Unexpectedly - Page 5

Originally Posted by Hands Sandon 

Obama has just blown the expected job numbers out of the water, creating a remarkable 163,000 jobs in July.

Originally Posted by Hands Sandon 

We all remember how Bush destroyed so many jobs, but less well known is Romney's truly appalling track record on jobs. Here are the facts. I should warn you though in advance, they are very ugly-

1. Ranked 47th in job growth: Despite Romney’s professed expertise in creating jobs, Massachusetts ranked 47th in job growth during his time as governor. The state’s total job growth was just 0.9 percent, well behind other high-wage, high-skill economies in New York (2.7), California (4.7), and North Carolina (7.6). The national average, meanwhile, was better than 5 percent.

 

2. Suffered the second-largest labor force decline in the nation: Only Louisiana, which was ravaged by Hurricane Katrina in 2005, saw a bigger decline in its labor force than Massachusetts during Romney’s tenure as governor. The US Census Bureau estimated that between July 2002 and July 2006, 222,000 more residents left Massachusetts for other states than came to it. That decline largely explains the state’s decreasing unemployment rate (from 5.6 to 4.7 percent) while Romney was in office, according to Northeastern University economics professor Andrew Sum. At the same time, the nation as a wholeadded 8 million people to the labor force.

3. Lost 14 percent of its manufacturing jobs: Massachusetts lost 14 percent of its manufacturing jobs during Romney’s time in office, according to Sum. The loss was double the rate that the nation as a whole lost manufacturing jobs. In 2004, Romney vetoed legislation that would have banned companies doing business with the state from outsourcing jobs to other countries.

4. Experienced “below average” economic growth and was “often near the bottom”: “There was not one measure where the state did well under his term in office. We were below average and often near the bottom,” Sum told the Washington Post in February. As a result, the state was more comparable to Rust Belt states like Illinois, Michigan, and Ohio than it was to other high-tech economies it typically competes with.

5. Piled on more debt than any other state: Romney left Massachusetts residents with $10,504 in per capita bond debt, thehighest of any state in the nation when he left office in 2007. The state ranked second in debt as a percentage of personal income. Romney regularly omits those statistics from his Massachusetts record, instead touting the fact that he balanced the state’s budget (he was constitutionally required to do so). He wouldn’t be much different as president: his proposed tax plan adds more than $10 trillion to the national debt."

~ http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/06/04/494282/5-facts-about-the-massachusetts-economy-under-mitt-romney/

Originally Posted by Hands Sandon 

Obama has just blown the expected job numbers out of the water, creating a remarkable 163,000 jobs in July. If that wasn't enough, 172,000 were from private companies and shed were 9,000 government jobs-

"Private companies added 172,000 jobs last month, while governments shed 9,000 positions. Most economists had expected the latest nonfarm payroll figure to be around 95,000. The US added just 64,000 jobs in June."

~ http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/aug/03/us-economy-july-jobs-report

We all remember how Bush destroyed so many jobs, but less well known is Romney's truly appalling track record on jobs. Here are the facts. I should warn you though in advance, they are very ugly-

1. Ranked 47th in job growth: Despite Romney’s professed expertise in creating jobs, Massachusetts ranked 47th in job growth during his time as governor. The state’s total job growth was just 0.9 percent, well behind other high-wage, high-skill economies in New York (2.7), California (4.7), and North Carolina (7.6). The national average, meanwhile, was better than 5 percent.

 

2. Suffered the second-largest labor force decline in the nation: Only Louisiana, which was ravaged by Hurricane Katrina in 2005, saw a bigger decline in its labor force than Massachusetts during Romney’s tenure as governor. The US Census Bureau estimated that between July 2002 and July 2006, 222,000 more residents left Massachusetts for other states than came to it. That decline largely explains the state’s decreasing unemployment rate (from 5.6 to 4.7 percent) while Romney was in office, according to Northeastern University economics professor Andrew Sum. At the same time, the nation as a wholeadded 8 million people to the labor force.

3. Lost 14 percent of its manufacturing jobs: Massachusetts lost 14 percent of its manufacturing jobs during Romney’s time in office, according to Sum. The loss was double the rate that the nation as a whole lost manufacturing jobs. In 2004, Romney vetoed legislation that would have banned companies doing business with the state from outsourcing jobs to other countries.

4. Experienced “below average” economic growth and was “often near the bottom”: “There was not one measure where the state did well under his term in office. We were below average and often near the bottom,” Sum told the Washington Post in February. As a result, the state was more comparable to Rust Belt states like Illinois, Michigan, and Ohio than it was to other high-tech economies it typically competes with.

5. Piled on more debt than any other state: Romney left Massachusetts residents with $10,504 in per capita bond debt, thehighest of any state in the nation when he left office in 2007. The state ranked second in debt as a percentage of personal income. Romney regularly omits those statistics from his Massachusetts record, instead touting the fact that he balanced the state’s budget (he was constitutionally required to do so). He wouldn’t be much different as president: his proposed tax plan adds more than $10 trillion to the national debt."

~ http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/06/04/494282/5-facts-about-the-massachusetts-economy-under-mitt-romney/

Originally Posted by MJ1970 

 

Please stop this ignorant shit. Barack Obama has not created a single job. Not one. These job figures have not blown anything out of the water. If anything this is a testimony to the private sector's need and ability to create jobs in spite of Obama's economic policies. This is, at best, a mediocre number that gets closer to (but not quite) treading water. About 200,000 jobs need to be created each month just to stay even.

 

Only a fucking leftist, Democratic shill could find some way to spin this shitty economy as some kind of positive result of Obama's economic policies.

Originally Posted by MJ1970 

 

 These job figures have not blown anything out of the water. If anything this is a testimony to the private sector's need and ability to create jobs in spite of Obama's economic policies. This is, at best, a mediocre number that gets closer to (but not quite) treading water. About 200,000 jobs need to be created each month just to stay even.

 

Only a fucking leftist, Democratic shill could find some way to spin this shitty economy as some kind of positive result of Obama's economic policies.

Originally Posted by Hands Sandon 

lol, you guys crack me up. Just yesterday SDW was saying I'm a "democratic shill" and today, you. He probably said I was a "fucking leftist" too. 

Originally Posted by Hands Sandon 

The projected numbers where forecast to be much lower. 

Originally Posted by Hands Sandon 

I find it quite ironic that yesterday you said that you were amazed that I didn't just close my eyes and rejoice that the US has lots of money...   

Originally Posted by Hands Sandon 

...and today here you are attacking me for praising Obama's amazing home run in July on jobs...

Originally Posted by Hands Sandon 

...like I say, far greater than we were expecting...   

Originally Posted by Hands Sandon 

Maybe next month he'll get over 200,000 and you'll get on board...   

Originally Posted by Hands Sandon 

...but for now myself and plenty of others celebrate he's surpassing expectations.   

Originally Posted by MJ1970 

I will focus on facts irrespective of meaningless "expectations." And the facts are rather dismal regarding employment, deficits, debt, private sector economic growth and health, liberty, privacy, etc.

Originally Posted by Hands Sandon 

I don't doubt it's dismal, that's why this was welcome news. I'm sorry you don't see it that way.

Originally Posted by Hands Sandon 

Maybe this you'll at least see as encouraging-

Originally Posted by jazzguru 

 

They haven't under Obama. Is he accepting any blame?

Originally Posted by jimmac 

Compared to things falling apart during the Bush era or what might have happened say if McCain and Palin has got in there? I'm glad we're still here and big companies like GM didn't fold. Otherwise if you think it's bad now........

Originally Posted by BR 

Except, Floorjack, there wasn't private money available at the time to handle a private GM restructuring.  This was at the height of the banking crisis.  

Originally Posted by MJ1970 

 

You say that as if it is a valid reason.

 

GM should have gone through bankruptcy as governed by the bankruptcy laws. The only reason it didn't is because Obama wanted to return a favor to his union buddies.

Originally Posted by jimmac 

MJ if they had we'd be in a real depression.

Originally Posted by jimmac 

I have zero doubt of that.

Originally Posted by jimmac 

It's also the opinion of many economists as well.

Originally Posted by jimmac 

It's not just GM. It's all the people who work with them. That supply parts, dealerships  etc. That's a lot of people out of work.

Originally Posted by jimmac 

Can you say breadlines and real austerity?

Originally Posted by MJ1970 

 

Of course you don't know that.

 

 

 

Congratulations.

 

 

 

Yes, of some, but not all.

 

 

 

Thanks. I wasn't aware of that. :rolleyes:

 

 

 

I can. What's the point?

Originally Posted by MJ1970 

 

Of course you don't know that.

 

 

 

Congratulations.

 

 

 

Yes, of some, but not all.

 

 

 

Thanks. I wasn't aware of that. :rolleyes:

 

 

 

I can. What's the point?

Originally Posted by jimmac 

I don't exactly know what would happen if I stuck my hand in a lawnmower blade while the motor was running. I can pretty well guess however.

Originally Posted by jimmac 

The point is I'm really glad we're not there. A real depression would make what we've been through seem like a walk in the park. Most people now days aren't ready for that and it would be pretty ugly. Like I've said it's not just my speculation although most references to this also include the other bail outs as well.

Originally Posted by MJ1970 

 

If you try hard you might be able to come up with a worse and less apt analogy.

 

 

 

 

Yes, and? Oh, you are assuming there would have been a depression as a result of GM filing for real bankruptcy. You're begging the question. Got it.

Originally Posted by jimmac 

Sorry you didn't like my analogy but I thought it got the point across.

Originally Posted by jimmac 

Like I've said it would many begging the question then.

Originally Posted by jimmac 

The bailouts weren't fun to watch however they did keep us from going over the edge of a cliff that I for one wouldn't like to see us go over.

Originally Posted by MJ1970 

 

No it didn't...because it was shitty analogy that isn't analogous to the situation.

 

 

 

Yes. That happens a lot.

 

 

 

So you're going to continue begging the question even though it has now been pointed out to you?

Originally Posted by jimmac 

My point was that there are certain things you can be pretty sure of even if you don't have to go through with them.

Originally Posted by jimmac 

Like I've said it really seems like there's very little chance something else would have happened.

Originally Posted by jimmac 

So you're saying we should have bet the long odds and rolled the dice on this one?

Originally Posted by MJ1970 

 

I know what your point was. But you claim certainty where there is none.

 

 

 

I know this is what you believe. I believe you're wrong.

 

 

 

Sorry, I won't be dragged into your question begging.

Originally Posted by jimmac 

Ok. So they're both beliefs. So stalemate unless you'd like to provide proof to the contrary.

Originally Posted by jimmac 

It simply sounds like you don't have a good answer to me.

Originally Posted by MJ1970 

 

Yes. Same for you.

 

 

 

I have no doubt that's how it sounds to you.

Originally Posted by jimmac 

I did say " both ".

Originally Posted by jimmac 

Well it does.

Originally Posted by jazzguru 

GDP unexpectedly shrinks, decline seen temporary

 

"We were way off on our expectations. Again. But trust us, it's only temporary."

 

Hasn't it been "temporary" for several years now, at least?

Originally Posted by tonton 

Ah, yes, GDP, that wonderful measure of the average person's prosperity.

Originally Posted by tonton 

Not for the poor and middle class.

Originally Posted by MJ1970 


Actually...especially the poor and middle-class. Obama is an elitist corporatist socialist fascist who's reign has benefitted the politically well-connected rich far more than any other group and, mostly, at the expense of those other groups.

Originally Posted by tonton 


Yep. Different planets.

Originally Posted by MJ1970 


Indeed.