You are unemployed and want a new job, under a Democratic president you have a better chance of getting one!

[Faun]

Ahhh. This is from Politicrap. Just watched a YouTube video yesterday showing things that they labeled True or False, and then would show the actual facts. Typically in live video from political figures, etc. Maybe it was brought up already, but didn't feel like going through 45 pages that already negated the OPs post. I lived through much of those times, and know it is crap statistics.

It comes from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

 

[Delldude]

They left that up to Bush.

Usurping their duties.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Todd, your response is a perfect example of selective memory. It’s disingenuous to claim that the recession was over before anything Obama did could help. Sure, TARP and the Fed's QE helped stop the immediate liquidity crisis, but they were just the beginning of the recovery process. The ARRA wasn’t just about spending money, it was about stabilizing the economy over the long term, creating jobs, and preventing the kind of prolonged stagnation we saw in other countries that didn’t act as aggressively. To dismiss it as a "slush fund" is not only misleading, it’s flat-out wrong.

And let’s be real here, calling out the ARRA as wasteful while giving TARP a free pass is pure hypocrisy. Both were government interventions designed to save the economy (socialism saves capitalism every few years), but it seems like you’re only willing to label something a "slush fund" when it doesn’t align with your political biases. Obama’s actions didn’t just follow Bush’s; they expanded and reinforced the recovery, ensuring that the economy didn’t fall back into the abyss. To ignore that is to ignore the facts.

If you want to have an honest debate, let’s do that. But dismissing everything Obama did as irrelevant while conveniently ignoring the broader context is just biased claptrap. The recovery didn’t just happen by magic, it required sustained effort, much of which came from the policies you’re so quick to belittle.

Todd, your response is a perfect example of selective memory. It’s disingenuous to claim that the recession was over before anything Obama did could help. Sure, TARP and the Fed's QE helped stop the immediate liquidity crisis, but they were just the beginning of the recovery process.

TARP and QE started before the election. The recession ended in June, 2009, before anything Obama did could have more than the tiniest impact.

I never said June 2009 was the end of the "recovery process".
We all know that Obama's recovery was the weakest in history.

And let’s be real here, calling out the ARRA as wasteful while giving TARP a free pass is pure hypocrisy.
ARRA was a wasteful slush fund. TARP turned a large profit. It would have been even larger, if Obama hadn't handed billions to the UAW.
But dismissing everything Obama did as irrelevant while conveniently ignoring the broader context is just biased claptrap.

It was irrelevant to ending the recession.

The recovery didn’t just happen by magic, it required sustained effort, much of which came from the policies you’re so quick to belittle.

I know, Obama's efforts were the reason why the recovery was so weak.

 

[Faun]

Usurping their duties.

No, the delegated the call to Bush in the shadow of 9/11. Who knew he would lie to get us into war?

 

[Delldude]

No, the delegated the call to Bush in the shadow of 9/11. Who knew he would lie to get us into war?

Doesn't matter, it wasn't constitutional.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Yes but in March, just 6 weeks after he took over, it was at 6665 and the day he left it was at 18140. That is a 200% move up (I was wrong about 250%)

Yes but in March, just 6 weeks after he took over, it was at 6665

It's true, the market didn't like his early actions.

That is a 200% move up

8279 to 18140 is a 119% increase. You're pretty bad at math for an analyst.

What was Reagan's increase?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

No, I am well aware of what Carter did. He was a very bad president. Reagan did end inflation by giving tax cuts. What I said though, is that Reagan's recovery was small (compared to Obama's)


I am well aware of that but in the first 4 years, he was not able to make the economy recover very much and that means he was not all that good.

Reagan did end inflation by giving tax cuts. What I said though, is that Reagan's recovery was small (compared to Obama's)

Post the numbers, I'll be happy to highlight your error(s).

 

[tshrimp]

It comes from the Bureau of Labor Statistics

The job creation after Covid, for example, is not properly taken into account. Once places of businesses open up, employment will increase. Biden benefits, although there is a net loss.

 

[protectionist]

Your claim that there was "zero inflation" during Trump's presidency is misleading. While it's true that inflation remained relatively low, this was largely due to economic stagnation and the lack of wage growth, which kept consumer demand and thus prices down. The final months of Trump's presidency were marked by unprecedented government spending and monetary policy responses to the pandemic, which set the stage for the inflationary pressures that followed. Low inflation isn't necessarily a sign of a healthy economy for working-class Americans. You would know that had you actually learned anything from all of those books you supposedly read before I was born.

You have a habit of calling FACTS > "misleading" Temp's inflation numbers being on the zero level are facts.
Here's some FACTUAL examples.

Jul 1, 2020   0.99% Jun 1, 2020   0.65% May 1, 2020   0.12% Apr 1, 2020   0.33%

And you can conjure up all the spin you like (stagnation,wage growth, yakety yak) but the voters know that during Trump's years, inflation was very low, and as soon as Biden took over, it skyrockted (and prices are still rising).

The reported numbers of Biden's inflation are ridiculously underreported, but evn looking at them, on can easily show the stark contrast between the good Trump years, and the very bad Biden ones.

As they list it, Trumps' worst (highest) inflation month (2.95) is better (lower) than every one of Biden's 39 months from April 2021 to June 2024, and waaay below Biden's high months when it as 7-9% for a whole year.

112 Million American renters & 100+ business owners/stockholdrs will remember on election DAY, what we have been suffering through, the so sympathetic Democrat Bidns did NOTHING to alleviate that suffering.

Oh look! NOW they're talking about rent caps. Oh, how nice of them (2 months before the 2024 election)

Sorry boys! You made your bed by dumping the worst inflation (100-200%) ever, and doing nothing about it for 3.5 years. You now must sleep in that bed.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Sadly, gramps, you're batshit senile.

What Is a Recession?​

​

A recession is a significant, widespread, and prolonged downturn in economic activity. A common rule of thumb is that two consecutive quarters of negative gross domestic product (GDP) growth indicate a recession. However, more complex formulas are also used to determine recessions.​

And 3 consecutive such quarters do not count as 2 recessions.

He thinks dropping from 3% growth to 2% growth to 1.8% growth is a recession.

He's a moron.

 

[protectionist]

And now in your late age, you're a senile right-winger, serving the rich at the expense of the working class.

So the Bidens have served the working class by giving us 100-200% inflation in housing rents & gas prices ? And doing NOTHING to mitigate it, for 3.5 years.

And CAUSING it, by bringing in millions of illegal aliens, and cancelling oil drilling.

Looks like those Bidens have been serving the rich oil companies, by allowing thm to price gouge, and the same with landlords.

 

[Luckyone]

Moron. ^^^

I actually have to thank you for your post. You have now been added to my list of Trump lovers that spew hate and have no brains. It is a list that grows every day and with "your help" it gives me more PROOF of that fact,

In addition and given that every single post you addressed to me was an insult but was not addressing/debating a point, it has earned you the title of "a total waste of time" and being put on the ignore list (you are now #11).

One thing that does sadden me is that you did not prove my point that you may be a Russian minion on Social Media trying to affect the election. No Russian could be a dumb as you. You are certainly a perfect example of this:

 

[TruthNotBS]

Todd, your response is a perfect example of selective memory. It’s disingenuous to claim that the recession was over before anything Obama did could help. Sure, TARP and the Fed's QE helped stop the immediate liquidity crisis, but they were just the beginning of the recovery process.

TARP and QE started before the election. The recession ended in June, 2009, before anything Obama did could have more than the tiniest impact.

I never said June 2009 was the end of the "recovery process".
We all know that Obama's recovery was the weakest in history.

And let’s be real here, calling out the ARRA as wasteful while giving TARP a free pass is pure hypocrisy.
ARRA was a wasteful slush fund. TARP turned a large profit. It would have been even larger, if Obama hadn't handed billions to the UAW.
But dismissing everything Obama did as irrelevant while conveniently ignoring the broader context is just biased claptrap.

It was irrelevant to ending the recession.

The recovery didn’t just happen by magic, it required sustained effort, much of which came from the policies you’re so quick to belittle.

I know, Obama's efforts were the reason why the recovery was so weak.

Todd, let's cut through the nonsense here. Claiming that Obama’s actions were irrelevant to ending the recession is just ignoring reality. The recession may have technically ended in June 2009, (thanks to "socialism for the rich, "too big to fail"), but the economy was far from healthy. Without the ARRA and other policies, we could have easily slipped back into recession or faced a prolonged period of stagnation, much like what happened during the Great Depression. Obama stepped in with a massive effort to stabilize the economy and ensure that the recovery wasn’t just a brief bounce but something sustainable.

And by the way, it’s rich to call the ARRA a "slush fund" while praising TARP when both were government interventions aimed at saving the economy. You can't have it both ways.

As for the so-called "weakest recovery in history" line, let’s be real, Obama was dealing with the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. The fact that we even had a recovery, and one that ultimately led to over 75 consecutive months of job growth, is a testament to the effectiveness of the policies you’re so quick to dismiss. Sure, Obama could have done more, but he wasn’t a socialist, after all, but nonetheless, what he did was critical in pulling us back from the brink. Blaming him for not handling the recession perfectly when the mess was handed to him by the previous REPUBLICAN administration is just selective memory at its finest.

 

[protectionist]

You clearly don't understand the graph, if you think it supports your stupid conclusions.

I clearly DO understand th graph, which clearly shows 2015/2016 (Obama's last 2 years) with GDPs SINKING like a lead ball, and 2017/2018 with RISING GDPs in Trump's rescue of us from Obama's cluelessness.

Maybe you thought USMB posters can't read graphs, huh ? Sorry puppy. They can.

 

[Luckyone]

Reagan did end inflation by giving tax cuts. What I said though, is that Reagan's recovery was small (compared to Obama's)

Post the numbers, I'll be happy to highlight your error(s).

Let me begin by saying that I truly do not want to continue this debate, given that it means absolutely nothing as far as the situation now. My focus is on the future and what will happen and not on the past and what happened then.

Having said that, I did find this article from Forbes that does says it all:

The Obama Economy vs. The Reagan Economy​

While there is no question that Reagan’s economy rebounded with a greater fury and in a far shorter time frame than what Obama has been able to accomplish, the circumstances of Reagan’s recession were such that such a rebound was possible while all signs would indicate that such a result was not truly available to the current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue between 2009-2017. Thus, to seek to draw conclusions as to which president had the better idea is a failed enterprise given the extreme differences in their relative circumstances.

End of story for me on this conversation.

 

[jotathought]

Okay, lets talk about the 818,000 jobs lost. First of all, those were not lost in a week. It was a REVISION of the amount of jobs for the past 12 months (not in 1 week). When you factor this in:

View attachment 1001743

It means that instead of 15.7 million, it was 14.9 million, which is still more than the last 6 president created.

Is that what you are criticizing?

BTW, just to prove the number was for the year (not the month), here is the link to the info

The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics on Wednesday revised down its estimate of total employment in March 2024 by 818,000, the largest such downgrade in 15 years. That effectively means there were 818,000 fewer job gains than first believed from April 2023 through March 2024.

What are the net results of the Biden / Harris jobs creation? How many were illegal aliens and how many were federal jobs? The diagram only explains gross job gains / losses, and doesn't take into account the global pandemic. There are lies, damn lies and statistics.

 

[Faun]

The job creation after Covid, for example, is not properly taken into account. Once places of businesses open up, employment will increase. Biden benefits, although there is a net loss.

LOL

There is no net loss. Are you out of your fucking mind?

 

[TruthNotBS]

So the Bidens have served the working class by giving us 100-200% inflation in housing rents & gas prices ? And doing NOTHING to mitigate it, for 3.5 years.

And CAUSING it, by bringing in millions of illegal aliens, and cancelling oil drilling.

Looks like those Bidens have been serving the rich oil companies, by allowing thm to price gouge, and the same with landlords.

The claim that the Bidens caused "100-200% inflation in housing rents and gas prices" is a gross exaggeration and misrepresentation of the facts. While inflation has indeed affected many sectors, including housing and gas, it's important to note that these issues are driven by a complex mix of factors, many of which are beyond the control of any single administration. If our government was more socialist or leftist, it would deal with these issues more effectively, but unfortunately, it's not.

The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted global supply chains, leading to higher prices for goods and services, including energy. Additionally, the war in Ukraine significantly impacted global oil prices, contributing to the rise in gas prices. Blaming these increases solely on the Biden administration ignores the broader, global context that has influenced these price changes.

The accusation that the Bidens "caused" inflation by bringing in "millions of illegal aliens" and canceling oil drilling is not supported by evidence. The idea that immigration directly causes inflation, especially on the scale mentioned, is not backed by economic data.

The claim that the administration has done "nothing" to mitigate inflation is also misleading. The Biden administration has taken several measures, including the release of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to help lower gas prices and the passing of legislation aimed at addressing supply chain issues and supporting working families. These actions show a concerted effort to address inflation, contrary to the claim that nothing has been done.

Biden is also pro-labor unions and protecting worker rights, much more so than Trump is.

Could Biden do more? Yes, much more, but he's not a socialist. Trump will simply serve himself and his rich buddies, at the expense of the working class.


4o

 

[GWV5903]

What are you talking about?

Common sense, you’re obviously not very bright…

In addition, you start a conversation by insulting?

See above, you’re still weak…

What kind of a POS are you?

The kind you can’t handle

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Todd, let's cut through the nonsense here. Claiming that Obama’s actions were irrelevant to ending the recession is just ignoring reality. The recession may have technically ended in June 2009, (thanks to "socialism for the rich, "too big to fail"), but the economy was far from healthy. Without the ARRA and other policies, we could have easily slipped back into recession or faced a prolonged period of stagnation, much like what happened during the Great Depression. Obama stepped in with a massive effort to stabilize the economy and ensure that the recovery wasn’t just a brief bounce but something sustainable.

And by the way, it’s rich to call the ARRA a "slush fund" while praising TARP when both were government interventions aimed at saving the economy. You can't have it both ways.

As for the so-called "weakest recovery in history" line, let’s be real, Obama was dealing with the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. The fact that we even had a recovery, and one that ultimately led to over 75 consecutive months of job growth, is a testament to the effectiveness of the policies you’re so quick to dismiss. Sure, Obama could have done more, but he wasn’t a socialist, after all, but nonetheless, what he did was critical in pulling us back from the brink. Blaming him for not handling the recession perfectly when the mess was handed to him by the previous REPUBLICAN administration is just selective memory at its finest.

The recession may have technically ended in June 2009, (thanks to "socialism for the rich, "too big to fail")

Short term loans, repaid at a profit to the US Treasury is "socialism for the rich"?

we could have easily slipped back into recession or faced a prolonged period of stagnation,

Obama's weak recovery was in many ways a prolonged period of stagnation.

And by the way, it’s rich to call the ARRA a "slush fund" while praising TARP when both were government interventions aimed at saving the economy. You can't have it both ways.

It was both ways. ARRA was wasteful spending on favored Dem groups. TARP was mostly short-term loans, repaid at a profit.

let’s be real, Obama was dealing with the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression.

Usually, the steeper the decline the stronger the recovery. Until Obama.

The fact that we even had a recovery, and one that ultimately led to over 75 consecutive months of job growth

I agree, Obama's weak economic performance lasted a looong time.