PDA

View Full Version : Romoney's lies about job growth under Obama



Reality1st
11-04-2012, 05:22 PM
In the second Presidential debate, Romoney tried once again to claim that American jobs were declining under the Obama administration.

The Republican spin and deception on this issue is astonishing....but quite predictable too. Check out this chart below from The Federal Reserve Bank in St. Louis and ask yourself if this looks like a downward trend in job numbers to YOU?

For reasons that have nothing to do with reality and everything to do with partisan election politics, Romoney and the rightwingnut media echo chamber would claim that this chart does show a job loss under Obama.

So is Romoney right about job numbers declining since Obama took office??? Or is the context of what had been happening to the economy under Bush before Obama took office somehow important to consider if you want to actually understand the situation and not just score bogus political points???

Remember Obama came into office with the economy in the tank, the banking system and the auto industry about to collapse, and unemployment already skyrocketing* after eight years of Bush Admin. mismanagement that had taken the country from a $230 billion dollar surplus (http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Was_there_a_national_surplus_when_Clinton_left_off ice) when Clinton left office to a $1.3 trillion dollar deficit (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/01/10/national/main4712380.shtml?tag=mncol;lst;5) when Bush left office. It takes a while to turn the economy around and recover after a train wreck like Bush left behind but quite obviously progress is being made on recovery. If the corrupt republican greed freaks and plutocratic power trippers get back into control, expect to see this chart in the coming years look even worse than it looks here in 2009. The ride will be a lot rougher than the Bush years. If Romoney and Lyin' Ryan win, expect to see more wars in the Mideast, huge gas price hikes, more tax cuts for the super rich and the corporations, higher taxes for the middle class and even the poor, more profitable (for them) destruction of the economy and exporting of jobs, a ban on legal abortion and suppression of the availability of contraception supplies and information, more assaults on everyone's freedoms and rights, more packing the judiciary with far right wing ideologues which means more twisting of the laws to favor the top 1% at the expense of the rest of us. Give Obama a chance and the recovery seen here will continue and grow stronger. Let's give him a majority in the House and a 60 plus majority in the Senate while we're at it and the things we need to happen to grow our economy and compete in the global market can get done without all of the organized Republican obstructionism that we've all seen for the last four years. The right wing has shown a willingness to see the country go down the tubes rather than let Obama accomplish anything. In spite of that, he's accomplished quite a lot (http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/magazine/march_april_2012/features/obamas_top_50_accomplishments035755.php).

* "unemployment already skyrocketing" - FactCheck.org reports this:
Repeated Job Loss Claim (http://www.factcheck.org/2012/04/romney-fundraising-pitch-skews-stats/) - Romney's claim that Obama "stood watch over the greatest job loss in modern American history" is also wrong, as we've noted before. The truth is more jobs were lost under Bush than Obama, and most of the jobs lost since he took office have now been regained. Since we wrote about this last year, the BLS has revised its statistics slightly for improved accuracy, as it does every year. The latest data show that "total nonfarm employment" (the standard measure of jobs) declined by nearly 8.8 million between its most recent peak in January 2008 and when the job slump bottomed out more than two years later, in February 2010. Of those lost jobs, nearly 4.5 million disappeared while Bush was president, and just over 4.3 million vanished during Obama's first 13 months in office. And since the job totals hit bottom there have been slow and steady gains, totaling nearly 3.6 million jobs. The total for March (released April 6) stood just 740,000 short of where it was in January 2009 when Obama was inaugurated.

http://oi46.tinypic.com/64fb6v.jpg

Calypso Jones
11-04-2012, 05:37 PM
do you know how much the presidebt is worth, dude? 10 million.

and here's the gamechanger. 3 words. Benghazi

Trinnity
11-04-2012, 05:49 PM
The chart only shows job growth/decline in the midst of an economic crash. The reality is we're not adding enough new jobs to make the difference. Not even enough to keep up with population growth. There's your factcheck, sir.

wazi99
11-04-2012, 06:41 PM
The problem is job growth has not kept up with population growth. We need 104,116 jobs a month to keep up with growth of the country. Now there was help in the past as people quit the work force to retire but they are not doing that like they use to. http://www.economicpopulist.org/content/how-many-jobs-are-needed-keep-population-growth

Many economist say we could soon need more than 110k jobs a month to keep up with population growth as many people who went back to college now reenter the work force looking for higher paying jobs to pay off student loans.

You can't just say we made 100k new jobs but skip by the fact that we had 104k new people looking for work.

See the population clock here: http://www.census.gov/main/www/popclock.html

(http://www.census.gov/main/www/popclock.html)

wazi99
11-04-2012, 06:49 PM
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fredgraph.png?bgcolor=%23cccc99&fo=ge&height=315&width=525&id=NILFWJN&scale=Left&range=Custom&cosd=2000-01-01&coed=2012-08-01&line_color=%23660000&link_values=false&line_style=Solid&mark_type=NONE&mw=4&lw=3&ost=-99999&oet=99999&mma=0&fml=a&fq=Monthly&fam=avg&fgst=lin&transformation=lin&vintage_date=2012-09-07&revision_date=2012-09-07

As you can see the number of people not counted as part of the work force but looking for work is growing quickly as unemployment runs out. This can account for a great part of the reduction of the unemployment number this year.

patrickt
11-04-2012, 06:54 PM
My god, the one who names himself Reality1st doesn't even know who's running for President. Pitiful but liberal.

wazi99
11-04-2012, 07:11 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_606w/WashingtonPost/Content/Blogs/ezra-klein/StandingArt/laborforcepart.png?uuid=MCoM9pYpEeGhfj5NDgP7Sg

No matter what way you look at it there are less people working today than the day Obama took office. Even with the slanted numbers they use. If we had a work force the same size as it was the day Obama took office we would have a unemployment rate over 11%.

Read about this in detail here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_606w/WashingtonPost/Content/Blogs/ezra-klein/StandingArt/laborforcepart.png?uuid=MCoM9pYpEeGhfj5NDgP7Sg

Chris
11-04-2012, 09:33 PM
he's accomplished quite a lot

Not really if you compare:

http://i.snag.gy/bQ842.jpg

Peter1469
11-04-2012, 09:37 PM
Welcome new guy.

Remember that many of the jobs created in the last few years are part time jobs..., that don't include benefits. Probably because benefits are too expensive under this regime.

Captain Obvious
11-04-2012, 10:56 PM
Welcome Reality - glad you're here.

Deadwood
11-05-2012, 12:17 AM
Who's Romony?

And where in that chart are the people who have given up looking?

And where in that chart are the university educated McDonald's part time workers?

As my grandfather used to say, "liars figure and figures lie?"

Nice try though. Next time put some meat in that stew and you might not get laughed off the forum.

Deadwood
11-05-2012, 12:24 AM
And oh, how come we're going back two weeks to the second presidential debate?

How about we talk about what's happened since, like Obama;s incredibly imaginative story about how four Americans died over a spontaneous protest in Benghazi over and English language movie trailer most Libyans could not have seen? A LIE he maintained for two weeks while the truth unfolded through the foreign media?

So yeah, want to talk about lies in the past? Let's go back to Cash for Cars, dipshit. How that $3,000,000,000.000 program created jobs in the auto industry, a LIE your super hero without a cape looked straight into the camera and without flinching stated as gospel.

Yep, that boondoggle sure did create jobs in the auto industry...in Japan, Korea, Canada and Germany...

Want some more?

Let's have a contest to see whose told the biggest whoppers.....

KC
11-05-2012, 03:25 AM
Welcome Reality first! Glad you took the time to write out such a thoughtful first post, hope there are more to come.

Trinnity
11-05-2012, 08:40 AM
And oh, how come we're going back two weeks to the second presidential debate?
I was wondering about that too. Well?

Reality1st
11-05-2012, 03:21 PM
The latest report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/empsit_11022012.htm) shows that there are now about 580,000 more people employed than when Obama took office.

Also....

Strong Job Figures Belie Romney’s Attacks (http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/johncassidy/2012/11/strong-october-job-figures-bely-romneys-attacks.html)
The New Yorker
Posted by John Cassidy
November 2, 2012
(excerpts)
According to the Labor Department’s October employment report (http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm), 171,000 new jobs were added last month—the highest figure since February. The new positions were spread throughout the economy, with retailing (plus 36,000), health care (plus 31,000), and business services (plus 51,000) showing particular strength. The only big group of employers that shed workers were state and local governments (minus 13,000) which are still being hit by budget cuts.

Over the past year, the total number of people employed has risen from 140.3 million to 143.4 million, according to the household survey. After allowing for population growth, the number of people unemployed has fallen by a million, and the number working part-time or no longer actively looking for work has dropped by about half a million. The number of people who have been out of work for more than six months—the hard-core unemployed—has fallen by more than eight hundred thousand, and it now stands at five million.

wazi99
11-05-2012, 04:58 PM
The problem is job growth has not kept up with population growth. We need 104,116 jobs a month to keep up with growth of the country. Now there was help in the past as people quit the work force to retire but they are not doing that like they use to. http://www.economicpopulist.org/cont...ulation-growth (http://www.economicpopulist.org/content/how-many-jobs-are-needed-keep-population-growth)

Many economist say we could soon need more than 110k jobs a month to keep up with population growth as many people who went back to college now reenter the work force looking for higher paying jobs to pay off student loans.

You can't just say we made 100k new jobs but skip by the fact that we had 104k new people looking for work.

See the population clock here: http://www.census.gov/main/www/popclock.html
(http://www.census.gov/main/www/popclock.html)

Mainecoons
11-05-2012, 05:09 PM
How many were part time? How well do they pay compared to all the jobs that were lost?

Why do the experts keep saying that job growth will have to exceed 250,000 per month to really make a dent in this thing? Maybe because there are those millions of people who have given up looking for work and would come back if there was hope. And then, as detailed above, there is the matter of population growth.

Obama's administration is not going to foster a robust economy. Perhaps nothing will at this point but for sure, an administration that is constantly attacking the productive and stacking new job killing regulations isn't going to. I see now that EPA is going to try and shove through some anti-coal regulations during the lame duck period.

Par for the course for this administration.

coolwalker
11-05-2012, 05:13 PM
Those jobs claims are skewed. Many of those people took two jobs part-time to try to equal one decent job, so cut those numbers down a bit and you have a terrible jobs growth. Unless of course people want to work 16 hour days to live halfway decently..

Mainecoons
11-05-2012, 05:16 PM
Here's an example of a government that is a congenital job killer:

http://www2.timesdispatch.com/news/rtd-opinion/2012/nov/04/tdopin02-we-need-regulation-but-not-this-much-ar-2333362/


The plural of anecdote, of course, is not data. So here are some data: In its
first three years the Obama administration imposed more than 100 economically
significant regulations — those costing $100 million or more. That's roughly
four times as many as the Bush administration did during a similar period,
according to the conservative Heritage Foundation.

Liberal outfits insist Heritage is wrong. But even by their Obama-friendly
accounting, the current president has been issuing major rules at a rate 24
percent faster than Bush. Despite the lip service he often pays to the free
market, the president has overseen massive regulatory expansions. See, e.g., the
banking industry; vehicle mileage standards; Obamacare's seemingly endless new
rules; carbon emission limits on coal-fired power plants; energy-efficiency
standards for home appliances; and dozens more.

According to a report by the House Committee on Oversight and Government
Reform, "The published regulatory burden for 2012 [alone] could exceed $105
billion. . . . Since January 1, the federal government has imposed $56.6 billion
in compliance costs and more than 114 million annual paperwork burden
hours."

Ask Jones about paperwork. Buckingham Slate is overseen by an alphabet soup
of federal and state agencies, and "each one of them wants something from us all
the time that is costing us money" — spill-prevention plans that require hiring
an engineer; pre-shift inspections; dust monitoring; and more. Jones estimates
that five of his 45 employees spend 20 percent of their time simply filling out
paperwork.

Reality1st
11-05-2012, 06:28 PM
Who's Romony?
I don't know. Why don't you tell us, since you made the name up.

If you're struggling futilely to repeat the name I used for the Republican candidate, well, I call him 'Romoney', or Ro-money, because he is an 'old money' plutocrat, stooging for the corporations and for the bizarre political agenda of the Mormon elders.

Peter1469
11-05-2012, 07:07 PM
I don't know. Why don't you tell us, since you made the name up.

If you're struggling futilely to repeat the name I used for the Republican candidate, well, I call him 'Romoney', or Ro-money, because he is an 'old money' plutocrat, stooging for the corporations and for the bizarre political agenda of the Mormon elders.


stooging for the corporations, ah yes, like Obama....

Welcome to the forum Real.

Chris
11-05-2012, 07:17 PM
I don't know. Why don't you tell us, since you made the name up.

If you're struggling futilely to repeat the name I used for the Republican candidate, well, I call him 'Romoney', or Ro-money, because he is an 'old money' plutocrat, stooging for the corporations and for the bizarre political agenda of the Mormon elders.

Did you make up the meaning of ro- as 'old'?

There's another lib around here that calls him robmoney.

texmaster
11-05-2012, 08:44 PM
In the second Presidential debate, Romoney tried once again to claim that American jobs were declining under the Obama administration.

The Republican spin and deception on this issue is astonishing....but quite predictable too. Check out this chart below from The Federal Reserve Bank in St. Louis and ask yourself if this looks like a downward trend in job numbers to YOU?

For reasons that have nothing to do with reality and everything to do with partisan election politics, Romoney and the rightwingnut media echo chamber would claim that this chart does show a job loss under Obama.

So is Romoney right about job numbers declining since Obama took office??? Or is the context of what had been happening to the economy under Bush before Obama took office somehow important to consider if you want to actually understand the situation and not just score bogus political points???

Remember Obama came into office with the economy in the tank, the banking system and the auto industry about to collapse, and unemployment already skyrocketing* after eight years of Bush Admin. mismanagement that had taken the country from a $230 billion dollar surplus (http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Was_there_a_national_surplus_when_Clinton_left_off ice) when Clinton left office to a $1.3 trillion dollar deficit (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/01/10/national/main4712380.shtml?tag=mncol;lst;5) when Bush left office. It takes a while to turn the economy around and recover after a train wreck like Bush left behind but quite obviously progress is being made on recovery. If the corrupt republican greed freaks and plutocratic power trippers get back into control, expect to see this chart in the coming years look even worse than it looks here in 2009. The ride will be a lot rougher than the Bush years. If Romoney and Lyin' Ryan win, expect to see more wars in the Mideast, huge gas price hikes, more tax cuts for the super rich and the corporations, higher taxes for the middle class and even the poor, more profitable (for them) destruction of the economy and exporting of jobs, a ban on legal abortion and suppression of the availability of contraception supplies and information, more assaults on everyone's freedoms and rights, more packing the judiciary with far right wing ideologues which means more twisting of the laws to favor the top 1% at the expense of the rest of us. Give Obama a chance and the recovery seen here will continue and grow stronger. Let's give him a majority in the House and a 60 plus majority in the Senate while we're at it and the things we need to happen to grow our economy and compete in the global market can get done without all of the organized Republican obstructionism that we've all seen for the last four years. The right wing has shown a willingness to see the country go down the tubes rather than let Obama accomplish anything. In spite of that, he's accomplished quite a lot (http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/magazine/march_april_2012/features/obamas_top_50_accomplishments035755.php).

* "unemployment already skyrocketing" - FactCheck.org reports this:
Repeated Job Loss Claim (http://www.factcheck.org/2012/04/romney-fundraising-pitch-skews-stats/) - Romney's claim that Obama "stood watch over the greatest job loss in modern American history" is also wrong, as we've noted before. The truth is more jobs were lost under Bush than Obama, and most of the jobs lost since he took office have now been regained. Since we wrote about this last year, the BLS has revised its statistics slightly for improved accuracy, as it does every year. The latest data show that "total nonfarm employment" (the standard measure of jobs) declined by nearly 8.8 million between its most recent peak in January 2008 and when the job slump bottomed out more than two years later, in February 2010. Of those lost jobs, nearly 4.5 million disappeared while Bush was president, and just over 4.3 million vanished during Obama's first 13 months in office. And since the job totals hit bottom there have been slow and steady gains, totaling nearly 3.6 million jobs. The total for March (released April 6) stood just 740,000 short of where it was in January 2009 when Obama was inaugurated.

http://oi46.tinypic.com/64fb6v.jpg

There are less people working today than in January 2009, there has been a net loss of jobs every single month of Obama's term. Some jobs not all full time of course were created, but more were lost----there was a NET LOSS.

Once again the liberal lies are exposed.

Peter1469
11-05-2012, 09:14 PM
Right, don't forget that as the job participation rate drops, the unemployment rate goes down, without added jobs. Math is hard for Americans.

Reality1st
11-06-2012, 04:17 AM
There are less people working today than in January 2009, there has been a net loss of jobs every single month of Obama's term. Some jobs not all full time of course were created, but more were lost----there was a NET LOSS.

Once again the liberal lies are exposed.

Repeating the tired lies of the rightwingnut media echo chamber over and over won't make them any less ridiculous or mistaken.

Bureau of Labor figures show that there are more people working today than when Obama took office. All of the figures show that there have been over 30 consecutive months of job gains.

32 Straight Months Of Private Sector Job Growth (http://www.dpcc.senate.gov/?p=blog&id=172)
Nov 2, 2012
(excerpt)
http://www.dpcc.senate.gov/files/images/LeadershipPayroll EmploymentOctober2012.png


Under President Obama's leadership, the economy has added private sector jobs for 32 straight months. During this span, 5.4 million private sector jobs have been created.