king Obama

[The_Grimy_One 10+ year member]

Oh wow! You must listen to liberal news. First, what just got over for the year? Oh the holidays? Isn't that when a lot of employers seek part time labor? So since people have income, the "jobless claims" would dip a bit right? YOU need to check your facts because you don't know what you're talking about.
Wonkbook: The real unemployment rate is 11 percent - The Washington Post

You need to check your facts... The graph is updated this month, not last.

 

[ahole-ic]

You need to check your facts... The graph is updated this month, not last.

Son, did you not read my last post? It proves your graph wrong. You can't just post a graph with data that has been proved wrong and think you're right. Lol the graph is updated with the most current data which is the previous month's. So yeah if it was updated this month it would be LAST MONTH'S data because this month isn't done yet and can't be reported. It's incomplete.... wow guy. Your graph even shows that it stops at december of last year, thus proving me right. Lol look up u3 and u6 etc. Find out what they mean and then come back and apologize.

 

[cyn 10+ year member]

Unemployment data is false no matter how you look at it... over the past 2 years most people have ran out of unemployment funds... which moves them off of the stats... which they can then say oh well unemployment is down.... not true they just have no funds left to draw out, they aren't working either... so its a win win for the gov. to show the unemployment is down... but in no way is it really down... something they don't tell you about in the news...

 

[ahole-ic]

Unemployment data is false no matter how you look at it... over the past 2 years most people have ran out of unemployment funds... which moves them off of the stats... which they can then say oh well unemployment is down.... not true they just have no funds left to draw out, they aren't working either... so its a win win for the gov. to show the unemployment is down... but in no way is it really down... something they don't tell you about in the news...

Exactly what I was getting at with telling grimy to learn what u3 and u6 are.

 

[The_Grimy_One 10+ year member]

Son, did you not read my last post? It proves your graph wrong. You can't just post a graph with data that has been proved wrong and think you're right. Lol the graph is updated with the most current data which is the previous month's. So yeah if it was updated this month it would be LAST MONTH'S data because this month isn't done yet and can't be reported. It's incomplete.... wow guy. Your graph even shows that it stops at december of last year, thus proving me right. Lol look up u3 and u6 etc. Find out what they mean and then come back and apologize.

No need to apologize... You gave me an article from last month. I dont have that kind of time to read that lonf of an article from the Washington Post. Another biased source. Maybe where you live it is going up, but here in Phoenix, its easy to see that more and more jobs are being created or acquired.

 

[zako 10+ year member]

The economy tanked in 2008 when the housing crisis hit.

The crisis hit when the housing bubble burst. The bubble took many years to build. I could see in 2007 the disaster that's coming.

You can do some research on who benefited from Bush tax cuts. If you make >100K your marginal tax rate goes down by a few percentage point. There are also those for whom the tax cut meant a couple of hundred bucks in the their tax return check.

No. He took our deficit and doubled it on failed "stimulus".

If I remember, the stimulus bill was less than 1trillion, out of which a considerable portion was tax cuts. The deficit might have doubled, but most of it is due to weak economy and hence weak tax revenue.

The economy has went nowhere but down. He proved to us all that liberalism/socialism kills economies.

I don't think that constitutes "the proof". A contrary argument could spin things around and say that without stimulus the macro economy would have been worse right now.

And regarding the Iraq war, you have got to be kidding me. There is nothing even to discuss here. There was practically zero evidence of WMDs or Saddam Hussein's link to Al Queda before we went to war. Most of 'evidence', which was used as one of excuses for war, came from claims of the Iraqi dissidents, many of whom would benefit greatly from a regime change in Iraq. And don't get me started about the whole Plame Affair. It shows very nicely how the case was being cooked up for the Iraq war. Bush and his people used the 9/11 tragedy in order to drum up support for a war that served their unstated goals, sent thousands of American soldiers to their deaths, and added a nice trillion to the government's debt. The Iraq war is what made the previous administration truly despicable instead of merely unlikable.

I could care less about what's happening in Iraq right now. That's their problem now. They'll deal with it. If Iraq is meant to implode for cultural reasons, it will implode. For how long should have American troops remained there anyways? 5 years? 10 years? 20 years? If this is important for the world peace, why aren't other countries contributing their troops?

 

[DJ_FURY_GME 10+ year member]

no need to argue with fox news watchers it a proven fact That people who watch fox new news are less informed to actual facts

 

[RAM_Designs 5,000+ posts]

Also, I'm not for policing the world, but you can't start something and not finish it. You can't study the world and still think we don't need an ally over there.

There's a difference between needing an ally and spending hundreds of billions on an unjustified war against a country that had nothing to do with 9/11. Maintaining an alliance with a country does not require us to have tens of thousands of our troops fighting unnecessary "wars" in their part of the world. Nothing should have been started that needed(s) to be finished...you can thank Bush for that.

$121k per US citizen is what the Iraqi war has cost so far...Bush and co. estimated it to be a 50-60bil operation, with that snake John Wolfowitz saying "We are dealing with a country that can really finance its own reconstruction, and relatively soon."

 

[Sketchup 10+ year member]

Lets keep in perspective we are all here for car audio…not really politics cuz this subject is just becoming heated one

 

[ahole-ic]

The crisis hit when the housing bubble burst. The bubble took many years to build. I could see in 2007 the disaster that's coming.
You can do some research on who benefited from Bush tax cuts. If you make >100K your marginal tax rate goes down by a few percentage point. There are also those for whom the tax cut meant a couple of hundred bucks in the their tax return check.

I've done the research. My taxes would go up several thousand dollars per year if the Bush tax cuts expired and I'm nowhere near that 100k.

If I remember, the stimulus bill was less than 1trillion, out of which a considerable portion was tax cuts. The deficit might have doubled, but most of it is due to weak economy and hence weak tax revenue.

Check your numbers. There is very little true in this statement.

I don't think that constitutes "the proof". A contrary argument could spin things around and say that without stimulus the macro economy would have been worse right now.

No, I don't think it could. You could say that a problem occurred. Money was injected to delay collapse. No reforms were put into place. So, the same problems exist, they are just much larger due to the currency injected, and inflation.

And regarding the Iraq war, you have got to be kidding me. There is nothing even to discuss here. There was practically zero evidence of WMDs or Saddam Hussein's link to Al Queda before we went to war. Most of 'evidence', which was used as one of excuses for war, came from claims of the Iraqi dissidents, many of whom would benefit greatly from a regime change in Iraq. And don't get me started about the whole Plame Affair. It shows very nicely how the case for war was being cooked up for the Iraq war. Bush and his people used the 9/11 tragedy in order to drum up support for a war that served their unstated goals, sent thousands of American soldiers to their deaths, and added a nice trillion to the government's debt. The Iraq war is what made the previous administration truly despicable instead of merely unlikable by some.

Oh lord. Google George Piro and the saddam hussein interrogation. It will show you how your liberal mind has been deceived by your beloved media.

 

[DJ_FURY_GME 10+ year member]

so who has a new build for 2012?

 

[ahole-ic]

There's a difference between needing an ally and spending hundreds of billions on an unjustified war against a country that had nothing to do with 9/11. Maintaining an alliance with a country does not require us to have tens of thousands of our troops fighting unnecessary "wars" in their part of the world. Nothing should have been started that needed(s) to be finished...you can thank Bush for that.

Were we still fighting a war? Nope not anymore. We were just the big kid on the playground nobody wanted to screw with. Please try to stay on topic. The relevance of why we went in has nothing to do with pulling out. It has been done. We dismantled their government and infrastructure. Leaving them to be swallowed up by the stronger lands around them who have wanted their resources for decades is just cruel... and stupid when it is in our economic interest to keep a middle eastern ally.

$121k per US citizen is what the Iraqi war has cost so far...Bush and co. estimated it to be a 50-60bil operation, with that snake John Wolfowitz saying "We are dealing with a country that can really finance its own reconstruction, and relatively soon."

Great.... but you're still arguing something that cannot be undone. So now that we've sunk all this money in, let's get something in return.... not just be vagines and pull out.

 

[ahole-ic]

so who has a new build for 2012?

You started the thread. Don't act like we shouldn't have the discussion now.... like we're all out of line. LOL

 

[RAM_Designs 5,000+ posts]

Were we still fighting a war? Nope not anymore. We were just the big kid on the playground nobody wanted to screw with. Please try to stay on topic. The relevance of why we went in has nothing to do with pulling out. It has been done. We dismantled their government and infrastructure. Leaving them to be swallowed up by the stronger lands around them who have wanted their resources for decades is just cruel... and stupid when it is in our economic interest to keep a middle eastern ally.Great.... but you're still arguing something that cannot be undone. So now that we've sunk all this money in, let's get something in return.... not just be vagines and pull out.

So you're wanting Obama to spend more money on pointless policing/rebuilding of the Middle East, and then use those expenses to say "look at the deficit!"

 

[audiobaun 5,000+ posts]

//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/hilarious.gif.02a037aad04aa96f19982b298a3d70a8.gif

You started the thread. Don't act like we shouldn't have the discussion now.... like we're all out of line. LOL