No More Hope

[Samson]

That's because Bush was not "stimulating" the right areas.

It took a gay president to know where to stroke.

I can't wait until school starts and 7th graders won't be posting.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Love how you spun the graphs, Seawytch but here what that really looks like:

]

Jesus
That's interesting. What your chart says is that after a long decline in participation throughout the Bush presidency,

the rate stabilized one year into the Obama presidency and has remained steady ever since.

Good work, Mr. President.

Stabilized at a lower level. When I read a graph, and a liberal like you says 'recovery', I expect that little red line to go up. Not stay in the same place.

Actually one would presume that after that decline, there would be a rise to near the levels in the Bush Presidency, correct?

Bad job, no more half assery from you Carbine.

So it falls under Bush, and that's fine, but it stabilizes under Obama and that's a sign the situation is hopeless.

jeezus.

Oh, and btw, why don't you remind where you are in that chart,

and why....

 

[rightwinger]

Stabilized at a lower level. When I read a graph, and a liberal like you says 'recovery', I expect that little red line to go up. Not stay in the same place.

Actually one would presume that after that decline, there would be a rise to near the levels in the Bush Presidency, correct?

Bad job, no more half assery from you Carbine.

The labor participation rate has been dropping for the last 15 years and will continue to drop for another 15

That is why this has become the new go to statistic for Republicans

Used to be unemployment, unemployment, unemployment

Now it is labor participation rate ,labor participation rate ,labor participation rate

OK, use the unemployment rate, it still ain't that great.

The unemployment rate has dropped 4%. That is why Republicans no longer mention it

 

[Peach]

Actually I do believe that most recessions we recovered from without putting our children into massive debt. There is nothing to say that the economy would not have turned around just as fast if not faster then it did without the stimulus. History shows that recovery from recession is fastest depending on how big the recession. With the 2008 recession the recovery should have been big, instead we get our grandchildren in debt and the longest and weakest recovery in history. Seems to me one would think that maybe the stimulus was not that great of an idea considering the results. Of course we can speculate on what could have happen had we not had the stimulus but just look at history and see what has happened before.

Past economic history was turned on its head, war without recovery: 2002-2008.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Stabilized at a lower level. When I read a graph, and a liberal like you says 'recovery', I expect that little red line to go up. Not stay in the same place.

Actually one would presume that after that decline, there would be a rise to near the levels in the Bush Presidency, correct?

Bad job, no more half assery from you Carbine.

The labor participation rate has been dropping for the last 15 years and will continue to drop for another 15

That is why this has become the new go to statistic for Republicans

Used to be unemployment, unemployment, unemployment

Now it is labor participation rate ,labor participation rate ,labor participation rate

Look at rw trying to spin it his way. The harvest is plentiful, but the laborers are few....

Government employment has been in a depression for the entire Obama presidency.

 

[Samson]

Jesus
That's interesting. What your chart says is that after a long decline in participation throughout the Bush presidency,

the rate stabilized one year into the Obama presidency and has remained steady ever since.

Good work, Mr. President.

Stabilized at a lower level. When I read a graph, and a liberal like you says 'recovery', I expect that little red line to go up. Not stay in the same place.

Actually one would presume that after that decline, there would be a rise to near the levels in the Bush Presidency, correct?

Bad job, no more half assery from you Carbine.

So it falls under Bush, and that's fine, but it stabilizes under Obama and that's a sign the situation is hopeless.

jeezus.

Oh, and btw, why don't you remind where you are in that chart,

and why....

So I guess the 2001 recession was Clinton's fault.


You partisans crack me up in your little black-and-white worlds.

 

[rightwinger]

Stabilized at a lower level. When I read a graph, and a liberal like you says 'recovery', I expect that little red line to go up. Not stay in the same place.

Actually one would presume that after that decline, there would be a rise to near the levels in the Bush Presidency, correct?

Bad job, no more half assery from you Carbine.

The labor participation rate has been dropping for the last 15 years and will continue to drop for another 15

That is why this has become the new go to statistic for Republicans

Used to be unemployment, unemployment, unemployment

Now it is labor participation rate ,labor participation rate ,labor participation rate

Look at rw trying to spin it his way. The harvest is plentiful, but the laborers are few....

When was the last time you filed a tax return?

 

[rightwinger]

The labor participation rate has been dropping for the last 15 years and will continue to drop for another 15

That is why this has become the new go to statistic for Republicans

Used to be unemployment, unemployment, unemployment

Now it is labor participation rate ,labor participation rate ,labor participation rate

Look at rw trying to spin it his way. The harvest is plentiful, but the laborers are few....

Government employment has been in a depression for the entire Obama presidency.

Republicans have insisted on cutting government spending while we are trying to revive our economy

It amounts to throwing on the economic brakes and then complaining we are not moving fast enough

 

[Samson]

Actually I do believe that most recessions we recovered from without putting our children into massive debt. There is nothing to say that the economy would not have turned around just as fast if not faster then it did without the stimulus. History shows that recovery from recession is fastest depending on how big the recession. With the 2008 recession the recovery should have been big, instead we get our grandchildren in debt and the longest and weakest recovery in history. Seems to me one would think that maybe the stimulus was not that great of an idea considering the results. Of course we can speculate on what could have happen had we not had the stimulus but just look at history and see what has happened before.

Past economic history was turned on its head, war without recovery: 2002-2008.

Um.....the "war" did not end in 2008.

 

[NYcarbineer]

[

Actually one would presume that after that decline, there would be a rise to near the levels in the Bush Presidency, correct?

.

So you're conceding that the Bush presidency was a failure because the ratio never returned to Clinton levels, even during the Bush 'recovery'.

lol, good point.

 

[Samson]

Look at rw trying to spin it his way. The harvest is plentiful, but the laborers are few....

Government employment has been in a depression for the entire Obama presidency.

Republicans have insisted on cutting government spending while we are trying to revive our economy

It amounts to throwing on the economic brakes and then complaining we are not moving fast enough

There is not Democratic Leadership to counter the Vast Conservative Republican Conspiracy!!!

 

[NYcarbineer]

Look at rw trying to spin it his way. The harvest is plentiful, but the laborers are few....

Government employment has been in a depression for the entire Obama presidency.

Republicans have insisted on cutting government spending while we are trying to revive our economy

It amounts to throwing on the economic brakes and then complaining we are not moving fast enough

Conservatives have gotten what they wanted, smaller government, fewer government employees,

something they said was the key to economic growth and prosperity,

but now that those job losses have gotten factored into the national numbers,

conservatives are using them to attack the President.

Simple question: are conservatives really so stupid as to not realize the negative economic impact of 700,000 government JOBS disappearing over the course of a few years?

 

[rightwinger]

Government employment has been in a depression for the entire Obama presidency.

Republicans have insisted on cutting government spending while we are trying to revive our economy

It amounts to throwing on the economic brakes and then complaining we are not moving fast enough

Conservatives have gotten what they wanted, smaller government, fewer government employees,

something they said was the key to economic growth and prosperity,

but now that those job losses have gotten factored into the national numbers,

conservatives are using them to attack the President.

Simple question: are conservatives really so stupid as to not realize the negative economic impact of 700,000 government JOBS disappearing over the course of a few years?

They know what they are doing.

It is part of the Obama must fail mentality. Do everything possible to block a recovery

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Government employment has been in a depression for the entire Obama presidency.

Republicans have insisted on cutting government spending while we are trying to revive our economy

It amounts to throwing on the economic brakes and then complaining we are not moving fast enough

Conservatives have gotten what they wanted, smaller government, fewer government employees,

something they said was the key to economic growth and prosperity,

but now that those job losses have gotten factored into the national numbers,

conservatives are using them to attack the President.

Simple question: are conservatives really so stupid as to not realize the negative economic impact of 700,000 government JOBS disappearing over the course of a few years?

Conservatives are really that dishonest.

 

[Peach]

Actually I do believe that most recessions we recovered from without putting our children into massive debt. There is nothing to say that the economy would not have turned around just as fast if not faster then it did without the stimulus. History shows that recovery from recession is fastest depending on how big the recession. With the 2008 recession the recovery should have been big, instead we get our grandchildren in debt and the longest and weakest recovery in history. Seems to me one would think that maybe the stimulus was not that great of an idea considering the results. Of course we can speculate on what could have happen had we not had the stimulus but just look at history and see what has happened before.

Past economic history was turned on its head, war without recovery: 2002-2008.

Um.....the "war" did not end in 2008.

No, but the majority of the money was SPENT, and no recovery. 1.6, yet an economic downturn, not before seen in US history.

 

[Samson]

Past economic history was turned on its head, war without recovery: 2002-2008.

Um.....the "war" did not end in 2008.

No, but the majority of the money was SPENT, and no recovery. 1.6, yet an economic downturn, not before seen in US history.

So nothing but the "war" and specific costs while Bush was President had anything to do with the economy, but costs of the "war" after Obama was elected had no effect.

Gotchya.

It must be a comfort to have such tunneled vision.

 

[Wildman]

The immigration situation has you this down, yet 9/11/01, New Orleans underwater, and thousands of Americans dead & maimed to find weapons that didn't exist were BRIGHT spots in our history? I see hope, 5 and a half years without disasters that claimed thousands of lives and cost trillions.

Maybe this will start a trend, our next President can improve the economy, and we stay on the road to "normalcy".

you might also add that the stock market more than doubled, jobs are being created at a are of over 200,000 a month and fewer people not getting medical care because they can't afford it.

i'm very hopeful that the GOP will take their party back from wackos and congress will do it's job again. if they were, we'd have a lot more to celebrate.

you might also add that the stock market more than doubled,

all due to triple inflation

jobs are being created at a are of over 200,000 a month

“He lied about everything.”

Obotcare..., haaaa, what a major cluster fuck, the S.O.B. kept changing the "law" he signed without Congress's approval. “He lied about everything.”

 

[Peach]

Um.....the "war" did not end in 2008.

No, but the majority of the money was SPENT, and no recovery. 1.6, yet an economic downturn, not before seen in US history.

So nothing but the "war" and specific costs while Bush was President had anything to do with the economy, but costs of the "war" after Obama was elected had no effect.

Gotchya.

It must be a comfort to have such tunneled vision.

Nope, I already posted "flat lining" is not success. The economy remains in the doldrums(.)

 

[LoneLaugher]

Holy shit! What are you doing wasting your talents here. A thing of beauty like that needs to be published. Have you tried The New Yorker? Maybe Backpage?

I would thank you for that if I didn't already know how sarcastic you were with me just then.

The New Yorker isn't bad though... and Backpage not a very nice place to publish anything other than classifieds. It is a cheap and lecherous knockoff of Craigslist. In fact, I should neg you for even suggesting Backpage. How utterly revolting.

Sarcasm? Me?

 

[Statistikhengst]

The immigration situation has you this down, yet 9/11/01, New Orleans underwater, and thousands of Americans dead & maimed to find weapons that didn't exist were BRIGHT spots in our history? I see hope, 5 and a half years without disasters that claimed thousands of lives and cost trillions.

Maybe this will start a trend, our next President can improve the economy, and we stay on the road to "normalcy".

you might also add that the stock market more than doubled, jobs are being created at a are of over 200,000 a month and fewer people not getting medical care because they can't afford it.

i'm very hopeful that the GOP will take their party back from wackos and congress will do it's job again. if they were, we'd have a lot more to celebrate.