Forbes: Obama Outperforms Reagan on Jobs, Growth And Investing

http://www.forbes.com/sites/adamhartung/2014/09/05/obama-outperforms-reagan-on-jobs-growth-and-investing/



"...This is the best private sector jobs creation performance in American history..."

Interesting article. Now you are going to send PaceDog and Markle into hissy-fits........

LOL! I doubt if Reagan is rolling around his grave over this meaningless comparison.

I tend to think Clinton beat the pants off all recent Presidents regarding the overall economy.

Why don't you compare foreign policy results while you're at it. I realize it will be tough to list all of Obama's failures but give it a try. Those economic impacts have yet to be felt in real terms.......

I guess if you consider creating part time jobs that pay on average 23 percent less than prerecession era jobs a success, you believe the moon is made of green cheese as well.

I will give it to Obamaites, they have their propaganda machine churning out some real doozies of late and now this falsified hit piece on Reagan. It just shows that numbers are easily spun to make the COWH look better than he is.....

I think a comparison of the means and cost of the policies leaves this where it belongs... a non-starter.

The debt piled up by this administration alone is "stunning" on top of the fed intervention... numbers are skewed.

Why don't you compare foreign policy results while you're at it. I realize it will be tough to list all of Obama's failures but give it a try. Those economic impacts have yet to be felt in real terms.......


Children. He ran on disengagement, and being vigilant on those who bring harm to America. He got Bin Laden. He got Mr. K. He got us out of Iraq. He gets us out of Afghanastan in December, and he got the chemical weapons out of Syria without bombs, and other than the zone of influence which Russia must maintain in regard to their warm water naval port, he has mocked Putin to call his bluff......of course you reported the invasion......where are the troops in Kiev......children.

President Obama's most significant laurels will be his international relations and accomplishments in a new American Paradigm. His economic recovery is more the function of the stimulus which must be shared with President Bush and Congress. He has stayed the course and although I did not vote for him, I am proud to call him my President.

2seaoat wrote:Why don't you compare foreign policy results while you're at it. I realize it will be tough to list all of Obama's failures but give it a try. Those economic impacts have yet to be felt in real terms.......


Children. He ran on disengagement, and being vigilant on those who bring harm to America. He got Bin Laden. He got Mr. K. He got us out of Iraq. He gets us out of Afghanastan in December, and he got the chemical weapons out of Syria without bombs, and other than the zone of influence which Russia must maintain in regard to their warm water naval port, he has mocked Putin to call his bluff......of course you reported the invasion......where are the troops in Kiev......children.

President Obama's most significant laurels will be his international relations and accomplishments in a new American Paradigm. His economic recovery is more the function of the stimulus which must be shared with President Bush and Congress. He has stayed the course and although I did not vote for him, I am proud to call him my President.

The stimulus bill was introduced after obama took office... how does bush or the republican minority get credit?

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=American_Recovery_and_Reinvestment_Act_of_2009

You need to revisit your source.......President Bush used the first 800 billion to stabalize capital markets, and this was more critical than what followed. Without President Bush and Congress the stimulus would have been too little too late.

2seaoat wrote:You need to revisit your source.......President Bush used the first 800 billion to stabalize capital markets, and this was more critical than what followed. Without President Bush and Congress the stimulus would have been too little too late.

You're the one confused old man... you must be thinking of the bailout or the treasury fund TARP. Try to focus.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Emergency_Economic_Stabilization_Act_of_2008

Though I supported neither... an important distinction between the two is the bottom line debt added by each.

There is no distinction between the two. Please become familiar with basic concepts. The introduction of government capital into the market is a stimulus. You can try to redefine economics and take a pile of chit with whipped cream and convince somebody it is a banana split.........economics 101......actually I learned the definition as a junior in high school, but you know us old man still were able to be taught.

Crickets.....I have to go to a public meeting, and hope to be back later tonight for the concession speech that PK does not have a whit of economic education, but bumps along with generalities and cuts and paste........I love this place.....children.

2seaoat wrote:Crickets.....I have to go to a public meeting, and hope to be back later tonight for the concession speech that PK does not have a whit of economic education, but bumps along with generalities and cuts and paste........I love this place.....children.

Lol... you can't even get the events right. You deserve a seat up front in the handicap section.

Lol... you can't even get the events right. You deserve a seat up front in the handicap section.

I have it right. Now you can show me how I have it wrong. Or you can run away. Just like Michigan State and the Bears.....not all what they were made out to be.....they just got beat. So get in line for your beating. Show me my error.

2seaoat wrote:Lol... you can't even get the events right. You deserve a seat up front in the handicap section.

I have it right. Now you can show me how I have it wrong. Or you can run away. Just like Michigan State and the Bears.....not all what they were made out to be.....they just got beat. So get in line for your beating. Show me my error.

If you are right... you and boards need to start singing the praises of the bush leadership that saved the economy.

Show me you're right... the only thing you can beat is your meat.

I voted for President Bush twice. He had to bring congress to the table and authorize 800 billion to save this country and our economy. President Obama followed and mostly made good decisions. The hard carry was the initial 800 billion. It took courage by President Bush, and those in Congress who voted for that 800 billion also share in that courage. I am completely 100% correct that without those government dollars being poured into the private sector the second stimulus would not have made a bit of difference. This was a bipartisan success.

2seaoat wrote:I voted for President Bush twice. He had to bring congress to the table and authorize 800 billion to save this country and our economy. President Obama followed and mostly made good decisions. The hard carry was the initial 800 billion. It took courage by President Bush, and those in Congress who voted for that 800 billion also share in that courage. I am completely 100% correct that without those government dollars being poured into the private sector the second stimulus would not have made a bit of difference. This was a bipartisan success.

Your premise is flawed. The bailout was in the form of loans... mostly paid back. The stimulus was boondoggle. The fed injecting billions per month for YEARS now is unprecedented. Obama will likely have DOUBLED our debt by 2017.

We don't even know where we are as far as the govt numbers being thrown around... the interventions are massive.

If the plan was to redistribute wealth from home owners and retirement accounts to banks and wall street...

congratulations comrade.

Sal wrote:Numbers confound wingnutz. 

Do you think the feds injecting trillions (which we owe even though the instruments they use are basically printing money) into banks and investment houses and corps and wall st... ect... has no effect on the govt economic numbers?

That some how those indicators are not influenced and skewed? There will be a price to pay... from we the people.

If there were any social justice to this circus each american would have received their fair share of the trillions... our children will have to pay it back afterall. How did you enjoy your childrens share? Oh... that went to goldman sacs... my bad.

And you think conservatives are bad at math? LMAO..!!

Sal wrote:Numbers confound wingnutz. 

You cannot fathom 17 TRILLION.

Sal wrote:Numbers confound wingnutz. 

Bush left office when the debt clock read approximately $10 trillion almost to the number. That only added $4 trillion to the debt. The debt clock now reads nearly $18 trillion and we're only six years into this administration. So yes numbers do confound wingnutz... like you.

Hope you enjoy paying all that money back with interest for the rest of your life... and your grandkids...... and your great grandkids...

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3khH9ih2XJg

I guess PK's choice was to run. The 800 billion poured into the private sector by President Bush and Congress was most certainly a stimulus. The rest is your disjointed feudal paradigm, and a complete absence of undergraduate economics training, let alone graduate training. Your fears as expressed would result in inflation.....you have no grasp of the velocity of money and what is actually happening today. Read and educate yourself before going half cocked into a discussion which is straight forward and understood by 99.9% of economist today.......Each day the % of national debt to GDP gets smaller, and the trend lines are all good.

by PACEDOG#1 Yesterday at 4:43 pm
I guess if you consider creating part time jobs that pay on average 23 percent less than prerecession era jobs a success, you believe the moon is made of green cheese as well.

I will give it to Obamaites, they have their propaganda machine churning out some real doozies of late and now this falsified hit piece on Reagan. It just shows that numbers are easily spun to make the COWH look better than he is.....