So how is Ballsack, Taintider and the other idiot leftards going to spin the shitty job numbers

[Zambroski]

3 minutes ago, racer254 said:

 

When Obama took office only 40% of the population was receiving some type of government assistance.

Actually, I believe the # was about 35% and that was WITH the increase of the housing crash and subsequent economy crash.  Now it is more than 50%.  

But...we're doing GREAT!

[racer254]

1 minute ago, SnowRider said:

What's included in government assistance..??  SS, Medicare, Military salaries, VA..... 

Look it up.  You ask too many questions to even think of yourself as intelligent.

[SnowRider]

Just now, racer254 said:

Look it up.  You ask too many questions to even think of yourself as intelligent.

Don't you know what's included in your numbers?  

[Zambroski]

12 minutes ago, racer254 said:

 

When Obama took office only 40% of the population was receiving some type of government assistance.

 

3 minutes ago, SnowRider said:

Don't you know what's included in your numbers?  

Hey stupid fuck....see the bold in his statement above?  What the fuck do you think that means?  Now, go lay down.

[SnowRider]

Just now, Zambroski said:

 

Hey stupid fuck....see the bold in his statement above?  What the fuck do you think that means?  Now, go lay down.

Help him out and tell us what's included...??  

[racer254]

14 minutes ago, SnowRider said:

Help him out and tell us what's included...??  

Poor lil fella.  15% increase on some type of assistance. GO OBAMA.

Edited October 7, 2016 by racer254

[1jkw]

58 minutes ago, Zambroski said:

Obama's Presidential approval rating?

No, should have been more clear, jobs numbers.

[Zambroski]

16 minutes ago, 1jkw said:

No, should have been more clear, jobs numbers.

Wouldn't have made any difference.  They are mostly "throw away" jobs.  But, it sounds "adequate".

[1jkw]

11 minutes ago, Zambroski said:

Wouldn't have made any difference.  They are mostly "throw away" jobs.  But, it sounds "adequate".

It's far better then the negative or job loss numbers of the same period in 2008.

[Mainecat]

Yeah the veterans have nothing to do with rising government assistance......yeah nothing.

 

[Mainecat]

2 hours ago, Mileage Psycho said:

It's what Reagan's was in 1988   

 

And it took him 11 tax increases.

[SnowRider]

2 minutes ago, Mainecat said:

Yeah the veterans have nothing to do with rising government assistance......yeah nothing.

 

Or the age of the population.....

[Zambroski]

3 minutes ago, 1jkw said:

It's far better then the negative or job loss numbers of the same period in 2008.

You know you cannot compare 2008 with anything short of going back 35 years or so.  That's not how it is done.  It all sounds "great" and "progressive" but, no.  I almost started to go deeper but, gotta do something.  You know though.

[1jkw]

3 minutes ago, Zambroski said:

You know you cannot compare 2008 with anything short of going back 35 years or so.  That's not how it is done.  It all sounds "great" and "progressive" but, no.  I almost started to go deeper but, gotta do something.  You know though.

Yeah because 8 years is the same as 35, and the change in technology is  the same from 35 years compared to 8.

[Zambroski]

1 hour ago, 1jkw said:

Yeah because 8 years is the same as 35, and the change in technology is  the same from 35 years compared to 8.

Jesus.  Maybe your dimmer than I thought.  Let's just say it then...this is the most economically successful time in history because we "added" 15000 jobs after a massive ressession...oh and those "uber awesome career jobs" only took 8 years to attain.

OBAMA FTW!!!  FOUR YEARS MORE!!!

It's just easier to do this than to try and help some of you fucking knott-heads on macro economics.

Edited October 7, 2016 by Zambroski

[1jkw]

Just now, Zambroski said:

Jesus.  Maybe your dimmer than I thought.  Let's just say it then...this is the most economically successful time in history because we "added" 15000 jobs after a massive ressession...oh and those "uber awesome career jobs only took 8 years to attain.  

OBAMA FTW!!!  FOUR YEARS MORE!!!

It's just easier to do this than to try and help some of you fucking knott-heads on macro economics.

Not saying it was the best of all time, and far more then 15000 jobs have been added, and the addition of jobs is far better than the loss of jobs in 2008. The incredible part is trying to compare a recovery 35 years ago with todays WORLD ECONOMY and the number of jobs that were already lost prior too 2000 let alone 2009, shows your total lack of macro economic knowledge.

[Zambroski]

3 minutes ago, 1jkw said:

Not saying it was the best of all time, and far more then 15000 jobs have been added, and the addition of jobs is far better than the loss of jobs in 2008. The incredible part is trying to compare a recovery 35 years ago with todays WORLD ECONOMY and the number of jobs that were already lost prior too 2000 let alone 2009, shows your total lack of macro economic knowledge.

No, my reference was going back 35 years ago was the last time we were hit so hard economically.  Not to compare world economies.  And of course adding jobs is better than losing them.  But this is mediocre results at best and most occurred more in spite of the current administration than because of it.  Now we can compare those 15k jobs to the ones lost and then subtract the difference in what are "career positions" to get a whole new angle.  But I get it, celebrating mediocrity is our thing now.  Groovy.  And as far as the world trade economic part, how is that working out for us?  Nevermind.

My point, as it's always been, is we should have been where we are now in this recovery 4-5 years ago.  But, again, participation awards for everyone!  We should all feel good about where we are instead of where we should be.  It just feels "gooder" and validates a poor choice that we all really know we made the second time around.  Well, not me.  Him and his group of idiots were way too much for me to even think he deserved another term.  Good little sheep!   Now, time for CNN indoctrination hour.

[1jkw]

15 minutes ago, Zambroski said:

No, my reference was going back 35 years ago was the last time we were hit so hard economically.  Not to compare world economies.  And of course adding jobs is better than losing them.  But this is mediocre results at best and most occurred more in spite of the current administration than because of it.  Now we can compare those 15k jobs to the ones lost and then subtract the difference in what are "career positions" to get a whole new angle.  But I get it, celebrating mediocrity is our thing now.  Groovy.  And as far as the world trade economic part, how is that working out for us?  Nevermind.

My point, as it's always been, is we should have been where we are now in this recovery 4-5 years ago.  But, again, participation awards for everyone!  We should all feel good about where we are instead of where we should be.  It just feels "gooder" and validates a poor choice that we all really know we made the second time around.  Well, not me.  Him and his group of idiots were way too much for me to even think he deserved another term.  Good little sheep!   Now, time for CNN indoctrination hour.

You see that's your contention that the economy should be better than it is based on past recessions, and that is where you are 100% wrong, there is no comparing the past with todays competition in the world economy and our dependency on foreign countries buying our products as well.

 

The US economy is in far better shape than it was 8 years ago, our dollar is stronger and that hurts our export potential as does the global slowdown,  we have had record auto sales, record number of people traveling by car and aircraft, that doesn't happen when thing are as terrible as you like to say they are.

[Zambroski]

7 minutes ago, 1jkw said:

You see that's your contention that the economy should be better than it is based on past recessions, and that is where you are 100% wrong, there is no comparing the past with todays competition in the world economy and our dependency on foreign countries buying our products as well.

 

The US economy is in far better shape than it was 8 years ago, our dollar is stronger and that hurts our export potential as does the global slowdown,  we have had record auto sales, record number of people traveling by car and aircraft, that doesn't happen when thing are as terrible as you like to say they are.

1st: No, I'm not

2nd: Like "8 years ago" past?

And we are not near as well off as some of you want so hard to believe.  NOT EVEN CLOSE.  And just because I don't agree that we are "at the pinnacle of exellence" like most of the Dems want and MAKE some believe, doesn't mean I said they are terrible.  Are you watching what the Fed is doing?  Do you know why they are doing it?  We are being propped up by their every hint of a move..or "non-move".  Guess how fragile that is.

Now...I can't argue like this on my phone so.....wait until tomorrow if you want me to debate anymore.  Or don't.  Dealers choice.

 

[1jkw]

55 minutes ago, Zambroski said:

1st: No, I'm not

2nd: Like "8 years ago" past?

And we are not near as well off as some of you want so hard to believe.  NOT EVEN CLOSE.  And just because I don't agree that we are "at the pinnacle of exellence" like most of the Dems want and MAKE some believe, doesn't mean I said they are terrible.  Are you watching what the Fed is doing?  Do you know why they are doing it?  We are being propped up by their every hint of a move..or "non-move".  Guess how fragile that is.

Now...I can't argue like this on my phone so.....wait until tomorrow if you want me to debate anymore.  Or don't.  Dealers choice.

 

Then what is your frame of reference that you use to say we should have been better sooner?

 

Yes 8 years ago past, and even that short length of time ago the world economy has changed.

 

Yes the fed is doing what it did back when gasoline was at historic highs, keeping rates down to keep the economy going, a lesson learned from the 70's when the price of gas raised the rate of inflation and the feds raised rates high and killed the economy.

 

Yes things are fragile and in the world economy we are in we are far better off than most all other countries.

Talk about it when you get on you computer.