Quietly, Unemployment drops to Bush Levels ... Quietly

[Cigar]

Monthly unemployment rates (percent)




Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec


2011
9.1
9.0
8.9
9.0
9.0
9.1
9.1
9.1
9.0
8.9
8.7
8.5


2012
8.3
8.3
8.2
8.1
8.2
8.2
8.3
8.1
7.8
7.9
7.7




Source: U.S. Department of Labor’s Bureau of Labor Statistics


Quietly ... back to the day George W Bush left The White House



Year
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec


2008
5.0
4.9
5.1
5.0
5.4
5.6
5.8
6.1
6.1
6.5
6.8
7.3


2009
7.8
8.3
8.7
8.9
9.4
9.5
9.5
9.6
9.8
10.0
9.9
9.9


2010
9.7
9.8
9.8
9.9
9.6
9.4
9.5
9.6
9.5
9.5
9.8
9.4


2011
9.1
9.0
8.9
9.0
9.0
9.1
9.1
9.1
9.0
8.9
8.7
8.5


2012
8.3
8.3
8.2
8.1
8.2
8.2
8.3
8.1
7.8
7.9
7.7




http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000

[Chris]

IOW, no recovery yet.

[Cigar]

IOW, no recovery yet.

Are you expecting one?

I thought you Cons were happy with obstruction and failure.

[Cigar]

AT THE CLOSING BELL ON Tuesday11 December 2012



Dow Jones 13,248.44 +78.56 (0.60%)
S&P 500 1,427.84 +9.29 (0.65%)
Nasdaq 3,022.30 +35.34 (1.18%)

[patrickt]

Cigar sets President Bush as the standard President Obama must struggle to achieve...and fail.

[Chris]

Are you expecting one?

I thought you Cons were happy with obstruction and failure.

I see, you expect no recovery under Obama.

We are happy Obama's policies for failure are obstructed.

[GrassrootsConservative]

Growth in the economy under Obama making the news is a sad thing. Most presidents have had growth automatically, but with Obama every single job created is a nationwide story that all the mainstream media channels are oh-so-happy to report the messiah finally doing something right for a change.

[Cigar]

Looks to me like Obama doing better than you think ... :)

http://www.gallup.com/poll/113980/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Job-Approval.aspx

[patrickt]

And relying on government managed statistics to "prove" President Obama's successes is rather stupid. President Obama lures people out of the job market, thereby reducing unemployment, and the nitwits cheer.

[Chris]

Looks to me like Obama doing better than you think ... :)

http://www.gallup.com/poll/113980/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Job-Approval.aspx

Now if you could just connect public opinion to economic reality.

[wazi99]

If the work force size was the same now as under Bush it would be over 14% unemployment. Only by not counting people who ran out of unemployment benefits can you get it that low.



Measure
Not seasonally adjusted
Seasonally adjusted


Nov.
2011
Oct.
2012
Nov.
2012
Nov.
2011
July
2012
Aug.
2012
Sept.
2012
Oct.
2012
Nov.
2012


U-1 Persons unemployed 15 weeks or longer, as a percent of the civilian labor force

4.9
4.3
4.2
5.0
4.5
4.4
4.3
4.4
4.3


U-2 Job losers and persons who completed temporary jobs, as a percent of the civilian labor force

4.7
3.9
3.9
4.9
4.6
4.5
4.2
4.2
4.1


U-3 Total unemployed, as a percent of the civilian labor force (official unemployment rate)

8.2
7.5
7.4
8.7
8.3
8.1
7.8
7.9
7.7


U-4 Total unemployed plus discouraged workers, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus discouraged workers

8.9
8.0
7.9
9.3
8.8
8.6
8.3
8.4
8.3


U-5 Total unemployed, plus discouraged workers, plus all other persons marginally attached to the labor force, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force

9.7
9.0
8.8
10.2
9.7
9.6
9.3
9.3
9.2


U-6 Total unemployed, plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force, plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force

15.0
13.9
13.9
15.6
15.0
14.7
14.7
14.6
14.4



Full details here: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t15.htm

Nothing like leaving out the true story Cigar maybe you should read something more than Obama press releases.

[wazi99]

Meant this to be part of the post above so I just deleted it.

[GrassrootsConservative]

If the work force size was the same now as under Bush it would be over 11% unemployment. Only by not counting people who ran out of unemployment benefits can you get it that low.

Whatever works for the bums at MSNBC. They're not worried, they have jobs.

[Cigar]

Whatever works for the bums at MSNBC. They're not worried, they have jobs.

... and so do I. :)

How about you? Do you have a Job?

[patrickt]

Looks to me like Obama doing better than you think ... :)

http://www.gallup.com/poll/113980/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Job-Approval.aspx

By liberal measurements most popular equals most successful. So the most popular girl is the best even if she gives the entire football team the clap.

[Cigar]

By liberal measurements most popular equals most successful. She the most popular girl is the best even if she gives the entire football team the clap.


Yea ... I remember the good old days when Republicans would never complement Bill Clinton.

[elvisroy0000]

what Jobs and this Phoney Growth Report is sad. when you Google search number of people in us employed on inauguration day and then google search number of people working Now you get the real Numbers around 6 million lost since Obama took office so how do you get any job gains fantasy world and to those 1.5 million new unemployed over last two weeks who are Obama voters i am Laughing at you there are no New Jobs this lie is getting Tiresome

[Cigar]

what Jobs and this Phoney Growth Report is sad. when you Google search number of people in us employed on inauguration day and then google search number of people working Now you get the real Numbers around 6 million lost since Obama took office so how do you get any job gains fantasy world and to those 1.5 million new unemployed over last two weeks who are Obama voters i am Laughing at you there are no New Jobs this lie is getting Tiresome

So what are you saying ... do you want Big Government to employ people or your Job Creators?

The Job Creators have had their opportunity for more than a decade ... Obama ... 4 years.

[Chris]

So what are you saying ... do you want Big Government to employ people or your Job Creators?

The Job Creators have had their opportunity for more than a decade ... Obama ... 4 years.

Job creators generally succeed, Obama not.

[Peter1469]

Wazi99 is correct. If you don't consider the job participation rate you will miss the fact that every month more jobs are lost from the market than are created. No sane person can call that success. Look at the U-6 number, not the U-3.

[Cigar]

Job creators generally succeed, Obama not.

It's been 10 years, when are they going to start?

[Chris]

It's been 10 years, when are they going to start?

In the last 10 years I've been hired and held 3 jobs. What are you talking about. If government got out of the way things would be much better.

[Chris]

Wazi99 is correct. If you don't consider the job participation rate you will miss the fact that every month more jobs are lost from the market than are created. No sane person can call that success. Look at the U-6 number, not the U-3.

Exactly. But cigar doesn't want to consider that, only what supports his prejudices.

[Cigar]

Exactly. But cigar doesn't want to consider that, only what supports his prejudices.

Im not taking Business Advice from Forum Members.

I do just fine.

[Mister D]

How is that black unemployment rate, Cigar?

[wazi99]

Wazi99 is correct. If you don't consider the job participation rate you will miss the fact that every month more jobs are lost from the market than are created. No sane person can call that success. Look at the U-6 number, not the U-3.


Im not taking Business Advice from Forum Members.

I do just fine.

What business advise? Cigar you make the weirdest most unrelated posts ever. How about a response to the U6 number? Or are facts hard to accept?

[covert]

the lack of freedom of enterprise is the problem, you should not need a license to start a business.

[Peter1469]

the lack of freedom of enterprise is the problem, you should not need a license to start a business.


Welcome to tPF!

That is a bit to libertrian for me, but you and Chris will get along swell!

[Chris]

Im not taking Business Advice from Forum Members.

I do just fine.

We're not discussing business advice, cigar, we're talking the economy--remember, you started the topic, doh! :geez:

[roadmaster]

We're not discussing business advice, cigar, we're talking the economy--remember, you started the topic, doh! :geez:

It's only because people are not counted anymore. They can't receive unemployment benefits because they have ran out. Look at all the 99ers that lost benefits. We are talking about huge numbers. They don't exist in the system anymore.

[Peter1469]

It's only because people are not counted anymore. They can't receive unemployment benefits because they have ran out. Look at all the 99ers that lost benefits. We are talking about huge numbers. They don't exist in the system anymore.

The people past 99 weeks are getting jobs. The ones that still have gravy train left are not.

I was talking about jobs that disappeared. Not people who stopped looking.

[Agravan]

It's been 10 years, when are they going to start? They did succeed. UE under Bush was below 5% during most of his tenure until Dems took control of Congress and went hog wild with spending and regulations.

[Chris]

It's only because people are not counted anymore. They can't receive unemployment benefits because they have ran out. Look at all the 99ers that lost benefits. We are talking about huge numbers. They don't exist in the system anymore.

Not sure that's true. I think they're not counted because they no longer actively seek employment, not because they aren't receiving benefits. See Mulligan on Redistribution, Unemployment, and the Labor Market (http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/9384-Mulligan-on-Redistribution-Unemployment-and-the-Labor-Market).

[wazi99]

I think Cigar is to scared to answer any of the facts here. To bad he can't have a honest discussion.

[Chris]

I don't think he has any interest in facts. It's all about whatever gotcha he thinks he can find. The gotcha does have to be true so long as he thinks it will irritate someone.

[Awryly]

Monthly unemployment rates (percent)




Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec


2011
9.1
9.0
8.9
9.0
9.0
9.1
9.1
9.1
9.0
8.9
8.7
8.5


2012
8.3
8.3
8.2
8.1
8.2
8.2
8.3
8.1
7.8
7.9
7.7




Source: U.S. Department of Labor’s Bureau of Labor Statistics


Quietly ... back to the day George W Bush left The White House



Year
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec


2008
5.0
4.9
5.1
5.0
5.4
5.6
5.8
6.1
6.1
6.5
6.8
7.3


2009
7.8
8.3
8.7
8.9
9.4
9.5
9.5
9.6
9.8
10.0
9.9
9.9


2010
9.7
9.8
9.8
9.9
9.6
9.4
9.5
9.6
9.5
9.5
9.8
9.4


2011
9.1
9.0
8.9
9.0
9.0
9.1
9.1
9.1
9.0
8.9
8.7
8.5


2012
8.3
8.3
8.2
8.1
8.2
8.2
8.3
8.1
7.8
7.9
7.7




http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000


It's a terrible mistake. Soon to be remedied by a fiscal cliff.

And a fairly steep plunge into a Republican nirvana.

[Peter1469]

The "fiscal cliff" is nothing. Just wait until liberal spending destroys the USD.

[Awryly]

The people past 99 weeks are getting jobs. The ones that still have gravy train left are not.

I was talking about jobs that disappeared. Not people who stopped looking.


You must talk to Romney about that. I gather he is in the business of "disappearing" jobs.

[Peter1469]

Obama is better for this discussion. Labor participate under him is the lowest since that number has been tracked.

[elvisroy0000]

first their is no Truth to the Numbers the real Unemployement rate By OIbama stooges estimate 14 % secondly do a Google Search no of People in US employed when Obama inagurated subtract Number of people working now over 5 million jobs Lost since Obama took office how is this Bettar

[Awryly]

Don't you guys do national household employment et alia surveys?

We do. It shows up the under-employed, voluntary labour market withdrawals, and other stuff official benefit receipt and registered unemployment figures do not.

[zelmo1234]

Yea ... I remember the good old days when Republicans would never complement Bill Clinton.

Now I am about as conservative as they come, and economically Clinton was not a bad President, he moved to the middle after hilary care failed and worked well with Speaker Gingrich and the moved the economy forward. Most will not remember that Clintons tax increases went all the way down to the making just over 40K per year, and most have forgoten in exchange for the slight perccentage of increase in income tax, Clinton cut capital gains and actually reduced taxes on the rich.

Morally he was bankrupt, but economically he did well.

[Awryly]

Now I am about as conservative as they come, and economically Clinton was not a bad President, he moved to the middle after hilary care failed and worked well with Speaker Gingrich and the moved the economy forward. Most will not remember that Clintons tax increases went all the way down to the making just over 40K per year, and most have forgoten in exchange for the slight perccentage of increase in income tax, Clinton cut capital gains and actually reduced taxes on the rich.

Morally he was bankrupt, but economically he did well.


I would have thought, if all that was so, he exhibited the highest standards in American morality.

Or are you talking about THAT blow-job?

[zelmo1234]

It's been 10 years, when are they going to start?

This is easy I will start to hire and Obama administration stops regulating, taxing and confiscating my profits to pay for his programs.

Until the eviroment is profitable, I have to shelter, and it sucks. I would much rather grow.

Now before you start to talk about the last 10 years you had better look at those Bush unemployment, spending and revenue neubers.

He was far from a great President, but when compaired with obama, the Bush years were the good old days.

[zelmo1234]

You must talk to Romney about that. I gather he is in the business of "disappearing" jobs.

Are you Sure about that????

Many of the companies that Bane invested in, are thriving!

Target and Staples come to mind? But most people do not understand investment capital, they are not in the business of investing in companies that are on solid ground, they invest in compaines that are going out of business, they are able to save some, and they loose some, but they were all going out of business anyway!

I know that is a hard thing to admit when you want to demonize someone

[zelmo1234]

I would have thought, if all that was so, he exhibited the highest standards in American morality.

Or are you talking about THAT blow-job?

I really do nto care about his sexual acts, lying under oath was more of what I was refering to?

[Awryly]

I really do nto care about his sexual acts, lying under oath was more of what I was refering to?


You expect your politicians to be honest?

Isn't that a bit extreme?

[Chris]

I really do nto care about his sexual acts, lying under oath was more of what I was refering to?

zelmo, welcome to the forum. Ignore trolls like awryly.

[zelmo1234]

zelmo, welcome to the forum. Ignore trolls like awryly.

Thanks I am glad to be here, but I tend to listen to everyone, you never know when you may learn or teach something.

besides that is whjy the constitution gave the right to free speach, so I listen but never let it get me down.

[Chris]

Thanks I am glad to be here, but I tend to listen to everyone, you never know when you may learn or teach something.

besides that is whjy the constitution gave the right to free speach, so I listen but never let it get me down.

Let us know when you see him say something informative.

[Chris]

besides that is whjy the constitution gave the right to free speach

The Constitution doesn't give rights.

[Awryly]

The Constitution doesn't give rights.

Jeez, with people like you, America does not need uneducated kids in schools that get shot up.


The Bill of Rights is the collective name for the first ten amendments (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_amendments_to_the_United_States_Constituti on) to the United States Constitution (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Constitution). These limitations serve to protect the natural rights (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_rights) of liberty (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberty) and property (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Property). They guarantee a number of personal freedoms, limit the government's power in judicial and other proceedings, and reserve some powers to the states and the public.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Bill_of_Rights

What form of sanity, conceivably, do you subscribe to?

[Chris]

Jeez, with people like you, America does not need uneducated kids in schools that get shot up.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Bill_of_Rights

Having trouble reading, awryly?

"The Bill of Rights is the collective name for the first ten amendments to the United States Constitution. These limitations serve to protect the natural rights of liberty and property. They guarantee a number of personal freedoms, limit the government's power in judicial and other proceedings, and reserve some powers to the states and the public."

No where does it say in the Constitution that rights are given.

We've been through this before, you've been asked to cite one line from the Constitution that gives rights. You failed then, just as you fail now.

Being a troll you will just keep making a fool of yourself.

[Awryly]

Having trouble reading, awryly?

"The Bill of Rights is the collective name for the first ten amendments to the United States Constitution. These limitations serve to protect the natural rights of liberty and property. They guarantee a number of personal freedoms, limit the government's power in judicial and other proceedings, and reserve some powers to the states and the public."

No where does it say in the Constitution that rights are given.

We've been through this before, you've been asked to cite one line from the Constitution that gives rights. You failed then, just as you fail now.

Being a troll you will just keep making a fool of yourself.


*Sigh*

Every right is a limitation on unbridled power.

That's why they're called rights.

[Chris]

*Sigh*

Every right is a limitation on unbridled power.

That's why they're called rights.

So now you invent meanings. How trolling of you.

So where in the Constitution do you see it giving rights?

[Awryly]

So now you invent meanings. How trolling of you.

So where in the Constitution do you see it giving rights?

The first ten amendments. Duh.

Not sure about the right to own slaves.

[Chris]

The first ten amendments. Duh.

Not sure about the right to own slaves.

Here they are, awryly:
Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Amendment II

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Amendment III

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Amendment VI

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

Amendment VII

In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

Amendment VIII

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Not one gives rights, in fact the last two state the people already have these rights.

[Awryly]

Here they are, awryly:

Not one gives rights, in fact the last two state the people already have these rights.


If I convert to Republicanism (let's throw in Catholicism and Tea Partyism as well), could I become as disturbed as you are?

[Chris]

If I convert to Republicanism (let's throw in Catholicism as well), could I become as disturbed as you are?

Three signs of a troll: arrogance, echoing, change topic. It is so easy to bring them out of you, awryly. Good night now, happy trolling.

[hanger4]

Here they are, awryly:

Not one gives rights, in fact the last two state the people already have these rights.

This exchange between you and Awryly has been hilarious.

[Chris]

This exchange between you and Awryly has been hilarious.

It is when you consider that this is the third time he's made the claim and been shown utterly wrong, and especially so when you know he will do it again. I don't know, maybe he's not a troll...nah, no one could be so stupendously stupid without trying. He's a troll.

[Peter1469]

Don't you guys do national household employment et alia surveys?

We do. It shows up the under-employed, voluntary labour market withdrawals, and other stuff official benefit receipt and registered unemployment figures do not.

All of that data is gathered. We have 6 different figures: U-1 through U-6. The media and politicians use U-3. U-6 is the most complete measure of unemployment and underemployment.

[zelmo1234]

Let us know when you see him say something informative.

Sometimes the most informative thing that someone cane do, is to give you insite in to the way their mind works. Apparently He does not even live in our country, and yet has the same mind set as many of the Liberal voters in the US.

The Republicans are spending time and energy trying to appeal to this mindset, and Yet there is nothing that they can do, as the Liberal voter is not at all concerned with results, but with the appearence of compassion.

The examples are abundant.

Look at many of there programs

Welfare was designed for a very short term helping hand, to get people back on their feet, and yet is has turned into a program that keeps people on the government system and dooms then to poverty and hardship, Yet they (Democrats) will not allow any change because this program has the appearence of compassion.

Obamacare will in fact cost most Americans much more, and will cause the quality of healthcare to decline in the Country, and Yet they will change nothing becasue of the appearence of compassion.

SS, Education, Medicare/caid, All broken and causing hardship, and yet they risist any and all change, because they want people to believe that they have compassion.

This is the problem that we are facing in washington

[Chris]

Sometimes the most informative thing that someone cane do, is to give you insite in to the way their mind works. Apparently He does not even live in our country, and yet has the same mind set as many of the Liberal voters in the US.

The Republicans are spending time and energy trying to appeal to this mindset, and Yet there is nothing that they can do, as the Liberal voter is not at all concerned with results, but with the appearence of compassion.

The examples are abundant.

Look at many of there programs

Welfare was designed for a very short term helping hand, to get people back on their feet, and yet is has turned into a program that keeps people on the government system and dooms then to poverty and hardship, Yet they (Democrats) will not allow any change because this program has the appearence of compassion.

Obamacare will in fact cost most Americans much more, and will cause the quality of healthcare to decline in the Country, and Yet they will change nothing becasue of the appearence of compassion.

SS, Education, Medicare/caid, All broken and causing hardship, and yet they risist any and all change, because they want people to believe that they have compassion.

This is the problem that we are facing in washington

Thank you for your well-thought-out insights. I think that's what most here try to do, liberals included much as I might disagree with them. But awryly only provides insights into his hate for everything and everyone here in the form of persistent, insistent trolling.

[Awryly]

It is when you consider that this is the third time he's made the claim and been shown utterly wrong, and especially so when you know he will do it again. I don't know, maybe he's not a troll...nah, no one could be so stupendously stupid without trying. He's a troll.

I rest happily in what passes for your mind as a troll.

Never forget that. :weedsmoking::weedsmoking::weedsmoking:

[Carygrant]

It is when you consider that this is the third time he's made the claim and been shown utterly wrong, and especially so when you know he will do it again. I don't know, maybe he's not a troll...nah, no one could be so stupendously stupid without trying. He's a troll.


You seem quite obsessive about your badly hidden need to actually keep your podium spot unchallenged .

[GrumpyDog]

Translation for Awryly, from GrumpyDog Conservative to Liberal Translation Guide:

See: Government (bad) wrote the Constitution (good). Except that any rights guaranteed by the Constitution (good), cannot be guaranteed by the Government (bad). Since individual conservative representatives (good) voluntarily must coexist with liberal representatives(bad), this coexistence precludes any Government(bad) from ever being good.

[Chris]

You seem quite obsessive about your badly hidden need to actually keep your podium spot unchallenged .

And you seem obsessively unable to communicate the simplest thought. What were you trying to say?

[Cigar]

You seem quite obsessive about your badly hidden need to actually keep your podium spot unchallenged .

A Strong Base is required to prevent movement :)

[Chris]

Translation for Awryly, from GrumpyDog Conservative to Liberal Translation Guide:

See: Government (bad) wrote the Constitution (good). Except that any rights guaranteed by the Constitution (good), cannot be guaranteed by the Government (bad). Since individual conservative representatives (good) voluntarily must coexist with liberal representatives(bad), this coexistence precludes any Government(bad) from ever being good.

Grump, this is typical of your made up fantasies: "Government (bad) wrote the Constitution (good)." The government didn't write the Constitution, the people write the Constitution and thereby created the government. Here, try reading something:


We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.


This is just self-annihilating nonsense: "Except that any rights guaranteed by the Constitution (good), cannot be guaranteed by the Government (bad)."

And this I can't even parse: "Since individual conservative representatives (good) voluntarily must coexist with liberal representatives(bad), this coexistence precludes any Government(bad) from ever being good."

[Chris]

A Strong Base is required to prevent movement :)

I see you didn't understand him either. But it's always fun to see one troll talk to another one. Here we have awryly, cary and cigar talking to each other and not making a lick of sense.

[Cigar]

I see you didn't understand him either. But it's always fun to see one troll talk to another one. Here we have awryly, cary and cigar talking to each other and not making a lick of sense.

Wouldn't expect you to understand ... see the Joke now?

[Chris]

Sometimes the most informative thing that someone cane do, is to give you insite in to the way their mind works. Apparently He does not even live in our country, and yet has the same mind set as many of the Liberal voters in the US.

The Republicans are spending time and energy trying to appeal to this mindset, and Yet there is nothing that they can do, as the Liberal voter is not at all concerned with results, but with the appearence of compassion.

The examples are abundant.

Look at many of there programs

Welfare was designed for a very short term helping hand, to get people back on their feet, and yet is has turned into a program that keeps people on the government system and dooms then to poverty and hardship, Yet they (Democrats) will not allow any change because this program has the appearence of compassion.

Obamacare will in fact cost most Americans much more, and will cause the quality of healthcare to decline in the Country, and Yet they will change nothing becasue of the appearence of compassion.

SS, Education, Medicare/caid, All broken and causing hardship, and yet they risist any and all change, because they want people to believe that they have compassion.

This is the problem that we are facing in washington

I think you'll find that awryly is not liberal in an American sense--nor is cary. Perhaps in a more European sense, they are. But these two hate America, period, and with awryly anything not NZ. In the past they have trolled each other, and you can see here where they respond to each other, it's all with non sequiturs. Ditto now cigar, who is also not a liberal, but simple a Democrat, all party, no principles. But I will leave you to see this in time.

[Chris]

Wouldn't expect you to understand ... see the Joke now?

If one of you trolls said something in plain simple English that wasn't self-contradictory, I assure you not only I but everyone else here would understand you, and reply to that understanding, and, OMG, a discussion just might ensue--but I forget you trolls are not interested in discussion.

[Cigar]

I understand ... it's a really difficult time to be Conservative / Republican, but you'll survive ... maybe. :)

[Chris]

I understand ... it's a really difficult time to be Conservative / Republican, but you'll survive ... maybe. :)

See, no interest at all in discussing the topic (the economy, remember?), just interest in taking another trolling dig, one that is unintelligible in missing it's mark (I didn't and don't vote Con/Rep, remember?). So much for your self-exalted understanding! When are you going to stop tilting at windmills, cigar?

[Cigar]

See, no interest at all in discussing the topic (the economy, remember?), just interest in taking another trolling dig, one that is unintelligible in missing it's mark (I didn't and don't vote Con/Rep, remember?). When are you going to stop tilting at windmills, cigar?

The topic is easy ... Yes or No are the numbers back to Bush Levels ... ?

[Carygrant]

If one of you trolls said something in plain simple English that wasn't self-contradictory, I assure you not only I but everyone else here would understand you, and reply to that understanding, and, OMG, a discussion just might ensue--but I forget you trolls are not interested in discussion.


Demonstrate that you can talk sensibly about something and we might chat .
But you tend to be so insular , unfunny and lacking in up to date world information that it is hard to take you seriously . Look at that topic you started today on the state of the UK economy . It is blindingly obvious you are clueless and your motivation for raising it is also pertinent .
Visit your Doctor to discuss your Troll mania and concentrate on having something germane to contribute when the adults get together . And stop working in packs as though you are frightened to engage in humour , repartee and wit . You do yourself no service by trying to imagine you have talents which you so obviously don't have .
If you learned to be less defensive , you might learn a few things . And even vice versa .

[Chris]

The topic is easy ... Yes or No are the numbers back to Bush Levels ... ?

Topics are for discussion, not merely stating a fact, cigar. Facts don't speak for themselves, they need to be interpreted in terms of accuracy, cause, effect and other aspects. But I forget, that would not suit your trolling agenda.

[Chris]

Demonstrate that you can talk sensibly about something and we might chat .
But you tend to be so insular , unfunny and lacking in up to date world information that it is hard to take you seriously . Look at that topic you started today on the state of the UK economy . It is blindingly obvious you are clueless and your motivation for raising it is also pertinent .
Visit your Doctor to discuss your Troll mania and concentrate on having something germane to contribute when the adults get together . And stop working in packs as though you are frightened to engage in humour , repartee and wit . You do yourself no service by trying to imagine you have talents which you so obviously don't have .
If you learned to be less defensive , you might learn a few things . And even vice versa .


Demonstrate that you can talk sensibly about something and we might chat .

Here, first carygrant:

http://i.snag.gy/YvA9D.jpg

Now me:

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

Q.E.D.

Won't respond to the rest of your made up nonsense.

[GrumpyDog]

Grump, this is typical of your made up fantasies: "Government (bad) wrote the Constitution (good)." The government didn't write the Constitution, the people write the Constitution and thereby created the government. Here, try reading something:






This is just self-annihilating nonsense: "Except that any rights guaranteed by the Constitution (good), cannot be guaranteed by the Government (bad)."

And this I can't even parse: "Since individual conservative representatives (good) voluntarily must coexist with liberal representatives(bad), this coexistence precludes any Government(bad) from ever being good."

The "government" IS WE the People, Chris. Maybe you think it is not,but the original founders, DID. If they were so adverse to the idea of "government, then they would simply have declared all forms of government are undesirable, thus would disband their fellowship and every man for himself after that. Instead, they forged ahead, TOGETHER, to devise a NEW form of GOVERNMENT, which in theory at least, would afford EVERY citizen both certain RIGHTS, and as much say as possible, in HOW the WHOLE of this NEW emerging US society would operate.

"OUR" government, is an organizational construct, based on the idea of DEMOCRATIC representation in the form of a REPUBLIC, which is based on the idea of WE THE PEOPLE deciding what is best for ALL of US, not just what Chris wants, or Grumpy wants.

So what is the problem with such a government, I ask?

[Chris]

The "government" IS WE the People, Chris. Maybe you think it is not,but the original founders, DID. If they were so adverse to the idea of "government, then they would simply have declared all forms of government are undesirable, thus would disband their fellowship and every man for himself after that. Instead, the forged ahead, TOGETHER, to devise a NEW form of GOVERNMENT, which in theory at least, would afford EVERY citizen both certain RIGHTS, and as much say as possible, in HOW the WHOLE of this NEW emerging US society would operate.

"OUR" government, is an organizational construct, based on the idea of DEMOCRATIC representation in the form of a REPUBLIC, which is based on the idea of WE THE PEOPLE deciding what is best for ALL of US, not just what Chris wants, or Grumpy wants.

So what is the problem with OUR "government" I ask?


The "government" IS WE the People, Chris.

That's not what the Constitution says, Grump. The Declaration says "Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government".

The rest of your long paragraph is predicated on that initial falsehood, no need to respond to it, as you can't base truth on false premises.

[nic34]

I see, you expect no recovery under Obama.

We are happy Obama's policies for failure are obstructed.

That dosen't even make sense.

You consider a failing recovery as a success?

[nic34]

That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government".

Yeah, we did that in 2008 and 2012....

[Cigar]

That dosen't even make sense.

You consider a failing recovery as a success?

For Conservative ... anything they can do to hurt America will be a Success for them because it can be used against Obama.

Kinda stupid ... because Obama is already set for life and these morons are only hurting themselves.

[Chris]

Originally Posted by Chris
I see, you expect no recovery under Obama.

We are happy Obama's policies for failure are obstructed.


That dosen't even make sense.

You consider a failing recovery as a success?

Obviously that doesn't make sense. But then, it's not what I said, was it, it's what you said.

[Chris]

For Conservative ... anything they can do to hurt America will be a Success for them because it can be used against Obama.

Kinda stupid ... because Obama is already set for life and these morons are only hurting themselves.

And then cigar draws another conclusion based on a false premise. Kinda stupid to do that.

And, mr off topic, obama is not the topic. It's the economy.

[Awryly]

The "government" IS WE the People, Chris. Maybe you think it is not,but the original founders, DID. If they were so adverse to the idea of "government, then they would simply have declared all forms of government are undesirable, thus would disband their fellowship and every man for himself after that. Instead, they forged ahead, TOGETHER, to devise a NEW form of GOVERNMENT, which in theory at least, would afford EVERY citizen both certain RIGHTS, and as much say as possible, in HOW the WHOLE of this NEW emerging US society would operate.

"OUR" government, is an organizational construct, based on the idea of DEMOCRATIC representation in the form of a REPUBLIC, which is based on the idea of WE THE PEOPLE deciding what is best for ALL of US, not just what Chris wants, or Grumpy wants.

So what is the problem with such a government, I ask?

Just theory. Your elites have spent billions making sure your so-called democracy does not work.

[Mainecoons]

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-12-21/75-economic-numbers-2012-are-almost-too-crazy-believe

Only the truly stupid think the economy is getting better in the U.S.

[Mainecoons]

Here's something else to think about:


Generation Y professionals entering the workforce are finding careers that once were gateways to high pay and upwardly mobile lives turning into detours and dead ends. Averageincomes (http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/data/historical/people/) for individuals ages 25 to 34 have fallen 8 percent, double the adult population’s total drop, since the recession began in December 2007. Their unemployment (http://www.bloomberg.com/quote/USURTOT:IND) rate remains stuck one-half to 1 percentage point above the national figure.Three and a half years after the worst recession since the Great Depression, the earnings and employment gap between those in the under-35 population and their parents and grandparents threatens to unravel the American dream of each generation doing better than the last. The nation’s younger workers have benefited least from an economic recovery that has been the most uneven in recent history.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-12-21/american-dream-fades-for-generation-y-professionals.html

[Awryly]

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-12-21/75-economic-numbers-2012-are-almost-too-crazy-believe

Only the truly stupid think the economy is getting better in the U.S.

I guess you don't believe that you still having working banks and car manufacturers and higher employment an improvement.

[Mainecoons]

There is no higher employment unless you ignore all the people who have given up looking, genius.

You aren't better employed if you lose a full time job and end up with a no benefits part time job either, genius.

Stick to New Zealand, you don't seem to be sufficiently educated to understand statistics and how they can be manipulated as this administration has manipulated the employment data.

[Awryly]

There is no higher employment unless you ignore all the people who have given up looking, genius.

You aren't better employed if you lose a full time job and end up with a no benefits part time job either, genius.

Stick to New Zealand, you don't seem to be sufficiently educated to understand statistics and how they can be manipulated as this administration has manipulated the employment data.

Frictional unemployment always exists. But it goes up and down as any other form of unemployment.

The odd thing is that all those people now encouraged to re-seek employment have had little effect on the downward trajectory of the figures.

You can say the economy is improving to such an extent that absorbs them so readily as to register in the statistics insufficiently to cause them to rise. That is a remarkable achievement.

[zelmo1234]

The topic is easy ... Yes or No are the numbers back to Bush Levels ... ?

NO! they have just equaled the worst month of his 8 years?

And worker participation is not even Close!

[zelmo1234]

The "government" IS WE the People, Chris. Maybe you think it is not,but the original founders, DID. If they were so adverse to the idea of "government, then they would simply have declared all forms of government are undesirable, thus would disband their fellowship and every man for himself after that. Instead, they forged ahead, TOGETHER, to devise a NEW form of GOVERNMENT, which in theory at least, would afford EVERY citizen both certain RIGHTS, and as much say as possible, in HOW the WHOLE of this NEW emerging US society would operate.

"OUR" government, is an organizational construct, based on the idea of DEMOCRATIC representation in the form of a REPUBLIC, which is based on the idea of WE THE PEOPLE deciding what is best for ALL of US, not just what Chris wants, or Grumpy wants.

So what is the problem with such a government, I ask?

Nothing! I wish we still had one!

[Awryly]

NO! they have just equaled the worst month of his 8 years?

And worker participation is not even Close!

Bush inherited a GFC from Clinton, did he?

[zelmo1234]

Bush inherited a GFC from Clinton, did he?

Help GFC?????

[Awryly]

Help GFC?????

Google is your friend.

[Captain Obvious]

Help GFC?????

General Fu's Chicken.

The stuff that nobody bought.

[zelmo1234]

Google is your friend.

I was hoping that you would be my friend and help me out? So come on throw a conservative a bone?

[hanger4]

Global Financial Crisis

[Chris]

Frictional unemployment always exists. But it goes up and down as any other form of unemployment.

The odd thing is that all those people now encouraged to re-seek employment have had little effect on the downward trajectory of the figures.

You can say the economy is improving to such an extent that absorbs them so readily as to register in the statistics insufficiently to cause them to rise. That is a remarkable achievement.


The odd thing is that all those people now encouraged to re-seek employment have had little effect on the downward trajectory of the figures.

You make a faulty assumption.

Truth of the matter is, because of earlier huge increases in UI-related subsidies, the unemployed have been disincentivized to seek employment. Simply by reducing their purchasing by 20%, as any retiree would, it pays more not to work, and enjoy the free time, than to work. And that purchasing reduction has the further repercussion of reducing demand on production, thus the downward trajectory.

This was discussed here: Mulligan on Redistribution, Unemployment, and the Labor Market (http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/9384-Mulligan-on-Redistribution-Unemployment-and-the-Labor-Market).

[Awryly]

You make a faulty assumption.

Truth of the matter is, because of earlier huge increases in UI-related subsidies, the unemployed have been disincentivized to seek employment. Simply by reducing their purchasing by 20%, as any retiree would, it pays more not to work, and enjoy the free time, than to work. And that purchasing reduction has the further repercussion of reducing demand on production, thus the downward trajectory.

This was discussed here: Mulligan on Redistribution, Unemployment, and the Labor Market (http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/9384-Mulligan-on-Redistribution-Unemployment-and-the-Labor-Market).


That's an old chestnut. A few are disencentivised, but become re-incentivised when economic conditions improve. Most people want to work. That's a fact. Yes, there are some dole bludgers, just as there are businesses that prey on the state by demanding subsidies and avoiding tax. But most people want to improve their lives by working.

I should know. I have been in the employment game for a couple of decades.

[Chris]

That's an old chestnut. A few are disencentivised, but become re-incentivised when economic conditions improve. Most people want to work. That's a fact. Yes, there are some dole bludgers, just as there are businesses that prey on the state by demanding subsidies and avoiding tax. But most people want to improve their lives by working.

I should know. I have been in the employment game for a couple of decades.

Sorry, charlie, it's a new event brought on by Obama. If you followed the link you'd know it's back by facts happening now not mere guessing games like "A few are disencentivised [sic], but become re-incentivised". Talk to us when you find some data.

[Awryly]

Sorry, charlie, it's a new event brought on by Obama. If you followed the link you'd know it's back by facts happening now not mere guessing games like "A few are disencentivised [sic], but become re-incentivised". Talk to us when you find some data.

Sorry, noddy. A Mulligan from the University of Chicago has all the credibility of the guards at Abu Graib.

Give me something from Oxford or Cambridge or the London School of Economics.

[zelmo1234]

Just courious, if people really think it was the polices of GWB that brougth about the financial crisis that have the economic is this sick state?

Will beinteresting to see what people really want to beleive?

[Awryly]

Just courious, if people really think it was the polices of GWB that brougth about the financial crisis that have the economic is this sick state?

Will beinteresting to see what people really want to beleive?

Will be interesting to see you speak English.

Or what passes for English in the US.

[zelmo1234]

Will be interesting to see you speak English.

Or what passes for English in the US.

Sorry very tired, What do you think brought on the financial crisis in America?

And What do you think is driving our debt?

And if I were to make you king for a day, what would you do to get our economy growing at the 5% rate that we desparatly need?

[Awryly]

Sorry very tired, What do you think brought on the financial crisis in America?

And What do you think is driving our debt?

And if I were to make you king for a day, what would you do to get our economy growing at the 5% rate that we desparatly need?

You have lived far beyond your means for far too long and blown too many bubbles. That and your crooked business sector and compliant government. Think Spain and Greece.

What will save you? Certainly not the Republicans. They will drive you further to destruction. Obama? Possibly.

He's the only hope you've got. Not that I have any reason, as a New Zealander, to like him.

[zelmo1234]

You have lived far beyond your means for far too long and blown too many bubbles. That and your crooked business sector and compliant government. Think Spain and Greece.

What will save you? Certainly not the Republicans. They will drive you further to destruction. Obama? Possibly.

He's the only hope you've got. Not that I have any reason, as a New Zealander, to like him.

I would actually agree with everything that you have said including the part about the Republicans

Except Obama, when you talk about living beyond our means, and then support the Person responsible for one third of our national debt in four year???

Does not compute

[Awryly]

I would actually agree with everything that you have said including the part about the Republicans

Except Obama, when you talk about living beyond our means, and then support the Person responsible for one third of our national debt in four year???

Does not compute


The computation is this.

Either to let Obama do his thing (he has improved your economy) or you go down the great gurgler in the sky.

I know that's gravitationally challenging.

[Peter1469]

Just courious, if people really think it was the polices of GWB that brougth about the financial crisis that have the economic is this sick state?

Will beinteresting to see what people really want to beleive?

No. Some things Bush did helpped kick the can down the road (the tax cuts); some things he did tried to ease problems (warning Congress about the subprime mortgage bubble- but then backing down when democrats called the administration racist.

The problems in the financial sector were pre-Bush, although he wanted his regulators to use the soft touch in dealing with wall street and the banks.

So Bush didn't cause the mortgage and fiscal melt downs, but he didn't do anything to fix the structual flaws that caused them.

[Peter1469]

The computation is this.

Either to let Obama do his thing (he has improved your economy) or you go down the great gurgler in the sky.

I know that's gravitationally challenging.

Obama wants to strenghten the structural flaws that caused the problems in the first place. No thanks. If you think he is so great you can have him. We will even pay shipping (air fare).

[Mainecoons]

They can't afford him or his wife. Those two would bankrupt New Zealand with their vacations in one year.

We pay for them by printing money.

[Chris]

That and your crooked business sector and compliant government.

Sure would be interesting to hear some details on this. How is the business sector crooked? Government compliant? And why you don't think you've got the cart before the horse?


Would also be interesting if you'd turned your criticism constructive by answering: "And if I were to make you king for a day, what would you do to get our economy growing at the 5% rate that we desparatly need?"

[Awryly]

Sure would be interesting to hear some details on this. How is the business sector crooked? Government compliant? And why you don't think you've got the cart before the horse?


Would also be interesting if you'd turned your criticism constructive by answering: "And if I were to make you king for a day, what would you do to get our economy growing at the 5% rate that we desparatly need?"

No. I would decapitate a few vulture capitalists pour encourager les autres and teach you how to spell.

[Chris]

No. I would decapitate a few vulture capitalists pour encourager les autres and teach you how to spell.

So you would implement tyranny like the French Revolution using guillotines or the Caliphate using swords for decapitation?

Again, "Sure would be interesting to hear some details on this. How is the business sector crooked? Government compliant? And why you don't think you've got the cart before the horse?"

[Awryly]

So you would implement tyranny like the French Revolution using guillotines or the Caliphate using swords for decapitation?

Again, "Sure would be interesting to hear some details on this. How is the business sector crooked? Government compliant? And why you don't think you've got the cart before the horse?"


I would simply be replacing a malign autocracy with a benign one.

Just like the Girondins would have done.

Though i do realise teaching you how to spell might be construed as cruel and unnatural torture.

[Chris]

I would simply be replacing a malign autocracy with a benign one.

Just like the Girondins would have done.

Though i do realise teaching you how to spell might be construed as cruel and unnatural torture.

Autocracies are malign by definition: "government in which one person has uncontrolled or unlimited authority over others; the government or power of an absolute monarch." dictionary.com

But I appreciate your malign honesty, I really do.

[Awryly]

Autocracies are malign by definition: "government in which one person has uncontrolled or unlimited authority over others; the government or power of an absolute monarch." dictionary.com

But I appreciate your malign honesty, I really do.


Good. Would you like to start your spelling lessons now or wait until I take over?

[Chris]

Good. Would you like to start your spelling lessons now or wait until I take over?

Trying to run away from the topic so soon by changing the topic?

[Awryly]

Trying to run away from the topic so soon by changing the topic?

Hey, it was your idea to make me king of America.

[Chris]

Hey, it was your idea to make me king of America.

:moron: