Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Okay a few things.
1) Your red huge font is extremely obnoxious. I know you want us to think you are passionate and bold, but in reality it makes you look like a complete tool. Big type does nothing to change the fact that you are ignorant.
2) You have a poor understanding of economics. You haven't provided any sources for all of this obnoxious babbling for one thing. Another thing is that doesn't even matter. just because there was more people in the workforce after 8 years, it does not mean that many jobs were created. Plus, When it comes to jobs created, the stats still take into account jobs loss as well. The most jobs lost were in 2007 and 2008 regardless of this point (bush's final two years).
Here are the real facts:
Surprise! Obama Is Creating More New Jobs Than George W. Bush - Rick Newman (usnews.com)
More Jobs Created Under Obama Than Bush, Nonpartisan Report Finds - Careers Articles
More Jobs Created Under Obama Than Bush, Non-Partisan Report Finds | Politics And Regulation | Minyanville's Wall Street
The Truth About The Bush Tax Cuts And Job Growth - Forbes
This thread is partly inspired by welfarequeen's poll on how USMB members grade Obama's presidency. The large majority of you gave Obama an F which, in my opinion, is completely unfair and is an obvious indication of willful ignorance.
This is a fair and balanced assessment of how the country has faired under Obama. They are based upon numbers only. Subjective criticism such as his character or leadership skills are not in this article. I highlighted in bold what I consider to be important points. Keep in mind that these figures only represent what has happened UNDER Obama. Which means many factors influence them. Not just Obama.
America is still gaining jobs under President Obama, but millions more live in poverty, typical household incomes have not kept pace with inflation, and the federal debt is up nearly 90 percent and on pace to double before he leaves office. Stockholders, meanwhile, are far wealthier than they were the day he was sworn in.
U.S. oil production continues to boom, as do wind and solar power, while dependence on foreign oil keeps dropping. International opinion of the United States has slipped a bit, but generally remains far higher than before he took office, except in the Muslim world, where it has gotten even worse.
These are among the findings in our latest update of Obamas Numbers.
This is another in our series of regular quarterly updates of key statistical indicators of the Obama presidency. It follows our Obamas Numbers article in October, a pre-election update we posted Nov. 5, and quarterly updates posted April 16 and July 19.
The mix of statistics in these reports will vary. This update includes income and poverty figures that are issued annually, for example. We select other figures that are available monthly or quarterly depending on what we judge to be most topical. Our intent is to provide accurate measures of whats changed for better or worse since Obama first took office in January 2009.
by Brooks Jackson
Obama?s Numbers, October Update
To me the trick is determining how much Obama's policies have influenced these economic numbers. And of course not just him, but Congress as well.
My take on the economy: Things could be better with 7.3% unemployment. However, the economy went into a free fall in 2007. 100,000s of jobs were being lost each month up. The unemployment rate may have gone up under Obama, but there is no denying that Obama has created more jobs than Bush did in his entire 8 years. In other words, a president only has so much control over a nation's economy. In my perspective, the higher unemployment rate has very little to do with Obama's policies. Could he have done more to repair the problem? Maybe, but our do-nothing congress has contributed a great deal to this. Republicans, historically since 2000, have done NOTHING to improve the economy.
Your post confuses causation with correlation. Republicans controlled Presidency and Congress for a short time, the three decades previous were almost unanimously controlled by Democrats. Nonetheless, they are merely the same people masquerading these days.
The economy has slightly improved under Obama, but it is despite his actions and not in spite of them. In order to prove this point, I ask you, what is the critical difference between Obama and Bush?
Both push meaningless wars. Obama has killed more Middle Eastern people than Bush ever did.
Both approved outrageous bailouts for the already rich and risky upper-class bankers.
Both approved redundant social programs designed to give the people back a small portion of their money.
Both approved sanctions to increase welfare.
Both approved legislation that benefits our corporatocracy.
The biggest difference between GWB and Obama is that Obama did all the same things Bush did, but harder. I have been alive and paying full attention long enough to see full well the comparisons, even in my relatively young age.
EDIT: Another drunken spelling error.
Okay a few things.
1) Your red huge font is extremely obnoxious. I know you want us to think you are passionate and bold, but in reality it makes you look like a complete tool. Big type does nothing to change the fact that you are ignorant.
2) You have a poor understanding of economics. You haven't provided any sources for all of this obnoxious babbling for one thing. Another thing is that doesn't even matter. just because there was more people in the workforce after 8 years, it does not mean that many jobs were created. Plus, When it comes to jobs created, the stats still take into account jobs loss as well. The most jobs lost were in 2007 and 2008 regardless of this point (bush's final two years).
Here are the real facts:
Surprise! Obama Is Creating More New Jobs Than George W. Bush - Rick Newman (usnews.com)
More Jobs Created Under Obama Than Bush, Nonpartisan Report Finds - Careers Articles
More Jobs Created Under Obama Than Bush, Non-Partisan Report Finds | Politics And Regulation | Minyanville's Wall Street
The Truth About The Bush Tax Cuts And Job Growth - Forbes
None of your sources take into account either of two things.
1) The amount of time it takes for politically motivated economic decisions to take hold which has been estimated at around 8 years (ever so conveniently I'm sure).
2) Obama has done very little different than Bush has with the exception of magnitude.
You are obviously ignoring key phrases in my post. I made it clear these stats merely occurred under Obama and that his policies didn't necessarily have to do with all of the facts presented. So yeah, jackass, I know. Correlation doesnt mean causation.
I also made it clear that subjective opinion of Obama was not included in the OP. These comparisons you are making between Bush and Obama, while true, are subjective criticisms. Obviously there is more to the story of Obama's presidency than what I presented. No one is denying that.
You are obviously ignoring key phrases in my post. I made it clear these stats merely occurred under Obama and that his policies didn't necessarily have to do with all of the facts presented. So yeah, jackass, I know. Correlation doesnt mean causation.
In this case, I concede. However I feel it should not be confused, under any scrutiny, that Obama's decisions should reign hold over any of those in which preceded him whom agreed. Under these pretenses, we should be fighting the same battle.
I also made it clear that subjective opinion of Obama was not included in the OP. These comparisons you are making between Bush and Obama, while true, are subjective criticisms. Obviously there is more to the story of Obama's presidency than what I presented. No one is denying that.
I must admit I missed these declarations of subjective opinion held in any difference from one another, at least until you presented it as such. Still yet, when I see one compelled to convince us of Obama's moral sanctity, or even that which could be remotely confused as such, I feel compelled to refute such claims, for Obama is little more than much worse a pre-existing problem. Should we agree on this point, I formally apologize for any advancements made thenceforth, which were made under presumption... a mortal flaw of Man. Should we disagree here, I look forward to an extension of intellectual debate on the subject. Either way I hope that your day is nice and you enjoy yourself in ways I couldn't begin to comprehend.
1) What are you even talking about? That point is completely moot if we haven't gotten through all of Obama's term. Either way, we are comparing numbers. Number do not lie.
2) Why should these articles take into account such a vague, subjective point?
You're a good soldier, Billy000.
1) What are you even talking about? That point is completely moot if we haven't gotten through all of Obama's term. Either way, we are comparing numbers. Number do not lie.
2) Why should these articles take into account such a vague, subjective point?
1) While the point can be considered moot until after Obama's full term, I think it right to point out that numbers can lie, and have been used to perpetuate lies.
2) They really shouldn't, which was sort of the point. What should be taken into account is what was promised, revealing true beliefs, and what was done, reflecting influence over what was once held as belief.
The one thing I don't understand is why Obama sticks with his corporate contributors despite his inability to be re-elected. It either represents true evil, or a true misconception of his real beliefs.
The two of you should not demean Billy in his ways, he is simply standing for what he believe is right by himself. If you condemn him for that you may as well condemn me for my beliefs, however I would not recommend it for it is a fight you will more than likely lose.
The two of you should not demean Billy in his ways, he is simply standing for what he believe is right by himself. If you condemn him for that you may as well condemn me for my beliefs, however I would not recommend it for it is a fight you will more than likely lose.
May I kindly remind you that people don't respond well to threats, either. You opine on a forum, where the opinions and beliefs of others are fair game to be praised or ridiculed. Thick skin is required to play here.
You're a good soldier, Billy000.
I keep telling him, Billy, don't be a zero. But he does it anyway.
The two of you should not demean Billy in his ways, he is simply standing for what he believe is right by himself. If you condemn him for that you may as well condemn me for my beliefs, however I would not recommend it for it is a fight you will more than likely lose.
May I kindly remind you that people don't respond well to threats, either. You opine on a forum, where the opinions and beliefs of others are fair game to be praised or ridiculed. Thick skin is required to play here.
While I agree in the latter, I have the "thick skin" required to endure such attacks, and it was this ability exactly in which I referenced. There was no intended threat, I will not stalk and kill a member of this forum, but I will stick to my beliefs with the experiences which lead me here and when proven wrong I have no problem admitting my mistake. It takes quite a lot to show me I was wrong about this society, however.
May I remind you again, the fact surrounding this post correspond with the actions of Obama in comparison to his predecessors, in which I say with little argument resemble one another in almost parallel. This country has been hijacked by corporate lobbyists, and these are the same people Obama spoke against when I voted for him at the age of 18. Little did I know at the time, he was little more than a pawn in their game and I would never waste me time voting again. If you honestly believe there is a difference between Bush and Obama, i urge you to bring it unto me.
The two of you should not demean Billy in his ways, he is simply standing for what he believe is right by himself. If you condemn him for that you may as well condemn me for my beliefs, however I would not recommend it for it is a fight you will more than likely lose.
May I kindly remind you that people don't respond well to threats, either. You opine on a forum, where the opinions and beliefs of others are fair game to be praised or ridiculed. Thick skin is required to play here.
While I agree in the latter, I have the "thick skin" required to endure such attacks, and it was this ability exactly in which I referenced. There was no intended threat, I will not stalk and kill a member of this forum, but I will stick to my beliefs with the experiences which lead me here and when proven wrong I have no problem admitting my mistake. It takes quite a lot to show me I was wrong about this society, however.
May I remind you again, the fact surrounding this post correspond with the actions of Obama in comparison to his predecessors, in which I say with little argument resemble one another in almost parallel. This country has been hijacked by corporate lobbyists, and these are the same people Obama spoke against when I voted for him at the age of 18. Little did I know at the time, he was little more than a pawn in their game and I would never waste me time voting again. If you honestly believe there is a difference between Bush and Obama, i urge you to bring it unto me.
This thread is partly inspired by welfarequeen's poll on how USMB members grade Obama's presidency. The large majority of you gave Obama an F which, in my opinion, is completely unfair and is an obvious indication of willful ignorance.
This is a fair and balanced assessment of how the country has faired under Obama. They are based upon numbers only. Subjective criticism such as his character or leadership skills are not in this article. I highlighted in bold what I consider to be important points. Keep in mind that these figures only represent what has happened UNDER Obama. Which means many factors influence them. Not just Obama.
Obama?s Numbers, October Update
To me the trick is determining how much Obama's policies have influenced these economic numbers. And of course not just him, but Congress as well.
My take on the economy: Things could be better with 7.3% unemployment. However, the economy went into a free fall in 2007. 100,000s of jobs were being lost each month up. The unemployment rate may have gone up under Obama, but there is no denying that Obama has created more jobs than Bush did in his entire 8 years. In other words, a president only has so much control over a nation's economy. In my perspective, the higher unemployment rate has very little to do with Obama's policies. Could he have done more to repair the problem? Maybe, but our do-nothing congress has contributed a great deal to this. Republicans, historically since 2000, have done NOTHING to improve the economy.
"but there is no denying that Obama has created more jobs than Bush did in his entire 8 years. "
Do you recall these events??
1) Recession that started under Clinton ended 11/01?
Specifically, 50.8 million jobs were lost through the first six quarters of the 01 recession .
Heritage Employment Report: February Continues Winter Blues
The 2001 recession officially started 03/2001... BUT the steps leading up to it started under Clinton!
DID THIS HAPPEN?? WAS IT BUSH's FAULT???
1) Dot.com bust cost $5 trillion in lost market value..
this means every year for 30 years now starting in 2000 the federal revenue is over $20 billion written off against taxes owed.
According to the Los Angeles Times, when the dot-com bubble burst, it wiped out $5 trillion dollars in market value for tech companies.
More than half of the Internet companies created since 1995 were gone by 2004 -
and hundreds of thousands of skilled technology workers were out of jobs.
The dot-com bubble: How to lose $5 trillion ? Anderson Cooper 360 - CNN.com Blogs
DID THIS HAPPEN???
DID THIS HAPPEN??
2) Did YOU forget that 9/11 occurred and it cost $2 trillion over the next 30 years again $8 billion will NOT BE PAiD.. was that Bush's fault?
Jobs lost in New York owing to the attacks: 146,100 JUST in New York!!
Year 2001: September 11 Terrorist Attacks
The 9/11 terrorist attacks were the events that helped shape other financial events of the decade. After that terrible day in September 2001, our economic climate was never to be the same again. It was only the third time in history that the New York Stock Exchange was shut down for a period of time. In this case, it was closed from September 10 - 17. Besides the tragic human loss of that day, the economic loss cannot even be estimated. Some estimate that there was over $60 billion in insurance losses alone.
Approximately 18,000 small businesses were either displaced or destroyed in Lower Manhattan after the Twin Towers fell. There was a buildup in homeland security on all levels. 9/11 caused a catastrophic financial loss for the U.S.
The Top 10 Financial Events of the Decade
DID THIS HAPPEN???
DID THIS HAPPEN?? DID BUSH CAUSE THE WORST HURRICANE SEASONS!!!!???
3) $1 trillion in written off losses due to the WORST Hurricane SEASONS in history!
The worst Katrina made landfall in Louisiana as a Category 3 in 2005. It took 1,836 lives and caused $81.2 billion in damages. Andrew slammed into South Florida in 1992 as a Category 5. It caused 40 deaths and $30 billion in property damage. More than 250,000 people were left homeless and 82,000 businesses were destroyed or damaged.
Hurricane Katrina ALONE! Year 2005: Hurricanes Katrina and Rita
On August 25, 2005, Hurricane Katrina hit the Gulf Coast of the U.S. as a strong Category 3 or low Category 4 storm. It quickly became the biggest natural disaster in U.S. history, almost destroying New Orleans due to severe flooding.
Hurricane Rita quickly followed Katrina only to make matters worse. Between the two, more than $200 billion in damage was done. 400,000 jobs were lost and 275,000 homes were destroyed. Many of the jobs and homes were never to be recovered. Hundreds of thousands of people were displaced and over 1,000 were killed and more are missing. The effect on oil and gasoline prices was long-lasting.
400,000 jobs due to Hurricanes Katrina/Rita
145,000 jobs in NYC alone due to 9/11
300,000 jobs lost due to dot.com busts.
Largest Gross Domestic Product in history!!
When Bush took office in 2001 GDP was $12.355,271,000,000
when Bush left office in 2008 GDP was $14,359,490,000,000
A 16% increase in GDP or $2 TRILLION.
Bush growth of the GDP was greater then Clinton in 2005 GDP grew at 6.5% Clinton's best:6.4%
Measuring Worth - GDP result.
When Bush started 131,785,000 people employed.
At the end of 2008 136,790,000 people employed or
5,000,000 more employed then when he took office.
DID THIS HAPPEN???
Oh and did I mention along the way when "Mission Accomplished" occurred after less then six weeks of combat in May 2003.. 10 years ago..that over 1 million Iraq people were
saved from starving? 50,000 people a year were starving under Saddam and when he was removed, (by the way at the request of Kerry,Pelosi, and 90% of the 28 million Iraqis) the
UN mandated embargo was removed.
Researcher Richard Garfield estimated that "a minimum of 100,000 and a more likely estimate of 227,000 excess deaths among young children from August 1991 through March 1998" from all causes including sanctions. Human rights in Saddam Hussein's Iraq - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
SO PLEASE.... TELL ME what comparable EVENTS during Obama's presidency comes CLOSE TO the above?????
AND YET he still shuts down federal drilling leases!
Obama orders EPA to destroy millions of jobs!
FACTS: 1) EPA itself estimated that its ozone standard would cost $90 billion a year,
while other studies have projected that the rule could cost upwards of a trillion dollars and destroy 7.4 million jobs.
2)Boiler MACT Rule: EPA's Boiler MACT (Maximum Achievable Control Technology) standards are so strict that not even the best-performing sources can meet them, so many companies will have no choice but to shut their doors and ship manufacturing jobs overseas.
The rule has been projected to reduce US GDP by as much as 1.2 billion dollars and will destroy nearly 800,000 jobs.
Articles: Obama's EPA Plans for 2013
So HoW can there be more jobs more employment while Obama's EPA is destroying theM???
Okay a few things.
1) Your red huge font is extremely obnoxious. I know you want us to think you are passionate and bold, but in reality it makes you look like a complete tool. Big type does nothing to change the fact that you are ignorant.
2) You have a poor understanding of economics. You haven't provided any sources for all of this obnoxious babbling for one thing. Another thing is that doesn't even matter. just because there was more people in the workforce after 8 years, it does not mean that many jobs were created. Plus, When it comes to jobs created, the stats still take into account jobs loss as well. The most jobs lost were in 2007 and 2008 regardless of this point (bush's final two years).
Here are the real facts:
Surprise! Obama Is Creating More New Jobs Than George W. Bush - Rick Newman (usnews.com)
More Jobs Created Under Obama Than Bush, Nonpartisan Report Finds - Careers Articles
More Jobs Created Under Obama Than Bush, Non-Partisan Report Finds | Politics And Regulation | Minyanville's Wall Street
The Truth About The Bush Tax Cuts And Job Growth - Forbes
What I find amusing about this string is that you started it by accusing Barack Obama's critics of using "hyperbole & rhetoric" against him and promised to use "FACTS" in an examination of his Presidency only to spend most of your time trotting out the same tired hyperbole and rhetoric that the Left has used to try and obscure how ineffective this Administration has been.
Why even bother?
What I find amusing about this string is that you started it by accusing Barack Obama's critics of using "hyperbole & rhetoric" against him and promised to use "FACTS" in an examination of his Presidency only to spend most of your time trotting out the same tired hyperbole and rhetoric that the Left has used to try and obscure how ineffective this Administration has been.
Why even bother?
What are you even talking about? You havent provided any facts at all. If you think my facts are bullshit, you need to counter with your own. Right now you sound like a 5 year old.
