The poor in America

[Socialite]

Because the size of the economy and labor force varies, we also calculate in percentage terms how much the total payroll count expanded under each president. President Bush, once taking account how long he’s been in office, shows the worst track record for job creation since the government began keeping records. –Sudeep Reddy
(from the Wall Street Journal article)


I'll adjust my statement, and said under President Reagan, job growth increased pretty significantly. But many Reagan worshipers over-emphasize the economy under Reagan. I've read many reports about economics under Reagan and it wasn't this Utopian perfection that everyone parades around. I'll see if I can find some of those reports...

[coadie]

Originally Posted by Socialite

The Bush administration created about three million jobs (net) over its eight years, a fraction of the 23 million jobs created under President Bill Clinton‘s administration and only slightly better than President George H.W. Bush did in his four years in office.

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2009/...ord-on-record/

Nothing to brag about for sure. And, in the process, he increased the nation's deficit to record numbers, an awkward position for a so-called fiscal conservative.

You are off by a few trillion dollars on the deficit.
Obama is adding to the deficit more in a month than Bush did in a year.

[Socialite]

Originally Posted by coadie

You are off by a few trillion dollars on the deficit.
Obama is adding to the deficit more in a month than Bush did in a year.

Obama isn't in this discussion. We are talking about so-called fiscal conservatives.

And Obama continues with a "bailout" that W initiated. He may be increasing the deficit, but his spending STILL (by % of increase) hasn't eclipsed W. This is a statement thrown around so much by talk show radio heads, but lacks facts.

Obama is paying for an inherited war, so defense cost should be a wash.

That leaves 3 primary spending programs:
TARP Program – $154 billion (money spent during Obama’s administration but passed under Bush)
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act – $202 billion
Omnibus Spending Bill

[coadie]

We are down around 8 million jobs below what it was when Obama was elected.

ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/suppl/empsit.compaes.txt

The drop in GDP at the end of the Clinton term showed up very strongly in the first of the year. Most people remember 9/11 was a huge factor and drop but the pain was already hitting 3 quarters earlier. Clinton left the dot com and telecom bubble crashing and the markets lost 23 trillion dollars in stock value.

The layoffs when the dotcoms crashed came early in the Bush administration.
People with no econ education often focus on a single variable. News papers do the same. Real economics I was taught has hundreds of variabbles. They have different weights.

[Socialite]

Originally Posted by coadie

We are down around 8 million jobs below what it was when Obama was elected.

ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/suppl/empsit.compaes.txt

The drop in GDP at the end of the Clinton term showed up very strongly in the first of the year. Most people remember 9/11 was a huge factor and drop but the pain was already hitting 3 quarters earlier. Clinton left the dot com and telecom bubble crashing and the markets lost 23 trillion dollars in stock value.

The layoffs when the dotcoms crashed came early in the Bush administration.
People with no econ education often focus on a single variable. News papers do the same. Real economics I was taught has hundreds of variabbles. They have different weights.

Yeah, the Dot Com was Clinton's fault too. Sheesh...

Please don't try to reprimand Clinton on fiscal policy. He oversaw one of the most healthy economies every in US history. It should be reasonably noted that Bush got slammed by the dot com bust, but his SPENDING was simply out of control.

Glad you aren't uni-dimensional in your facts. Then you know talking about job creation also has many layers.

[Socialite]

But we digress from the original point... the poor.

[coadie]

Originally Posted by Socialite

Obama isn't in this discussion. We are talking about so-called fiscal conservatives.

And Obama continues with a "bailout" that W initiated. He may be increasing the deficit, but his spending STILL (by % of increase) hasn't eclipsed W. This is a statement thrown around so much by talk show radio heads, but lacks facts.

Obama is paying for an inherited war, so defense cost should be a wash.

That leaves 3 primary spending programs:
TARP Program – $154 billion (money spent during Obama’s administration but passed under Bush)
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act – $202 billion
Omnibus Spending Bill

Wait. The budget comes from the House of Representatives.

You should know that.

Obama administration is hiding numbers.
How much money was given to GM and how much money does Obama say they paid off?
Obama said GM paid off 5 years early. They truthfully still owed 30 billion in debt when he said that and 27 billion for UAW pensions.

[coadie]

Originally Posted by aegsm76

It's very unusual for a thread to deviate from the original post.
The problem that I have with Keller is that whenever you remove statistics and measurements from anything, then it becomes all about feeling.
So, you can call anyone poor, it just depends on your "feeling".


Do you know what the number 1 predictor is for a "poor" household?
The lack of a father. Again, bad choices.
Also to redefine "poor" as a lack of power, encourages the wrong type of mentality.
It encourages a victim mentality instead of a mentality that I can change my life with better choices.
As one who was raised up "poor", (by the governments definition), I can state that is what I believe.

We should pay more taxes because they got a divorce? Becuse they got pregnant and never married?

It is not my fault. It is not the kids fault.

[coadie]

Originally Posted by Socialite

Yeah, the Dot Com was Clinton's fault too. Sheesh...

Please don't try to reprimand Clinton on fiscal policy. He oversaw one of the most healthy economies every in US history. It should be reasonably noted that Bush got slammed by the dot com bust, but his SPENDING was simply out of control.

Glad you aren't uni-dimensional in your facts. Then you know talking about job creation also has many layers.
And Obama continues with a "bailout" that W initiated. He may be increasing the deficit, but his spending STILL (by % of increase) hasn't eclipsed W. This is a statement thrown around so much by talk show radio heads, but lacks facts

http://blog.heritage.org/2009/03/24/...t-in-pictures/

http://hotair.com/archives/2011/04/0...lement-reform/
You are off by a couple of years. last october Pelosi had a duty to pass a budget. She didn't do it. It seems the lefies like yourself say this budget is Bush' duty. He retired years ago.

Pelosi was avoiding work. Now the party of NO is Reid and the Dems. They are fighting cuts in spending. Obama is fighting spending cuts.


We have a defcit this year of over 1.6 trillion dollars. Obama single year deficit is similar to Bush over 8 years total.
Pelosi and her ilk have made false claims and the libs go for them.
It will take years after Obama is gone to uncover where the money is going. They are hiding their spending.

[Socialite]

Originally Posted by coadie

We should pay more taxes because they got a divorce? Becuse they got pregnant and never married?

It is not my fault. It is not the kids fault.

You're on your usual tangent. aegsm said nothing about taxation. Snap out of it.