Does President Obama Care About High Unemployment?

[nostrandave68]

I mean seriously you have to be this verbose?
You should know a president can only do so much in terms of economic growth, the FED controls monetary policy the key mechanism to creating growth. You can give all the tax breaks you want and lower capital gains and etc and businesses still won't reinvest in human capital and if they do its in another country where labor is much cheaper. People don't educate themselves and see that alot of these corporations pay WAYYYY below the capital gains percentage, they get caught up in businesses are heavily taxed. Jesus its not 1980's anymore Reaganomics doesn't work but I also don't believe Kenynesian Economics works either, all of these macroeconomic theories have no merit if you have poor human capital, our education system is in shambles thats where the focus should be. How can we be a competitive society with failing students, thats where the problem lies.

 

[budweiser]

Originally Posted by rashi

Why does he have to care? Why does any politician have to care about unemployment? These politicians are oblivious of business cycles, never had a real job, and never had to make payroll.

This. The average politician couldn't hold down a job at McDonald's.

 

[budweiser]

Originally Posted by rashi

Why does he have to care? Why does any politician have to care about unemployment? These politicians are oblivious of business cycles, never had a real job, and never had to make payroll.

This. The average politician couldn't hold down a job at McDonald's.

 

[createdestroy]

Originally Posted by SunDOOBIE

Originally Posted by Kramer

Unemployment is almost to his benefit. All those unemployed people would much rather see a democrat in office over a republican, and since he's there they will support him and he gets reelected

I agree.  Obama/Democrats made sure that unemployment compensation was extended for another 13-20 months and the first $2,400 wasn't taxable in tax year 2009.  While the Republicans both in the House/Senate voted against the Reinvestment Act that included this extension of jobless benefits.  
I certainly HOPE Obama and the Democrats bring this up when the Election come about because unemployed voters should definitely remember this. 

You guys are looking at this picture the wrong way. 
1. If Obama somehow got unemployment down to 4%....his chances of reelection would be exponentially higher than it would be with the current unemployment percentage.
2. The number one detrimental aspect of Obama's presidency is the economy and unemployment.

You guys believe that the administration wants unemployment to be high?! It doesn't even make sense. The lower the unemployment, the higher his polls. The republicans who tried to prevent the benefit extension simply shot themselves in the foot.

You guys believe that Obama purposely kept unemployment high in order to offer extended benefits then use the republican opposition to the extension as a strategy to bolster his support. That's not logical thinking; it's partisan paranoia. 

 

[createdestroy]

Originally Posted by SunDOOBIE

Originally Posted by Kramer

Unemployment is almost to his benefit. All those unemployed people would much rather see a democrat in office over a republican, and since he's there they will support him and he gets reelected

I agree.  Obama/Democrats made sure that unemployment compensation was extended for another 13-20 months and the first $2,400 wasn't taxable in tax year 2009.  While the Republicans both in the House/Senate voted against the Reinvestment Act that included this extension of jobless benefits.  
I certainly HOPE Obama and the Democrats bring this up when the Election come about because unemployed voters should definitely remember this. 

You guys are looking at this picture the wrong way. 
1. If Obama somehow got unemployment down to 4%....his chances of reelection would be exponentially higher than it would be with the current unemployment percentage.
2. The number one detrimental aspect of Obama's presidency is the economy and unemployment.

You guys believe that the administration wants unemployment to be high?! It doesn't even make sense. The lower the unemployment, the higher his polls. The republicans who tried to prevent the benefit extension simply shot themselves in the foot.

You guys believe that Obama purposely kept unemployment high in order to offer extended benefits then use the republican opposition to the extension as a strategy to bolster his support. That's not logical thinking; it's partisan paranoia. 

 

[createdestroy]

Originally Posted by rashi

For others or President Obama in particular the end results for folks in the auto industry was for them to stayed employed and not added onto the unemployment number.  So again, between the Rex and President Obama with this examle in mind who truly does care about high unemployment or not??      

Where was everyone elses "Bailout"? Are the people in the auto industry more important than other people in other industries?







what other major industry do you think deserved a bailout?

 

[createdestroy]

Originally Posted by rashi

For others or President Obama in particular the end results for folks in the auto industry was for them to stayed employed and not added onto the unemployment number.  So again, between the Rex and President Obama with this examle in mind who truly does care about high unemployment or not??      

Where was everyone elses "Bailout"? Are the people in the auto industry more important than other people in other industries?







what other major industry do you think deserved a bailout?

 

[Betonblck]

Originally Posted by rashi

The same people who support the Bailouts are probably the same people who opposed bailing out of the Banks, which is stupid because they are the same thing just different industry.



Unemployment and poverty are created by government.

Let me get up in this discussion.

I personally was for all of the bailouts, however, I am also for increased taxes on the primary beneficiaries of the bank bailouts.  Elimination of the capital gains income loophole.

I think it's reasonable.  You want bailouts, pay higher taxes.  Who stays rich because of those bailouts, Goldman and all the other big investment banks.  What about the government money that paid for AIG executives to hang out at luxury resorts.

 

[Betonblck]

Originally Posted by rashi

The same people who support the Bailouts are probably the same people who opposed bailing out of the Banks, which is stupid because they are the same thing just different industry.



Unemployment and poverty are created by government.

Let me get up in this discussion.

I personally was for all of the bailouts, however, I am also for increased taxes on the primary beneficiaries of the bank bailouts.  Elimination of the capital gains income loophole.

I think it's reasonable.  You want bailouts, pay higher taxes.  Who stays rich because of those bailouts, Goldman and all the other big investment banks.  What about the government money that paid for AIG executives to hang out at luxury resorts.

 

[lazybonejone]

Originally Posted by daantimpire

every month for the past 15 months the unemployment rate has dropped
what do you call that .. and how fast do you want it fixed?
know the facts BEFORE you write a long essay on a bunch of nonsense

rome wasn't built in one day

These statistics are terribly skewed.  You should learn the definition of unemployment before espousing widely available data.
"Unemployment" not account for those that lose hope and give-up, neglects those that are no longer have unemployment benefits (includes expired and those who obtained PART-TIME employment), and not included are college graduates who never had a job.

 

[lazybonejone]

Originally Posted by daantimpire

every month for the past 15 months the unemployment rate has dropped
what do you call that .. and how fast do you want it fixed?
know the facts BEFORE you write a long essay on a bunch of nonsense

rome wasn't built in one day

These statistics are terribly skewed.  You should learn the definition of unemployment before espousing widely available data.
"Unemployment" not account for those that lose hope and give-up, neglects those that are no longer have unemployment benefits (includes expired and those who obtained PART-TIME employment), and not included are college graduates who never had a job.

 

[rashi]

Originally Posted by NostrandAve68

 Reaganomics doesn't work but I also don't believe Kenynesian Economics works either, all of these macroeconomic theories have no merit if you have poor human capital, our education system is in shambles thats where the focus should be. How can we be a competitive society with failing students, thats where the problem lies.

Reaganomics = Keynesian Economics



Austrian Business Cycle has merit. It predicts Booms and Busts based on the works of the Central Bank and their monopoly over interest rates and monetary policy. Austrian economists have been predicting Depressions and Recessions for almost since it became mainstream in the 1850's. Mises and Hayek predicted the Depression 10 years before, Hayek predicted the massive inflation of the late 70's after Nixon did away with Brenton Woods. Prominent economist Murray Rothbard and Ron Paul predicted the Recession during Bush I in the mid 80's, they predicted "Dot Com" bubble after Greenspan reduced interest rates. Ron Paul predicted the most recent Bust in 2003 and was even having Congressional Hearings at that time warning Greenspan on what was going to happen, the vids are on YouTube.


On the other hand, you have morons like Paul Krugman, Robert Reich, and alike who politicians listen too. This is the same guy last week stated "We need a threat of war to get the economy going".

Let me get up in this discussion.

I personally was for all of the bailouts, however, I am also for increased taxes on the primary beneficiaries of the bank bailouts.  Elimination of the capital gains income loophole.

I think it's reasonable.  You want bailouts, pay higher taxes.  Who stays rich because of those bailouts, Goldman and all the other big investment banks.  What about the government money that paid for AIG executives to hang out at luxury resorts.


I don't want bailouts, you are rewarding failure and on top of it, you are using money that was stolen from the citizens via taxation and redistributed to Banksters. Anyone who is in favor of Bailouts is a Fascist.


Nobody is "too big to fail". In the Free Market, you are free to be successful and you are free to fail.

 

[rashi]

Originally Posted by NostrandAve68

 Reaganomics doesn't work but I also don't believe Kenynesian Economics works either, all of these macroeconomic theories have no merit if you have poor human capital, our education system is in shambles thats where the focus should be. How can we be a competitive society with failing students, thats where the problem lies.

Reaganomics = Keynesian Economics



Austrian Business Cycle has merit. It predicts Booms and Busts based on the works of the Central Bank and their monopoly over interest rates and monetary policy. Austrian economists have been predicting Depressions and Recessions for almost since it became mainstream in the 1850's. Mises and Hayek predicted the Depression 10 years before, Hayek predicted the massive inflation of the late 70's after Nixon did away with Brenton Woods. Prominent economist Murray Rothbard and Ron Paul predicted the Recession during Bush I in the mid 80's, they predicted "Dot Com" bubble after Greenspan reduced interest rates. Ron Paul predicted the most recent Bust in 2003 and was even having Congressional Hearings at that time warning Greenspan on what was going to happen, the vids are on YouTube.


On the other hand, you have morons like Paul Krugman, Robert Reich, and alike who politicians listen too. This is the same guy last week stated "We need a threat of war to get the economy going".

Let me get up in this discussion.

I personally was for all of the bailouts, however, I am also for increased taxes on the primary beneficiaries of the bank bailouts.  Elimination of the capital gains income loophole.

I think it's reasonable.  You want bailouts, pay higher taxes.  Who stays rich because of those bailouts, Goldman and all the other big investment banks.  What about the government money that paid for AIG executives to hang out at luxury resorts.


I don't want bailouts, you are rewarding failure and on top of it, you are using money that was stolen from the citizens via taxation and redistributed to Banksters. Anyone who is in favor of Bailouts is a Fascist.


Nobody is "too big to fail". In the Free Market, you are free to be successful and you are free to fail.

 

[wr]

they are purposely letting certain industries dies off, while giving life support to others. people want the economy to go back to some sort of state of normalcy that never existed. What seems to passing most people up is the fact that our whole governmental structure is going through a complete makeover. Honestly with politics, it's like arguing over last years news. ( with the budget, it literally is last years business).

Artificial props for what's supposed to be a purely capitalistic system voids being allowed to call your self a capitalist. You are a baby asking for a parent to feed you.

In the handful of centuries after we left the gold value standard after nixon, how has it come to be that the debt grew so cancerous like?

I think from those times to now, we essentially started running the country and the rest of the world off of monopoly money and we were the ones closest to the print store to print more money when we needed the board game to expand or what they call economic growth.

 

[wr]

they are purposely letting certain industries dies off, while giving life support to others. people want the economy to go back to some sort of state of normalcy that never existed. What seems to passing most people up is the fact that our whole governmental structure is going through a complete makeover. Honestly with politics, it's like arguing over last years news. ( with the budget, it literally is last years business).

Artificial props for what's supposed to be a purely capitalistic system voids being allowed to call your self a capitalist. You are a baby asking for a parent to feed you.

In the handful of centuries after we left the gold value standard after nixon, how has it come to be that the debt grew so cancerous like?

I think from those times to now, we essentially started running the country and the rest of the world off of monopoly money and we were the ones closest to the print store to print more money when we needed the board game to expand or what they call economic growth.

 

[createdestroy]

Originally Posted by Wr

they are purposely letting certain industries dies off, 

which industries are they letting die off?

 

[createdestroy]

Originally Posted by Wr

they are purposely letting certain industries dies off, 

which industries are they letting die off?

 

[hop]

Originally Posted by lazybonejone

Originally Posted by daantimpire

every month for the past 15 months the unemployment rate has dropped
what do you call that .. and how fast do you want it fixed?
know the facts BEFORE you write a long essay on a bunch of nonsense

rome wasn't built in one day

These statistics are terribly skewed.  You should learn the definition of unemployment before espousing widely available data.
"Unemployment" not account for those that lose hope and give-up, neglects those that are no longer have unemployment benefits (includes expired and those who obtained PART-TIME employment), and not included are college graduates who never had a job.

So statistics are "terribly skewed" when their not in favor of your argument? 
So did "Unemployent" account for all of items you listed before Obama got in to office?

 

[hop]

Originally Posted by lazybonejone

Originally Posted by daantimpire

every month for the past 15 months the unemployment rate has dropped
what do you call that .. and how fast do you want it fixed?
know the facts BEFORE you write a long essay on a bunch of nonsense

rome wasn't built in one day

These statistics are terribly skewed.  You should learn the definition of unemployment before espousing widely available data.
"Unemployment" not account for those that lose hope and give-up, neglects those that are no longer have unemployment benefits (includes expired and those who obtained PART-TIME employment), and not included are college graduates who never had a job.

So statistics are "terribly skewed" when their not in favor of your argument? 
So did "Unemployent" account for all of items you listed before Obama got in to office?

 

[rashi]

Originally Posted by CreateDestroy

Originally Posted by rashi

For others or President Obama in particular the end results for folks in the auto industry was for them to stayed employed and not added onto the unemployment number.  So again, between the Rex and President Obama with this examle in mind who truly does care about high unemployment or not??      

Where was everyone elses "Bailout"? Are the people in the auto industry more important than other people in other industries?

what other major industry do you think deserved a bailout?




No industry deserves a bailout. I'm just saying what made the Auto Industry so special that they got one instead of millions of other people? The U.S. auto industry is terrible, bad investments in technology, inflated inventory, ect.

 

[rashi]

Originally Posted by CreateDestroy

Originally Posted by rashi

For others or President Obama in particular the end results for folks in the auto industry was for them to stayed employed and not added onto the unemployment number.  So again, between the Rex and President Obama with this examle in mind who truly does care about high unemployment or not??      

Where was everyone elses "Bailout"? Are the people in the auto industry more important than other people in other industries?

what other major industry do you think deserved a bailout?




No industry deserves a bailout. I'm just saying what made the Auto Industry so special that they got one instead of millions of other people? The U.S. auto industry is terrible, bad investments in technology, inflated inventory, ect.

 

[wr]

Originally Posted by CreateDestroy

Originally Posted by Wr

they are purposely letting certain industries dies off, 

which industries are they letting die off?

k-12 education. What they could pay the teachers and the school districts to fix the problems there are mere pennies compared to what gets spent on everything else. I would even say some cities as industries are led to die off too. But this is all a step in some sort of reform or gentrification. Like a eminent domain rifle with a suppressor on it. 
I think we could have done without the auto bail out. I would have rather seen that money go to other new companies with new technologies that make sure the US stays technologically adept in the long term rather than just adding another prop to what we been riding in for the past 80 yrs. When people in the 50's wrote about and made movies about 2011, they thought for sure we would have been in flying cars or something along the lines of that magnitude by now. Our economic policies have enslaved us all to dealing with remixes of the same ole same ole instead letting the US be a technological super power. We just have to settle for having military super power while the military research and development get's the best of everything and the public consumer is left playing with the toys of yesterday..

Just look at everything they are spending and not spending money on.  

 

[wr]

Originally Posted by CreateDestroy

Originally Posted by Wr

they are purposely letting certain industries dies off, 

which industries are they letting die off?

k-12 education. What they could pay the teachers and the school districts to fix the problems there are mere pennies compared to what gets spent on everything else. I would even say some cities as industries are led to die off too. But this is all a step in some sort of reform or gentrification. Like a eminent domain rifle with a suppressor on it. 
I think we could have done without the auto bail out. I would have rather seen that money go to other new companies with new technologies that make sure the US stays technologically adept in the long term rather than just adding another prop to what we been riding in for the past 80 yrs. When people in the 50's wrote about and made movies about 2011, they thought for sure we would have been in flying cars or something along the lines of that magnitude by now. Our economic policies have enslaved us all to dealing with remixes of the same ole same ole instead letting the US be a technological super power. We just have to settle for having military super power while the military research and development get's the best of everything and the public consumer is left playing with the toys of yesterday..

Just look at everything they are spending and not spending money on.  

 

[createdestroy]

Originally Posted by rashi

Originally Posted by CreateDestroy

Originally Posted by rashi



Where was everyone elses "Bailout"? Are the people in the auto industry more important than other people in other industries?

what other major industry do you think deserved a bailout?

No industry deserves a bailout. I'm just saying what made the Auto Industry so special that they got one instead of millions of other people? The U.S. auto industry is terrible, bad investments in technology, inflated inventory, ect.

millions of jobs rely on that industry....
Therefore giving money to the industry is the same as saying "your company is going bankrupt.... you should get laid off...but I'm going to give your company enough money to keep going and you won't be laid off"

It's easier to give money directly to an industry that millions rely on... rather than cutting a million small checks to each individual person. An individual check wouldn't perpetuate income indefinitely like a bailout would either (depending on how investment savvy/lucky the recipient is)

Chrysler already paid back it's bailout amount (6 years ahead of schedule) and  GM is halfway through.

I think the auto industry bailout was acceptable and saved a lot of people from devastation. The CEO/executives/board members have millions in the bank...and a collapse of an industry would just mean less profit for them. The collapse of an industry to a middle/low income worker = poverty.

[font=Georgia, 'Times New Roman', Times, serif]
[/font]

 

[createdestroy]

Originally Posted by rashi

Originally Posted by CreateDestroy

Originally Posted by rashi



Where was everyone elses "Bailout"? Are the people in the auto industry more important than other people in other industries?

what other major industry do you think deserved a bailout?

No industry deserves a bailout. I'm just saying what made the Auto Industry so special that they got one instead of millions of other people? The U.S. auto industry is terrible, bad investments in technology, inflated inventory, ect.

millions of jobs rely on that industry....
Therefore giving money to the industry is the same as saying "your company is going bankrupt.... you should get laid off...but I'm going to give your company enough money to keep going and you won't be laid off"

It's easier to give money directly to an industry that millions rely on... rather than cutting a million small checks to each individual person. An individual check wouldn't perpetuate income indefinitely like a bailout would either (depending on how investment savvy/lucky the recipient is)

Chrysler already paid back it's bailout amount (6 years ahead of schedule) and  GM is halfway through.

I think the auto industry bailout was acceptable and saved a lot of people from devastation. The CEO/executives/board members have millions in the bank...and a collapse of an industry would just mean less profit for them. The collapse of an industry to a middle/low income worker = poverty.

[font=Georgia, 'Times New Roman', Times, serif]
[/font]