GOP jobs agenda

[Dad2three]

It's an easy question, Faun...

Simply tell me what Obama policy it is that's dropped the unemployment rate and created quality jobs for Americans? He was totally against increased production of fossil fuels like shale oil and natural gas so you can cross those jobs off his plus side of the ledger. His stance on coal has caused job losses in coal producing States like West Virginia. His policy of delaying drilling permits caused job losses in States like Louisiana. His stonewalling of the Keystone pipeline cost jobs in Middle America. His Justice Department suing companies like Boeing from opening a new plant in South Carolina delayed the creation of jobs there! God knows that his "green" energy companies that he touted as being our savior going forward have been a disaster! Most of the ones he spent billions of tax payer stimulus dollars on have long since gone bankrupt putting more people out of work. So what's Barry actually done to create jobs, Faun?

Just a few...

- American Financial Stability Act
- Workers tax credit
- Small Business Jobs Act
- ARRA
- Making Home Affordable plan
- Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act
- Credit Card Accountability, Responsibility and Disclosure Act
- Worker, Homeownership, and Business Assistance Act

Go through those, Faun and explain to me how it is that they created jobs?

The fact is...you can't come up with any legislation that you Progressives passed or proposed that created jobs...so you posted that laundry list of legislation that was passed hoping I'd buy the fact that maybe some of them helped to create a few jobs.

 

[Dad2three]

I just showed you how. Weren't you paying attention?

Under Obama, the unemployment rate is under 6% since the fall of 2014. Romney said he couldn't get it that low until the end of 2016, almost 2 years from now.

We are far better off than had Romney won.

Yawn.

That's ok, I don't expect an intelligent response from you.

You want an intelligent response to you holding Romney responsible for his promise to get us to 6% at least by the end of 2016 if he won. Yet, you changed his promise into some sort of insane demand that he meant that he would do something to make it stay above 6% until the end of 2016. You still want a response to that? My response would likely be something like... you are making shit up.

Better?

Maybe I wasn't clear enough? I don't expect an intelligent answer from you.

And I never said he would do something to keep it above 6%. I said he claimed his policies would have it down to 6% in 4 years. Well Obama's policies got it down to 6% in less than half that time.

Why do you keep lying? First, that is not what you said, ya liar. Go back and read what you said.

Second, Obama's policies have done NOTHING AT ALL to improve our unemployment in any sector beyond government and government contracts.

The main reason it's down to 6% is the republicans forced OBAMA to accept ending the 2-year unemployment extensions. No one could be as stupid as you keep pretending. You butt holes on the left SCREAMED LIKE MURDER when the republicans forced you to be fiscally sound, such as by eliminating the unemployment extensions. Then you try to take credit for it afterwards. You folks are insane.

When the unemployment ended people a few got part time jobs, millions got on disability, and most left the workforce.

lol

 

[Dad2three]

It's an easy question, Faun...

Simply tell me what Obama policy it is that's dropped the unemployment rate and created quality jobs for Americans? He was totally against increased production of fossil fuels like shale oil and natural gas so you can cross those jobs off his plus side of the ledger. His stance on coal has caused job losses in coal producing States like West Virginia. His policy of delaying drilling permits caused job losses in States like Louisiana. His stonewalling of the Keystone pipeline cost jobs in Middle America. His Justice Department suing companies like Boeing from opening a new plant in South Carolina delayed the creation of jobs there! God knows that his "green" energy companies that he touted as being our savior going forward have been a disaster! Most of the ones he spent billions of tax payer stimulus dollars on have long since gone bankrupt putting more people out of work. So what's Barry actually done to create jobs, Faun?

Just a few...

- American Financial Stability Act
- Workers tax credit
- Small Business Jobs Act
- ARRA
- Making Home Affordable plan
- Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act
- Credit Card Accountability, Responsibility and Disclosure Act
- Worker, Homeownership, and Business Assistance Act

Go through those, Faun and explain to me how it is that they created jobs?

The fact is...you can't come up with any legislation that you Progressives passed or proposed that created jobs...so you posted that laundry list of legislation that was passed hoping I'd buy the fact that maybe some of them helped to create a few jobs.

That's not possible since the government rarely compiles such information. This is true of all presidents. By the same token, you cannot prove which policies Reagan passed which has helped the economy or which policies Clinton passed which helped the economy. A president pushes policies and those policies are judged by the performance of the economy. For better or worse, the president gets the credit or the blame for the economy.

Let me get this straight. On the one hand you are saying one can't prove which policies help or hurt the economy. Then on the other hand you are saying for better or worse the presidents will get credit or blame for the economy.

IOW you want your cake, and you want to eat it, and you want someone else to pay for it, and you want to blame someone else for eating it, and take credit for paying for it, and then give credit to the president of your choice and blame the president of your choice.

Some changes pushed by and executed by can be directly measured for their effect, positive and negative. For example, all of the taxes and regulations surrounding ACA.

"Some changes pushed by and executed by can be directly measured for their effect, positive and negative. For example, all of the taxes and regulations surrounding ACA."



LIKE THE 11+ MILLION PRIVATE SECTOR JOBS CREATED IN THE LESS THAN 5 YEARS ACA PASSED? THIS WAS AFTER 8 YEARS OF DUBYA/GOP JOB CREATOR POLICIES WHERE HE LOST 1+ MILLION EVEN STOPPING AT HIS HIGH POINT IN 2007, DUBYA ONLY HAD 4 MILLION? LOL




Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

 

[Dad2three]

It's an easy question, Faun...

Simply tell me what Obama policy it is that's dropped the unemployment rate and created quality jobs for Americans? He was totally against increased production of fossil fuels like shale oil and natural gas so you can cross those jobs off his plus side of the ledger. His stance on coal has caused job losses in coal producing States like West Virginia. His policy of delaying drilling permits caused job losses in States like Louisiana. His stonewalling of the Keystone pipeline cost jobs in Middle America. His Justice Department suing companies like Boeing from opening a new plant in South Carolina delayed the creation of jobs there! God knows that his "green" energy companies that he touted as being our savior going forward have been a disaster! Most of the ones he spent billions of tax payer stimulus dollars on have long since gone bankrupt putting more people out of work. So what's Barry actually done to create jobs, Faun?

Just a few...

- American Financial Stability Act
- Workers tax credit
- Small Business Jobs Act
- ARRA
- Making Home Affordable plan
- Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act
- Credit Card Accountability, Responsibility and Disclosure Act
- Worker, Homeownership, and Business Assistance Act

Go through those, Faun and explain to me how it is that they created jobs?

The fact is...you can't come up with any legislation that you Progressives passed or proposed that created jobs...so you posted that laundry list of legislation that was passed hoping I'd buy the fact that maybe some of them helped to create a few jobs.

That's not possible since the government doesn't rarely compiles such information. This is true of all presidents. By the same token, you cannot prove which policies Reagan passed which has helped the economy or which policies Clinton passed which helped the economy. A president pushes policies and those policies are judged by the performance of the economy. For better or worse, the president gets the credit or the blame for the economy.

I can tell you exactly what strategy Ronald Reagan employed to combat the Stagflation that he inherited from Jimmy Carter. He proposed and the Fed tightened the money supply to fight runaway inflation. He proposed and Congress passed cuts in the marginal tax rate. He proposed and Congress reduced domestic discretionary spending and streamlined regulations to make them less of a burden on businesses seeking to create jobs. Reagan had a PLAN...a plan he stuck with despite public support waning early on because of an increase in unemployment when he tightened up the money supply. He did what he did because it made common sense to him despite what "some" economists and many politicians were saying.

So tell me what economic policies Barack Obama proposed to lead us out of the recession he inherited from George W. Bush!

The Myths of Reaganomics
Murray N. Rothbard
The Mises Daily presents relevant short articles from the perspective of an unfettered free market and Austrian economics

GNP in 1980 as 21.6%, and after six years of Reagan, 24.3%. A better comparison would be percentage of federal spending to net private product, that is, production of the private sector. That percentage was 31.1% in 1980, and a shocking 34.3% in 1986. So even using percentages, the Reagan administration has brought us a substantial increase in government spending.


Deregulation. Another crucial aspect of freeing the market and getting government off our backs is deregulation, and the administration and its Reaganomists have been very proud of its deregulation record. However, a look at the record reveals a very different picture. In the first place, the most conspicuous examples of deregulation; the ending of oil and gasoline price controls and rationing, the deregulation of trucks and airlines, were all launched by the Carter administration, and completed just in time for the Reagan administration to claim the credit. Meanwhile, there were other promised deregulations that never took place; for example, abolition of natural gas controls and of the Department of Energy.

Overall, in fact, there has probably been not deregulation, but an increase in regulation.
Mises Daily Mises Institute



WANT TO TRY AGAIN BUBBA? Or you mean Reagan taking the top rate to 50% the first six years AS he increased taxes on the avg guy, through eleven other forms of tax increases actually boomed the economy? THAT must be Obama's problem, the top rate isn't nearly as high as Ronnie had it his first 6 years???

 

[Dad2three]

Just a few...

- American Financial Stability Act
- Workers tax credit
- Small Business Jobs Act
- ARRA
- Making Home Affordable plan
- Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act
- Credit Card Accountability, Responsibility and Disclosure Act
- Worker, Homeownership, and Business Assistance Act

Go through those, Faun and explain to me how it is that they created jobs?

The fact is...you can't come up with any legislation that you Progressives passed or proposed that created jobs...so you posted that laundry list of legislation that was passed hoping I'd buy the fact that maybe some of them helped to create a few jobs.

That's not possible since the government doesn't rarely compiles such information. This is true of all presidents. By the same token, you cannot prove which policies Reagan passed which has helped the economy or which policies Clinton passed which helped the economy. A president pushes policies and those policies are judged by the performance of the economy. For better or worse, the president gets the credit or the blame for the economy.

I can tell you exactly what strategy Ronald Reagan employed to combat the Stagflation that he inherited from Jimmy Carter. He proposed and the Fed tightened the money supply to fight runaway inflation. He proposed and Congress passed cuts in the marginal tax rate. He proposed and Congress reduced domestic discretionary spending and streamlined regulations to make them less of a burden on businesses seeking to create jobs. Reagan had a PLAN...a plan he stuck with despite public support waning early on because of an increase in unemployment when he tightened up the money supply. He did what he did because it made common sense to him despite what "some" economists and many politicians were saying.

So tell me what economic policies Barack Obama proposed to lead us out of the recession he inherited from George W. Bush!

Hey look ... you just did what I did. You listed some policies with zero proof they helped the economy. Thanks for confirming my point.

Zero proof? With all due respect, Faun...those policies produced the longest period of sustained economic growth in modern American history. For you to say that there is no proof they helped the economy is rather amusing.

"Zero proof? With all due respect, Faun...those policies produced the longest period of sustained economic growth in modern American history"

ANY proof to back it up other than OPINIONS? lol

"My colleagues and I have been very appreciative of your [President Clinton's] support of the Fed over the years, and your commitment to fiscal discipline has been instrumental in achieving what in a few weeks will be the longest economic expansion in the nation's history."
— Alan Greenspan, Federal Reserve Board Chairman, January 4, 2000, with President Clinton at Chairman Greenspan's re-nomination announcement


One of the reasons Goldman Sachs cites for the "best economy ever" is that "on the policy side, trade, fiscal, and monetary policies have been excellent, working in ways that have facilitated growth without inflation. The Clinton Administration has worked to liberalize trade and has used any revenue windfalls to reduce the federal budget deficit."
— Goldman Sachs, March 1998

 

[Dad2three]

Barack Obama came into office with control of the House, the Senate and the Oval Office. He used that control to pass ObamaCare. Kindly explain why he was able to pass the ACA which the GOP HATED...yet they were able to somehow prevent him from fixing the economy?

Yes, 'control' (Super majority) for a total of 60 days AS THE DUBYA/GOP economy was losing 700,00+ jobs a month and had just contracted 9% the previous quarter, 3 YEARS GROWTH IN ONE QUARTER

11+ million PRIVATE jobs since Obamacares passed isn't good? But losing 1+ million PRIVATE sector jobs using Dubya/GOP 'job creator policy is what YOU want US to go back to? lol

 

[Oldstyle]

It's an easy question, Faun...

Simply tell me what Obama policy it is that's dropped the unemployment rate and created quality jobs for Americans? He was totally against increased production of fossil fuels like shale oil and natural gas so you can cross those jobs off his plus side of the ledger. His stance on coal has caused job losses in coal producing States like West Virginia. His policy of delaying drilling permits caused job losses in States like Louisiana. His stonewalling of the Keystone pipeline cost jobs in Middle America. His Justice Department suing companies like Boeing from opening a new plant in South Carolina delayed the creation of jobs there! God knows that his "green" energy companies that he touted as being our savior going forward have been a disaster! Most of the ones he spent billions of tax payer stimulus dollars on have long since gone bankrupt putting more people out of work. So what's Barry actually done to create jobs, Faun?

Just a few...

- American Financial Stability Act
- Workers tax credit
- Small Business Jobs Act
- ARRA
- Making Home Affordable plan
- Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act
- Credit Card Accountability, Responsibility and Disclosure Act
- Worker, Homeownership, and Business Assistance Act

Go through those, Faun and explain to me how it is that they created jobs?

The fact is...you can't come up with any legislation that you Progressives passed or proposed that created jobs...so you posted that laundry list of legislation that was passed hoping I'd buy the fact that maybe some of them helped to create a few jobs.

That's not possible since the government doesn't rarely compiles such information. This is true of all presidents. By the same token, you cannot prove which policies Reagan passed which has helped the economy or which policies Clinton passed which helped the economy. A president pushes policies and those policies are judged by the performance of the economy. For better or worse, the president gets the credit or the blame for the economy.

I can tell you exactly what strategy Ronald Reagan employed to combat the Stagflation that he inherited from Jimmy Carter. He proposed and the Fed tightened the money supply to fight runaway inflation. He proposed and Congress passed cuts in the marginal tax rate. He proposed and Congress reduced domestic discretionary spending and streamlined regulations to make them less of a burden on businesses seeking to create jobs. Reagan had a PLAN...a plan he stuck with despite public support waning early on because of an increase in unemployment when he tightened up the money supply. He did what he did because it made common sense to him despite what "some" economists and many politicians were saying.

So tell me what economic policies Barack Obama proposed to lead us out of the recession he inherited from George W. Bush!

The Myths of Reaganomics
Murray N. Rothbard
The Mises Daily presents relevant short articles from the perspective of an unfettered free market and Austrian economics

GNP in 1980 as 21.6%, and after six years of Reagan, 24.3%. A better comparison would be percentage of federal spending to net private product, that is, production of the private sector. That percentage was 31.1% in 1980, and a shocking 34.3% in 1986. So even using percentages, the Reagan administration has brought us a substantial increase in government spending.


Deregulation. Another crucial aspect of freeing the market and getting government off our backs is deregulation, and the administration and its Reaganomists have been very proud of its deregulation record. However, a look at the record reveals a very different picture. In the first place, the most conspicuous examples of deregulation; the ending of oil and gasoline price controls and rationing, the deregulation of trucks and airlines, were all launched by the Carter administration, and completed just in time for the Reagan administration to claim the credit. Meanwhile, there were other promised deregulations that never took place; for example, abolition of natural gas controls and of the Department of Energy.

Overall, in fact, there has probably been not deregulation, but an increase in regulation.
Mises Daily Mises Institute



WANT TO TRY AGAIN BUBBA? Or you mean Reagan taking the top rate to 50% the first six years AS he increased taxes on the avg guy, through eleven other forms of tax increases actually boomed the economy? THAT must be Obama's problem, the top rate isn't nearly as high as Ronnie had it his first 6 years???

You know what's amusing about your cite, Dad? You know so little about economics and specifically about the economics of the Reagan years that you fall for the bullshit that Mr. Rothbard was selling. Let me see if I can put some of his statistics in context!

Mr. Rothbard is apoplectic about Reagan increasing government spending by a "shocking" 3.2%. What he fails to tell you is that Reagan's policies also increased government revenues from just over $517 billion in 1980 to more than $1 trillion in 1990. In constant inflation-adjusted dollars, this was a 28 percent increase in revenue. So yes...Reagan did in fact increase government spending but he also increased the amount of money that the government was taking in.

As for who was paying what in taxes? The actual amount of taxes paid by the wealthy increased under Reagan and the amount of taxes paid by the "average guy" went down.

You know what, Dad...if you spent a little less time at HuffPo trolling for the nonsense you post here and more time sitting in a classroom learning about economics...perhaps you wouldn't be perceived as the the second coming of R-Derp here! Just saying...

 

[Dot Com]

Oldstyle will stay logged-on all day to spew his UNSOURCED opinions (rw talking-points) as long as someone responds to him. Not falling for his rw kool aid today, or any other day for that matter, henceforward. Wasted enough time w/ "that one" ystrdy. Prolly some kid who is too lazy to use sources or a typical eXtreme rw'er on this board

 

[Dot Com]

 

[Siete]

Just a few...

- American Financial Stability Act
- Workers tax credit
- Small Business Jobs Act
- ARRA
- Making Home Affordable plan
- Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act
- Credit Card Accountability, Responsibility and Disclosure Act
- Worker, Homeownership, and Business Assistance Act

Go through those, Faun and explain to me how it is that they created jobs?

The fact is...you can't come up with any legislation that you Progressives passed or proposed that created jobs...so you posted that laundry list of legislation that was passed hoping I'd buy the fact that maybe some of them helped to create a few jobs.

That's not possible since the government doesn't rarely compiles such information. This is true of all presidents. By the same token, you cannot prove which policies Reagan passed which has helped the economy or which policies Clinton passed which helped the economy. A president pushes policies and those policies are judged by the performance of the economy. For better or worse, the president gets the credit or the blame for the economy.

I can tell you exactly what strategy Ronald Reagan employed to combat the Stagflation that he inherited from Jimmy Carter. He proposed and the Fed tightened the money supply to fight runaway inflation. He proposed and Congress passed cuts in the marginal tax rate. He proposed and Congress reduced domestic discretionary spending and streamlined regulations to make them less of a burden on businesses seeking to create jobs. Reagan had a PLAN...a plan he stuck with despite public support waning early on because of an increase in unemployment when he tightened up the money supply. He did what he did because it made common sense to him despite what "some" economists and many politicians were saying.

So tell me what economic policies Barack Obama proposed to lead us out of the recession he inherited from George W. Bush!

The Myths of Reaganomics
Murray N. Rothbard
The Mises Daily presents relevant short articles from the perspective of an unfettered free market and Austrian economics

GNP in 1980 as 21.6%, and after six years of Reagan, 24.3%. A better comparison would be percentage of federal spending to net private product, that is, production of the private sector. That percentage was 31.1% in 1980, and a shocking 34.3% in 1986. So even using percentages, the Reagan administration has brought us a substantial increase in government spending.


Deregulation. Another crucial aspect of freeing the market and getting government off our backs is deregulation, and the administration and its Reaganomists have been very proud of its deregulation record. However, a look at the record reveals a very different picture. In the first place, the most conspicuous examples of deregulation; the ending of oil and gasoline price controls and rationing, the deregulation of trucks and airlines, were all launched by the Carter administration, and completed just in time for the Reagan administration to claim the credit. Meanwhile, there were other promised deregulations that never took place; for example, abolition of natural gas controls and of the Department of Energy.

Overall, in fact, there has probably been not deregulation, but an increase in regulation.
Mises Daily Mises Institute



WANT TO TRY AGAIN BUBBA? Or you mean Reagan taking the top rate to 50% the first six years AS he increased taxes on the avg guy, through eleven other forms of tax increases actually boomed the economy? THAT must be Obama's problem, the top rate isn't nearly as high as Ronnie had it his first 6 years???

You know what's amusing about your cite, Dad? You know so little about economics and specifically about the economics of the Reagan years that you fall for the bullshit that Mr. Rothbard was selling. Let me see if I can put some of his statistics in context!

Mr. Rothbard is apoplectic about Reagan increasing government spending by a "shocking" 3.2%. What he fails to tell you is that Reagan's policies also increased government revenues from just over $517 billion in 1980 to more than $1 trillion in 1990. In constant inflation-adjusted dollars, this was a 28 percent increase in revenue. So yes...Reagan did in fact increase government spending but he also increased the amount of money that the government was taking in.

As for who was paying what in taxes? The actual amount of taxes paid by the wealthy increased under Reagan and the amount of taxes paid by the "average guy" went down.

You know what, Dad...if you spent a little less time at HuffPo trolling for the nonsense you post here and more time sitting in a classroom learning about economics...perhaps you wouldn't be perceived as the the second coming of R-Derp here! Just saying...

yeah Ronnie raised so much revenue he increased the National Debt 189% ..

RW's are so stupid they're almost funny ... almost.

 

[Oldstyle]

Go through those, Faun and explain to me how it is that they created jobs?

The fact is...you can't come up with any legislation that you Progressives passed or proposed that created jobs...so you posted that laundry list of legislation that was passed hoping I'd buy the fact that maybe some of them helped to create a few jobs.

That's not possible since the government doesn't rarely compiles such information. This is true of all presidents. By the same token, you cannot prove which policies Reagan passed which has helped the economy or which policies Clinton passed which helped the economy. A president pushes policies and those policies are judged by the performance of the economy. For better or worse, the president gets the credit or the blame for the economy.

I can tell you exactly what strategy Ronald Reagan employed to combat the Stagflation that he inherited from Jimmy Carter. He proposed and the Fed tightened the money supply to fight runaway inflation. He proposed and Congress passed cuts in the marginal tax rate. He proposed and Congress reduced domestic discretionary spending and streamlined regulations to make them less of a burden on businesses seeking to create jobs. Reagan had a PLAN...a plan he stuck with despite public support waning early on because of an increase in unemployment when he tightened up the money supply. He did what he did because it made common sense to him despite what "some" economists and many politicians were saying.

So tell me what economic policies Barack Obama proposed to lead us out of the recession he inherited from George W. Bush!

The Myths of Reaganomics
Murray N. Rothbard
The Mises Daily presents relevant short articles from the perspective of an unfettered free market and Austrian economics

GNP in 1980 as 21.6%, and after six years of Reagan, 24.3%. A better comparison would be percentage of federal spending to net private product, that is, production of the private sector. That percentage was 31.1% in 1980, and a shocking 34.3% in 1986. So even using percentages, the Reagan administration has brought us a substantial increase in government spending.


Deregulation. Another crucial aspect of freeing the market and getting government off our backs is deregulation, and the administration and its Reaganomists have been very proud of its deregulation record. However, a look at the record reveals a very different picture. In the first place, the most conspicuous examples of deregulation; the ending of oil and gasoline price controls and rationing, the deregulation of trucks and airlines, were all launched by the Carter administration, and completed just in time for the Reagan administration to claim the credit. Meanwhile, there were other promised deregulations that never took place; for example, abolition of natural gas controls and of the Department of Energy.

Overall, in fact, there has probably been not deregulation, but an increase in regulation.
Mises Daily Mises Institute



WANT TO TRY AGAIN BUBBA? Or you mean Reagan taking the top rate to 50% the first six years AS he increased taxes on the avg guy, through eleven other forms of tax increases actually boomed the economy? THAT must be Obama's problem, the top rate isn't nearly as high as Ronnie had it his first 6 years???

You know what's amusing about your cite, Dad? You know so little about economics and specifically about the economics of the Reagan years that you fall for the bullshit that Mr. Rothbard was selling. Let me see if I can put some of his statistics in context!

Mr. Rothbard is apoplectic about Reagan increasing government spending by a "shocking" 3.2%. What he fails to tell you is that Reagan's policies also increased government revenues from just over $517 billion in 1980 to more than $1 trillion in 1990. In constant inflation-adjusted dollars, this was a 28 percent increase in revenue. So yes...Reagan did in fact increase government spending but he also increased the amount of money that the government was taking in.

As for who was paying what in taxes? The actual amount of taxes paid by the wealthy increased under Reagan and the amount of taxes paid by the "average guy" went down.

You know what, Dad...if you spent a little less time at HuffPo trolling for the nonsense you post here and more time sitting in a classroom learning about economics...perhaps you wouldn't be perceived as the the second coming of R-Derp here! Just saying...

yeah Ronnie raised so much revenue he increased the National Debt 189% ..

RW's are so stupid they're almost funny ... almost.

Dutch Reagan increased the National Debt by a little over 1.3 trillion in 8 years...Barack Obama has increased the National Debt by a little over 7 trillion in the six years he's been in office.

Yeah...that Reagan! What a spendthrift!!!

 

[RKMBrown]

It's an easy question, Faun...

Simply tell me what Obama policy it is that's dropped the unemployment rate and created quality jobs for Americans? He was totally against increased production of fossil fuels like shale oil and natural gas so you can cross those jobs off his plus side of the ledger. His stance on coal has caused job losses in coal producing States like West Virginia. His policy of delaying drilling permits caused job losses in States like Louisiana. His stonewalling of the Keystone pipeline cost jobs in Middle America. His Justice Department suing companies like Boeing from opening a new plant in South Carolina delayed the creation of jobs there! God knows that his "green" energy companies that he touted as being our savior going forward have been a disaster! Most of the ones he spent billions of tax payer stimulus dollars on have long since gone bankrupt putting more people out of work. So what's Barry actually done to create jobs, Faun?

Just a few...

- American Financial Stability Act
- Workers tax credit
- Small Business Jobs Act
- ARRA
- Making Home Affordable plan
- Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act
- Credit Card Accountability, Responsibility and Disclosure Act
- Worker, Homeownership, and Business Assistance Act

Go through those, Faun and explain to me how it is that they created jobs?

The fact is...you can't come up with any legislation that you Progressives passed or proposed that created jobs...so you posted that laundry list of legislation that was passed hoping I'd buy the fact that maybe some of them helped to create a few jobs.

That's not possible since the government rarely compiles such information. This is true of all presidents. By the same token, you cannot prove which policies Reagan passed which has helped the economy or which policies Clinton passed which helped the economy. A president pushes policies and those policies are judged by the performance of the economy. For better or worse, the president gets the credit or the blame for the economy.

Let me get this straight. On the one hand you are saying one can't prove which policies help or hurt the economy. Then on the other hand you are saying for better or worse the presidents will get credit or blame for the economy.

IOW you want your cake, and you want to eat it, and you want someone else to pay for it, and you want to blame someone else for eating it, and take credit for paying for it, and then give credit to the president of your choice and blame the president of your choice.

Some changes pushed by and executed by can be directly measured for their effect, positive and negative. For example, all of the taxes and regulations surrounding ACA.

Actually, the one who wants to eat his cake and have it too is you.

Had the economy failed, you would have been screaming how Obama's policies have failed. But when the economy does well, you posit it has nothing to do with his policies.

You are not paying attn. In my opinion our Economy is in the dump. The only thing making the numbers look so so are the mere facts that the worlds economy is also in the dump and that the GDP, and employment numbers are, as usual, fabricated bullshit.

IMO the health of economy must be measured in real terms, such as average income of private sector employees after adjusting for real inflation.

This Average income would mean flat if the number of workers was flat. But I'm pretty sure the number of people in the workforce has decreased, thus the amount of money rowing the country up river is reduced.

 

[nodoginnafight]

Oh so YOUR opinion trumps numbers ?????

Is that really what you are trying to sell?

 

[Bush92]

With Republicans taking over Congress today, prepare to be dazzled with their jobs agenda. It is what we have been waiting six years for

In the new Congress, Republicans will have the majority in both the Senate and the House for the first time in eight years. As they get ready to take power, their rhetorical focus is clear: jobs, the economy, and more jobs.
So far, there are two main proposals on deck for the GOP. First, the Hire More Heroes Act, which would make it easier for small businesses that hire veterans to deny health care to their employees. Second, they want to immediately build the Keystone XL pipeline, a project that would transport oil from Canada to the Gulf Coast.
On their own, these are both extremely small-bore policies. But as a jobs agenda, this doesn't even rise to the level of pitiful. It's the latest evidence that Republicans continue to struggle with basic macroeconomics — and it does not bode well for the nation should they win the White House in 2016.

Sorry Republicans The Keystone XL pipeline is not a jobs agenda - The Week

As opposed to the Democrat's agenda? Hasn't changed since this cartoon from 1993.

 

[Faun]

Just a few...

- American Financial Stability Act
- Workers tax credit
- Small Business Jobs Act
- ARRA
- Making Home Affordable plan
- Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act
- Credit Card Accountability, Responsibility and Disclosure Act
- Worker, Homeownership, and Business Assistance Act

Go through those, Faun and explain to me how it is that they created jobs?

The fact is...you can't come up with any legislation that you Progressives passed or proposed that created jobs...so you posted that laundry list of legislation that was passed hoping I'd buy the fact that maybe some of them helped to create a few jobs.

That's not possible since the government doesn't rarely compiles such information. This is true of all presidents. By the same token, you cannot prove which policies Reagan passed which has helped the economy or which policies Clinton passed which helped the economy. A president pushes policies and those policies are judged by the performance of the economy. For better or worse, the president gets the credit or the blame for the economy.

I can tell you exactly what strategy Ronald Reagan employed to combat the Stagflation that he inherited from Jimmy Carter. He proposed and the Fed tightened the money supply to fight runaway inflation. He proposed and Congress passed cuts in the marginal tax rate. He proposed and Congress reduced domestic discretionary spending and streamlined regulations to make them less of a burden on businesses seeking to create jobs. Reagan had a PLAN...a plan he stuck with despite public support waning early on because of an increase in unemployment when he tightened up the money supply. He did what he did because it made common sense to him despite what "some" economists and many politicians were saying.

So tell me what economic policies Barack Obama proposed to lead us out of the recession he inherited from George W. Bush!

Hey look ... you just did what I did. You listed some policies with zero proof they helped the economy. Thanks for confirming my point.

Zero proof? With all due respect, Faun...those policies produced the longest period of sustained economic growth in modern American history. For you to say that there is no proof they helped the economy is rather amusing.

Do you even see what you're doing? You're doing exactly what I'm doing, only you're claiming you're right but I'm wrong.

You're referencing some of Reagan's policies just as I'm referencing some of Obama's policies; and you're using the healthy economy which followed as evidence his policies worked just as I'm using the current economy as evidence Obama's policies have worked.

It's quite amusing how you rely on the same type of evidence as myself but you think it only works for you.

 

[Dad2three]

Just a few...

- American Financial Stability Act
- Workers tax credit
- Small Business Jobs Act
- ARRA
- Making Home Affordable plan
- Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act
- Credit Card Accountability, Responsibility and Disclosure Act
- Worker, Homeownership, and Business Assistance Act

Go through those, Faun and explain to me how it is that they created jobs?

The fact is...you can't come up with any legislation that you Progressives passed or proposed that created jobs...so you posted that laundry list of legislation that was passed hoping I'd buy the fact that maybe some of them helped to create a few jobs.

That's not possible since the government doesn't rarely compiles such information. This is true of all presidents. By the same token, you cannot prove which policies Reagan passed which has helped the economy or which policies Clinton passed which helped the economy. A president pushes policies and those policies are judged by the performance of the economy. For better or worse, the president gets the credit or the blame for the economy.

I can tell you exactly what strategy Ronald Reagan employed to combat the Stagflation that he inherited from Jimmy Carter. He proposed and the Fed tightened the money supply to fight runaway inflation. He proposed and Congress passed cuts in the marginal tax rate. He proposed and Congress reduced domestic discretionary spending and streamlined regulations to make them less of a burden on businesses seeking to create jobs. Reagan had a PLAN...a plan he stuck with despite public support waning early on because of an increase in unemployment when he tightened up the money supply. He did what he did because it made common sense to him despite what "some" economists and many politicians were saying.

So tell me what economic policies Barack Obama proposed to lead us out of the recession he inherited from George W. Bush!

The Myths of Reaganomics
Murray N. Rothbard
The Mises Daily presents relevant short articles from the perspective of an unfettered free market and Austrian economics

GNP in 1980 as 21.6%, and after six years of Reagan, 24.3%. A better comparison would be percentage of federal spending to net private product, that is, production of the private sector. That percentage was 31.1% in 1980, and a shocking 34.3% in 1986. So even using percentages, the Reagan administration has brought us a substantial increase in government spending.


Deregulation. Another crucial aspect of freeing the market and getting government off our backs is deregulation, and the administration and its Reaganomists have been very proud of its deregulation record. However, a look at the record reveals a very different picture. In the first place, the most conspicuous examples of deregulation; the ending of oil and gasoline price controls and rationing, the deregulation of trucks and airlines, were all launched by the Carter administration, and completed just in time for the Reagan administration to claim the credit. Meanwhile, there were other promised deregulations that never took place; for example, abolition of natural gas controls and of the Department of Energy.

Overall, in fact, there has probably been not deregulation, but an increase in regulation.
Mises Daily Mises Institute



WANT TO TRY AGAIN BUBBA? Or you mean Reagan taking the top rate to 50% the first six years AS he increased taxes on the avg guy, through eleven other forms of tax increases actually boomed the economy? THAT must be Obama's problem, the top rate isn't nearly as high as Ronnie had it his first 6 years???

You know what's amusing about your cite, Dad? You know so little about economics and specifically about the economics of the Reagan years that you fall for the bullshit that Mr. Rothbard was selling. Let me see if I can put some of his statistics in context!

Mr. Rothbard is apoplectic about Reagan increasing government spending by a "shocking" 3.2%. What he fails to tell you is that Reagan's policies also increased government revenues from just over $517 billion in 1980 to more than $1 trillion in 1990. In constant inflation-adjusted dollars, this was a 28 percent increase in revenue. So yes...Reagan did in fact increase government spending but he also increased the amount of money that the government was taking in.

As for who was paying what in taxes? The actual amount of taxes paid by the wealthy increased under Reagan and the amount of taxes paid by the "average guy" went down.

You know what, Dad...if you spent a little less time at HuffPo trolling for the nonsense you post here and more time sitting in a classroom learning about economics...perhaps you wouldn't be perceived as the the second coming of R-Derp here! Just saying...

Mr Rothbard the LIBERTARIAN from right wing Mises, is happy Reagan increased the tax revenues? (Which he didn't actually, as share of GDP AS ECONOMISTS MEASURE IT, NOT CONSTANT DOLLARS, LOL, MOST of the 'new' revenues were INFLATION, followed by Reagan's ELEVEN TAX INCREASES THAT PRIMARILY HIT THE MIDDLE CLASS, followed by population growth

Reagan shifted the tax burden down the income scale. During the 1980s, the total effective federal taxation rate for the poorest one-fifth of American families actually increased by more than 16%. By contrast, the effective taxation rate for the wealthiest one-fifth of families fell by 5.5%, and the richest one percent of Americans saved even more: their tax rate fell by 14.4%. (AS THEIR INCOMES SOARED, LOL)
Economy in The Reagan Era



Office of Tax Analysis estimates that the act (RONNIE'S 1981 TAX ACT)lowered federal income tax revenue by 13% relative to where it would have been in the bill's absence
http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/tax-policy/tax-analysis/Documents/ota81.pdf

Real revenue growth 36 percent in the 8 years before Reagan, 26 percent under Reagan, 28 percent in the years following.

-- Paul Krugman

During the 1980s, the total effective federal taxation rate for the poorest one fifth of American families (that group that saw its income decline by 24%) actually increased by more than 16%.


By contrast, the effective taxation rate for the wealthiest one fifth of families (the group which already saw a 14% increase) fell by 5.5%

And this is only tax policy. When wages are examined, particularly CEO wage earnings, we find a similar wealth curve to the top.


http://www.csun.edu/~galasso/CFA-galasso2012.pdf





Top .1 Percent Income Share in the United States, 1980-2012

(Including capital gains)

1980 ( 3.41)
1981 ( 3.57) Reagan
1982 ( 4.18)
1983 ( 4.62)
1984 ( 4.98)


1985 ( 5.32)
1986 ( 7.40)
1987 ( 4.90)
1988 ( 6.80)
1989 ( 6.00) Bush

1990 ( 5.82)
1991 ( 5.12)
1992 ( 6.03)
1993 ( 5.73) Clinton
1994 ( 5.70)

1995 ( 6.21)
1996 ( 7.24)
1997 ( 8.18)
1998 ( 9.00)
1999 ( 9.62)

2000 ( 10.88)
2001 ( 8.37) Bush
2002 ( 7.34)
2003 ( 7.87)
2004 ( 9.46)

2005 ( 10.98)
2006 ( 11.59)
2007 ( 12.28)
2008 ( 10.40)
2009 ( 8.30) Obama

2010 ( 9.66)
2011 ( 9.27)
2012 ( 11.33)

-- Thomas Piketty and Emmanuel Saez

 

[Dad2three]

Just a few...

- American Financial Stability Act
- Workers tax credit
- Small Business Jobs Act
- ARRA
- Making Home Affordable plan
- Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act
- Credit Card Accountability, Responsibility and Disclosure Act
- Worker, Homeownership, and Business Assistance Act

Go through those, Faun and explain to me how it is that they created jobs?

The fact is...you can't come up with any legislation that you Progressives passed or proposed that created jobs...so you posted that laundry list of legislation that was passed hoping I'd buy the fact that maybe some of them helped to create a few jobs.

That's not possible since the government rarely compiles such information. This is true of all presidents. By the same token, you cannot prove which policies Reagan passed which has helped the economy or which policies Clinton passed which helped the economy. A president pushes policies and those policies are judged by the performance of the economy. For better or worse, the president gets the credit or the blame for the economy.

Let me get this straight. On the one hand you are saying one can't prove which policies help or hurt the economy. Then on the other hand you are saying for better or worse the presidents will get credit or blame for the economy.

IOW you want your cake, and you want to eat it, and you want someone else to pay for it, and you want to blame someone else for eating it, and take credit for paying for it, and then give credit to the president of your choice and blame the president of your choice.

Some changes pushed by and executed by can be directly measured for their effect, positive and negative. For example, all of the taxes and regulations surrounding ACA.

Actually, the one who wants to eat his cake and have it too is you.

Had the economy failed, you would have been screaming how Obama's policies have failed. But when the economy does well, you posit it has nothing to do with his policies.

You are not paying attn. In my opinion our Economy is in the dump. The only thing making the numbers look so so are the mere facts that the worlds economy is also in the dump and that the GDP, and employment numbers are, as usual, fabricated bullshit.

IMO the health of economy must be measured in real terms, such as average income of private sector employees after adjusting for real inflation.

This Average income would mean flat if the number of workers was flat. But I'm pretty sure the number of people in the workforce has decreased, thus the amount of money rowing the country up river is reduced.

CBO finds that, between 1979 and 2007, income grew by:

275 percent for the top 1 percent of households,
65 percent for the next 19 percent,
Just under 40 percent for the next 60 percent, and
18 percent for the bottom 20 percent.

The share of income going to higher-income households rose, while the share going to lower-income households fell.

The top fifth of the population saw a 10-percentage-point increase in their share of after-tax income.
Most of that growth went to the top 1 percent of the population.
All other groups saw their shares decline by 2 to 3 percentage points.


Trends in the Distribution of Household Income Between 1979 and 2007 Congressional Budget Office

 

[Oldstyle]

Go through those, Faun and explain to me how it is that they created jobs?

The fact is...you can't come up with any legislation that you Progressives passed or proposed that created jobs...so you posted that laundry list of legislation that was passed hoping I'd buy the fact that maybe some of them helped to create a few jobs.

That's not possible since the government doesn't rarely compiles such information. This is true of all presidents. By the same token, you cannot prove which policies Reagan passed which has helped the economy or which policies Clinton passed which helped the economy. A president pushes policies and those policies are judged by the performance of the economy. For better or worse, the president gets the credit or the blame for the economy.

I can tell you exactly what strategy Ronald Reagan employed to combat the Stagflation that he inherited from Jimmy Carter. He proposed and the Fed tightened the money supply to fight runaway inflation. He proposed and Congress passed cuts in the marginal tax rate. He proposed and Congress reduced domestic discretionary spending and streamlined regulations to make them less of a burden on businesses seeking to create jobs. Reagan had a PLAN...a plan he stuck with despite public support waning early on because of an increase in unemployment when he tightened up the money supply. He did what he did because it made common sense to him despite what "some" economists and many politicians were saying.

So tell me what economic policies Barack Obama proposed to lead us out of the recession he inherited from George W. Bush!

Hey look ... you just did what I did. You listed some policies with zero proof they helped the economy. Thanks for confirming my point.

Zero proof? With all due respect, Faun...those policies produced the longest period of sustained economic growth in modern American history. For you to say that there is no proof they helped the economy is rather amusing.

Do you even see what you're doing? You're doing exactly what I'm doing, only you're claiming you're right but I'm wrong.

You're referencing some of Reagan's policies just as I'm referencing some of Obama's policies; and you're using the healthy economy which followed as evidence his policies worked just as I'm using the current economy as evidence Obama's policies have worked.

It's quite amusing how you rely on the same type of evidence as myself but you think it only works for you.

Actually, Faun...I've shown you the exact policies that Reagan implemented that turned the American economy around. What policies have you show me that Barack Obama implemented? I hope you don't think that pathetic list of legislation you came up with...a list that had little to no effect on jobs or the economy...is the same thing as my explaining exactly what Reagan's plan was to attack Stagflation?

 

[Oldstyle]

And here comes Dad again...have you noticed that the bigger the font size gets in his posts...the more ridiculous the posts become?

If you want to see just how bad Dad can be go look at that site he cited about the Reagan Economy. See how he ignores the bulk of a piece that is overwhelmingly complimentary to Reagan to concentrate on one paragraph that wasn't.

 

[Dad2three]

That's not possible since the government doesn't rarely compiles such information. This is true of all presidents. By the same token, you cannot prove which policies Reagan passed which has helped the economy or which policies Clinton passed which helped the economy. A president pushes policies and those policies are judged by the performance of the economy. For better or worse, the president gets the credit or the blame for the economy.

I can tell you exactly what strategy Ronald Reagan employed to combat the Stagflation that he inherited from Jimmy Carter. He proposed and the Fed tightened the money supply to fight runaway inflation. He proposed and Congress passed cuts in the marginal tax rate. He proposed and Congress reduced domestic discretionary spending and streamlined regulations to make them less of a burden on businesses seeking to create jobs. Reagan had a PLAN...a plan he stuck with despite public support waning early on because of an increase in unemployment when he tightened up the money supply. He did what he did because it made common sense to him despite what "some" economists and many politicians were saying.

So tell me what economic policies Barack Obama proposed to lead us out of the recession he inherited from George W. Bush!

Hey look ... you just did what I did. You listed some policies with zero proof they helped the economy. Thanks for confirming my point.

Zero proof? With all due respect, Faun...those policies produced the longest period of sustained economic growth in modern American history. For you to say that there is no proof they helped the economy is rather amusing.

Do you even see what you're doing? You're doing exactly what I'm doing, only you're claiming you're right but I'm wrong.

You're referencing some of Reagan's policies just as I'm referencing some of Obama's policies; and you're using the healthy economy which followed as evidence his policies worked just as I'm using the current economy as evidence Obama's policies have worked.

It's quite amusing how you rely on the same type of evidence as myself but you think it only works for you.

Actually, Faun...I've shown you the exact policies that Reagan implemented that turned the American economy around. What policies have you show me that Barack Obama implemented? I hope you don't think that pathetic list of legislation you came up with...a list that had little to no effect on jobs or the economy...is the same thing as my explaining exactly what Reagan's plan was to attack Stagflation?

You mean the policies started with Carter, BESIDES cutting taxes for the rich? lol

Ronnie was smart enough to stick with Carters guy, Volker AND most deregulation started under Carter

Weird though, Carter had 9+ million PRIVATE sector jobs in his FOUR years to Ronnie's 14 million in EIGHT years? He was a 'job creator'?? lol

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data