Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Pensacola Discussion Forum » Politics » Initial jobless claims come in at 251,000 for the week of November 19. This is the longest stretch (90 weeks) of sub 300k results since 1970.

Initial jobless claims come in at 251,000 for the week of November 19. This is the longest stretch (90 weeks) of sub 300k results since 1970.

4 posters

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

boards of FL

boards of FL

http://mam.econoday.com/byshoweventfull.asp?fid=471769&cust=mam&year=2016&lid=0&prev=/byweek.asp#top


We're also in the midst of the longest stretch of consecutive months of jobs growth in US history. But ask a Trump voter, and you'll here "It's a disaster!"


Initial jobless claims come in at 251,000 for the week of November 19. This is the longest stretch (90 weeks) of sub 300k results since 1970. Showimage


_________________
I approve this message.

2seaoat



Thank you President Obama. I did not vote for you, but you exceeded my wildest expectations. One of our businesses doubled revenues in the eight years as we have experienced steady growth in a stable environment. After losing almost everything in the Bush crash, a president I voted for twice, we see record stock prices, below 2 buck gas, American troops home from the 100k plus to a few thousand, and a stable nation being handed off to an oligarchy which used every dirty trick to take us backward. I hope I am wrong. I hope that Donald Trump can actually work for those blue collar American families which he promised to raise their incomes, but President Obama did the same.

Guest


Guest

And it only cost 10 TRILLION DOLLARS.

Yea team..!! lol... just imagine what would've happened had he only spent 5 TRILLION DOLLARS.

Scary

boards of FL

boards of FL

PkrBum wrote:And it only cost 10 TRILLION DOLLARS.

Yea team..!! lol... just imagine what would've happened had he only spent 5 TRILLION DOLLARS.

Scary


Can you elaborate on this? What, specifically, do you mean when you say "And it only cost 10 TRILLION DOLLARS"?


_________________
I approve this message.

Guest


Guest

boards of FL wrote:
PkrBum wrote:And it only cost 10 TRILLION DOLLARS.

Yea team..!! lol... just imagine what would've happened had he only spent 5 TRILLION DOLLARS.

Scary


Can you elaborate on this?  What, specifically, do you mean when you say "And it only cost 10 TRILLION DOLLARS"?

First tell me what you think the results would've been for only 5 TRILLION DOLLARS.

boards of FL

boards of FL

PkrBum wrote:
boards of FL wrote:
PkrBum wrote:And it only cost 10 TRILLION DOLLARS.

Yea team..!! lol... just imagine what would've happened had he only spent 5 TRILLION DOLLARS.

Scary


Can you elaborate on this?  What, specifically, do you mean when you say "And it only cost 10 TRILLION DOLLARS"?

First tell me what you think the results would've been for only 5 TRILLION DOLLARS.


I'd like to be able to do that, but first I need you to explain what it is that you mean exactly when you say "And it only cost 10 TRILLION DOLLARS". I still don't even know what you're talking about there, so I obviously can't speak to what "5 TRILLION DOLLARS" would look like.

Are you able explain what it is that you're talking about?


_________________
I approve this message.

Guest


Guest

I'm talking about the unprecedented debt in spending by the federal govt during the Obama regime.

Do you think that has no effect on the economy?

2seaoat



unprecedented debt

Not even close. However, using your analogy, Donald Trump is being handed the best economic situation in thirty years, so he is responsible for the same. I just cannot get over how partisan you are and you think you are somehow objective. You cannot even bring yourself to say that the black guy did a great job, and look for every excuse to justify your fantasy. President Obama did not drive the economy into the ditch, and the tow bill was not his doing, just like the low unemployment handed to trump had nothing to do with Donald Trump, and the first year of the Trump administration will bask in the economic success of the Obama administration which of course if we are lucky he will not screw up and will expand. You are simply a hack who pretends you are objective. You are blinded by your hate.

boards of FL

boards of FL

PkrBum wrote:I'm talking about the unprecedented debt in spending by the federal govt during the Obama regime.

Do you think that has no effect on the economy?


Ah. Ok. Well, Obama and the democrats tried to no avail to let the Bush tax cuts expire. That certainly would have helped. We wound down the two wars that Bush started. That certainly helped stop some of the bleeding. I mean, Obama cannot help that he inherited a $1.4 trillion dollar budget deficit. Sure, it would nice if he had inherited the $200+ bill surplus that Bush did, but alas.

No, I don't think that maintaining low taxes for top tier incomes has a material effect on the economy. We could have raised taxes on top tier incomes and would have seen just as much growth but considerably faster deficit reduction and much less debt accumulation.

The point is that you can't just point to debt and say that that why we have had a steady economy with unprecedented job growth under Obama. Our debt problems are primarily due to the steady cutting of taxes on top tier income brackets, which - again - democrats have tried to correct to no avail.

And now watch. Republicans are going to make the problem much much worse.


_________________
I approve this message.

boards of FL

boards of FL

But to answer the original question, sure, we probably could have done just as well with $5 trillion added to debt under Obama. Sharp increases in top tier income brackets coupled with decreases in lower and middle class brackets, increases in top tier corporate tax rates, closing tax loopholes for corporations who hide funds overseas, eliminating the cap on social security tax, cutting the defense budget, and investing $1 trillion in an infrastructure project probably would have seen us come in at under $5 trillion with considerably more growth and jobs.

But, alas, we have republicans.


_________________
I approve this message.

Markle

Markle

boards of FL wrote:But to answer the original question, sure, we probably could have done just as well with $5 trillion added to debt under Obama.  Sharp increases in top tier income brackets coupled with decreases in lower and middle class brackets, increases in top tier corporate tax rates, closing tax loopholes for corporations who hide funds overseas, eliminating the cap on social security tax, cutting the defense budget, and investing $1 trillion in an infrastructure project probably would have seen us come in at under $5 trillion with considerably more growth and jobs.

But, alas, we have republicans.

Then why didn't Lame Duck President Barack Hussein Obama do that when he had total control of the Oval Office, the House and Senate?

Guest


Guest

For some reason BOF data doesn't mention the fact that we have record numbers on welfare. Why is that BOF?

Guest


Guest

Obama had been the biggest fraud ever perpetrated on the American public.

Guest


Guest

We also have more people out of the workforce than ever before as well.

boards of FL

boards of FL

Markle wrote:
boards of FL wrote:But to answer the original question, sure, we probably could have done just as well with $5 trillion added to debt under Obama.  Sharp increases in top tier income brackets coupled with decreases in lower and middle class brackets, increases in top tier corporate tax rates, closing tax loopholes for corporations who hide funds overseas, eliminating the cap on social security tax, cutting the defense budget, and investing $1 trillion in an infrastructure project probably would have seen us come in at under $5 trillion with considerably more growth and jobs.

But, alas, we have republicans.

Then why didn't Lame Duck President Barack Hussein Obama do that when he had total control of the Oval Office, the House and Senate?


Because the democrats didn't have a filibuster proof majority in the senate.

You know, it's too late for you to register at your local community college for CIV1101: Introduction to American Civics, though if you start getting your application together now you may be able to make it in by the fall term. Because it's never too late to stop being ignorant.


_________________
I approve this message.

boards of FL

boards of FL

Tellthetruth wrote:For some reason BOF data doesn't mention the fact that we have record numbers on welfare. Why is that BOF?


We also have record numbers of people working in the private sector, record GDP, and record (insert anything else that is tied to population growth).

What we don't have is a record number of people on welfare as a percentage of the general population, which is was the smart people look at. Perhaps that's why you use the other stat?


_________________
I approve this message.

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

boards of FL wrote:
Tellthetruth wrote:For some reason BOF data doesn't mention the fact that we have record numbers on welfare. Why is that BOF?

What we don't have is a record number of people on welfare as a percentage of the general population, which is was the smart people look at.  Perhaps that's why you use the other stat?

He is heavily influenced by those wingnut blogs he reads........

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Pensacola Discussion Forum » Politics » Initial jobless claims come in at 251,000 for the week of November 19. This is the longest stretch (90 weeks) of sub 300k results since 1970.

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum