Group on Financial Markets?

 

[KissMy]

Check out Bush taking action in 2002 to increase Sub-Prime Loans creating fake economy that busted 4 years later.



In 2003 President Bush Signed American Dream Downpayment Act

The US Dollar crashed & Gold Price took off in 2003 due to Exploding Subprime & Deficit from Tax Cut.

 

[kaz]

If someone doesn't fill out any applications, doesn't respond to any ads, doesn't place any ads or send out any resumes, doesn't bid on any contracts, doesn't even ask any friends or family if they know of anything and isn't on the union rolls...then how is he available to be hired? He isn't. No one can hire him until he actually tries to get a job.

You don't know what the word "available" means.. ...

Ok, then please explain to me how someone who is not doing anything at all about work and about whom no employer is aware is available for work.

Let's take three people. All three are just handed out applications to work at McDonalds.
Person 1 fills out the application and turns it in.
Person 2 does not fill it out because he doesn't think they'll hire him because he's Black.
Person 3 would like to work, but is too busy taking care of the kids right now and doesn't fill out the form.

Do you really want to claim that 1 and 2 should be counted the same as available to work? Neither 2 nor 3 can be hired because neither is trying to work. The reason is irrelevant for immediate availability. Neither is available.

They want a job
They gave up looking

Buy a dictionary

And if they want a job but can't work for whatever reason, according to your nonsense, that reason can only be that they're frustrated.

Even worse for your idiocy... you think they all gave up looking. It's beyond your limited comprehension that many never started looking in the first place.

Like students who've never had a job and want to work but don't have the time, so they don't bother looking?

Students are a prime example. They're of working age, they're included in the labor participation calculation, they're not working and they don't want to.

Not being employed does not mean unemployed.

What does that have to do with someone who is not a mother who wants to stay home and not a student who is enhancing their education to bet a better job?

There are millions today who want to work and have given up, it has nothing to do with your shit