Obama's recovery more impressive than Reagan's

[Hypergalaxy]

I don't see how Dady O has fixed the economy, more poor people, near 9.5% of unemployment, more crime and more delocalizations. Obama loves marketing but I don't really see something positive over the long run with this irrealistic and reckless president.

Moderate your tone immediately pal. If you can't disagree politely with someone else by explaining and exposing concrete facts and without using insulting pet names then don't bother to reply. Don't start insulting other people including our president because they share different points of views than yours. Hope I'm clear enough.

 

[tynar]

Moderate your tone immediately pal. If you can't disagree politely with someone else by explaining and exposing concrete facts and without using insulting pet names then don't bother to reply. Don't start insulting other people including our president because they share different points of views than yours. Hope I'm clear enough.

I agree with your comments, but in a board where members and moderators are speaking ill of another board member - Who hasn't even posted here AND the very fact that the person who started this thread admitted it was basically directed at another board member...While your complaint is clear and appropriate, the moderators have been equally clear that they condone the behavior.

 

[xfire]

I agree with your comments, but in a board where members and moderators are speaking ill of another board member - Who hasn't even posted here AND the very fact that the person who started this thread admitted it was basically directed at another board member...While your complaint is clear and appropriate, the moderators have been equally clear that they condone the behavior.

Why don't you go peruse that particular members "started thread" history, then peruse mine and get back with me.

 

[tynar]

Why don't you go peruse that particular members "started thread" history, then peruse mine and get back with me.

No thanks. It is pointless.

I'm not a believer in two wrongs making a right.

 

[xfire]

I'm glad your moral compass is intact. I think you fail to see the larger picture, though. Take your complaint, for example. You saw something you felt was wrong and took action against it by making a post. Would you suggest that others sit silent when they see something they feel is wrong? One could say that your post is a prime example of what you just lamented above.

 

[bodie54]

I don't see how Dady O has fixed the economy, more poor people, near 9.5% of unemployment, more crime and more delocalizations. Obama loves marketing but I don't really see something positive over the long run with this irrealistic and reckless president.

Current unemployment rate: 8.5%

FBI reports crime rates, which dropped significantly in 2010, continued to fall in 2011
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/12/19/us-usa-crime-fbi-idUSTRE7BI0ZR20111219
http://justcrim.typepad.com/deathpe...rime-statistics-volumes-continue-to-fall.html

I don't know what a delocalization is.

 

[Master Roshi]

Current unemployment rate: 8.5%

FBI reports crime rates, which dropped significantly in 2010, continued to fall in 2011
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/12/19/us-usa-crime-fbi-idUSTRE7BI0ZR20111219
http://justcrim.typepad.com/deathpe...rime-statistics-volumes-continue-to-fall.html

I don't know what a delocalization is.

the feds fudge the statistics and have done so for years, real unemployment is closer to 25 percent and crime has actually gone up ex. the NYPD has stated for the last few years that all major index crimes are slightly down EXCEPT murder which as been slightly increasing, this is because its extremely hard to fudge a homicide though I'm sure they have tried to

 

[lurkingdirk]

I don't see how Dady O has fixed the economy, more poor people, near 9.5% of unemployment, more crime and more delocalizations. Obama loves marketing but I don't really see something positive over the long run with this irrealistic and reckless president.

Your unemployment number is incorrect, and your misspelled nickname for the President isn't funny. Please explain exactly how President Obama is irrealistic [sic] and explain how he is reckless.

Also, why are you, a mod, entering into political discussions? I thought that was discouraged now?

the feds fudge the statistics and have done so for years, real unemployment is closer to 25 percent and crime has actually gone up ex. the NYPD has stated for the last few years that all major index crimes are slightly down EXCEPT murder which as been slightly increasing, this is because its extremely hard to fudge a homicide though I'm sure they have tried to

What on earth are you smoking? Real unemployment is closer to 25%? That is just plain false. Please provide ANY type of proof for this claim.

 

[Master Roshi]

http://toddkinsey.com/blog/2011/10/07/real-unemployment-approaches-25-percent/

here is just one example, you can find numerous other sources in regards to the stats and how the feds constantly smoke them unfortunately

 

[Master Roshi]

you can also find numerous sources that show 50 plus million Americans are now on food stamps, do the math

 

[lurkingdirk]

http://toddkinsey.com/blog/2011/10/07/real-unemployment-approaches-25-percent/

here is just one example, you can find numerous other sources in regards to the stats and how the feds constantly smoke them unfortunately

Yes, I can see that Todd Kinsey, and his proof sites such as shadowstats.com are far more reliable than anything the federal government, or the independent corporations that produce stats, would produce.

:tinhat:

 

[Master Roshi]

Yes, I can see that Todd Kinsey, and his proof sites such as shadowstats.com are far more reliable than anything the federal government, or the independent corporations that produce stats, would produce.

:tinhat:

lol the federal government can't even balance the budget and you expect them to put out accurate statistics, I wish I had your faith

 

[StanScratch]

Of that 25 percent, how many are children under the working age, retired elderly and those too disabled to work?
This is an honest question, and I would bet almost ANYTHING they are being figured into that 25 percentage...which IMHO, is a much more dishonest representation. This isn't even to mention stay-at-home moms/dads, or those who are working, but getting paid under the table.

 

[lurkingdirk]

lol the federal government can't even balance the budget and you expect them to put out accurate statistics, I wish I had your faith

You do. You just choose to have faith in some nobody's blog instead.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not defending the administration, nor am I saying that the stats we get are completely accurate. I do think, however, that I'll stick with stuff that's at least under national scrutiny, rather than some guy in his mom's basement, creating a blog because he has some agenda.

:2 cents:

 

[Master Roshi]

he's not the only source that is talking about the high unemployment rate, as I have stated there are numerous others but 50 plus million people on food stamps is never a good thing

 

[xfire]

You can't compare "real" numbers if those numbers don't accurately reflect unemployment over time. In other words, you have to use the same metric that was used for the last administration if you want an accurate comparison.

 

[Rey C.]

Some things that have happened over the past 50 years or so which have affected the unemployment rate:

• In 1961, JFK removed "discouraged workers"--those folks who had quit looking for work--from the unemployment statistic.
• Under Reagan, military service was reclassified from "not in the labor force" to "employed."
• In the 80s and 90s, according to Austan Goolsbee, "Congress began loosening the standards to qualify for disability payments .... and people who would normally be counted as unemployed started moving in record numbers into the disability system -- a kind of invisible unemployment."
• JFK removed "discouraged workers" from unemployment rolls, but in 1994, the Clinton administration removed them from the labor rolls. As Kevin Phillips writes, "The longer-term discouraged—some 4 million U.S. adults—fell out of the main monthly tally."
• Beginning in '96, the sample for measuring unemployment dropped from 60,000 to 50,000, and a disproportionate number of the dropped households were in the inner cities.

Credit to Blue Oregon

But to the best of my knowledge, there have been no major changes to the components of the employment measurement system, since Obama became President, which would skew the reported data. So at least between W. Bush and Obama, we can compare apples to apples. Reagan got a huge boost from the military reclassification because he greatly expanded the military during his terms. Along with George Bush (I) and Clinton, somewhat, Reagan also benefited from the people who had been classified as "unemployed", but were then able to get on SSI or disability under Reagan. If there have been any major employment reclassifications since 2008, I'm not aware of them - but I would like to hear about them.

 

[Rey C.]

In other words, you have to use the same metric that was used for the last administration if you want an accurate comparison.

^^^This

Even if the numbers are not completely valid (like a ruler that is off by 1"), as long as you use the same ruler to measure all of your lumber, you will still be consistent, even if you aren't completely accurate.

 

[Facetious]

Meanwhile, as everybody is looking over here at 0bama's "most impressive economic recovery" (stemmed largely from the private investment in offshored American enterprises and well as investment in bogus renewable energy sources), the potus asks for an increase in the debt ceiling.


YO, potus... how much longer are you going to be paying a $15 minimum on the nation's CC?
We're in for a lifetime of significantly increasing taxes *everybody, get used to it.


* Well, not everybody, just those who have actually decided work for a living.

he's not the only source that is talking about the high unemployment rate, as I have stated there are numerous others but 50 plus million people on food stamps is never a good thing

You're dead wrong!!!! It's only 48 million! :1orglaugh

 

[xfire]

Tell me, Facetious, what is the obligation of congress to give the president anything he asks for?