Libs are making the case NOW that the economy is getting better due to Obama. The things you are talking about are 5 years old.
You would acknowledge the middle class is in deep trouble correct?
The last six years all they did was block bills and votes.
Also the last congress was one of the least productive in history.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/03/john-boehner-least-productive_n_4377930.html
So when this GOP congress is getting their bills veto one after another.
Just remember who started this bullshit the last six years.
I guess when you have nothing else lying is still the way to go for the GOP circus! LOL
I don't like to, since so many of your posts are so badly written and your game totally sucks. But the truth is the truth. After doing their best to shoot the economy in both feet for the past 6 years, the Republicans want to take credit for the economy since the election, when it has actually been strong all year and growing well since before that.
Look, these clowns have gotten away with every lie they've told for six years. Why should they stop now?
All the libs here have been saying, and very recently I might add, that R's were blocking all these great ideas Obama has to improve the economy.
Last time I checked, those great bills are still blocked right?
So how did Obama improve the economy if the very tools he wanted to use to make it better were blocked?
First of all, I don't really care what "all the libs here have been saying." I don't like most of them and am not responsible for what they say. I don't read it either.
But, yes, the Republicans blocked some of the things Obama wanted to do, though the most significant things he did when he had a majority in both houses were the stimulus package and the bailouts of the auto companies.
The stimulus, despite Republican lies about it, actuality did work. I can say from my own observation that a huge number of highways and bridges in the northeast have been rebuilt with stimulus money and lots of jobs saved or created. And the auto bailouts kept about a million people working. Not to mention that most of the money was recouped by stock sales.
There's no way to demonstrate what would have happened to the economy if these two things weren't done, but many believe we would have been spun into an economic "nuclear winter."
The Europeans, for example, did a lot less stimulus and a lot more belt tightening and look what shape they're in. Our economy is much healthier. If it wasn't, you'd be blaming Obama. So you can't deny him some of the credit.
Libs are making the case NOW that the economy is getting better due to Obama. The things you are talking about are 5 years old.
You would acknowledge the middle class is in deep trouble correct?
Not aided by the Republicans. The economy has been getting better ever since and really got much stronger last year. Look at the stats. As for Obama's role, the stimulus helped because it kept things from going lower and got the recovery started. If things were worse you'd blame him. So since things are better he deserves some of the credit.
Maybe you didn't understand your own question, because I nailed it.
As for the middle class, it's been in deep trouble since a decline that started under Reagan, was briefly lifted under Clinton and has continued since then, abetted by the lousy tax policies of Dubya.
But again, you didn't ask about the middle class. Seems like every time I give you an answer you try to change the question
Look at Europe today, and how is that austerity program working for them? Stimulus helped, and in each recession, depending upon its severity, you do as little as tax cuts, or do you more like what was proposed in 2009, including TARP.
2010/11 wasn't great because you had the ongoing fiscal fights, debt downgrade, and other shit that wasn't necessary. But to Obama's main credit, was keeping Bernanke and then nominating Yellen, and the resulting QE programs and low interest policy. Whether you agree or disagree with the Fed policies, the 1%, 5%, 10%, maybe the top 25% should keep their mouth shut, because they probably made a shit load of money the past 6 years. I know I have. More than I can imagine.
When Obama announced his Cuba policy back on Dec 17th most people were lauding or bitching about capitulating to a despotic regime. I on the other hand bought shares in Royal Caribbean Cruise Line early in the morning. I gotta thank Obama, because he specifically made me money.
How much credit a President should get for the economy good or bad is always debatable.
Re the middle class decline since Reagan, tax policy impact maybe on the fringes, it's more to do with globalization, lack of education, skills, competencies, and an immigration policy that doesn't target immigrants that have something of value....think of H1-B visas as an example.
But overall, I agree with you. Now I'm going to get that bottle of Makers Mark, and take a few shots and forget I ever mentioned agreeing with you. (lol).
Maybe you didn't understand your own question, because I nailed it.
As for the middle class, it's been in deep trouble since a decline that started under Reagan, was briefly lifted under Clinton and has continued since then, abetted by the lousy tax policies of Dubya.
But again, you didn't ask about the middle class. Seems like every time I give you an answer you try to change the question.
Damn, I hate it when I have to agree with you, but you leave me no choice by agreeing with me. Where's GaGa when we need him? LMAO!
and with interest rates already so low, he did so with almost no bullets left in his gun. Huge props to him.
BTW, I expected to hate him, and only gradually came around after watching the great job he did.
I do have to say, a lot of his work is being undone right now. This overly strong dollar might be helping drive oil prices down (and I admit being biased here) but a strong dollar is the last thing we need with an 18 trillion dollar national debt, much of it owed to the likes of China.
St C, please explain to Pimples and the other morons who are bound to argue with me, just why a strong dollar is such a bad thing. You are so much more patient than me in explaining simple concepts that full grown men and women seem to be unable to grasp on their own.
I still would like someone here to answer why 75% of the public feels like we are in recession since Mari won't ever address it.
And I just checked the latest poll on the economy, the only one of the new year, and Obama is at stunningly bad 39%.
Yes, there is a recovery for the well off but it did not make it to the middle class.
Let's all be honest about that.
Catching an early flight tomorrow so I'll catch up with y'all next week.
Have a great weekend guys!
-- Modified on 1/9/2015 11:59:23 PM
If 75% of the public "feels" like we're in a recession, then we are? Please. I'm not saying sentiment is unimportant but when it's the opposite of all the other actual metrics it's not exactly the most telling figure.
Have a nice weekend. Get laid, for goodness sake. It might clear your head.
-- Modified on 1/10/2015 8:38:51 AM
The "metrics" are not making it down to the peeps. Obamas horrible approval rating on the economy, 2/3 of the country wanting a direction change and the PBS poll I cited about the 75%, along with the largest Republican lead in congress since 1928 all back that up.
And yes, if they feel like they are in recession, who are you or anyone else to tell them they are wrong? They don't give a damn about your metrics or those trying to pump rainbows up their ass. Their reality, by everything I cite above, is quite different than Obama sycophants would like to acknowledge.
For more on this topic as to why the metrics are not accurate for so many, read the attached from PBS and the polls they cite. Things are NOT getting better for them Nick.
Good debate though. Peace.
-- Modified on 1/10/2015 11:59:49 AM
know what a recession is. A recession is two consecutive quarters of decline in the GNP. Wages have very little to do with a recession – in fact wages and salaries seldom fall in a recession but usually increase, albeit not as fast as in boom times:
"During the recession, wage growth slowed much less than expected in response to the sharp increase in unemployment (Daly, Hobijn, and Lucking 2012). And so far in the recovery, wage growth has remained slow, despite substantial declines in the unemployment rate (Daly, Hobijn, and Ni 2013).
One explanation for this pattern is the hesitancy of employers to reduce wages and the reluctance of workers to accept wage cuts, even during recessions, a behavior known as downward nominal wage rigidity."
I pointed out in the other post that you were mistaken - wages are not falling on a yearly basis but have gradually increased 2% a year and slightly ahead of inflation. And wages did not fall during the 2008 recession either. Anyone who believes we are in a "recession" because wages are "falling" is wrong on both counts.
I assume you will trust its source. It doesn't matter what a technical definition of a recession is. They are telling you they are hurting. SC is right about the top 25%. They are doing well or quite well.
It's the bottom 75% that are doing bad or horrifically so. The "better" economy I keep hearing about just hasn't reached them Mari.
That's what PBS is saying and that is what everyone is saying using any fair and impartial reading of all the evidence. I don't think you would fundamentally quibble with that fact.
"wealth gap” between the middle class and the rich, not economic conditions so poor that the middle class can legitimately feel like they are in a recession.
That is a TOTALLY different topic than the posts I critiqued – (“wages are going backward “ we have a wage disaster “). Look, Jack, if you point now is essentially “the rich are getting richer” and we’re not, I am in agreement with you. No matter how much I make, I’m not closing the gap with Mr. Buffett and Mr. Gates.
But your portrayal of the middle class as suffering from a “wage disaster” is simply inaccurate. The cold hard facts are that we have come back from the brink of economic disaster in 2008 and that the lower class, the middle class, and the upper class are all doing better.
Go back to 2009 and compare middle class housing values as related to mortgage debt. You will see a staggering number of middle class home owners who were underwater- their mortgage debt exceeded the value of their house. Check out the ratio today- there simply is no comparison. Add in low inflation, unlimited health insurance, subsidies for many, low gas prices, and declining unemployment, and the middle class are far better off than they were during the Bush admin.
For anyone in the middle class to say he “doesn’t feel the recovery” is frankly ridiculous, albeit that the rich are feeling a lot more
You are telling the middle class they are wrong about their own lives and their own experiences and not only that but you spoke in absolutes saying "anyone in the middle class" further making your point ridiculous.
That is the classic definition of being out of touch.
Three days ago Elizabth Warren said "the American middle class is in deep trouble." That is in direct contrast to the Obama sycophants like yourself have been saying. Is she lying or just as not informed and smart as you? Lol
One of the reasons she gives is wages. You are looking at the macro numbers and making a case it is working down to the micro and every poll is showing that it is not.
I said "wage disaster" and she said "deep trouble." If you want to play a semantical game between the difference of those phrases, then you got me! Lol
head over to the St. Regis, walk up to the bar, pretend you're Steve Kroft, and tell the first hot chick you see, "my favorite tastes and colors are pink and brown". If that doesn't work, pretend you're Bill Cosby, and just say, "drink this"! Not sure if those are the best moves. But as long as you got moves and money. Well, if you don't have the moves, double up on the money (lmao).
Also, I don't pick women up in bars. Well, unless it's in Costa Rica. Much easier to bring the money to their hotel room and fuck them. I like to keep the chit-chat to a minimum.
-- Modified on 1/10/2015 8:38:23 AM
I think you are still upset about me calling you old, nicky46 or both ways.
My game sucks is really funny.
Since you don't know anything about me.
Also your comments are not well written all the time either.
If you want to be a english teacher, then go work in a school.
Well at least we agree on this GOP point.
Thanks again for the laughs nick! Lol
Look, these clowns have gotten away with every lie they've told for six years. Why should they stop now?
My problem with you is the way you express yourself here. It's weak. And, yes, you really do suffer from a lack of game. And I know more about you than you think.
So please continue to call me old. Nothing you can possibly say bothers me a bit.
-- Modified on 1/10/2015 8:37:56 AM
The fact you felt a need to explain yourself says all I need to know.
We agree on some things and that's great.
You are still a clown and don't know shit about me or my game.
So people like you on this site are frauds.
They want to feel important because of some personal insecurity.
Then attack other members themselves but can't handle the heat.
I am having fun ladyboy and don't care if you don't like it.
Just look at your own comments and stop being a hypocrite!
Thanks again for the laughs this morning. Lol
So please continue to call me old. Nothing you can possibly say bothers me a bit.
-- Modified on 1/10/2015 8:37:56 AM
France. The shooting suspects were raised in what looked like a housing project.
Too simple? What a shock
of course I wouldn't, it's simply one element to the many flaws in liberalism. Everything has pros and cons.
The argument itself is a liberal argument. The liberal argument of how the ghetto, and or projects foster the environment where inner city youth, embrace the gang culture. Not much different than what has played out in Paris. The majority of gangs are extremely left leaning.
The shooters were leftist poster boys, deny reality all you want. I'm sure you've read enough about them by now. You should have been able to make the connection.
Every news program this week will be addressing France's open policies on immigration, and it's impact on national security. Is that the only element involved? No. However that is the foundation which everything else is built on.
politicians hold back the economy. give credit to big bad evil oil, as their tracking and advanced technologies have given us lower energy prices despite having a Prez who appointed an Energy Secretary who admitted to wanting high oil prices. score one for the private sector. Get guv out of its way and we would grow the economy enough to generate tax rev to put a dent in the 17 trillion deficit
The thought of Obama taking credit for lower oil prices is laughable, for the very reasons you cite.
Because of this, I am voting for Obama for King in 2016. I am in the oil business and these low prices are killing me. Obama is my best bet to returning to $100 oil, and fuck the Constitution and that pesky 22nd Amendment. He doesn't pay any attention to the rest of the Constitution, why should we get all hung up on an Amendment that far down the list, when even the first ten Amendments are being trampled over on a daily basis?
Fuck the rest of the economy, I am voting for higher oil prices!!!
yes my iPad made a typo
ironically high oil prices are good for you for obvious reasons, and for the liberals so they can scapegoat people like you. The free market will sort this out like when oil wells start getting capped like West Texas late 80s/early 90s when it was not profitable to drill. Then, when supply is lower and the price goes up, oil companies do well again and the democrats revive their oil bashing cottage industry. This stuff runs in cycles,
It is like the rooster taking credit for the sunrise! Their contribution to the improved economy = 0, Big ZERO.