Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
Results 121 to 140 of 140

Thread: MSNBC: UPDATE, OBAMA ECONOMIC DISCUSSION

  1. #121
    Senior Member Array title="steeldawg is a jewel in the rough">

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    4,533

    Re: MSNBC: UPDATE, OBAMA ECONOMIC DISCUSSION

    Quote Originally Posted by Wallace108 View Post
    I know I'm beating a dead horse, but these are the same kind of people who continue to say that Clinton's policies created 23 million jobs. It's absolutely not true.

    You still haven't answered one of my questions .... if the economy didn't stabilize itself, and it was Obama's policies that were so effective that they managed to stop an economic free fall in just 4 or 5 months, then why haven't those policies been able to create many jobs in the following 3 1/2 years?
    stimulus created between 2 and 3 million jobs granted thats not a ton but it was only project to create about 4 million. You had the emergency economic stabilization act of 2008, did these measures do nothing? All i know is we were in economic crisis these policies went into effect and now we are in slow recovery. Economist say the stimulus helped stabilize the economy the cbo says it helped stabilize the economy, if you dont want to believe it then dont, but thats what is being reported on it.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by GoSlash27 View Post
    No it doesn't. It merely claims it as a statement of fact, which is what you did.
    Well you let me know who has the facts

  2. #122
    The voice of reason Array title="GoSlash27 has a reputation beyond repute"> GoSlash27's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Iowegia
    Posts
    6,034

    Re: MSNBC: UPDATE, OBAMA ECONOMIC DISCUSSION

    Quote Originally Posted by steeldawg View Post
    Sure it does it establishes the economy was in a nose dive towards a depression and the stimulus helped to stop it.
    Also... it most definitely does *not* establish that premise because that premise has been proven invalid. The stimulus could not have "stopped" our nosedive into depression because we ended up *IN* a depression.
    The textbook definition for "depression" is an economic downturn that lasts for years instead of quarters, and that's exactly what we've got.
    I suppose you could try to support the argument that it stopped a "worse" depression.
    "You've heard people brag about 'being in the zone'. They don't know what the Hell being in the zone is about. I played in the NFL for 15 years and I was only in the zone that one time." - "Mean" Joe Greene on the 1974 playoff victory over Oakland

  3. #123
    The voice of reason Array title="GoSlash27 has a reputation beyond repute"> GoSlash27's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Iowegia
    Posts
    6,034

    Re: MSNBC: UPDATE, OBAMA ECONOMIC DISCUSSION

    Quote Originally Posted by steeldawg View Post
    stimulus created between 2 and 3 million jobs granted thats not a ton but it was only project to create about 4 million. You had the emergency economic stabilization act of 2008, did these measures do nothing? All i know is we were in economic crisis these policies went into effect and now we are in slow recovery. Economist say the stimulus helped stabilize the economy the cbo says it helped stabilize the economy, if you dont want to believe it then dont, but thats what is being reported on it.
    A good summary of your argument. The red bolded part is conflating correlation with causation. "When the housing market crashed, I kicked my puppy. Now the economy is improving. Therefore puppy-kicking saved the economy." The blue bolded part is an appeal to authority fallacy. "Most economists said the housing market wouldn't collapse and there would be no recession. Therefore it didn't collapse and there was no recession".


    Well you let me know who has the facts
    Dude... It's your argument, not mine. Perhaps you should start at the beginning and construct an actual *argument*.
    "You've heard people brag about 'being in the zone'. They don't know what the Hell being in the zone is about. I played in the NFL for 15 years and I was only in the zone that one time." - "Mean" Joe Greene on the 1974 playoff victory over Oakland

  4. #124
    Smashmouth Posting Array title="Seven has much to be proud of"> Seven's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Gender
    Posts
    2,146

    Re: MSNBC: UPDATE, OBAMA ECONOMIC DISCUSSION

    Quote Originally Posted by steeldawg View Post
    stimulus created between 2 and 3 million jobs granted thats not a ton but it was only project to create about 4 million. You had the emergency economic stabilization act of 2008, did these measures do nothing? All i know is we were in economic crisis these policies went into effect and now we are in slow recovery. Economist say the stimulus helped stabilize the economy the cbo says it helped stabilize the economy, if you dont want to believe it then dont, but thats what is being reported on it.
    I just don't know how you can justify the last four years as recovery when things are worse now than they were when Obama took office and immediately implemented his policies. Congress was entirely controlled by the democratic party during much of Obama's term, therefore he basically had free reign to do whatever he wanted - and 7.9% unemployment is the best he can do?

    Let's say, just for the sake of conversation, that the stimulus did "stabilize" the economy. How does that alone make you believe Obama is a better candidate than Romney to improve our economy over this next presidential term (not stabilize, but improve) when he has already had four years to do so and has not?

    If the Steelers signed a runningback to a totally guaranteed contract for two years and production in the running game went down in those two years why would you re-sign him? You wouldn't. You would give someone else a shot.

    And that's why we need to fire Barack Obama and give Mitt Romney a chance. I'm not certain Romney can improve the state of the economy either, but I know Obama can't.

  5. #125
    1 at a time Array title="Count Steeler has a reputation beyond repute"> Count Steeler's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Toronto
    Gender
    Posts
    18,009

    Re: MSNBC: UPDATE, OBAMA ECONOMIC DISCUSSION

    How many people are off the employment list? ie, no longer looking for work. Doesn't that also skew the numbers?

  6. #126
    Senior Member Array title="stillers4me has a reputation beyond repute"> stillers4me's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Shitzinnati
    Gender
    Posts
    24,842

    Re: MSNBC: UPDATE, OBAMA ECONOMIC DISCUSSION

    If the Steelers signed a runningback to a totally guaranteed contract for two years and production in the running game went down in those two years why would you re-sign him? You wouldn't. You would give someone else a shot.

    And that's why we need to fire Barack Obama and give Mitt Romney a chance. I'm not certain Romney can improve the state of the economy either, but I know Obama can't.
    And he scores!



  7. #127
    The voice of reason Array title="GoSlash27 has a reputation beyond repute"> GoSlash27's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Iowegia
    Posts
    6,034

    Re: MSNBC: UPDATE, OBAMA ECONOMIC DISCUSSION

    If the Steelers signed a runningback to a totally guaranteed contract for two years and production in the running game went down in those two years why would you re-sign him? You wouldn't. You would give someone else a shot.

    And that's why we need to fire Barack Obama and give Mitt Romney a chance. I'm not certain Romney can improve the state of the economy either, but I know Obama can't.
    The hole in this analogy is that Romney has the exact same running style as Obama. Sure Obama sucks, but "Romney might be better" is completely unsupported by his plan, his public statements, and his track record.

    Neither one of these two has much influence on the economy in general, and what little influence they have is negative and virtually identical. Vote for whichever you like, but don't think for a second that either one is going to fix this. The problem is bigger than that.
    "You've heard people brag about 'being in the zone'. They don't know what the Hell being in the zone is about. I played in the NFL for 15 years and I was only in the zone that one time." - "Mean" Joe Greene on the 1974 playoff victory over Oakland

  8. #128
    1 at a time Array title="Count Steeler has a reputation beyond repute"> Count Steeler's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Toronto
    Gender
    Posts
    18,009

    Re: MSNBC: UPDATE, OBAMA ECONOMIC DISCUSSION

    Found this, FWIW:

    If the labour force participation rate was the same as when Obama took office, however, unemployment would be 10.6 per cent.

    Found at http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ok-office.html

    Another article: Data Shows Clear Decline in Labor Force Participation Under President Obama

    Found at http://www.forbes.com/sites/gregorym...n-under-obama/

  9. #129
    The voice of reason Array title="GoSlash27 has a reputation beyond repute"> GoSlash27's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Iowegia
    Posts
    6,034

    Re: MSNBC: UPDATE, OBAMA ECONOMIC DISCUSSION

    ^ As a way-back gearhead, I like to use automotive analogies when discussing economics.
    What I'm saying is that the *mechanic* is the problem.
    He's got this notion in his head that he can control the mixture, flow, and distribution better than the carb itself can. He's defeated every internal feedback loop in the darn thing and installed manual controls that he likes to intentionally work *backwards* from how they otherwise would. As a result (surprise, surprise) the engine is always surging/ stalling/ flooding/ backfiring/ and slowly eating itself.
    Blaming the current driver and switching in a different one ain't gonna help.
    "You've heard people brag about 'being in the zone'. They don't know what the Hell being in the zone is about. I played in the NFL for 15 years and I was only in the zone that one time." - "Mean" Joe Greene on the 1974 playoff victory over Oakland

  10. #130
    Smashmouth Posting Array title="Seven has much to be proud of"> Seven's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Gender
    Posts
    2,146

    Re: MSNBC: UPDATE, OBAMA ECONOMIC DISCUSSION

    Quote Originally Posted by GoSlash27 View Post
    The hole in this analogy is that Romney has the exact same running style as Obama. Sure Obama sucks, but "Romney might be better" is completely unsupported by his plan, his public statements, and his track record.
    Probably. But you and I know politicians rarely do what they say they're going to anyway.

    Quote Originally Posted by GoSlash27 View Post
    Neither one of these two has much influence on the economy in general, and what little influence they have is negative and virtually identical. Vote for whichever you like, but don't think for a second that either one is going to fix this. The problem is bigger than that.
    I think the office of president has a little more influence on the economy than you're giving it credit for, but I understand the point. The bigger problem that you elude to is one that I don't have the patience to discuss right now haha. I, quite literally, would need to write a book on that. I'm sure it'll rear its head at some point sooner rather than later and we'll have plenty of time to live it.

  11. #131
    Conservatarian Array title="Wallace108 is a splendid one to behold"> Wallace108's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Y-Town
    Gender
    Posts
    2,446

    Re: MSNBC: UPDATE, OBAMA ECONOMIC DISCUSSION

    Quote Originally Posted by GoSlash27 View Post
    The hole in this analogy is that Romney has the exact same running style as Obama. Sure Obama sucks, but "Romney might be better" is completely unsupported by his plan, his public statements, and his track record.

    Neither one of these two has much influence on the economy in general, and what little influence they have is negative and virtually identical. Vote for whichever you like, but don't think for a second that either one is going to fix this. The problem is bigger than that.
    Amen!

    While I believe Romney will do a better job than Obama, I still don't see him focusing on the real problems. It's like having AIDS and then getting pneumonia because of your weakened immune system. You go to the doctor, and he focuses only on treating the pneumonia but completely ignores the fact that you have AIDS, which is why you ended up with pneumonia in the first place. But I'll paraphrase something Seven said earlier ... if we're going over the cliff, I'd prefer the driver to be someone I don't mind riding with.

    On a completely unrelated yet related note ...
    I keep hearing Obama say that he'll be better than Romney at getting tough with China. Well, he's had four years. Why hasn't he done it yet? In four years, he never even mentioned it until Romney brought it up. It's like when he was running against Hillary, he kept saying that if elected, he'd revisit the trade agreements. Well, four years later and we're still waiting. Off topic, but just a thought I had.

    And newsflash: MSNBC still sucks.

  12. #132
    Geek God Array title="X-Terminator has a reputation beyond repute"> X-Terminator's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Gender
    Posts
    9,152

    Re: MSNBC really is more partisan than Fox, according to Pew study

    Quote Originally Posted by steeldawg View Post
    Yes libertarians believe in limited govermant, but it dosent have anything to do with what i asked him. I didnt champion the stimulus but it did help stabalize the economy, this is not my interpretation this is from the CBO and many economists. I didnt think the stimulus would help at all when it was signed into law but it did in fact help. Republicans also had a stimulus bill on the table at that time, and guess whats coming if Romney is elected more stimulus. If you read my response to his statement that no goverment has taxed or spent their way to prosperity, it was a simple question, do you know any successful country's that do not tax, spend or have no goverment at all? I am a Libertarian like it or not, I dont criticize everything dems do,like most on this site and i dont critcize republicans for everything they do. I am more interested in what works for the country not trying to promote a certain party. Our choice is apparently romney or obama, Im not voting for either but i think obama is a better choice. The problem on this site is the bias is so strong its almost laughable, I can venture outside of my libertarian views and say hey that worked or that was a good idea, even it it doesnt line up with my philosphy of how the country should operate. If romney wins i will say i was wrong about the election, and if he turns the country around i will support him, i dont think he will but im not afraid to give credit where credit is do.
    OK. I can respect that. Thanks for the clarification. I don't think you really understood his question though. He's asking if a country has ever become successful by promoting government spending and high taxes over the private sector, and you'd be hard-pressed to find an example of one. Even in heavily-taxed countries like Canada or the UK, private enterprise is still the lifeblood of the country. The problem is that we have too many people in this country who believe we should pull a Greece and tax/spend ourselves into oblivion. It doesn't work, and it's never worked. I mean, look at all the money we are borrowing from China just to keep our government from having to...gasp...CUT SPENDING? Eventually our chickens are going to come home to roost, because it's simply not sustainable.








  13. #133
    Ghost Poster Array title="ALLD has a reputation beyond repute"> ALLD's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Treasure Coast
    Posts
    11,371

    Re: MSNBC: UPDATE, OBAMA ECONOMIC DISCUSSION

    Quote Originally Posted by Seven View Post
    I just don't know how you can justify the last four years as recovery when things are worse now than they were when Obama took office and immediately implemented his policies. Congress was entirely controlled by the democratic party during much of Obama's term, therefore he basically had free reign to do whatever he wanted - and 7.9% unemployment is the best he can do?

    Let's say, just for the sake of conversation, that the stimulus did "stabilize" the economy. How does that alone make you believe Obama is a better candidate than Romney to improve our economy over this next presidential term (not stabilize, but improve) when he has already had four years to do so and has not?

    If the Steelers signed a runningback to a totally guaranteed contract for two years and production in the running game went down in those two years why would you re-sign him? You wouldn't. You would give someone else a shot.

    And that's why we need to fire Barack Obama and give Mitt Romney a chance. I'm not certain Romney can improve the state of the economy either, but I know Obama can't.
    Even without a Democratic controlled Congress, the President pushed Obamacare through 60-0 and was reinforced by a rigged 5-4 Supreme Court ruling.
    All Defense!

  14. #134
    Senior Member Array title="steeldawg is a jewel in the rough">

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    4,533

    Re: MSNBC really is more partisan than Fox, according to Pew study

    Quote Originally Posted by X-Terminator View Post
    OK. I can respect that. Thanks for the clarification. I don't think you really understood his question though. He's asking if a country has ever become successful by promoting government spending and high taxes over the private sector, and you'd be hard-pressed to find an example of one. Even in heavily-taxed countries like Canada or the UK, private enterprise is still the lifeblood of the country. The problem is that we have too many people in this country who believe we should pull a Greece and tax/spend ourselves into oblivion. It doesn't work, and it's never worked. I mean, look at all the money we are borrowing from China just to keep our government from having to...gasp...CUT SPENDING? Eventually our chickens are going to come home to roost, because it's simply not sustainable.
    First off that wasnt his question, he never asked that question. He made a statement that you cant tax and spend your way to prosperity. My question to him was are there any successful countries that do not spend or tax? Pretty simple question, i never promoted more spending and high taxes. The statements made on here about obama being the worst president ever were all ive been arguing about, and about him inflating the debt all by himself. Its ridiculous to blame obama and democrats for our situation and then tout republicans like they had nothing to do with it and they are the ones we need to save us. So the question has been are we better than 4 years ago, the answer is yes we are, is it the long term answer I dont think it is but it is better than 4 years ago. Do i think the economy stabilized into a slow recovery all by itself that quickly no i do not, i think the stimulus package helped with it. This always happens here, somehow me asking are there countries that do not spend or tax turns into i want us to be greece and tax ourselves into oblivion. I never suggested higher taxes i just said they should let tax cuts expire and give tax cuts to the middle class to stimulate the economy because the middle class will will reinvest that money into the economy.

  15. #135
    Senior Member Array title="steeldawg is a jewel in the rough">

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    4,533

    Re: MSNBC: UPDATE, OBAMA ECONOMIC DISCUSSION

    Quote Originally Posted by GoSlash27 View Post
    A good summary of your argument. The red bolded part is conflating correlation with causation. "When the housing market crashed, I kicked my puppy. Now the economy is improving. Therefore puppy-kicking saved the economy." The blue bolded part is an appeal to authority fallacy. "Most economists said the housing market wouldn't collapse and there would be no recession. Therefore it didn't collapse and there was no recession".



    Dude... It's your argument, not mine. Perhaps you should start at the beginning and construct an actual *argument*.
    Nothing wrong with my argument, obama implemented the stimulus to stimulate a bad economy, now the economy is in slow recovery. I never said the stimulus was the only reason the economy is recovering but i do believe it helped. Im not using an appeal to authority fallacy, im citing sources, I dont know what else you want me to do?

  16. #136
    Senior Member Array title="zulater has a reputation beyond repute"> zulater's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Fair Hill Md.
    Posts
    15,903

    Re: MSNBC: UPDATE, OBAMA ECONOMIC DISCUSSION

    Once Obamacare is fully implemented debt will further skyrocket, unemployment will grow to over 10% and any sign of "recovery" will be shot to hell. Hope your happy with yourself American liberals, undecided's, and so called Libertarians. Romney may not be your ideal candidate but he would have shitcanned the most dangerous piece of legislation to ever come out of Washington. And that in and of itself was worth voting for Romney, though for too many of you, you'll never admit so even when Obama takes us to the brink of a full blown depression by 2015.
    "A man's got to know his limitations."

  17. #137
    1 at a time Array title="Count Steeler has a reputation beyond repute"> Count Steeler's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Toronto
    Gender
    Posts
    18,009

    Re: MSNBC: UPDATE, OBAMA ECONOMIC DISCUSSION

    Sounds like the best scenario is for the Republicans to keep control of the House and grab control on the Senate in 2 years. At least Obama will only have 2 years to work his magic.

    The Republicans should take this opportunity and clean house in the party executive. They don't need to be center-left, they need to have a conservative voice with some cajones to put up with the media BS and still do what is right for the country.

    There is approximately 60% of the people that did not vote. The Republicans have to look at that block and figure out why they could not speak to those people and get them involved in the process.

  18. #138

    Re: MSNBC: UPDATE, OBAMA ECONOMIC DISCUSSION

    Quote Originally Posted by ALLD View Post
    How come all the women on MSNBC look like men and all the men look like Tom Bradys?

    Because Rachel Maddow and Tom Brady are the love children of Liberace and Goria Steinem?
    "I believe the game is designed to reward the ones who hit the hardest. If you can't take it, you shouldn't play"

    -- Jack Lambert --

  19. #139
    Senior Member Array title="Shoes has a reputation beyond repute"> Shoes's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Gender
    Posts
    11,632

    Re: MSNBC: UPDATE, OBAMA ECONOMIC DISCUSSION

    >snip<

    Quote Originally Posted by GoSlash27 View Post
    Blaming the current driver and switching in a different one ain't gonna help.
    I agree ....... it hasn't helped the middle class all the way back to Nixon, regardless of what party was in power. The middle class is a mere chess pawn in the Dem/Rep hand.

  20. #140
    The voice of reason Array title="GoSlash27 has a reputation beyond repute"> GoSlash27's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Iowegia
    Posts
    6,034

    Re: MSNBC: UPDATE, OBAMA ECONOMIC DISCUSSION

    Quote Originally Posted by Count Steeler View Post
    Sounds like the best scenario is for the Republicans to keep control of the House and grab control on the Senate in 2 years. At least Obama will only have 2 years to work his magic.

    The Republicans should take this opportunity and clean house in the party executive. They don't need to be center-left, they need to have a conservative voice with some cajones to put up with the media BS and still do what is right for the country.

    There is approximately 60% of the people that did not vote. The Republicans have to look at that block and figure out why they could not speak to those people and get them involved in the process.
    Agreed. The Republican Party has shifted so far left over the years that there is no more middle for them to poach. I don't know if they will heed the lesson, but I know they should.
    "You've heard people brag about 'being in the zone'. They don't know what the Hell being in the zone is about. I played in the NFL for 15 years and I was only in the zone that one time." - "Mean" Joe Greene on the 1974 playoff victory over Oakland

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •