The President with the worst average unemployment rate since World War II is?

[bripat9643]

You're posting diversions, like you always do. No matter how many times I bring it up, you fail to address the point that the recovery began in 2008 Q4.

Who do you think you're fooling, asshole?

To be clear, you're claiming the recovery began in 2008. My point, which I've proven repeatedly, is that you're too brain-dead to expect anyone to accept your assertions.

As evidence, I point to your brain-dead assertion that the recession ended in December of 2008 when it actually ended in June of 2009.

I don't expect anyone to accept my assertions, you fucking dumbass. I posted government statistics showing that to be the case. In typical Faun fashion, you are still harping an a trivial semantic issue, because that's the only point you can win.

Imbecile....

You posted a graph and moronically claimed it showed the recession ended in December, 2008, when it actually ended in June, 2009.

You see, it's not the chart you posted -- it's your demented rightard interpretation of what it shows.

You're still dancing and avoiding the issue. How did Obama's "stimulus" boondoggle end the recession when the economy was already in recovery starting on Q4 of 2008? You know that isn't possible, so you will continue to lie and deflect.

I’ve already shown here you have no clue what you’re talking about. Who knows why you carry on like a raving lunatic?

Someone who relentlessly harps on an irrelevant point to avoid discussing the real issue is showing all the symptoms of a raving lunatic, as well as proving that he's an imbecile.

Who do you think you're fooling, dumbass?

 

[bripat9643]

Dow Has Set 64 Record Closes Since 2016 Election

Stock Market Rally Continues as Indexes Close at Record Highs

Unemployment hits record low in seven states

FWD 19 minutes into the video.

LOLOL

Too stupid for words.

First of all, you're giving trump credit for 17 times the Dow broke a record while Obama was president.

That nonsense aside, while the Dow went from its recession low of 6600 to 19800 under Obama, it broke a record high 122 times.

It's happened 48 times since trump has been president.

^DJI Historical Prices | Dow Jones Industrial Average Stock - Yahoo Finance

... and even then, it's more because Obama handed him a Dow that was near its record high when he left office.

And again... the Dow under Obama increased 139%. 200% from when it bottomed out from the Great Recession. Under trump, it's up 15.5%.

It is because they liked the one whom was elected as President.

Sorry to burst your partisan bubble -- but again ... Obama was still president.

Obama ... 122
Trump ....... 48

And it's not so hard to break that record when you're handed a Dow near its all-time record high. Try doing it like Obama did, inheriting a Dow that was 42% lower than its previous high. Trump inherited a Dow that was less than one percent (0.9%) off its previous high.

Actually, it's much easier in Obama's situation. When the Dow has bottomed out, then only way to go is up. Obama's only accomplishment was getting elected at the right time.

More rightarded nonsense.

In reality, from which you are clearly divorced, the Dow under Obama had to go from 6600 to over 14000 just to break the record. A 113% increase and roughly 7500 point increase from where the market bottomed out; while starting off in a massive recession. It then went up another 40% and broke a record high another 121 times before Obama left office.

Compared to President Tinkles who inherited the Dow at 19800. It needed to go up only about 200 points, less than one percent, for him to break a record high, in a good economy.

Leave it to brain-dead sycophants like you to blindly assert it’s easier to increase the Dow by 7500 points in a poor economy than it is to raise it by 200 points in a good economy.

It's easy to make the DOW go up when the FED pumps $4 trillion dollars into the economy and keeps interest rates at 0%. Under such circumstances, what can people do with their money other than put it into the stock market?

You're so stupid and gullible that it's positively comical.

 

[sealybobo]

Sorry to burst your partisan bubble -- but again ... Obama was still president.

Obama ... 122
Trump ....... 48

And it's not so hard to break that record when you're handed a Dow near its all-time record high. Try doing it like Obama did, inheriting a Dow that was 42% lower than its previous high. Trump inherited a Dow that was less than one percent (0.9%) off its previous high.

Actually, it's much easier in Obama's situation. When the Dow has bottomed out, then only way to go is up. Obama's only accomplishment was getting elected at the right time.

Actually the DOW could have gone down even more. But it did not. So what you said is some dumb shit.

Bullshit. I love the way all of Obama's accomplishments are based on what would have happened. This prediction comes from all the people who said Hillary had 98% chance of winning and that the economy would crator the minute Trump was innaugurated.

Business has picked up and stock market went up because trump promised to cut taxes and spend on infrastructure. We're waiting

I don' t think we can really attribute much of any growth to Trump, but I do agree that we are waiting for those tax cuts and infrastructure spending. Ironically infrastructure building is something Obama proposed.

I'll give Trump a little credit because corporations love it when a Republican wins and talks about cutting taxes and infrastructure spending. So far he hasn't fucked up Obama's good economy like Bush did Clinton's.

Remember Bill signed NAFTA but he put protections in it for the environment and American workers. Want to bet Bush and Chaney and Deley and Hastert took those protections out?

 

[Faun]

To be clear, you're claiming the recovery began in 2008. My point, which I've proven repeatedly, is that you're too brain-dead to expect anyone to accept your assertions.

As evidence, I point to your brain-dead assertion that the recession ended in December of 2008 when it actually ended in June of 2009.

I don't expect anyone to accept my assertions, you fucking dumbass. I posted government statistics showing that to be the case. In typical Faun fashion, you are still harping an a trivial semantic issue, because that's the only point you can win.

Imbecile....

You posted a graph and moronically claimed it showed the recession ended in December, 2008, when it actually ended in June, 2009.

You see, it's not the chart you posted -- it's your demented rightard interpretation of what it shows.

You're still dancing and avoiding the issue. How did Obama's "stimulus" boondoggle end the recession when the economy was already in recovery starting on Q4 of 2008? You know that isn't possible, so you will continue to lie and deflect.

I’ve already shown here you have no clue what you’re talking about. Who knows why you carry on like a raving lunatic?

Someone who relentlessly harps on an irrelevant point to avoid discussing the real issue is showing all the symptoms of a raving lunatic, as well as proving that he's an imbecile.

Who do you think you're fooling, dumbass?

That you have no fucking clue what you’re talking about is hardly irrelevant.

 

[Faun]

LOLOL

Too stupid for words.

First of all, you're giving trump credit for 17 times the Dow broke a record while Obama was president.

That nonsense aside, while the Dow went from its recession low of 6600 to 19800 under Obama, it broke a record high 122 times.

It's happened 48 times since trump has been president.

^DJI Historical Prices | Dow Jones Industrial Average Stock - Yahoo Finance

... and even then, it's more because Obama handed him a Dow that was near its record high when he left office.

And again... the Dow under Obama increased 139%. 200% from when it bottomed out from the Great Recession. Under trump, it's up 15.5%.

It is because they liked the one whom was elected as President.

Sorry to burst your partisan bubble -- but again ... Obama was still president.

Obama ... 122
Trump ....... 48

And it's not so hard to break that record when you're handed a Dow near its all-time record high. Try doing it like Obama did, inheriting a Dow that was 42% lower than its previous high. Trump inherited a Dow that was less than one percent (0.9%) off its previous high.

Actually, it's much easier in Obama's situation. When the Dow has bottomed out, then only way to go is up. Obama's only accomplishment was getting elected at the right time.

More rightarded nonsense.

In reality, from which you are clearly divorced, the Dow under Obama had to go from 6600 to over 14000 just to break the record. A 113% increase and roughly 7500 point increase from where the market bottomed out; while starting off in a massive recession. It then went up another 40% and broke a record high another 121 times before Obama left office.

Compared to President Tinkles who inherited the Dow at 19800. It needed to go up only about 200 points, less than one percent, for him to break a record high, in a good economy.

Leave it to brain-dead sycophants like you to blindly assert it’s easier to increase the Dow by 7500 points in a poor economy than it is to raise it by 200 points in a good economy.

It's easy to make the DOW go up when the FED pumps $4 trillion dollars into the economy and keeps interest rates at 0%. Under such circumstances, what can people do with their money other than put it into the stock market?

You're so stupid and gullible that it's positively comical.

LOLOL

So you say, but you don’t even know what s Recession is.

 

[sealybobo]

It is because they liked the one whom was elected as President.

Sorry to burst your partisan bubble -- but again ... Obama was still president.

Obama ... 122
Trump ....... 48

And it's not so hard to break that record when you're handed a Dow near its all-time record high. Try doing it like Obama did, inheriting a Dow that was 42% lower than its previous high. Trump inherited a Dow that was less than one percent (0.9%) off its previous high.

Actually, it's much easier in Obama's situation. When the Dow has bottomed out, then only way to go is up. Obama's only accomplishment was getting elected at the right time.

More rightarded nonsense.

In reality, from which you are clearly divorced, the Dow under Obama had to go from 6600 to over 14000 just to break the record. A 113% increase and roughly 7500 point increase from where the market bottomed out; while starting off in a massive recession. It then went up another 40% and broke a record high another 121 times before Obama left office.

Compared to President Tinkles who inherited the Dow at 19800. It needed to go up only about 200 points, less than one percent, for him to break a record high, in a good economy.

Leave it to brain-dead sycophants like you to blindly assert it’s easier to increase the Dow by 7500 points in a poor economy than it is to raise it by 200 points in a good economy.

It's easy to make the DOW go up when the FED pumps $4 trillion dollars into the economy and keeps interest rates at 0%. Under such circumstances, what can people do with their money other than put it into the stock market?

You're so stupid and gullible that it's positively comical.

LOLOL

Do you say, but you don’t even know what s Recession is.

 

[james bond]

Oh?

So you have BLS numbers saying 101 million people are unemployed?

You pathological fucking liar.

You're not sane, but then, you're not sentient. You are just a hate vessel for your filthy Bolshevik party.

First and foremost, what I said was...

There's 101 million people out of work now...

... and yes, of course I got that figure from the BLS, ya senile old coot...

Not in Labor Force: 94,417,000
Unemployed: 6,801,000

............... 94,417,000
................. 6,801,000
---------------------------------
Total ... 101,218,000

You know you lying retard, you can change your own posts, but you can't alter the backquotes in my posts...

View attachment 154536


OOPSSSS

Busted lying again, you fucking liar,

You're fucking demented, remember?

I changed nothing in your posts or mine. In fact, I even quoted my post verbatim.

I said, "there's 101 million people out of work now..."

and you idiotically thought I was said there's 101 million people looking for work -- which of course, I never said. sadly, your senility led you to believe I said that.

You lied, you got busted. The whole board sees it.

It should be nothing new for you, you lie incessantly.

LOLOL

You're sooo fucking senile.

I copied and pasted my quote verbatim and also included a link to my post.

You have any idea how crazed you have to be to assert I lied about what I said?

Faun, Faun, Faun, Faun, Faun. You are no faun (pun intended) at all. Your silly posts just goes to show that we should never listen to leftists when it comes to running a business, economy or country. Those NFL players should not have listened to you leftists. You and the left only know how to RUIN the economy, businesses and the country. Is it any wonder that, "Make America Great Again" was the winning slogan. Not "Stronger Together" nor the hilariously ridiculous "Hillary for America."

 

[james bond]

The unemployment numbers should be higher than 8.86%. Obama and the Dems created the most part-time jobs due to Obamacare and trying to get employment numbers higher so they could stay in office.

There's certainly no shortage of imbeciles like you who keep repeating bullshit like that, no matter how many times it gets debunked.

Part time jobs

jan/2009: 26,377,000
jan/2017: 27,405,000
increase: 1,028,000 (4%)

Full time jobs

jan/2009: 115,818,000
jan/2017: 124,705,000
increase: 8,887,000 (8%)

Civilian Labor Force

jan/2009: 154,210,000
jan/2017: 159,716,000
increase: 5,506,000 (4%)

Part time jobs increased on par with labor force growth, whereas full time jobs outpaced labor force growth by a factor of 2 to 1.

There's certainly no shortage of imbeciles like you who keep repeating bullshit like that, no matter how many times it gets debunked.

Heh. Calling me an imbecile when we know you are one of the lemmings that lick Obama's and other Dems' anal hole.

Figures don't lie, but liars do figure. The full time jobs that Obama created were not in the high productivity sector, but the low-skill, low-pay gigs in bars, restaurants, Wal-Marts and temp agencies. The number of breadwinner jobs full-time positions in energy and mining, construction, manufacturing, the white collar professions, business management and services, information technology, transportation/distribution and finance, insurance and real estate — is still 1.7 million below the level of December 2007; in fact, it is still lower than it was at the turn of the century.

What does this mean?

It means there is no mystery as to how the Obama and Wall Street celebrate d year after year of “jobs growth” during his term. However, the long-term trend of full-time, family-supporting employment levels were already heading south.

It’s the Democrats' version of “trickle-down economics,” and not the good kind.

What happened is the Keynesian money printers at the Fed were fueling serious financial bubbles. It generated a temporary lift in the discretionary incomes of the top 10 percent of households, which own 85 percent of the financial assets, and the next 10-20% which feed off the their winnings.

Accordingly, the leisure and hospitality sectors boomed, creating a lot of job slots for bar tenders, waiters, bellhops, etc.

I call this the “bread and circuses economy,” but it has two problems. Most of these slots generate only about 26 hours per week and $14 per hour. That’s about $19,000 on an annual basis, and means these slots constitute 40 percent jobs compared to the breadwinner category at about $50,000 per year. Besides that, a soon as the financial bubble goes bust, these jobs quickly disappear.

How stupid can you be if don't realize you can't create jobs by continuing to raise taxes on corporations?

You're done.

I already proved the vast majority of job gains under Obama were full time jobs.

You're someone with an IQ over 30 ha ha. I'm not sure why you're laughing as Donald Trump is POTUS now and has been draining the Obummer swamp. Obummer was a liar and one of the worst presidents of all time, so as I said the full time jobs were of the lower variety and ones that would not last. If the economy turns, then the companies can just easily cut them such as your job. What we want are the jobs Donald Trump has promised and that is the breadwinner category jobs such as full-time positions in energy and mining, construction, manufacturing, the white collar professions, business management and services, information technology, transportation/distribution and finance, insurance and real estate. These jobs were 1.7 million below the level of December 2007; in fact, it is still lower than it was at the turn of the century.

Thus, the joke is on you as like I said how stupid can you be if you don't realize you can't create great jobs by continuing to raise taxes on corporations? We want to cut ze taxes on corporations.

How did he Ryan and McConnell raise corporate taxes? When?

It started in 2009 with Obamacare. Then it continued in 2015 with his plan for more taxes will solve everything -- Obama's ten new taxes.

Full List of Obama Tax Hikes | Americans for Tax Reform

Obama's 10 new taxes

 

[james bond]

The President with the worst average unemployment rate since World War II is?

Barrack Obama: 8.86%

Average Unemployment Rates For US Presidents since World War II:

01. Lyndon Johnson: 4.19%
02. Harry Truman: 4.26%
03. Dwight Eisenhower: 4.89%
04. Richard Nixon: 5.00%
05. Bill Clinton: 5.20%
06. George W. Bush: 5.27%
07. John Kennedy: 5.98%
08. George H.W. Bush: 6.30%
09. Jimmy Carter: 6.54%
10. Ronald Reagan: 7.54%
11. Gerald Ford: 7.77%
12. Barack Obama: 8.86%

But Obama has the SECOND BEST difference between unemployment when starting and when finishing as president. Number one in Clinton. Only one Republican has + figures, Reagan, and only on Democrat doesn't have plus figures, Carter who had 0.

What the fuck are you lying about? Carter left Reagan an 8% unemployment rate, that was on a sharp rise due to the malaise that was the hallmark of the the Carter years.

^^^ more dementia.

Unemployment wasn't 8% or higher until 10 months into Reagan's first term.

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

And what frigidweirdo is alluding to is the fact that every Republican president on record except for one (Reagan) left office with an unemployment rate higher than when they started; whereas not a single Democrat on record left office with an unemployment rate higher than when they started.

You may now proceed with your next rightarded post.......

Your link says 7.5 when Reagan took office, 5.4 when he left.

Not a bad delta.

Wages went down and the wealth gap grew under Reagan.

So more people working for less and the rich got richer. No wonder you love reagan

Here's how Obama's trickle down theory didn't work.

OTOH, Reagan's supply side did work with flattening the tax curve, lowered homelessness and... well let the libertarian Cato Institute explain,

"Economist Stephen Moore stated in the Cato analysis, "No act in the last quarter century had a more profound impact on the U.S. economy of the eighties and nineties than the Reagan tax cut of 1981." He argued that Reagan's tax cuts, combined with an emphasis on federal monetary policy, deregulation, and expansion of free trade created a sustained economic expansion, the greatest American sustained wave of prosperity ever. He also claims that the American economy grew by more than a third in size, producing a $15 trillion increase in American wealth. Consumer and investor confidence soared. Cutting federal income taxes, cutting the U.S. government spending budget, cutting useless programs, scaling down the government work force, maintaining low interest rates, and keeping a watchful inflation hedge on the monetary supply was Ronald Reagan's formula for a successful economic turnaround."

What it meant was better jobs for the breadwinners even though some of lesser jobs that the left likes to promote were cut. Obama was the complete opposite of Reagan and that's why America went down. You can't rely on lower paying jobs that could be cut at a moment's notice to stimulate the economy long-term. His middle out trickle down theories were really jobs for the lower middle class.

Reaganomics Vs. Obamanomics: Facts And Figures

 

[Faun]

First and foremost, what I said was...

​

... and yes, of course I got that figure from the BLS, ya senile old coot...

Not in Labor Force: 94,417,000
Unemployed: 6,801,000

............... 94,417,000
................. 6,801,000
---------------------------------
Total ... 101,218,000

You know you lying retard, you can change your own posts, but you can't alter the backquotes in my posts...

View attachment 154536


OOPSSSS

Busted lying again, you fucking liar,

You're fucking demented, remember?

I changed nothing in your posts or mine. In fact, I even quoted my post verbatim.

I said, "there's 101 million people out of work now..."

and you idiotically thought I was said there's 101 million people looking for work -- which of course, I never said. sadly, your senility led you to believe I said that.

You lied, you got busted. The whole board sees it.

It should be nothing new for you, you lie incessantly.

LOLOL

You're sooo fucking senile.

I copied and pasted my quote verbatim and also included a link to my post.

You have any idea how crazed you have to be to assert I lied about what I said?

Faun, Faun, Faun, Faun, Faun. You are no faun (pun intended) at all. Your silly posts just goes to show that we should never listen to leftists when it comes to running a business, economy or country. Those NFL players should not have listened to you leftists. You and the left only know how to RUIN the economy, businesses and the country. Is it any wonder that, "Make America Great Again" was the winning slogan. Not "Stronger Together" nor the hilariously ridiculous "Hillary for America."

Derp

 

[sealybobo]

There's certainly no shortage of imbeciles like you who keep repeating bullshit like that, no matter how many times it gets debunked.

Part time jobs

jan/2009: 26,377,000
jan/2017: 27,405,000
increase: 1,028,000 (4%)

Full time jobs

jan/2009: 115,818,000
jan/2017: 124,705,000
increase: 8,887,000 (8%)

Civilian Labor Force

jan/2009: 154,210,000
jan/2017: 159,716,000
increase: 5,506,000 (4%)

Part time jobs increased on par with labor force growth, whereas full time jobs outpaced labor force growth by a factor of 2 to 1.

There's certainly no shortage of imbeciles like you who keep repeating bullshit like that, no matter how many times it gets debunked.

Heh. Calling me an imbecile when we know you are one of the lemmings that lick Obama's and other Dems' anal hole.

Figures don't lie, but liars do figure. The full time jobs that Obama created were not in the high productivity sector, but the low-skill, low-pay gigs in bars, restaurants, Wal-Marts and temp agencies. The number of breadwinner jobs full-time positions in energy and mining, construction, manufacturing, the white collar professions, business management and services, information technology, transportation/distribution and finance, insurance and real estate — is still 1.7 million below the level of December 2007; in fact, it is still lower than it was at the turn of the century.

What does this mean?

It means there is no mystery as to how the Obama and Wall Street celebrate d year after year of “jobs growth” during his term. However, the long-term trend of full-time, family-supporting employment levels were already heading south.

It’s the Democrats' version of “trickle-down economics,” and not the good kind.

What happened is the Keynesian money printers at the Fed were fueling serious financial bubbles. It generated a temporary lift in the discretionary incomes of the top 10 percent of households, which own 85 percent of the financial assets, and the next 10-20% which feed off the their winnings.

Accordingly, the leisure and hospitality sectors boomed, creating a lot of job slots for bar tenders, waiters, bellhops, etc.

I call this the “bread and circuses economy,” but it has two problems. Most of these slots generate only about 26 hours per week and $14 per hour. That’s about $19,000 on an annual basis, and means these slots constitute 40 percent jobs compared to the breadwinner category at about $50,000 per year. Besides that, a soon as the financial bubble goes bust, these jobs quickly disappear.

How stupid can you be if don't realize you can't create jobs by continuing to raise taxes on corporations?

You're done.

I already proved the vast majority of job gains under Obama were full time jobs.

You're someone with an IQ over 30 ha ha. I'm not sure why you're laughing as Donald Trump is POTUS now and has been draining the Obummer swamp. Obummer was a liar and one of the worst presidents of all time, so as I said the full time jobs were of the lower variety and ones that would not last. If the economy turns, then the companies can just easily cut them such as your job. What we want are the jobs Donald Trump has promised and that is the breadwinner category jobs such as full-time positions in energy and mining, construction, manufacturing, the white collar professions, business management and services, information technology, transportation/distribution and finance, insurance and real estate. These jobs were 1.7 million below the level of December 2007; in fact, it is still lower than it was at the turn of the century.

Thus, the joke is on you as like I said how stupid can you be if you don't realize you can't create great jobs by continuing to raise taxes on corporations? We want to cut ze taxes on corporations.

How did he Ryan and McConnell raise corporate taxes? When?

It started in 2009 with Obamacare. Then it continued in 2015 with his plan for more taxes will solve everything -- Obama's ten new taxes.

Full List of Obama Tax Hikes | Americans for Tax Reform

Obama's 10 new taxes

Is this true? Obamacare Medicine Cabinet Tax (Tax hike of $5 bil/took effect Jan. 2011): Americans are no longer able to use health savings account (HSA), flexible spending account (FSA), or health reimbursement (HRA) pre-tax dollars to purchase non-prescription, over-the-counter medicines (except insulin). Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,957-1,959

I found that on your link. This is the first I'm hearing this.

Obamacare Tax on Indoor Tanning Services?? No one goes to these things anymore. BFD

Obamacare Tax on Innovator Drug Companies? You mean like a tax on this guy?



Obamacare $500,000 Annual Executive Compensation Limit for Health Insurance Executives? GOOD!

And still the rich have never been richer. Your list is pathetic.

Obamacare “Black liquor” tax hike

 

[sealybobo]

But Obama has the SECOND BEST difference between unemployment when starting and when finishing as president. Number one in Clinton. Only one Republican has + figures, Reagan, and only on Democrat doesn't have plus figures, Carter who had 0.

What the fuck are you lying about? Carter left Reagan an 8% unemployment rate, that was on a sharp rise due to the malaise that was the hallmark of the the Carter years.

^^^ more dementia.

Unemployment wasn't 8% or higher until 10 months into Reagan's first term.

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

And what frigidweirdo is alluding to is the fact that every Republican president on record except for one (Reagan) left office with an unemployment rate higher than when they started; whereas not a single Democrat on record left office with an unemployment rate higher than when they started.

You may now proceed with your next rightarded post.......

Your link says 7.5 when Reagan took office, 5.4 when he left.

Not a bad delta.

Wages went down and the wealth gap grew under Reagan.

So more people working for less and the rich got richer. No wonder you love reagan

Here's how Obama's trickle down theory didn't work.

OTOH, Reagan's supply side did work with flattening the tax curve, lowered homelessness and... well let the libertarian Cato Institute explain,

"Economist Stephen Moore stated in the Cato analysis, "No act in the last quarter century had a more profound impact on the U.S. economy of the eighties and nineties than the Reagan tax cut of 1981." He argued that Reagan's tax cuts, combined with an emphasis on federal monetary policy, deregulation, and expansion of free trade created a sustained economic expansion, the greatest American sustained wave of prosperity ever. He also claims that the American economy grew by more than a third in size, producing a $15 trillion increase in American wealth. Consumer and investor confidence soared. Cutting federal income taxes, cutting the U.S. government spending budget, cutting useless programs, scaling down the government work force, maintaining low interest rates, and keeping a watchful inflation hedge on the monetary supply was Ronald Reagan's formula for a successful economic turnaround."

What it meant was better jobs for the breadwinners even though some of lesser jobs that the left likes to promote were cut. Obama was the complete opposite of Reagan and that's why America went down. You can't rely on lower paying jobs that could be cut at a moment's notice to stimulate the economy long-term. His middle out trickle down theories were really jobs for the lower middle class.

Reaganomics Vs. Obamanomics: Facts And Figures

The fact is the rich have never been richer. So why isn't it trickling down?

 

[bripat9643]

I don't expect anyone to accept my assertions, you fucking dumbass. I posted government statistics showing that to be the case. In typical Faun fashion, you are still harping an a trivial semantic issue, because that's the only point you can win.

Imbecile....

You posted a graph and moronically claimed it showed the recession ended in December, 2008, when it actually ended in June, 2009.

You see, it's not the chart you posted -- it's your demented rightard interpretation of what it shows.

You're still dancing and avoiding the issue. How did Obama's "stimulus" boondoggle end the recession when the economy was already in recovery starting on Q4 of 2008? You know that isn't possible, so you will continue to lie and deflect.

I’ve already shown here you have no clue what you’re talking about. Who knows why you carry on like a raving lunatic?

Someone who relentlessly harps on an irrelevant point to avoid discussing the real issue is showing all the symptoms of a raving lunatic, as well as proving that he's an imbecile.

Who do you think you're fooling, dumbass?

That you have no fucking clue what you’re talking about is hardly irrelevant.

I know exactly what you're doing dirbag, and proving your point isn't it.

 

[bripat9643]

It is because they liked the one whom was elected as President.

Sorry to burst your partisan bubble -- but again ... Obama was still president.

Obama ... 122
Trump ....... 48

And it's not so hard to break that record when you're handed a Dow near its all-time record high. Try doing it like Obama did, inheriting a Dow that was 42% lower than its previous high. Trump inherited a Dow that was less than one percent (0.9%) off its previous high.

Actually, it's much easier in Obama's situation. When the Dow has bottomed out, then only way to go is up. Obama's only accomplishment was getting elected at the right time.

More rightarded nonsense.

In reality, from which you are clearly divorced, the Dow under Obama had to go from 6600 to over 14000 just to break the record. A 113% increase and roughly 7500 point increase from where the market bottomed out; while starting off in a massive recession. It then went up another 40% and broke a record high another 121 times before Obama left office.

Compared to President Tinkles who inherited the Dow at 19800. It needed to go up only about 200 points, less than one percent, for him to break a record high, in a good economy.

Leave it to brain-dead sycophants like you to blindly assert it’s easier to increase the Dow by 7500 points in a poor economy than it is to raise it by 200 points in a good economy.

It's easy to make the DOW go up when the FED pumps $4 trillion dollars into the economy and keeps interest rates at 0%. Under such circumstances, what can people do with their money other than put it into the stock market?

You're so stupid and gullible that it's positively comical.

LOLOL

So you say, but you don’t even know what s Recession is.

Jest keep dancing and deflecting. You're only proving that you're a weasel and a fool.

 

[bripat9643]

What the fuck are you lying about? Carter left Reagan an 8% unemployment rate, that was on a sharp rise due to the malaise that was the hallmark of the the Carter years.

^^^ more dementia.

Unemployment wasn't 8% or higher until 10 months into Reagan's first term.

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

And what frigidweirdo is alluding to is the fact that every Republican president on record except for one (Reagan) left office with an unemployment rate higher than when they started; whereas not a single Democrat on record left office with an unemployment rate higher than when they started.

You may now proceed with your next rightarded post.......

Your link says 7.5 when Reagan took office, 5.4 when he left.

Not a bad delta.

Wages went down and the wealth gap grew under Reagan.

So more people working for less and the rich got richer. No wonder you love reagan

Here's how Obama's trickle down theory didn't work.

OTOH, Reagan's supply side did work with flattening the tax curve, lowered homelessness and... well let the libertarian Cato Institute explain,

"Economist Stephen Moore stated in the Cato analysis, "No act in the last quarter century had a more profound impact on the U.S. economy of the eighties and nineties than the Reagan tax cut of 1981." He argued that Reagan's tax cuts, combined with an emphasis on federal monetary policy, deregulation, and expansion of free trade created a sustained economic expansion, the greatest American sustained wave of prosperity ever. He also claims that the American economy grew by more than a third in size, producing a $15 trillion increase in American wealth. Consumer and investor confidence soared. Cutting federal income taxes, cutting the U.S. government spending budget, cutting useless programs, scaling down the government work force, maintaining low interest rates, and keeping a watchful inflation hedge on the monetary supply was Ronald Reagan's formula for a successful economic turnaround."

What it meant was better jobs for the breadwinners even though some of lesser jobs that the left likes to promote were cut. Obama was the complete opposite of Reagan and that's why America went down. You can't rely on lower paying jobs that could be cut at a moment's notice to stimulate the economy long-term. His middle out trickle down theories were really jobs for the lower middle class.

Reaganomics Vs. Obamanomics: Facts And Figures

The fact is the rich have never been richer. So why isn't it trickling down?

Immigrants from third world countries are holding our wages down.

 

[Faun]

Imbecile....

You posted a graph and moronically claimed it showed the recession ended in December, 2008, when it actually ended in June, 2009.

You see, it's not the chart you posted -- it's your demented rightard interpretation of what it shows.

You're still dancing and avoiding the issue. How did Obama's "stimulus" boondoggle end the recession when the economy was already in recovery starting on Q4 of 2008? You know that isn't possible, so you will continue to lie and deflect.

I’ve already shown here you have no clue what you’re talking about. Who knows why you carry on like a raving lunatic?

Someone who relentlessly harps on an irrelevant point to avoid discussing the real issue is showing all the symptoms of a raving lunatic, as well as proving that he's an imbecile.

Who do you think you're fooling, dumbass?

That you have no fucking clue what you’re talking about is hardly irrelevant.

I know exactly what you're doing dirbag, and proving your point isn't it.

LOL

Spits the idiot who demonstrated he doesn’t know what a recession is... doesn’t know how it started ... doesn’t know when it ends... doesn’t know what affects it... doesn’t know what defines it........

.... but thinks he’s an authority on the subject.

 

[bripat9643]

You're still dancing and avoiding the issue. How did Obama's "stimulus" boondoggle end the recession when the economy was already in recovery starting on Q4 of 2008? You know that isn't possible, so you will continue to lie and deflect.

I’ve already shown here you have no clue what you’re talking about. Who knows why you carry on like a raving lunatic?

Someone who relentlessly harps on an irrelevant point to avoid discussing the real issue is showing all the symptoms of a raving lunatic, as well as proving that he's an imbecile.

Who do you think you're fooling, dumbass?

That you have no fucking clue what you’re talking about is hardly irrelevant.

I know exactly what you're doing dirbag, and proving your point isn't it.

LOL

Spits the idiot who demonstrated he doesn’t know what a recession is... doesn’t know how it started ... doesn’t know when it ends... doesn’t know what affects it... doesn’t know what defines it........

.... but thinks he’s an authority on the subject.

More of the same.

What do you think you're proving, hosebag?

 

[Faun]

I’ve already shown here you have no clue what you’re talking about. Who knows why you carry on like a raving lunatic?

Someone who relentlessly harps on an irrelevant point to avoid discussing the real issue is showing all the symptoms of a raving lunatic, as well as proving that he's an imbecile.

Who do you think you're fooling, dumbass?

That you have no fucking clue what you’re talking about is hardly irrelevant.

I know exactly what you're doing dirbag, and proving your point isn't it.

LOL

Spits the idiot who demonstrated he doesn’t know what a recession is... doesn’t know how it started ... doesn’t know when it ends... doesn’t know what affects it... doesn’t know what defines it........

.... but thinks he’s an authority on the subject.

More of the same.

What do you think you're proving, hosebag?

Do you need my post explained to you??

Exactly how rightarded are you?

 

[Uncensored2008]

The President with the worst average unemployment rate since World War II is?

Barrack Obama: 8.86%

Average Unemployment Rates For US Presidents since World War II:

01. Lyndon Johnson: 4.19%
02. Harry Truman: 4.26%
03. Dwight Eisenhower: 4.89%
04. Richard Nixon: 5.00%
05. Bill Clinton: 5.20%
06. George W. Bush: 5.27%
07. John Kennedy: 5.98%
08. George H.W. Bush: 6.30%
09. Jimmy Carter: 6.54%
10. Ronald Reagan: 7.54%
11. Gerald Ford: 7.77%
12. Barack Obama: 8.86%

That is a lie...

The problem here is that there are lots of different figures.

https://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/d...ich-presidents-have-been-best-for-the-economy

Here are some different figures that show different presidents in good or bad light.

Picking one statistic and then saying it's all the President's fault is ridiculous. Often what a president does lasts for decades.

The top graph shows that Bush added more debt than Obama, which is a flat out lie.

You wonder why people don't trust the Communist press?

Here is the truth to destroy the blatant lie you just posted:

George W. Bush: Added $5.849 trillion, a 101 percent increase from the $5.8 trillion debt at the end of Clinton's last budget, FY 2001.

Barack Obama: Added $7.917 trillion, a 68 percent increase from the $11.657 trillion debt at the end of George W. Bush’s last budget, FY 2009.

Which President Added Most to the U.S. Debt?

 

[Uncensored2008]

You know you lying retard, you can change your own posts, but you can't alter the backquotes in my posts...

View attachment 154536


OOPSSSS

Busted lying again, you fucking liar,

You're fucking demented, remember?

I changed nothing in your posts or mine. In fact, I even quoted my post verbatim.

I said, "there's 101 million people out of work now..."

and you idiotically thought I was said there's 101 million people looking for work -- which of course, I never said. sadly, your senility led you to believe I said that.

You lied, you got busted. The whole board sees it.

It should be nothing new for you, you lie incessantly.

LOLOL

You're sooo fucking senile.

I copied and pasted my quote verbatim and also included a link to my post.

You have any idea how crazed you have to be to assert I lied about what I said?

Actually, that's what I did - which exposed you as what you are, a complete liar and fraud.

Hey, you're a Stalinist, lying is just your nature.

All you exposed is what I've been saying all along -- that you're batshit insane.

I said "101 million people are out of work now"; and your malfunctioning brain translated that into thinking I said, "101 million people seeking work cannot find it..." -- which of course, I never said.

Even worse for your dementia -- I copied and pasted my quote verbatim along with a link to it; and your abnormal brain thinks I lied.

That is NOT what you said, you lying fuck

Trump has a 40% unemployment rate is the lie you told - and you just keep on lying now that you've been busted.

But let's face it, if you had so much as a shred of integrity, you wouldn't be a Stalinist in the first place.