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 » Romney Goes On Offense, Pays For It In First Wave Of Fact Checks

Romney Goes On Offense, Pays For It In First Wave Of Fact Checks

+6
othershoe1030
gulfbeachbandit
VectorMan
2seaoat
Nekochan
boards of FL
10 posters

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3

Go down  Message [Page 3 of 3]

Markle

Markle

boards of FL wrote:
nochain wrote:125,000 NET jobs have been added in BHOs first term and the only reason this occurred is because of a “very quiet” BLS revised benchmark.

Crappy, right? What is your take on Bush's term and job creation during that period?

The Clinton Dot.Com recession began in March of 2000. If you recall, we also had a massive terrorist attack on 9/11/2001 which further crippled the economy and plunged us deeper into recession. UNEMPLOYMENT REACHED 6% before the Bush tax cuts went into effect and brought DOWN unemployment to 4.6% in 2006 and 2007 before the Democrat driven Housing/Mortgage/Financial meltdown led to this current crisis.

The DEBT over the eight years of the Bush Administration increased by $4.4 TRILLION. That’s FAR less than the damage done by the Democrats since Nancy Pelosi took over the House in 2007.

What happened when the "tax cuts you revile so much were implemented?

Revenues to IRS AVERAGED $1.875 TRILLION during Bush's first 3 years in office, before the BUSH TAX CUTS took effect. Gee...that's nearly President Barack Hussein Obama $1.3 TRILLION DEFICIT each year since Obama took office.

AFTER the BUSH TAX CUTS TOOK EFFECT, REVENUES AVERAGED $2.306 TRILLION his last FIVE years. That's $431 BILLION more per year or $2.155 TRILLION increase over five years.

WOW…how did that happen? They resulted in a $2.155 TRILLION INCREASE IN REVENUES?

The Top 1% already pay 39% of all income taxes, UP 2% from 37% in 2000 when President Bush took office.

The top 25% of income earners pay 86% of all federal income taxes. That is UP from 84% in 2000 prior to the Bush Tax cuts.

The Top 50% pay 97% of all income taxes

From the Wall Street Journal “In 1980, when the top income tax rate was 70%, the richest 1% paid only 19% of all income taxes; now, with a top rate of 35%, they pay more than double that share.”

FORTY NINE PERCENT of households paid NO INCOME TAXES in 2010.

Do yourself a favor and do even a bit of research on the Laffer Curve.

How much more do you want to punish those who produce and provide in order to reward those who…do not?

Margin Call

Margin Call

ghandi wrote:
boards of FL wrote:
ghandi wrote:Then why are more people on foodstamps now than in 2009?

The number of people on food stamps has been growing for some time now. Perhaps it is due to the perverse distribution of wealth in which much of it accumulates at the top among very few people and the rest of us fight over a much smaller percentage?

http://www.trivisonno.com/wp-content/uploads/Food-Stamps-Monthly2.jpg

ghandi wrote:Why is unemployment higher now than in 2009?

Because it isn't?

My bad. I thought that 8 was higher than 5. I guess my math teacher screwed up and taught me wrong.

The official unemployment rate peaked at 10% in 2009 and has been on a steady trajectory downward since.

boards of FL

boards of FL

Markle wrote:As you know, there was not REALLY a budget surplus during the Clinton years. The REVENUES INCLUDED those payments made for Social Security and Medicare. Deduct those and there was a deficit each year.

If you recall, the increase in revenue also came because of the Welfare Reform Act of 1996 and gutted by the Stimulus program. That was the Newt Gingrich House which had the Contract with America. Millions of people came off the welfare rolls, taking tax money, and onto the payrolls where they became tax payers.

Revenues were also greatly enhanced by the DOT.COM bubble which burst just before President George Walker Bush took office.

Romney Goes On Offense, Pays For It In First Wave Of Fact Checks - Page 3 DmWTe

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=200


_________________
I approve this message.

boards of FL

boards of FL

Markle wrote:
boards of FL wrote:
Nekochan wrote:OK, maybe Obama has presented budgets, but he can't get one passed.

Boards, is the total national debt today higher or lower than when Bush left office?

Clearly it is higher. There is a difference between an annual budget deficit and an overall debt tally.

I can understand how you could forget the figures. When asked by David Letterman (which should have been a sign of the debate) President Barack Hussein Obama claimed to not "remember" what the debt was when he took office.

It was $10.6 TRILLION and well over $16 TRILLION today.

And this has nothing to do with my comment.


_________________
I approve this message.

boards of FL

boards of FL

Markle wrote:At the rate we are adding jobs today and have been adding for the past three years, it will that 34 years until the unemployment rate reaches 5.5%.

Assuming this is true, this is a remarkable improvement over the pace at which we were targeting 5.5% unemployment when Obama took office, isn't it?


_________________
I approve this message.

boards of FL

boards of FL

Markle wrote:What happened when the "tax cuts you revile so much were implemented?

Everyone here has see you copy and paste this canned response enough times to probably have it memorized, and I have shown it to be complete BS many many times. You're perceived IQ is inversely correlated with the number of times you continue to post this.



Last edited by boards of FL on 10/5/2012, 9:22 am; edited 1 time in total


_________________
I approve this message.

othershoe1030

othershoe1030

US jobless rate falls to 7.8 pct., 44-month low
US unemployment rate falls to 7.8 pct. in September, lowest since Jan. 2009; hiring increases

By Christopher s. Rugaber, AP Economics Writer | Associated Press – 9 minutes ago
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The U.S. unemployment rate fell to 7.8 percent last month, dropping below 8 percent for the first time in nearly four years. The rate declined because more people found work, a trend that could have an impact on undecided voters in the final month before the presidential election.
The Labor Department said Friday that employers added 114,000 jobs in September. The economy also created 86,000 more jobs in July and August than first estimated. Wages rose in September and more people started looking for work.
The revisions show employers added 146,000 jobs per month from July through September, up from 67,000 in the previous three months. The unemployment rate fell from 8.1 percent in August, matching its level in January 2009 when President Barack Obama took office.

Guest


Guest

othershoe1030 wrote:US jobless rate falls to 7.8 pct., 44-month low
US unemployment rate falls to 7.8 pct. in September, lowest since Jan. 2009; hiring increases

By Christopher s. Rugaber, AP Economics Writer | Associated Press – 9 minutes ago
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The U.S. unemployment rate fell to 7.8 percent last month, dropping below 8 percent for the first time in nearly four years. The rate declined because more people found work, a trend that could have an impact on undecided voters in the final month before the presidential election.
The Labor Department said Friday that employers added 114,000 jobs in September. The economy also created 86,000 more jobs in July and August than first estimated. Wages rose in September and more people started looking for work.
The revisions show employers added 146,000 jobs per month from July through September, up from 67,000 in the previous three months. The unemployment rate fell from 8.1 percent in August, matching its level in January 2009 when President Barack Obama took office.

Yes, that makes these folks feel much better I'm sure.

"The number of unemployed decreased by 456,000, to 12.1 million workers. The number of long-term unemployed, those jobless for 27 weeks or more, was little changed at 4.8 million and accounted for 40.1 percent of the unemployed."

othershoe1030

othershoe1030

nochain wrote:
Yes, that makes these folks feel much better I'm sure.

"The number of unemployed decreased by 456,000, to 12.1 million workers. The number of long-term unemployed, those jobless for 27 weeks or more, was little changed at 4.8 million and accounted for 40.1 percent of the unemployed."

The point being the trend is going in the right direction.

Guest


Guest

othershoe1030 wrote:
nochain wrote:
Yes, that makes these folks feel much better I'm sure.

"The number of unemployed decreased by 456,000, to 12.1 million workers. The number of long-term unemployed, those jobless for 27 weeks or more, was little changed at 4.8 million and accounted for 40.1 percent of the unemployed."

The point being the trend is going in the right direction.

Oh really? At this rate by 2016 the next president will be dealing with an unemployment rate of only 7% and adjusted for reality of 13%. BHOs plan for improving the unemployment numbers hinges on people dropping out of the workforce and going on welfare. It's working great right now with 15% of Americans on food stamps (read unemployed or underemployed) and
15 million on welfare.

boards of FL

boards of FL

nochain wrote:
othershoe1030 wrote:
nochain wrote:
Yes, that makes these folks feel much better I'm sure.

"The number of unemployed decreased by 456,000, to 12.1 million workers. The number of long-term unemployed, those jobless for 27 weeks or more, was little changed at 4.8 million and accounted for 40.1 percent of the unemployed."

The point being the trend is going in the right direction.

Oh really? At this rate by 2016 the next president will be dealing with an unemployment rate of only 7% and adjusted for reality of 13%. BHOs plan for improving the unemployment numbers hinges on people dropping out of the workforce and going on welfare. It's working great right now with 15% of Americans on food stamps (read unemployed or underemployed) and
15 million on welfare.

Ah, yes. And Romney's healthcare plan covers people with pre-existing conditions. Coughbullshitcough.


_________________
I approve this message.

Guest


Guest

boards of FL wrote:
nochain wrote:
othershoe1030 wrote:
nochain wrote:
Yes, that makes these folks feel much better I'm sure.

"The number of unemployed decreased by 456,000, to 12.1 million workers. The number of long-term unemployed, those jobless for 27 weeks or more, was little changed at 4.8 million and accounted for 40.1 percent of the unemployed."

The point being the trend is going in the right direction.

Oh really? At this rate by 2016 the next president will be dealing with an unemployment rate of only 7% and adjusted for reality of 13%. BHOs plan for improving the unemployment numbers hinges on people dropping out of the workforce and going on welfare. It's working great right now with 15% of Americans on food stamps (read unemployed or underemployed) and
15 million on welfare.

Ah, yes. And Romney's healthcare plan covers people with pre-existing conditions. Coughbullshitcough.

Yeah, real relevant to the unemployment rate but keep the spin going any way you can.

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

boards of FL wrote:
Markle wrote:What happened when the "tax cuts you revile so much were implemented?

Everyone here has see you copy and paste this canned response enough times to probably have it memorized, and I have shown it to be complete BS many many times. You're perceived IQ is inversely correlated with the number of times you continue to post this.

Further, as Markle carps about Bush's "remarkable" increase in revenues after he cut taxes, Markle never addresses the fact that Bush also ran a deficit every year he was in office. So, the "increase" in revenue really did nothing to address the government's annual fiscal shortfalls.

Now he will come back with remarks comparing Obama's deficits to Bush's deficits. Maybe he thinks Bush's deficits were "good" because they were lower than Obama's. Oh, and don't forget this, Bush's deficits were the Democrats fault....

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

Guest


Guest

nochain wrote:
boards of FL wrote:
nochain wrote:
othershoe1030 wrote:
nochain wrote:
Yes, that makes these folks feel much better I'm sure.

"The number of unemployed decreased by 456,000, to 12.1 million workers. The number of long-term unemployed, those jobless for 27 weeks or more, was little changed at 4.8 million and accounted for 40.1 percent of the unemployed."

The point being the trend is going in the right direction.

Oh really? At this rate by 2016 the next president will be dealing with an unemployment rate of only 7% and adjusted for reality of 13%. BHOs plan for improving the unemployment numbers hinges on people dropping out of the workforce and going on welfare. It's working great right now with 15% of Americans on food stamps (read unemployed or underemployed) and
15 million on welfare.

Ah, yes. And Romney's healthcare plan covers people with pre-existing conditions. Coughbullshitcough.

Yeah, real relevant to the unemployment rate but keep the spin going any way you can.

Only time can ever remember when sheep seem to be happy that people celebrate the fact that many are dropping off the unemployment rolls because they've given up...dropping the numbers....Really good news?...

boards of FL

boards of FL

nochain wrote:
boards of FL wrote:
nochain wrote:
othershoe1030 wrote:
nochain wrote:
Yes, that makes these folks feel much better I'm sure.

"The number of unemployed decreased by 456,000, to 12.1 million workers. The number of long-term unemployed, those jobless for 27 weeks or more, was little changed at 4.8 million and accounted for 40.1 percent of the unemployed."

The point being the trend is going in the right direction.

Oh really? At this rate by 2016 the next president will be dealing with an unemployment rate of only 7% and adjusted for reality of 13%. BHOs plan for improving the unemployment numbers hinges on people dropping out of the workforce and going on welfare. It's working great right now with 15% of Americans on food stamps (read unemployed or underemployed) and
15 million on welfare.

Ah, yes. And Romney's healthcare plan covers people with pre-existing conditions. Coughbullshitcough.

Yeah, real relevant to the unemployment rate but keep the spin going any way you can.

My comment was relevant to your comment in that it was completely full of shit.


_________________
I approve this message.

boards of FL

boards of FL

newswatcher wrote:Only time can ever remember when sheep seem to be happy that people celebrate the fact that many are dropping off the unemployment rolls because they've given up...dropping the numbers....Really good news?...


(August) Civilian labor force: 154,645
(September) Civilian labor force: 155,063

(August) Not in labor force: 88,921
(September) Not in labor force: 88,710


_________________
I approve this message.

Guest


Guest

[quote="boards of FL"][quote="nochain"][quote="boards of FL"][quote="nochain"]
othershoe1030 wrote:
nochain wrote:
Yes, that makes
Yeah, real relevant to the unemployment rate but keep the spin going any way you can.

My comment was relevant to your comment in that it was completely full of shit.

If I were to agree with your drivel we would both be wrong.

boards of FL

boards of FL

[quote="nochain"][quote="boards of FL"][quote="nochain"][quote="boards of FL"]
nochain wrote:
othershoe1030 wrote:
nochain wrote:
Yes, that makes
Yeah, real relevant to the unemployment rate but keep the spin going any way you can.

My comment was relevant to your comment in that it was completely full of shit.

If I were to agree with your drivel we would both be wrong.

Well, if I were to agree with your drivel people would say that I'm one call shy of a Packers Monday night football victory.

Romney Goes On Offense, Pays For It In First Wave Of Fact Checks - Page 3 Packers_Seahawks_Football_0da2c-1213


_________________
I approve this message.

othershoe1030

othershoe1030

Okay, let's talk about what mittens said about his health care plan covering pre-existing conditions. Not allowing insurance companies to refuse a person with pre-existing conditions is not the same as covering pre-existing conditions of someone who has had continuous coverage:

“Preexisting conditions are covered under my plan.” Only people who are continuously insured would not be discriminated against because they suffer from pre-existing conditions. This protection would not be extended to people who are currently uninsured.

http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/fact-check-romney-told-27-myths-38-minutes-during-debate?page=0%2C3&akid=9489.310455.yEBwUY&rd=1&src=newsletter721973&t=3

knothead

knothead

newswatcher wrote:
nochain wrote:
boards of FL wrote:
nochain wrote:
othershoe1030 wrote:
nochain wrote:
Yes, that makes these folks feel much better I'm sure.

"The number of unemployed decreased by 456,000, to 12.1 million workers. The number of long-term unemployed, those jobless for 27 weeks or more, was little changed at 4.8 million and accounted for 40.1 percent of the unemployed."

The point being the trend is going in the right direction.

Oh really? At this rate by 2016 the next president will be dealing with an unemployment rate of only 7% and adjusted for reality of 13%. BHOs plan for improving the unemployment numbers hinges on people dropping out of the workforce and going on welfare. It's working great right now with 15% of Americans on food stamps (read unemployed or underemployed) and
15 million on welfare.

Ah, yes. And Romney's healthcare plan covers people with pre-existing conditions. Coughbullshitcough.

Yeah, real relevant to the unemployment rate but keep the spin going any way you can.

Only time can ever remember when sheep seem to be happy that people celebrate the fact that many are dropping off the unemployment rolls because they've given up...dropping the numbers....Really good news?...


Really good news? No, BUT, the numbers are IMPROVING on a positive trajectory. Is this something we should all celebrate? Absolutely, anyone who does not celebrate an improvement, meager as it seems, it is an improvement. The problem for Romney with this "improvement" and the GOP machine in its entirety, is the number has dropped below 8.0% for the first time in the previous 43 months. If you are one of the good citizens who have been complaining about President Obama's "promise" that employment would not fall below 8.0% are you distressed and/or dismayed by this positive development? Are you on America's side or are you on Romney's side? This positive news is not earth shattering but it is clearly positive but are we all, as Americans, going to celebrate?

Guest


Guest

othershoe1030 wrote:Okay, let's talk about what mittens said about his health care plan covering pre-existing conditions. Not allowing insurance companies to refuse a person with pre-existing conditions is not the same as covering pre-existing conditions of someone who has had continuous coverage:

“Preexisting conditions are covered under my plan.” Only people who are continuously insured would not be discriminated against because they suffer from pre-existing conditions. This protection would not be extended to people who are currently uninsured.

http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/fact-check-romney-told-27-myths-38-minutes-during-debate?page=0%2C3&akid=9489.310455.yEBwUY&rd=1&src=newsletter721973&t=3

I just rewatched the debates and Romney said his plan would be private health care plans. So who's paying for that? Obama's is private plans too.

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 3 of 3]

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3

Pensacola Discussion Forum » Politics » Romney Goes On Offense, Pays For It In First Wave Of Fact Checks

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