Easy ... just send you over a few big tits chicks ... :)

Not true sorry. try again. off topic havent seen you here much. I hope you are doing well.

I believe it's right on topic as it relates to the problems of how people perceive how bad it really is. Presidents have done things like add the military to skew the real % ( Reagan did that )and added extra security to airports ( I think it was Clinton did this ). All to bump the % in the right direction.

I'm doing good, getting some paysites going and I'm going to be launching a gay site. I think I went a little crazy on the design, LOL.

But I don't get this. The unemployment rate has little to do with Obama and everything to do with the Recession. Obama didn't cause the recession. President Bush was in office when it hit (and you can even argue Bush wasn't at fault as well).

Take politics out of it. Brett, you've been to my house and seen my hometown here. We were building and building like madmen before the recession hit. When the recession hit everything went to hell and a handbasket. Businesses went under, and our tax revenue disappeared. Tons of people lost their houses. Exactly half of the houses on my street were vacant. And now come election time they are pointing fingers at the current mayor and the current town council saying our town's problems are because of them. It isn't. They weren't in office leading up to this, and they weren't in office when the recession hit. Instead, they are doing their best to pick up the pieces and move forward - which is difficult at best if not impossible.

This isn't a four year problem. It's most likely not an eight year problem. It's a ten or twenty year problem. This is a massive world wide problem that has foreign governments on the brink of collapsing. This is massive and it happened under a Republican president.

We should be thankful un-employment is only at 8%.

I'm going to sup up this thread in six words.

My dad is better than your dad.

The reality is, it doesn't matter who is sitting in office. More and more companies are sending jobs over seas due to cheap labor, not always taxes. Americans are not the assets they once were and even within the USA, you are better off hiring someone better skilled who usually comes from another country.

There is no magic anything that is going to fix this. It's a global market now and fact is it's cheaper to do everything overseas.

i'd say it's closer to 20%

I just want to understand this:

The govt's own numbers say that it takes 200,000 new jobs being created each month to break even.

Any jobs created OVER 200,000 in a month means that the employment rate is rising and unemployment is dropping.
Anything UNDER 200,000 means the unemployment rate is rising.

The numbers came out today. They are 114,000
Far BELOW what was expected and 86,000 LESS than breaking even.

And yet the unemployment rate DROPPED.
They also released the numbers on people dropping out of the work force. 350,000 of them.

It sure does appear that Democrats and Obama supporters are so desperate to find ANYTHING to turn shit around after that debate that now they are completely ignoring the govt.'s own numbers.

I don't think I've ever seen the media try so hard to get a guy elected as they are for Obama. It's outrageous.

Part of the Glass?Steagall Act of 1933 was eliminated with the passage of the Gramm?Leach?Bliley Act, commercial banks, investment banks, securities firms, and insurance companies were allowed to consolidate. The legislation was signed into law by President Bill Clinton. Many believe that this act is what allowed the banks to get into the trouble that started it all.
Obama had more power than any sitting president in a long time by having both the house and the senate in democrat control. There were many things he could have done to generate (Shovel Ready Jobs ) what limited him was all the regulations that the government itself has in place. That and giving all that money to Solyndra because of campaign contributions and 1.4 billion to Bright Source which was 1.8 billion in the red, but a major share holder was Robert Kennedy Jr and one of the employee's of Robert Jr was Sanjay Wagle, he was a major contributor to Obama's campaign and was given a job with the department of energy, he ended up as the person that gave the check to Bright Source.
What does that have to do with anything about jobs? Obama asked for our trust and was let down, he said that the stimulus would keep the country going and not let the unemployment rate get to 8%, well, it went past that and stayed there till today. If Obama had handled that money better, the country would be in a better place now.

Obama took care of his hommies first I guess?

So your saying we should trust Romney who is telling us he'll create five million jobs, reduce the deficit, fix Obamacare - which is the same exact thing he just passed in Mass - all while lowering taxes... Something does add up here.

Did it ever occur to anyone in the Republican party that when Romney left office in Mass he only had a 34% approval rate.

He was lucky to have a 0% approval rating. That is "Tax-a-chussetts" and it was a miracle they ever elected a Republican governor.

bless you!

Anyone catch how they do the numbers?

A unit in treasury randomly calls 60,000 households and does a survey. They take the data, play with it, massage it, oil it up and pass it to bureau of statistics... I'm not saying the numbers are fudged but...apparently the only straight ones are the number crunchers in (BOS) who it is claimed are data slaves. But in every other step, somebody can play, from treasury to the office where report is printed. thats why, apparently numbers have been up/down/corrected/up/corrected/down all year long....so they say.

Im with DWB. We'll all probably have 2 jobs on Nov 2nd and no jobs on Nov 4th.:1orglaugh

Our fucking government still isn't automated... Sad.

Again, you fail at basic reading skills .
Here is the original post of Tony286:

Ponctuations ( . ) are to delimit beginning and end ... So he basically told you :
- it is not true
- try again
- Off topic, havent seen you here much. I hope you are doing well.

So his last sentence was inquiring about you , as he hasn`t seen you here in a while , and wishing you are well ...

This course was graciously offered by a foreigner who`s first language is NOT english ...

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

PS: I will always remember that post where you claimed that you spent most of your childhood ' in the back of a little red pickup ' ....

Forgot where I read it, but somewhere today or yesterday I read that poverty here was at its highest since 1993 and close to the highest since the '60s. This after 29-30 months of job growth?

I think a lot of job growth might be shitty jobs, in which case who gives a shit how many jobs places like McDonalds adds? Can't support a family flipping burgers.

In fact, I wonder if in counting jobs, they count 2 for someone needing to work a full time and either a part time or another full time in order to make a living, because I bet there's muuuch more of that going on today than in the past.

So tell us how you think we can add jobs? This problem isn't unique to the US and if you have the solution you could be the next President.

However, he's spot on. Jobs are leaving the West to go Eats for one reason. COST.

No one exporting jobs gives a fuck if we lose our jobs. In truth neither do we, if you're not out of work and buying imported goods.

100 unemployed...

Did any conservatives defend the BLS stats?

7.8% is a lot.

It's easy to explain... People still aren't making as much as they used to.

I have a friend of mine who worked in marketing for a large firm, made big bucks. She got laid off. Work was impossible to find. Eventually she got a part time job at Starbucks, which eventually turned into a full time job. She's making one fourth of what she used to.

Yeah, too bad huh? Next thing you know, it'll be 6.8%. There goes the neighborhood.

The unemployment rate fell. It's a good thing. The only ones upset about the news are assholes.

Obama 2012.

http://www.uspoliticalnewswire.com/w...05-images1.jpg

I hope the USA gets better employment...

It's amazing that all along the GOP has been using the numbers as irrefutable fact that Obama needs to go.

Now they say those same numbers are not to be believed.

Fuck. That. It's as bad as birtherism. Dumb shits.

Obama 2012.

http://www.bartcop.com/gop-jobs-numbers-5.jpg

Not going to get into a debate here, but I do want to present some food for thought...

The number of jobs added does not equate to the number of individuals that began working, these are just jobs created that are or need to be filled.

The number of jobs that are needed per month is not to "break even" that number is to keep up with population growth. That still doesn't mean that the people who reach an age to work all enter the job force. Many become stay at home moms, go to school full time, start a business of their own, or make other decisions that make them not part of the job force. This has always been the case.

Jobs are paying less, this is 100% true, but four years ago there were quite a few people, some who are on this board, that I personally had to lay off. Almost every single one of those people have jobs, or have started their own small businesses. Whether they employ any other employees or not, I do not know, but they are working.

The unemployment rate would have dropped below 7% 2 years ago had their been no extension of unemployment benefits at the end of 2010 as part of the congressional deal made to also extend the Bush tax cuts. This too would have been a false drop, but a drop non-the-less.

Has anyone got a solution. We all know it's bad, what's Romney's solution?

In the debate he said that oil and gas production and the Keystone pipeline were part of it.
The other part is cutting taxes on small business which gives them more money to work with.

Both those ideas sound like common sense to me. I don't KNOW if they will work or not...but with Obama we will never know because he hasn't had any solutions yet.

The housing market was already in turmoil and Lehman Brothers had already failed but the economy was still good?

I meant compared to what happened in 2009. At that time in 2008 I was still kinda thinking that it would turn around within a year or so. Never in my wildest dreams did I think that 4 years later it would still be like this.

Oh, good news... I'm now registered to vote.

I think it's going to fall even more - The Christmas season will be starting in full force and retail will be bulking up with seasonal employees. While this might be a tad bit misleading, it is a yearly thing, and of course Obama will take as much credit as he can for it.

This is a huge part of the problem. People seem to think this is something the President can quickly fix. It isn't. This isn't a four year problem, it's a ten year problem. The entire world is feeling this.

This is one step above the Great Depression. Half of the houses on my street were vacant at the height of this crisis - HALF. That's not something you can quickly recover from.

Don't believe me? Read about the "lost decade" of Japan.

Because tax cuts worked so well when Bush did it.

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Albert Einstein

BTW, oil and gas production in the US is higher than its been in 10 years.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...362643448.html

Where will the money come from for the small business tax cuts?

Giving small businesses a tax break may create some expansion or it might mean the bosses take it as extra wages.

The downside is tax cuts have to be matched by tax cuts, borrowing or increases in other sectors. Tax cuts = job losses.

So how can small businesses be encouraged by Government to expand?

Here's an idea. Make US produced Solar Panels subject to a discount at the tills. So more consumers will switch to them and move away from traditionally generated electricity to solar power.

Put $1,000 on the cost of a new gas driven car and a discount of $1,000 on an electrical or hybrid car. The $ amount can be adjusted for effectiveness.

Government aided or funded projects in new technology.

Taxing imported goods more.

Tax cuts bring $0 growth we have seen the proof of that so many times it's amazing people don't laugh when it's put forward. Because for every $10,000 cut a job is lost, (adjust the $10,000 it was an example) and the $10,000 spent by a tax payer doesn't result in 1 job created.

While Americans only vote for big spending campaigners, or motivated by short term greed, the system will never change. And as Robbie points out the system is at fault.

I only answered Paul's question.

Thunderballs, if you watched the debate Romney told Obama to his face that Obama's administration has cut new oil drilling on Federal lands in HALF. He had nothing to do with oil & gas production going up. It is all happening on PRIVATE land.

Paul...as unemployment goes down and more people pay taxes instead of taking govt. checks...the federal revenue doesn't go down. Federal revenue was fine during the Bush years...problem was that Bush was busy trying to conquer the world with the military. The whole idea behind the tax cuts was that the govt. was running a surplus...which means it was taking more of our money than it needed. Bush's stupidity was thinking we could fight expensive wars at the same time. That isn't the case now.

If not for invading a couple of countries in the middle east we wouldn't have had a deficit. The numbers for federal revenue by year are easy to Google.
Start doing that instead of asking dumb questions to adult webmasters on GFY:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...993_-_2008.png

True, so how do you get employment down?

Yes Bush inherited a surplus, spent and cut you into the mess you're in now. And?

The case now is. The US is deep in debt and taxes are not covering the debts? So cut taxes and then what happens?

I don't get this. You don't lower my taxes and I say "Hey, I'm going to hire another person". Instead I say "Wow, more money for me let's see what else I can write off to screw the government".

That's a valid point.

But then that person SPENDS that "more money for you" and that stimulates the economy and increases jobs as other businesses need more employees.

We can't grow the economy if we keep taking money out of it and giving it to the govt.

That guy who now has more money...he may just go buy a new car. Or a new flat screen. Or maybe his income has moved to a level where he now feels more comfortable purchasing a new home.

Giving it to Washington D.C. to spend on war and cronyism just doesn't sound right to me.
Remember..today the U.S. Federal govt. spent 10.6 BILLION dollars. And borrowed 4 BILLION of that from China.

Through this whole economic disaster the Feds have not slowed down spending one bit. While the rest of us are struggling to get through this...Washington has kept right on spending like nothing is wrong at all.

They don't need MORE money. They need LESS, and to STOP spending.

Taxing people more isn't going to do anything to create jobs. We are in DEBT over 16 TRILLION dollars. They haven't even slowed down the spending.

If I were in debt like that, I would STOP spending on anything not essential (I'd pay my mortgage, power, water, and groceries) and start paying down my debts.

That isn't what is happening in Washington. Those motherfuckers are still getting rich!

Think about it...10.6 BILLION dollars per DAY. They spend more in 29 minutes than Mitt Romney's entire net worth.
They spend more in 4 days than Warren Buffets entire net worth.

The number I saw was that you could "tax" all the people making over 250 thousand dollars at 100% and it would only run the govt. for about a month.

More taxes isn't the answer. As Obama likes to say: "It's mathematics" But he only likes to say that about CUTTING taxes. When it comes to taking people's money and spending it in Washington...math no longer exists.