Total Posts:50|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

My First Forum post!

Lsumichiganfan
Posts: 267
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2016 1:29:40 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
I have an overall topic for republicans. What is your response to unemployment dropping to 5% in Obama's presidency. The Economy has improved, so how is Obama doing harm to the economy?
Please vote on this debate: http://www.debate.org...
"You have displayed the political understanding of a tortoise thus far in this election" -Harder
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/30/2016 1:42:12 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/30/2016 1:29:40 AM, Lsumichiganfan wrote:
I have an overall topic for republicans. What is your response to unemployment dropping to 5% in Obama's presidency. The Economy has improved, so how is Obama doing harm to the economy?

Look at any economic indicator
Dow when Bush when he took office 10,787.99
Dow when Bush when he left office 7,949.09

Dow when Obama took office 7,949.09
Dow today Obama 16,466.30
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/31/2016 12:12:51 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/30/2016 1:29:40 AM, Lsumichiganfan wrote:
I have an overall topic for republicans. What is your response to unemployment dropping to 5% in Obama's presidency. The Economy has improved, so how is Obama doing harm to the economy?

That happrns when everyone is working part time
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/31/2016 12:13:58 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/30/2016 1:42:12 AM, TBR wrote:
At 1/30/2016 1:29:40 AM, Lsumichiganfan wrote:
I have an overall topic for republicans. What is your response to unemployment dropping to 5% in Obama's presidency. The Economy has improved, so how is Obama doing harm to the economy?

Look at any economic indicator
Dow when Bush when he took office 10,787.99
Dow when Bush when he left office 7,949.09

Dow when Obama took office 7,949.09
Dow today Obama 16,466.30

So Bush was a worse Democrat than Obama
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/31/2016 12:17:47 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/31/2016 12:13:58 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 1/30/2016 1:42:12 AM, TBR wrote:
At 1/30/2016 1:29:40 AM, Lsumichiganfan wrote:
I have an overall topic for republicans. What is your response to unemployment dropping to 5% in Obama's presidency. The Economy has improved, so how is Obama doing harm to the economy?

Look at any economic indicator
Dow when Bush when he took office 10,787.99
Dow when Bush when he left office 7,949.09

Dow when Obama took office 7,949.09
Dow today Obama 16,466.30

So Bush was a worse Democrat than Obama

Wilted, just it out. You can run from this crapbag, but he was not a democrat, and you know the economy has done MUCH better with democrats in the WH.
Lsumichiganfan
Posts: 267
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/31/2016 2:30:50 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/31/2016 12:17:47 AM, TBR wrote:
At 1/31/2016 12:13:58 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 1/30/2016 1:42:12 AM, TBR wrote:
At 1/30/2016 1:29:40 AM, Lsumichiganfan wrote:
I have an overall topic for republicans. What is your response to unemployment dropping to 5% in Obama's presidency. The Economy has improved, so how is Obama doing harm to the economy?

Look at any economic indicator
Dow when Bush when he took office 10,787.99
Dow when Bush when he left office 7,949.09

Dow when Obama took office 7,949.09
Dow today Obama 16,466.30

So Bush was a worse Democrat than Obama

Wilted, just it out. You can run from this crapbag, but he was not a democrat, and you know the economy has done MUCH better with democrats in the WH.

I agree TBR
Please vote on this debate: http://www.debate.org...
"You have displayed the political understanding of a tortoise thus far in this election" -Harder
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,295
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/31/2016 1:56:03 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/31/2016 12:13:58 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 1/30/2016 1:42:12 AM, TBR wrote:
At 1/30/2016 1:29:40 AM, Lsumichiganfan wrote:
I have an overall topic for republicans. What is your response to unemployment dropping to 5% in Obama's presidency. The Economy has improved, so how is Obama doing harm to the economy?

Look at any economic indicator
Dow when Bush when he took office 10,787.99
Dow when Bush when he left office 7,949.09

Dow when Obama took office 7,949.09
Dow today Obama 16,466.30

So Bush was a worse Democrat than Obama

I agree, the bank "bailout" was worse than the porkulous bill.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,295
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/31/2016 2:04:40 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/31/2016 12:13:58 AM, Wylted wrote:

So Bush was a worse Democrat than Obama

Look at this article.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com...

It explains in clear language to even the most extreme partisan how crippling government intervention in the markets can be.

Investors end up spending vasts amounts of resources into failing schemes ONLY because the government is subsidizing it, When the government sees the mistake it made (wayy into the future) then the investors line up to hand out the bribes. That's money that should be going to productive working Americans, not swindlers.

Happened under Bush's Bailout, and Obama's Porkulous.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/31/2016 5:34:59 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/31/2016 12:17:47 AM, TBR wrote:
At 1/31/2016 12:13:58 AM, Wylted wrote:
At 1/30/2016 1:42:12 AM, TBR wrote:
At 1/30/2016 1:29:40 AM, Lsumichiganfan wrote:
I have an overall topic for republicans. What is your response to unemployment dropping to 5% in Obama's presidency. The Economy has improved, so how is Obama doing harm to the economy?

Look at any economic indicator
Dow when Bush when he took office 10,787.99
Dow when Bush when he left office 7,949.09

Dow when Obama took office 7,949.09
Dow today Obama 16,466.30

So Bush was a worse Democrat than Obama

Wilted, just it out. You can run from this crapbag, but he was not a democrat, and you know the economy has done MUCH better with democrats in the WH.

Did Bush increase the size and scope of government like a Democrat or shrink it like a Republican?

Also your stat is misleading. No economist thinksvtgat the economy has done better with Democrats in office, because of Democrats. The fact is if you eliminate all thr sharp jumps and declines (market corrections) than both parties have performed roughly equally. And honestly that is only about 4 tiny points you'd remove to get the even stats.

Here is another thing that is going to surprise you. The Democrats and psuedo republicans who get elected always seem to increase the size of government. Whenever you have a majority Democrat congress lead by A Republican president ot a Republican congress lead by a Democrat president, the economy does the best. So when true conservative principles of not increasing the size of government are followed because of the gridlock of seperate parties sharing power, the economy does better.
The-Voice-of-Truth
Posts: 6,571
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/31/2016 5:59:33 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/30/2016 1:29:40 AM, Lsumichiganfan wrote:
I have an overall topic for republicans. What is your response to unemployment dropping to 5% in Obama's presidency. The Economy has improved, so how is Obama doing harm to the economy?

The global economy has a 7-year cycle that goes something like this: steady rise, hard recession, repeat. If you look at the records of the markets, you will see this. It was just Bush's lucky time, I guess.
Suh dude

"Because we all know who the most important snowflake in the wasteland is... It's YOU, champ! You're a special snowflake." -Vaarka, 01:30 in the hangouts

"Screw laying siege to Korea. That usually takes an hour or so." -Vaarka

"Crap, what is my religion again?" -Vaarka

I'm Rick Harrison and this is my pawn shop. I work here with my old man and my son, Big Hoss, and in 23 years I've learned one thing. You never know what is gonna come through that door.
Lsumichiganfan
Posts: 267
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/31/2016 6:28:56 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/31/2016 5:59:33 PM, The-Voice-of-Truth wrote:
At 1/30/2016 1:29:40 AM, Lsumichiganfan wrote:
I have an overall topic for republicans. What is your response to unemployment dropping to 5% in Obama's presidency. The Economy has improved, so how is Obama doing harm to the economy?

The global economy has a 7-year cycle that goes something like this: steady rise, hard recession, repeat. If you look at the records of the markets, you will see this. It was just Bush's lucky time, I guess.

So a presidents policies have no role in the economy? Is that what you are telling me?
Please vote on this debate: http://www.debate.org...
"You have displayed the political understanding of a tortoise thus far in this election" -Harder
Lsumichiganfan
Posts: 267
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/31/2016 6:32:47 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/31/2016 6:28:56 PM, Lsumichiganfan wrote:
At 1/31/2016 5:59:33 PM, The-Voice-of-Truth wrote:
At 1/30/2016 1:29:40 AM, Lsumichiganfan wrote:
I have an overall topic for republicans. What is your response to unemployment dropping to 5% in Obama's presidency. The Economy has improved, so how is Obama doing harm to the economy?

The global economy has a 7-year cycle that goes something like this: steady rise, hard recession, repeat. If you look at the records of the markets, you will see this. It was just Bush's lucky time, I guess.

So a presidents policies have no role in the economy? Is that what you are telling me?
Please vote on this debate: http://www.debate.org...
"You have displayed the political understanding of a tortoise thus far in this election" -Harder
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/31/2016 6:33:06 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/31/2016 5:59:33 PM, The-Voice-of-Truth wrote:
At 1/30/2016 1:29:40 AM, Lsumichiganfan wrote:
I have an overall topic for republicans. What is your response to unemployment dropping to 5% in Obama's presidency. The Economy has improved, so how is Obama doing harm to the economy?

The global economy has a 7-year cycle that goes something like this: steady rise, hard recession, repeat. If you look at the records of the markets, you will see this. It was just Bush's lucky time, I guess.

Yea, until you have a republican you can shower with compliments, right?

What exactly do you think was going on in banking, and whose policies allowed it to happen?
Lsumichiganfan
Posts: 267
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/31/2016 6:34:05 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/31/2016 6:33:06 PM, TBR wrote:
At 1/31/2016 5:59:33 PM, The-Voice-of-Truth wrote:
At 1/30/2016 1:29:40 AM, Lsumichiganfan wrote:
I have an overall topic for republicans. What is your response to unemployment dropping to 5% in Obama's presidency. The Economy has improved, so how is Obama doing harm to the economy?

The global economy has a 7-year cycle that goes something like this: steady rise, hard recession, repeat. If you look at the records of the markets, you will see this. It was just Bush's lucky time, I guess.

Yea, until you have a republican you can shower with compliments, right?

What exactly do you think was going on in banking, and whose policies allowed it to happen?

Haha you are so right TBR! They loved reagan when he was president!
Please vote on this debate: http://www.debate.org...
"You have displayed the political understanding of a tortoise thus far in this election" -Harder
The-Voice-of-Truth
Posts: 6,571
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/31/2016 6:34:42 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/31/2016 6:28:56 PM, Lsumichiganfan wrote:
At 1/31/2016 5:59:33 PM, The-Voice-of-Truth wrote:
At 1/30/2016 1:29:40 AM, Lsumichiganfan wrote:
I have an overall topic for republicans. What is your response to unemployment dropping to 5% in Obama's presidency. The Economy has improved, so how is Obama doing harm to the economy?

The global economy has a 7-year cycle that goes something like this: steady rise, hard recession, repeat. If you look at the records of the markets, you will see this. It was just Bush's lucky time, I guess.

So a presidents policies have no role in the economy? Is that what you are telling me?

They do, but nothing so drastic as the difference in the Bush administration or Obama's. The behavior of the market is natural.
Suh dude

"Because we all know who the most important snowflake in the wasteland is... It's YOU, champ! You're a special snowflake." -Vaarka, 01:30 in the hangouts

"Screw laying siege to Korea. That usually takes an hour or so." -Vaarka

"Crap, what is my religion again?" -Vaarka

I'm Rick Harrison and this is my pawn shop. I work here with my old man and my son, Big Hoss, and in 23 years I've learned one thing. You never know what is gonna come through that door.
The-Voice-of-Truth
Posts: 6,571
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/31/2016 6:48:09 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/31/2016 6:33:06 PM, TBR wrote:
At 1/31/2016 5:59:33 PM, The-Voice-of-Truth wrote:
At 1/30/2016 1:29:40 AM, Lsumichiganfan wrote:
I have an overall topic for republicans. What is your response to unemployment dropping to 5% in Obama's presidency. The Economy has improved, so how is Obama doing harm to the economy?

The global economy has a 7-year cycle that goes something like this: steady rise, hard recession, repeat. If you look at the records of the markets, you will see this. It was just Bush's lucky time, I guess.

Yea, until you have a republican you can shower with compliments, right?

Mmm, no, I don't like government interference with the market, regardless of party. I think it should regulate itself. Congress, the President -- no government of any type should interfere with the market.

And as a side note, I don't like the GOP, but they most closely relate to what I believe. I am an independent, but that won't get me anywhere in politics. If I don't stand with the majority parties, my voice has little to no say-so.

What exactly do you think was going on in banking, and whose policies allowed it to happen?

Honestly, I am against what Bush did. I know full and well what he did. He expanded the power of the government and interfered with the market. He is part of the reason the market decreased, but not the main reason.
Suh dude

"Because we all know who the most important snowflake in the wasteland is... It's YOU, champ! You're a special snowflake." -Vaarka, 01:30 in the hangouts

"Screw laying siege to Korea. That usually takes an hour or so." -Vaarka

"Crap, what is my religion again?" -Vaarka

I'm Rick Harrison and this is my pawn shop. I work here with my old man and my son, Big Hoss, and in 23 years I've learned one thing. You never know what is gonna come through that door.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,295
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/31/2016 7:20:15 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/31/2016 6:48:09 PM, The-Voice-of-Truth wrote:
At 1/31/2016 6:33:06 PM, TBR wrote:

Mmm, no, I don't like government interference with the market, regardless of party. I think it should regulate itself. Congress, the President -- no government of any type should interfere with the market.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com......
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,295
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/31/2016 7:21:11 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/31/2016 7:20:15 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 1/31/2016 6:48:09 PM, The-Voice-of-Truth wrote:
At 1/31/2016 6:33:06 PM, TBR wrote:

Mmm, no, I don't like government interference with the market, regardless of party. I think it should regulate itself. Congress, the President -- no government of any type should interfere with the market.

.

oops http://www.realclearpolitics.com...
The-Voice-of-Truth
Posts: 6,571
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/31/2016 7:26:31 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/31/2016 7:20:15 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 1/31/2016 6:48:09 PM, The-Voice-of-Truth wrote:
At 1/31/2016 6:33:06 PM, TBR wrote:

Mmm, no, I don't like government interference with the market, regardless of party. I think it should regulate itself. Congress, the President -- no government of any type should interfere with the market.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com......

Obviously an unbiased source *sees Bernie Sanders ad*
Suh dude

"Because we all know who the most important snowflake in the wasteland is... It's YOU, champ! You're a special snowflake." -Vaarka, 01:30 in the hangouts

"Screw laying siege to Korea. That usually takes an hour or so." -Vaarka

"Crap, what is my religion again?" -Vaarka

I'm Rick Harrison and this is my pawn shop. I work here with my old man and my son, Big Hoss, and in 23 years I've learned one thing. You never know what is gonna come through that door.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,295
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/31/2016 7:27:19 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/31/2016 7:26:31 PM, The-Voice-of-Truth wrote:
At 1/31/2016 7:20:15 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 1/31/2016 6:48:09 PM, The-Voice-of-Truth wrote:
At 1/31/2016 6:33:06 PM, TBR wrote:

Mmm, no, I don't like government interference with the market, regardless of party. I think it should regulate itself. Congress, the President -- no government of any type should interfere with the market.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com......

Obviously an unbiased source *sees Bernie Sanders ad*

Yah that was a broken link sorry.
The-Voice-of-Truth
Posts: 6,571
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/31/2016 7:36:34 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/31/2016 7:27:19 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 1/31/2016 7:26:31 PM, The-Voice-of-Truth wrote:
At 1/31/2016 7:20:15 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 1/31/2016 6:48:09 PM, The-Voice-of-Truth wrote:
At 1/31/2016 6:33:06 PM, TBR wrote:

Mmm, no, I don't like government interference with the market, regardless of party. I think it should regulate itself. Congress, the President -- no government of any type should interfere with the market.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com......

Obviously an unbiased source *sees Bernie Sanders ad*

Yah that was a broken link sorry.

You're good. Saw the second link. I disagree with the bailouts. That was government regulation right there, my friend.
Suh dude

"Because we all know who the most important snowflake in the wasteland is... It's YOU, champ! You're a special snowflake." -Vaarka, 01:30 in the hangouts

"Screw laying siege to Korea. That usually takes an hour or so." -Vaarka

"Crap, what is my religion again?" -Vaarka

I'm Rick Harrison and this is my pawn shop. I work here with my old man and my son, Big Hoss, and in 23 years I've learned one thing. You never know what is gonna come through that door.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,295
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/31/2016 7:39:00 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/31/2016 7:36:34 PM, The-Voice-of-Truth wrote:
At 1/31/2016 7:27:19 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 1/31/2016 7:26:31 PM, The-Voice-of-Truth wrote:
At 1/31/2016 7:20:15 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 1/31/2016 6:48:09 PM, The-Voice-of-Truth wrote:
At 1/31/2016 6:33:06 PM, TBR wrote:

Mmm, no, I don't like government interference with the market, regardless of party. I think it should regulate itself. Congress, the President -- no government of any type should interfere with the market.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com......

Obviously an unbiased source *sees Bernie Sanders ad*

Yah that was a broken link sorry.

You're good. Saw the second link. I disagree with the bailouts. That was government regulation right there, my friend.

Obama's porkulous was no better. Obama kept investors from actually growing the economy due to market fears that Obama may, at any time, decide to arbitrarily pick a new round of winners and losers in the marketplace. Like solar panels....
The-Voice-of-Truth
Posts: 6,571
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/31/2016 7:40:57 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/31/2016 7:39:00 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 1/31/2016 7:36:34 PM, The-Voice-of-Truth wrote:
At 1/31/2016 7:27:19 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 1/31/2016 7:26:31 PM, The-Voice-of-Truth wrote:
At 1/31/2016 7:20:15 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 1/31/2016 6:48:09 PM, The-Voice-of-Truth wrote:
At 1/31/2016 6:33:06 PM, TBR wrote:

Mmm, no, I don't like government interference with the market, regardless of party. I think it should regulate itself. Congress, the President -- no government of any type should interfere with the market.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com......

Obviously an unbiased source *sees Bernie Sanders ad*

Yah that was a broken link sorry.

You're good. Saw the second link. I disagree with the bailouts. That was government regulation right there, my friend.

Obama's porkulous was no better. Obama kept investors from actually growing the economy due to market fears that Obama may, at any time, decide to arbitrarily pick a new round of winners and losers in the marketplace. Like solar panels....

Yeah, I know. I hated that as well. Government should just keep out of the markets.
Suh dude

"Because we all know who the most important snowflake in the wasteland is... It's YOU, champ! You're a special snowflake." -Vaarka, 01:30 in the hangouts

"Screw laying siege to Korea. That usually takes an hour or so." -Vaarka

"Crap, what is my religion again?" -Vaarka

I'm Rick Harrison and this is my pawn shop. I work here with my old man and my son, Big Hoss, and in 23 years I've learned one thing. You never know what is gonna come through that door.
walker_harris3
Posts: 273
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/31/2016 9:25:51 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/30/2016 1:29:40 AM, Lsumichiganfan wrote:
I have an overall topic for republicans. What is your response to unemployment dropping to 5% in Obama's presidency. The Economy has improved, so how is Obama doing harm to the economy?

It depends what rate you use. The Obama administration is using the U-3 unemployment rate which is 5% to make things look better. The U-6 rate is a better indicator of how the economy is doing and a more accurate measure of what unemployment is, and it stands at around 10% right now. Obama has averaged a U-6 of 14.5%, Bush averaged 9%, and Clinton averaged 9.6%. Wages have also not significantly grown from the lows that were recorded during the recession. I would say the recovery has not been as successful as the Obama Administration makes it out to be, seeing that we're due for another recession in the very near future that could harm the economy even more so than the 08 crisis did.

If you go even further and look at the ratio of people 16+ with jobs to the overall population of people 16 and older, the unemployment rate is 40%, but this measure doesn't always accurately represent the economy.

Rule of thumb: Whenever the Department of Labor releases the unemployment statistics, always double it to get the "real" unemployment rate.
Lsumichiganfan
Posts: 267
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/31/2016 11:30:41 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/31/2016 9:25:51 PM, walker_harris3 wrote:
At 1/30/2016 1:29:40 AM, Lsumichiganfan wrote:
I have an overall topic for republicans. What is your response to unemployment dropping to 5% in Obama's presidency. The Economy has improved, so how is Obama doing harm to the economy?

It depends what rate you use. The Obama administration is using the U-3 unemployment rate which is 5% to make things look better. The U-6 rate is a better indicator of how the economy is doing and a more accurate measure of what unemployment is, and it stands at around 10% right now. Obama has averaged a U-6 of 14.5%, Bush averaged 9%, and Clinton averaged 9.6%. Wages have also not significantly grown from the lows that were recorded during the recession. I would say the recovery has not been as successful as the Obama Administration makes it out to be, seeing that we're due for another recession in the very near future that could harm the economy even more so than the 08 crisis did.

If you go even further and look at the ratio of people 16+ with jobs to the overall population of people 16 and older, the unemployment rate is 40%, but this measure doesn't always accurately represent the economy.

Rule of thumb: Whenever the Department of Labor releases the unemployment statistics, always double it to get the "real" unemployment rate.

So does this apply to Bush? When his unemployment rate was 10% Double it and get 20%? Nice try Nice try
Please vote on this debate: http://www.debate.org...
"You have displayed the political understanding of a tortoise thus far in this election" -Harder
walker_harris3
Posts: 273
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/1/2016 12:10:00 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/31/2016 11:30:41 PM, Lsumichiganfan wrote:
At 1/31/2016 9:25:51 PM, walker_harris3 wrote:
At 1/30/2016 1:29:40 AM, Lsumichiganfan wrote:
I have an overall topic for republicans. What is your response to unemployment dropping to 5% in Obama's presidency. The Economy has improved, so how is Obama doing harm to the economy?

It depends what rate you use. The Obama administration is using the U-3 unemployment rate which is 5% to make things look better. The U-6 rate is a better indicator of how the economy is doing and a more accurate measure of what unemployment is, and it stands at around 10% right now. Obama has averaged a U-6 of 14.5%, Bush averaged 9%, and Clinton averaged 9.6%. Wages have also not significantly grown from the lows that were recorded during the recession. I would say the recovery has not been as successful as the Obama Administration makes it out to be, seeing that we're due for another recession in the very near future that could harm the economy even more so than the 08 crisis did.

If you go even further and look at the ratio of people 16+ with jobs to the overall population of people 16 and older, the unemployment rate is 40%, but this measure doesn't always accurately represent the economy.

Rule of thumb: Whenever the Department of Labor releases the unemployment statistics, always double it to get the "real" unemployment rate.

So does this apply to Bush? When his unemployment rate was 10% Double it and get 20%? Nice try Nice try

Go back and read what I wrote please. You double the U-3 not the U-6. I listed the average U-6's for Clinton Bush and Obama
Lsumichiganfan
Posts: 267
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/1/2016 12:11:12 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/1/2016 12:10:00 AM, walker_harris3 wrote:
At 1/31/2016 11:30:41 PM, Lsumichiganfan wrote:
At 1/31/2016 9:25:51 PM, walker_harris3 wrote:
At 1/30/2016 1:29:40 AM, Lsumichiganfan wrote:
I have an overall topic for republicans. What is your response to unemployment dropping to 5% in Obama's presidency. The Economy has improved, so how is Obama doing harm to the economy?

It depends what rate you use. The Obama administration is using the U-3 unemployment rate which is 5% to make things look better. The U-6 rate is a better indicator of how the economy is doing and a more accurate measure of what unemployment is, and it stands at around 10% right now. Obama has averaged a U-6 of 14.5%, Bush averaged 9%, and Clinton averaged 9.6%. Wages have also not significantly grown from the lows that were recorded during the recession. I would say the recovery has not been as successful as the Obama Administration makes it out to be, seeing that we're due for another recession in the very near future that could harm the economy even more so than the 08 crisis did.

If you go even further and look at the ratio of people 16+ with jobs to the overall population of people 16 and older, the unemployment rate is 40%, but this measure doesn't always accurately represent the economy.

Rule of thumb: Whenever the Department of Labor releases the unemployment statistics, always double it to get the "real" unemployment rate.

So does this apply to Bush? When his unemployment rate was 10% Double it and get 20%? Nice try Nice try

Go back and read what I wrote please. You double the U-3 not the U-6. I listed the average U-6's for Clinton Bush and Obama

Ok I read it, but your argument is still garbage
Please vote on this debate: http://www.debate.org...
"You have displayed the political understanding of a tortoise thus far in this election" -Harder
walker_harris3
Posts: 273
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/1/2016 12:15:24 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/1/2016 12:11:12 AM, Lsumichiganfan wrote:
At 2/1/2016 12:10:00 AM, walker_harris3 wrote:
At 1/31/2016 11:30:41 PM, Lsumichiganfan wrote:
At 1/31/2016 9:25:51 PM, walker_harris3 wrote:
At 1/30/2016 1:29:40 AM, Lsumichiganfan wrote:
I have an overall topic for republicans. What is your response to unemployment dropping to 5% in Obama's presidency. The Economy has improved, so how is Obama doing harm to the economy?

It depends what rate you use. The Obama administration is using the U-3 unemployment rate which is 5% to make things look better. The U-6 rate is a better indicator of how the economy is doing and a more accurate measure of what unemployment is, and it stands at around 10% right now. Obama has averaged a U-6 of 14.5%, Bush averaged 9%, and Clinton averaged 9.6%. Wages have also not significantly grown from the lows that were recorded during the recession. I would say the recovery has not been as successful as the Obama Administration makes it out to be, seeing that we're due for another recession in the very near future that could harm the economy even more so than the 08 crisis did.

If you go even further and look at the ratio of people 16+ with jobs to the overall population of people 16 and older, the unemployment rate is 40%, but this measure doesn't always accurately represent the economy.

Rule of thumb: Whenever the Department of Labor releases the unemployment statistics, always double it to get the "real" unemployment rate.

So does this apply to Bush? When his unemployment rate was 10% Double it and get 20%? Nice try Nice try

Go back and read what I wrote please. You double the U-3 not the U-6. I listed the average U-6's for Clinton Bush and Obama

Ok I read it, but your argument is still garbage

Not even making an argument here, just stating the facts and statistics. You asked the question, and I answered it.
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,286
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/1/2016 12:36:19 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/30/2016 1:42:12 AM, TBR wrote:
At 1/30/2016 1:29:40 AM, Lsumichiganfan wrote:
I have an overall topic for republicans. What is your response to unemployment dropping to 5% in Obama's presidency. The Economy has improved, so how is Obama doing harm to the economy?

Look at any economic indicator
Dow when Bush when he took office 10,787.99
Dow when Bush when he left office 7,949.09

Dow when Obama took office 7,949.09
Dow today Obama 16,466.30

This whole line of argumentation is post hoc. Economic situations aren't determined on the sole variable of 'president'. What presidents and legislatures did decades ago can affect the present day very strongly (the CRA and the recession, for example). It's like blaming a change in a patient's fever temperature on the staff at a hospital switching shifts.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/1/2016 12:41:10 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 1/31/2016 7:40:57 PM, The-Voice-of-Truth wrote:
At 1/31/2016 7:39:00 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 1/31/2016 7:36:34 PM, The-Voice-of-Truth wrote:
At 1/31/2016 7:27:19 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 1/31/2016 7:26:31 PM, The-Voice-of-Truth wrote:
At 1/31/2016 7:20:15 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 1/31/2016 6:48:09 PM, The-Voice-of-Truth wrote:
At 1/31/2016 6:33:06 PM, TBR wrote:

Mmm, no, I don't like government interference with the market, regardless of party. I think it should regulate itself. Congress, the President -- no government of any type should interfere with the market.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com......

Obviously an unbiased source *sees Bernie Sanders ad*

Yah that was a broken link sorry.

You're good. Saw the second link. I disagree with the bailouts. That was government regulation right there, my friend.

Obama's porkulous was no better. Obama kept investors from actually growing the economy due to market fears that Obama may, at any time, decide to arbitrarily pick a new round of winners and losers in the marketplace. Like solar panels....

Yeah, I know. I hated that as well. Government should just keep out of the markets.

Governments need to be smart about how they regulate markets. Having 0 regulation is just as bad - or worse - than over-regulation. Both situations create monopolies, as has been proven by history. No regulation means there's no accountability. Over-regulation means, in this day and age, declining employment and wages.