Why would we want go back to Republicans crashing the economy?
>""""""""republicans""""""""
>>67800126
>leaving data from prior to crash out of graph
welcome to the cherry picking zone
>>67800309
You don't see that huge crater in the chart when Bush left office?
Are you fucking blind or just a retard?
>Murican intellectuals
>>67800126
Every single rate of unemployment AND underemployment has plummeted under President Obama.
>>67800126
>why would we want jobs of more than 29 hours a week?
>why would we want to count all NEET people?
stay ignorant nigger
>>67800510
and no data prior to the crash, and a convenient color coded to help you decide it was bushes fault
no data prior to the fall because it shows that those "jobs" are at half the rate they were prior, I know that under Trudeau critical thinking are outlawed but please when your going to post with americans do your homework and leave your liberal propaganda at home comrade
>>67801115
Wtf are you talking about? It's color coded by President. The entire 8 years of the Bush presidency created only 1 million net jobs.
The Obama presidency has created 14 million jobs and counting, over 14x more.
>that those "jobs" are at half the rate they were prior
Do you have a source for this? You obviously just made this up.
The US is on a 72 month streak of job creation, that's the longest streak in American history.
Seriously how fucking retarded are you?
>>67800126
No.
>>67801684
>Graphs end in 2013.
>Doesn't realize baby boomers are retiring.
You're so fucking stupid, you don't even know that the WORKING AGE participation rate is exactly where it was under Reagan.
>>67801684
>workforce participation rate
What is that?
>>67802153
It's baby boomers retiring. Right wing retards don't realize that when a baby boomer retires, they leave the labor force.
>>67800126
>part-time jobs with no benefits
Thanks, Obamacare!
>>67801428
>Seriously how fucking retarded are you?
lol
>workforce participation rate
>What is that?
can you not see that your original chart only shows the year of crash and then Obama. it excludes job creation prior to the crash because then your liberal cherry picking chart would show the true nature of obamas "recovery" that it doesnt exist.
that chart screams that job creation is FLAT
and also consider that 200k a month is shit when we have around 5 million new college grads a year.
So again, the chart is missing the part of the data where you could examine pre-crash growth.
why do you think they did this?
>>67800126
>14.2 million new private sector jobs
>all are low age part time shit tier job were half of them are being filled by illegal mexicans
>>67800309
>>leaving data from prior to crash out of graph
>welcome to the cherry picking zone
Here you go. Not sure how it matters.
>>67802885
95% full time.
>>67802153
Workforce participation rate = (number of people working) / (population)
The Eternal Cucknadian strikes again
>>67803288
>>67803100
Yeah Bush crashed the economy, Obama fixed the Republican mess. What's your point?
By the way, you're missing another 3 million jobs gained in the last year.
How is it cherry picking to show Obama's record?
Seems like you're the one cherry picking by going back to years before Obama was President.
>>67803349
>>67803288
Jobs lost under Bush. Gained under Obama. Your chart ends in 2012. Don't you think you need to update your information?
>>67802151
>workforce participation rate lowest its ever been in ~50 years
Oh yea, thats just great, thanks Obama, great job.... ebil bush, had us at a high mark in 2008.
>>67802153
Its the real number of people who are able to work, that are actually working. Hes lying when he says its people retiring, they arent counted, neither are children.
The "unemployment rate" is a propaganda statistic made so that democrats can pretend they are doing awesome. It cuts out all the people who are out of work, but have stopped looking.. or have been looking for longer than 6 months, or who have part time work but cant pay the bills (which is why the part time workforce chart was included, which the OP also ignored in his horseshit marxist truth denying reply)
>>67800126
Nice try jew, Democrats crashed the economy.
>Fannie May Freddie Mac
>Community Reinvestment Act
>LMI - Low - Moderate Income borrowers
>The effort to reduce mortgage lending standards was led by the Department of Housing and Urban Development through the 1994 National Homeownership Strategy, published at the request of President Clinton.
http://spectator.org/articles/42211/true-origins-financial-crisis
>>67803386
Obama helped ruin the economy even more by bailing out wallstreet
here is a chart which shows that Obama is actually lagging other eras in job creation, and doesn't cherry pick data to push a narrative
>>67800126
>"I have to give you healthcare if you keep working 40 hours a week. We'll hire another guy and put you both at 20 hours! Yay more jobs!"
That was 2012. Thanks magical negro.
forgot pic
>>67803410
Oh so you agree with Obama that we need to raise the minimum wage and raise taxes on the rich? That's interesting. Shame Republicans are blocking it.
Trump eliminating the estate tax will fix this!
>>67803349
>Private debt going up since 1950.
THANKS OBAMA!
>>67803049
>>all are low age part time shit tier job were half of them are being filled by illegal mexicans
Sauce?
>>67800656
"Unemployed" statistic stops counting people who have been unemployed over 3 months
>>67803579
>>67803628
>the lying cucknadian pretends Obama never promised to change things
Such is the nature of the Eternal Syrup Nigger.
>>67803628
People don't have job/income so they are putting everything on their credit cards you dumbshit
>>67803579
government regulation is what drives wealth into a smaller number of hands
>>67803488
Lol you're trolling right?
Are you so fucking retarded that you don't know that Bush bailed out Wall Street?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troubled_Asset_Relief_Program
>>67803386
>Bush crashed the economy
source?
In reality Clinton crashed the economy. >>67803486
>>67803386
how can you reasonably say that using a larger data pool is cherry picking, i dont think you even understand what the term means.
>>67803544
Democrats way better for jobs.
>>67800126
>breaking up full time jobs into 2 or 3 part time jobs is creating new jobs
thanks obama
I feel like there's a problem with the cause and effect when looking at the economy and the political environment
>things are good, don't want things to change
>elect a conservative
>things are going poorly, need a change
>elect liberal
>>67800510
Presidents have basically no control over the economy.
>>67803829
Obama signed off on it and refused to change things (Despite promising Hope and Change, his endless campaign slogan)
The Eternal Leaf Faggot Strike Again.
>>67803386
>Yeah Bush crashed the economy
Wrong you lying little shit.
Clinton's CRA and wall street Jews selling toxic assets to stupid goys crashed the economy.
>>67803753
U3 does. Not U4,U5 and U6. They've all plummeted under Obama. U4 includes all discouraged workers. It's 5.3%.
Job openings are at record highs right now.
Job openings rise in January
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/job-openings-rise-in-january-2016-03-17
>>67800656
>>67800510
>You don't see that huge crater in the chart when Bush left office?
In Canada they blame Harper for that. In nations with left liberals as the head of government they blame the global down turn of 08.
>>67803486
Fucking this
>>67804011
But mostly this
>>67804143
>They've all plummeted
Thanks to low wage jobs, cuck king.
>>67803788
Yeah like when Republicans cut taxes for the rich.
I'm sure if it were up to Walmart and Mcdonalds they would pay all their workers $20 per hour right?
Oh wait they only pay minimum wage.
>>67804028
Bush signed TARP.
You're officially a retard.
>>67803829
>Are you so fucking retarded that you don't know that Bush bailed out Wall Street?
TARP was purposed under Bush, Obama ratified it. Next lie you have coming?
>>67804311
Obama refused to change anything
you literal Leaf
>>67803486
this x1000
you people comparing the economy or job growth to presidents are idiots, the economy always lags government policies
>>67804236
What is it with you right wingers? Why do all your charts end in 2012 or 2013?
Wages are up. 14 million jobs under Obama.
I do agree with you that we need to raise the minimum wage and that corporations are ripping off their workers.
I'm not sure why you think Trump bringing back $1/hour jobs from China is going to raise wages.
>>67800126
it had literally nothing to do with Obama.
Plus, the majority of those jobs are actually minimum wage, part-time, crappy jobs.
>>67800126
its amazing what you can do when you count someone with 3 part time jobs as 3 people employed.
>>67804413
We already agree that Bush and the Republicans crashed the economy and Obama put it back together. Your chart is obsolete. It's from 2012. Wages are up since then.
>>67804469
>we need to raise the minimum wage
>he seriously thinks this helps anyone
>>67803386
>Bush crashed the economy
From NY Times, 1999 (Clinton years)
>''From the perspective of many people, including me, this is another thrift industry growing up around us,'' said Peter Wallison a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. ''If they fail, the government will have to step up and bail them out the way it stepped up and bailed out the thrift industry.''
>Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, does not lend money directly to consumers. Instead, it purchases loans that banks make on what is called the secondary market. By expanding the type of loans that it will buy, Fannie Mae is hoping to spur banks to make more loans to people with less-than-stellar credit ratings.
hmmm, I wonder why people expected the banks to get bailed out? Maybe because the government was backing the loans all along. Thanks Clinton!
http://www.nytimes.com/1999/09/30/business/fannie-mae-eases-credit-to-aid-mortgage-lending.html
>>67804311
>implying tarp is bad
>>67804469
>Wages are up
Listen to this delusion! The eternal cucknadian strikes again.
>>67804562
Alan Greenspan the Fed Reserve chairman and a jew crashed the economy (twice, once under Bush once under Clinton)
Nice try Cucknada.
>>67804464
Right. Like when Obama enacts a massive stimulus project and it averts a Republican Great Depression. The Americans put back to work on infrastructure projects starting in 2009, don't actually start working until 2022.
That's what you're saying. See how dumb you sound.
>>67800510
Those were almost exclusively part time jobs to illegals, or government jobs due to increased bureaucracy.
But I think you knew that, but didn't want to admit it.
>>67804509
95% full time actually.
>>67803101
>>67804562
>We already agree that Bush and the Republicans crashed the economy
no you haven't provided a single statistic to address these well sourced events:
>>67804630
>>67803486
>>67803386
>Bush crashed the economy
Bush helped in crashing the economy by doing nothing, and keeping the route that was set by Clinton.
Clinton and Reagan were the ones who set the policies that crashed the economy
And Obama hasnt solved shit. As it will become ever more evident over the course of the next months
>>67803877
I'm showing Obama's jobs record. Obama was not President in 2005. You're an idiot.
>>67803957
95% full time.
>>67803101
>>67800126
I wonder how many of these are minimum wage, part-time jobs hmmm
>>67804690
Obama's "stimulus" was handing trillions to wallstreet so banks could hoard it you lying leaf
>>67804251
>Yeah like when Republicans cut taxes for the rich.
thats not a regulation nit wit
>I'm sure if it were up to Walmart and Mcdonalds they would pay all their workers $20 per hour right?
>Oh wait they only pay minimum wage.
1. none of those workers are forced to take the minimum wage job
2. why would they pay more then "regulated" its clear that the market has determined the value of a wal mart worker, doubling his pay adds no value to the company and will only raise prices on everyone and everything and reduce the number of employees that walmart can hire.
>>67804824
>>67804796
Clinton left Bush one of the best economies in American history. 3.9% unemployment, a thriving economy, a $263 BILLION annual budget surplus, the national debt set to be paid off within 10 years, the highest labor participation rate in American history, and no wars.
Within 8 years, George Bush and the Republicans left America on its knees.
This is why Republicans can't be trusted with the economy. No matter how good a situation they inherit, they'll fuck it all up and blame Democrats.
>>67803049
>private sector
>private
>sector
>PRIVATE
>>67804236
>>67804469
>>67804509
Ya the tea party had to fight Obama tooth and nail not to raise taxes and extend tax cuts for those under 50k year.
That plus gas prices are the reason things look kinda ok for the moment....
but the rest of the worlds market are crashing and burning right now.
>>67800510
You are more delusoional than a schizoid.
>cucking this hard for Obumfuck
You want him you can have him you fucking leaf.
>>67804675
but based bernanke brought out econ back with QE and 4 trill injected into the markets senpai, thats where all the new jobs came from - companies expanding via cheap cost of capital
the econ ads about 200k jobs per month, but labor force participation rate is down, but that has to do with an aging population ( partially anyhow)
obama didnt fix our econ, bush AND clinton created policys that allowed more people to get homes by increasing ease of borrowing
>>67804960
dont forget that they are now REQUIRED to have much more capital on hand then before - so they cant lend out as much
plus rates are low, and most companies aren't growing top line revenue so they dont borrow as much
so its a 2 sided street my friend
>>67804960
thanks to lower wages caused by Obama's war on the working class
>>67804675
>(twice, once under Bush once under Clinton)
You must be severely retarded. When in the world did the economy crash under Clinton?
The economy only crashes under Republicans.
>>67804743
>Those were almost exclusively part time jobs to illegals, or government jobs due to increased bureaucracy.
Sauce?
Actually this is a chart of private sector job creation.
>>67804630
For years I brought this up, and people just rolled their eyes and accused me of making shit up.
>>67804562
>We already agree that Bush and the Republicans crashed the economy and Obama put it back together.
no one but brain dead liberals believes this
>>67805098
the only recovery was in Wallstreet's bank accounts
>>67805188
The Dot Com bubble you disgusting moose fucker.
>>67805096
I love how pissed people get over Obama but I don't think I've seen any proper criticism other than the whole "muh birthd certificate" or "MUH MUSLIM"
>>67805282
That's because you're an anti white working class kike
>>67804562
HUD ANNOUNCES NEW REGULATIONS TO PROVIDE $2.4 TRILLION IN MORTGAGES FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR 28.1 MILLION FAMILIES
The historic federal regulations by HUD raises the required percentage of mortgage loans for low- and moderate-income families that finance companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac must buy annually from the current 42 percent of their total purchases to a new high of 50 percent - a 19 percent increase.
http://archives.hud.gov/news/2000/pr00-317.html
>>67800126
>26 posts by this leaf
>>67803100
OK. Take the dip out and Obama's numbers are still higher than Bush.
>>67804833
how can you compare it with others performance if you exclude all data but that which pushes your narrative
>>67804960
No it was spending money on infrastructure project.
Bush spent trillions on Iraq.
Obama spent $700 billion on US infrastructure in order to avert another Republican Great Depression.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Recovery_and_Reinvestment_Act_of_2009
facts have no business on /pol/
>>67805052
it was the policy of clinton that lead to the downturn. it was the policy of reagan that lead to the clinton years boom.
>>67805052
topkek
You know the recession was caused by the housing mortgage bubble right?
>>67805188
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/21/part-time-job-creation_n_3788365.html
>inb4huffpost
Obamacare made it impossible to hire full time workers, so they were almost all part time.
>>67805085
Look at the chart. When Obama entered office, the US was losing 700,000 jobs a month. Thanks to GOP economic policies.
Now thanks to Obama and the Democrats, the US is on a 72 month streak of job creation, the longest streak in American history.
>>67800126
Amazing! The economy recovered after an all time low! Meanwhile we have an entire generation which is now worse off than their predecessors.
>>67805216
because the media reported it exactly wrong. This is a good article picking apart a famous NY Times front page article that was completely dishonest:
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2008/12/21/new-york-times-blames-housing-financial-crisis-bush
>>67805137
Does that have anything to do with The Great Bush Crash and ensuing Republican Recession, the worst financial calamity since the Republican Great Depression.
>>67805282
>I don't think I've seen any proper criticism other than the whole "muh birthd certificate" or "MUH MUSLIM"
How's it back there in 2008? Hope you look forward to race relations being set back 50 years and an even more destabilized Middle East, among other things.
>>67805429
>$100 Billion a year
>when you handed wallstreet literally trillions
KEK
the eternal leaf cuck can't stop sucking Obongo off.
>>67805260
>The Dot Com bubble you disgusting moose fucker.
The dot com bubble was not an economic crash and it did not occur under Clinton.
What kind of a fucking moron are you?
>>67805052
>Clinton left Bush one of the best economies in American history. 3.9% unemployment, a thriving economy, a $263 BILLION annual budget surplus, the national debt set to be paid off within 10 years, the highest labor participation rate in American history, and no wars
...and a completely uncontrolled speculative financialized economy that boosted all that with service sector jobs and mountains and mountains of debt.
Budget surplus mean absolutely shit because the US can literally spend whatever the fuck they want. Budget restrictions are only important because they force a budget balance.
As long as the US dollar reigns supreme, the US government can sell treasury securities and indebt himself for a long time.
![LFP%20Participation[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/oT9QZaa.jpg "LFP%20Participation[1].jpg")
Forbes had a nice article once comparing Reagan to Obama.
Both are being marketed as "job creators", both lowered the unemployment rate, yet Reagan created millions of jobs while Obama destroyed millions of jobs.
This is why people remember Reagan so fondly while Obama is widely resented and is considered one of the worst presidents in US history (and rightly so)
>>67805404
I love arguing with right wing morons.
I don't know why you idiots want Republicans to crash the economy again. So you can blame Democrats in 2024? Does that really seem like a sound strategy?
>>67805679
The mean the jewish Alan Greenspan crash?
Yes that kike caused it.
>>67805759
KEK
it was built up under Clinton you worthless mountie
>>67805260
i dont disagree - most of the new jobs created are service industry shit jobs
and our recovery has been mostly in the stockmarket - real econ is getting there, but we need another two years atleast to see some wage growth
>>67800126
1. republicans didn't crash the economy. It was crashed by measures Clinton put in place to require banks to give out and absorb bad loans for minorities until they took so much debt they crashed.
2. WHO got the jobs?
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/04/us/last-task-after-layoff-at-disney-train-foreign-replacements.html?_r=0
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/oct/31/two-thirds-of-jobs-go-to-immigrants/?page=all
http://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_data/unemployment-charts?utm_source=akdart
Only a fucking liberal would ignore the shrinking middle class that's now smaller than the poverty class, the 90 million unemployed Americans while the government claims only 5%, and all the other bullshit.
>>67805140
Dotcom bubble.
kek.
You're completely ignorant about this crap. Get out of here..
>>67805823
>Reagan created millions of jobs while Obama destroyed millions of jobs
the president has nothing to do with either of these
>>67805412
>>67803100
No kidding. I can't believe how stupid these people are.
Obama: 14.2 million private sector jobs and counting
Bush: 1.1 million private sector jobs. The worst jobs record since Republican Hoover.
>Fucking Obama!
- Trumptards
>>67805052
Clinton signed NAFTA in 1999 which directly lead the loss of thousands of factories during Bush's terms. Many dumb libshits don't know this.
>>67805679
>The Great Bush Crash
still telling this lie
>>67805986
who approved nafta dumbfuck
>>67806032
>facts are now lies
welcome to /pol/
>>67805912
93 million.
>>67805904
Wages are stagnant while debt is increasing
This is basically Obama taking the middle class to the woodchipper, not that he cares.
He'll be getting $500,000 speaking fees at Goldman Sachs when his term is over for bailing them out.
>>67805898
Houses are too expensive now, and they're only getting more expensive every day as all the Obama-people that keep pouring keep increasing the demand in the market while not price-competing since they pay their rent with government money.
If another democrat gets elected it'll be only rich leftist celebs and non-white immigrants will be able to afford a house, and that's already true in a lot of cities
>>67806050
Bill Clinton
Undeniable fact
>>67805830
im sure your liberal leaders plan of selling all your gold off at the same time oil plummets will do wonders for your country, watching canada rise under the true globalist leadership of liberals will be amazing.
The canadien dollar is faring so well against the US dollar atm, please continue to tell us how to manage our economy.
it may cost $5 for a loaf of bread up there but at least the local trannies meds are covered.
>>67803466
>>workforce participation rate lowest its ever been in ~50 years
No it isn't. The WORKING AGE labor participation rate is exactly where it was under Reagan. Why are you so retarded?
>>67802151
>The "unemployment rate" is a propaganda statistic made so that democrats can pretend they are doing awesome. It cuts out all the people who are out of work, but have stopped looking.. or have been looking for longer than 6 months, or who have part time work but cant pay the bills (which is why the part time workforce chart was included, which the OP also ignored in his horseshit marxist truth denying reply)
The U4 rate includes all discouraged workers. It's 5.3%
The U6 rate is underemployment. It's 9.7%.
They've all plummeted under Obama.
Look at the chart before you spew debunked right wing talking points you moron.
>>.67800656
>>67806094
you haven't presented a single fact that bush caused the housing crash, while I have posted a lot of evidence it was caused by mortagage policy forced by Clinton
>>67800126
Trudeau, you come on here every day sucking obama's dick. It's getting tiring.
Don't worry, when Trump swears in, obama will be looking for a new job.
You can have him.
>>67806188
see /pol/
this is why you have to learn history or else you'll end up like this fuckhead
>>67805140
the republicans presided over the entire economic boom of the 1990s. maybe read up on who controlled the house/senate.
>>67805724
>>when you handed wallstreet literally trillions
TARP was passed by Bush. I don't think it was trillions.
I do agree we need to raise taxes on the rich and regulate Wall Street more.
To be honest, Bernie is the only candidate talking about that.
Trump's policies are the exact opposite.
>>67800126
Too bad he didn't do that to the education system
>>67806094
It's the Alan Greenspan crash based on his policies (where he encourages banks to make bad loans because they know they will be bailed out by the FED regardless of what happens)
And what did Obama do? He bailed them out like the little Wallstreet whore he is.
republican congress
>>67805973
It's selective statistics for retards, labor participation rate is all time low.
What you're seeing is high paying jobs being broken up for several part time low paying jobs.
And most of the jobs go to service, while manufacturing is dying
>>67806508
>still bitching about muh TARP
pathetic. Obama handed them trillions more and never undid TARP. Your lies can only get you so far.
>>67806508
too bad you cant vote in the only country that matters
>>67806335
http://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet
The Labor Force Participation Rate is the lowest its been since 1976, which is under Carter, not Reagan. This is the lowest its been in 30 years.
So yes, Bush > Obama. Even though both suck in reality.
>>67806471
>NAFTA "It was signed into law by President Clinton on December 8, 1993, and took effect on January 1, 1994."
you were saying?
>>67805429
700 billion is literally scrap money
Compare it to the trillions spent in QE
>>67806286
Rich are getting richer,poorer are getting poorer and middle class is dying, what does 3% GDP increase mean to anyone?
>>67805823
>Both are being marketed as "job creators", both lowered the unemployment rate, yet Reagan created millions of jobs while Obama destroyed millions of jobs.
How did Obama destroy millions of jobs when we're up 14 million jobs?
Here's the Forbes article:
Obama Outperforms Reagan On Jobs, Growth And Investing
http://www.forbes.com/sites/adamhartung/2014/09/05/obama-outperforms-reagan-on-jobs-growth-and-investing/#7d12b05320bc
Also don't forget that Reagan TRIPLED the national debt. The worst record in the modern era.
If Obama was as bad as Reagan on the debt, it would be $30 TRILLION right now.
Also, the labor participation rate under Obama is exactly where it was under Reagan.
>>67802151
What kind of a retard are you?
>>67806724
1976 is actually still president Ford, so it's even worse than I thought
>>67806533
>He bailed them out like the little Wallstreet whore he is.
Our country would have been fucked sideways without the bailout, it was needed
>>67806724
post the sentence before that from the wiki article friend
>>67803897
>pulls the lowest stat for repubs and the highest stat for dems.
Could you please cherry pick harder?
>>67806848
its called kicking the can down the road, were still fucked but not for today.
>>67806692
>Obama handed them trillions more and never undid TARP. Your lies can only get you so far.
obama doesnt set those policys though - bernanke did
obama didn't invent QE man
>>67806775
>How did Obama destroy millions of jobs when we're up 14 million jobs?
You can't just count raw jobs. There are immigrants and babies always being added to the population.
If job growth, doesn't outstrip population growth then the Labor Force Participation actually declines, like it has consistently under Obama's entire term.
Why are you such a liar?
>>67806775
>How did Obama destroy millions of jobs when we're up 14 million jobs?
Again let us explain slowly to your retard brain, these are low paying part time Jobs.
Employers break up full time jobs to part time to avoid paying benefits like medicaid, 96 million people are still out of the labor force.
Also the types of jobs that are being created is mostly service jobs which are low paying, high paying jobs like manufacturing are ever decreasing
>>67805823
stop with the "president is responsible for the economy" meme.
Reagan had almost no influence in how the economy worked during his tenure, and the same applies to Obummer.
They're just as important (actually way less) than the Chairman of the Fed, and the Congress who actually pass policies into action.
>>67807020
So an employer breaks up a high paying full time job to two part time jobs, Obama takes credit for fixing the economy and adds two jobs, but everyone is worse off
>>67805759
>The dot com bubble was not an economic crash
The US was in recession when the dot com crash hit.
It just wasnt as hard-hitting as 2008.
>>67806884
>>67806884
Why don't you post it? Unlike you, I'm not going to blindly defend one side or the other. I'm against any president who was bad for American jobs and trade. And Bill Clinton was one of those presidents.
Nobody forced Clinton to sign NAFTA. Nobody is forcing Obama to sign the TPP (well...actually now that I think about it...)
>>67800126
Why did you leave out the fact that the vast majority of those jobs are minimum wage?
There have always been plenty of low income jobs. It is the middle income jobs that are disappearing.
>>67806286
GDP growth rate is a delayed reaction to econ policy. So your chart means jack shit, lol. Are you really this stupid or are you just a bored baiter?
>>67804675
>Some middle class failed
>some succeeded
>"ER MAH GERD WE NEEDZ TEH SOSHULISMS TO FIX THIS"
Or just fuck off.
>>67806775
Lets say that the debt after Carter was just 1 Trillion
>raising debt 189% from 1 trillion = 2.89 trillion total debt, difference of 1.89 T
>55% = 4.47 Trillion total debt, difference is 1.58 Trillion
>36% = 6.07 Trillion 1.6 Trillion difference
>Obama's first 18 months in office +2 Trillion in debt
This is why percentages are worthless, Leaf.
>>67806848
Too big to fail is too big to exist
>>67806948
Obama appoints the FED chairmen
>>67807302
fuck off Shekelberg
>>67806724
oops my link is this:
http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000
just chance the time range to the 1970's on the top
>>67805423
Oh I agree it's fair to compare Obama's jobs performance vs Bush's. You're right about that.
Obama: +14.2 million private sector jobs
Bush +1 million private sector jobs
Democrats are always better for jobs.
>>67803897
That's why I posted this chart.
Everyone knows that.
Democrats--58 Million Private Jobs, Republicans--25.5 Million Private Jobs--Since 1943
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/11/04/1341603/-Democrats-58-Million-Private-Jobs-Republicans-25-5-Million-Private-Jobs-Since-1943
>>67806286
yes and?
Lets completely ignore the fact that policies that may affect GDP growth are usually retroactive, so your neat breaking of republicans and democrats into different fields is completely useless.
>>67807337
>Supporting capitalism is being a Jew
You know what they say about you and Reddit.
>>67806508
>I don't think it was trillions
It was.
Go study it, and stop seing this as some sort of partisan politics.
It has nothing to do with democrats/republicans.
This shit is mostly the work of the Fed and private entities.
>>67805830
>Implying right wingers like George Bush
I'm an independent conservative, and couldn't care less about the Republican party. George Bush was a failed president, but Obama has been far worse than any president in US history.
As the other anon said, enjoy your failing currency and country.
>>67800126
or we could go with Gary Johnson and fix the economy once and for all
>>67807197
No it wasn't. US was in recession because George Bush kept America safe on 9/11.
Turns out when you have the worst terrorist attack in US history, stock markets are going to go down.
Most of the economic damage to the US in 2001 occurred because of 9/11.
That's on Bush because he kept Murica safe.
>>67807452
>Oh I agree it's fair to compare Obama's jobs performance vs Bush's. You're right about that.
>Obama: +14.2 million private sector jobs
>Bush +1 million private sector jobs
But what about population growth? You didn't factor that in. Why is the Labor Force Participation rate dropping? It's at Carter levels, not Reagan.
>>67806533
look at that recovery!
Truly a resounding success I see!
>>67807499
cucking for wallstreet jews who make all their money from FED handouts makes you a cuck
sorry.
>>67807452
>Democrats
Yeah man. The President just flips the jobs switch at the economy switch board in the Oval office. Bush decided on his own to be a dick and hit the "LOSE JOBS" button.
Never mind that Dems lost the House back in 2010, after two years of Obeezy. Never mind that it was the biggest fucking change of seats in history. Oh but I'm sure that's just some "Faux" News trickery and GOP jerrymandering. Never mind that even when reelected the Dems bled seats from the House and Senate until they lost the Senate in 2014. The Dems managed to win POTUS twice, but lose constantly in other elections since, and after. But dem jobs, man. Dem tasty, juicy, part time, no benefits, minimum wage jobs.
>>67806724
Buddy how fucking stupid are you?
Baby boomers are retiring. What happens when baby boomers retired. THEY LEAVE THE LABOR FORCE YOU MORON.
GET THIS THROUGH YOUR SKULLS RETARDS.
THE 25-54 (WORKING AGE) LABOR PARTICIPATION RATE RIGHT NOW UNDER OBAMA IS EXACTLY WHERE IT WAS UNDER REAGAN.
PROOF:
>>67802151
LOOK AT THE FUCKING CHART RETARDS
>>67806828
>>67807717
When the fuck did I do that, you illiterate cumstain?
>>67806940
What would you have done? lets stop blaming obama or bush or whatever. I don't think there was any viable alternative to the bailouts without destroying our country.
We have QE and low rates which helped the stock market grow and adding jobs back to the economy. Granted they mostly aren't good jobs. This allows companies to borrow to grow and employ more people.
Wage growth will come up when we start seeing laborforce participation grow up, we're at 4.9 unemployment but I think the new 5% rate everyone thinks is full employment is actually now closer to ~4.3 - and once we get there and if laborforce participation rate stays the same we'll see an upward pressure on wages due to the increase in demand
so we'll need another 2 years of this and some innovation, so we'll see wage growth and corporate topline revenue growth. Wallstreet will take a dip in the short term, but be better off in the long term.
>>67807337
>Obama appoints the FED chairmen
Bush appointed bernanke - fed chairmen have 14 terms
as for yelen that bush appointed she has done okay thus far- not soon enough to tell
Trumps policys of protectionist trade help the USA. South Korea 50 years ago was a dirt hole, but due to protectist trade they grew greatly, have a huge growth in per capita income and gdp.
If you smoked american cigs or used non korean products in korea in the 60's - 80s they would shame and disown you. It fucking worked, they put up a fuckton of tarrifs and became a econ powerhouse
The most significant factor in rapid industrialization was the adoption of an outward-looking strategy in the early 1960s.[citation needed] This strategy was particularly well-suited to that time because of South Korea's poor natural resource endowment, low savings rate, and tiny domestic market. The strategy promoted economic growth through labor-intensive manufactured exports, in which South Korea could develop a competitive advantage. Government a key role in this process.
>>67807584
Bush turned a $263 BILLION annual budget surplus into a $1.4 TRILLION budget deficit by the time he was done.
5,000 dead American soldiers. Trillions squandered in pointless wars.
National debt doubled.
Leaves behind the worst economic crash since the Republican Great Depression.
1 million net jobs created over 8 years. The worst record since Republican Hoover.
Leaves behind a financial system on the brink of collapse.
America was hated all around the world.
Oh and Bush kept America safe on 9/11.
But yeah, Obama was totally worse...
>>67807658
>US was in recession because George Bush kept America safe on 9/11.
>Most of the economic damage to the US in 2001 occurred because of 9/11.
The stock market crashed in 2000, and recession followed after that.
9/11 obviously wasnt a very good thing for the economy obviously, but it has nothing to do with the recession
You dont have a clue about what you're talking about
>>67802692
Yeah, and it's not like anyone is entering at the same time or anything
>>67800126
>OP Hasn't seen the labor report.
100% of job growth has gone to immigrants.
http://cis.org/sites/cis.org/files/camarota-employment_0.pdf
Sorry, but I'm not keen on giving domestic jobs to foreigners instead of American families because they're cheaper.
>>67808030
baby boomers have been retiring since the late 90's.
you're not factoring in actual population growth in the US via immigration
The US isnt Europe or Japan (yet)
Whats with this obsession with jobs?
jobs = something needs to be done
Why don't we focus on accomplishing things instead of creating problems that need to be fixed
Its a good day when we DONT need people to do things; when our human tools are doing them for us
>>67807662
>But what about population growth?
Obama job creation is far outpacing population growth. That's why the unemployment rate keeps falling and why there are over 5.6 million job OPENINGS. A record high.
>Why is the Labor Force Participation rate dropping?
Because baby boomers are retiring. It's not complicated.
The working age labor participation rate is exactly where it was under Reagan.
LOOK AT THE CHART
>>67802151 (You)
>>67800126
Man, Obama's great for the American economy, the bar turned blue the second he took office.
>>67800126
thanks fracking
>>67808484
Yeah and Democrats were in charge of Congress and the Senate from 2005-2010? What's your point? Is it all the Presidents fault? Is the presidnet supposed to take all the glory too?
Is this belief that one person has the majority of power based on the fact that you live in a country controlled by and overseas monarch?
>>67808873
>baby boomers have been retiring since the late 90's.
That's exactly why the labor participation rate has been falling since 1999.
>you're not factoring in actual population growth in the US via immigration
Yes I am. The US takes in about 1 million immigrants per year. About 60-70% are working age. That's 700,000 PER YEAR or 58,333 per MONTH.
The US is averaging about 200,000 net new jobs per month.
Obama job creation is far outpacing population growth.
That's exactly why the unemployment rate is falling and why there are a record 5.6 million job openings.
America has near record 5.6 million job openings
http://money.cnn.com/2016/02/09/news/economy/america-5-6-million-record-job-openings/
>>67809033
It's falling because the labor force shrinks from long term unemployed no longer being counted
>>67809146
He averted another Republican Great Depression.
A lot better than Harper who plunged Canada into a recession.
>>67809250
>Yeah and Democrats were in charge of Congress and the Senate from 2005-2010?
NOPE.
Bush had a GOP Congress for the first 6 years. Up until January 2007. That's exactly why Republicans crashed the economy.
>>67809472
It's falling because the economy has created over 14 million private sector jobs.
The U4 rate includes all discouraged workers. It's 5.3%.
This isn't complicated.
Every measure of unemployment and underemployment has plummeted under Obama.
>>67800656
There are a record 5.6 million job openings.
http://money.cnn.com/2016/02/09/news/economy/america-5-6-million-record-job-openings/
If you can't find a job in this economy, you're probably a Trumptard and will never be able to find a job.
>>67800126
It's this same euphoric Maplesperg, pushing the same "presidents create jobs" meme. Let's recap:
>Consumer confidence is higher under Democrats: 25 percent.
>Fewer adverse oil shocks under Democrats: 12.5-25 percent.
> More positive TFP shocks under Democrats: 25 percent.
>Unexplained: 25-37.5 percent.
Source:
> http://www.princeton.edu/~mwatson/papers/Presidents_Blinder_Watson_Nov2013.pdf
/thread
>>67807458
>Lets completely ignore the fact that policies that may affect GDP growth are usually retroactive
He is too stupid for this. He doesn't realize that economic polices have a delayed effect. The literal term is called "time lag".
>>67805588
you keep pointing to job creation, even though multiple people in this thread have pointed out that turning a full time position into two part time jobs isn't creation, its division.
>>67806888
>67803897
What? That chart is showing total job creation average over their entire term.
How delusional are you?
>>67809902
>He is too stupid for this
This is the only reason he's here, to keep shitposting. He's not going to accept a single point anyone makes, even if he eventually has to contradict himself, he's just here to shitpost.
sage this shit
>>67802151
boomers are staying in the workforce at a higher rate and choosing not to retire because they need money, which comes at the expense of younger workers as they get shitcanned so their company can afford to keep the higher paid older vets.
And even with that there's 90 million people in this country who don't work, and you think it's fucking sunshine and rainbows. What a fucking dumbass.
>>67809557
Republicans didn't crash the economy. The false economy crashed itself. An entire economy based upon lies and distortions was doomed to collapse. A massive tech bubble burst then was supplanted by a massive housing bubble (given even greater reach due to wall street shenanigans) and since that popped we're pushing tech bubble 2.0. This one is even worse since the "products" are selfie photos, DIY taxi services, dating apps, and mobile flea market apps. Don't kid yourself that either party is more to blame or more responsible. They both are beholden to their wall street masters and both suck.
Democrats are a bit worse since they like to kill babies and think faggots are special little snowflakes.
>>67800126
>only jobs added
>no metric of jobs lost or quality of employment
>>67810260
Nice post. Informative and intelligent.
But he wont listen. He thinks the POTUS sits in the White House pressing buttons that say "MORE JOBS" or "CRASH ECONOMY"
>>67809033
http://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet
Again, go here, change range to 1970 - 2016.
You can clearly see that the Labor Force Participation has fallen under Obama's term. It is Carter level, not Reagan. This is because job creation is NOT keeping pace with population growth.
There are many millennials entering the workforce who cannot find jobs.
>Obama job creation is far outpacing population growth.
If this were true, the LFPR would be rising, not falling.
You keep going back to "unemployment rate" and forgetting this statistic doesn't count those who give up looking for work.
>>67809822
and you still have shit wage-growth and household-income.
You can have loads of jobs, if they're low paying, no-benefits jobs with no career prospect, it really leaves much to desire.
But hey, loads o'jobs right?
The economy is great! Even when people in the street keep saying it isnt!
>>67809822
>Every measure of unemployment and underemployment has plummeted under Obama.
Except the only one that matters: the Labor Force Participation rate.
>>67807304
When comparing changes in debt by president, of course you use %. What are you a fucking moron? You think you use nominal dollars? You think $1 in 1950 = $1 in 2016? Christ you right wingers are fucking retarded.
You'll yell and scream about how Obama doubled the national debt, even though he didn't. But then when I show that Reagan TRIPLED the national debt, it doesn't count anymore.
>>67810615
>>67810545
>>67810521
>>67809822
>>67809384
>>67809033
You guys really need to read this:
http://cis.org/sites/cis.org/files/camarota-employment_0.pdf
>>67810669
Again.
The POTUS does not have the power of the purse. The President does not have the power to do these things you blame them for.
>>67810521
BUDDY YOU'RE SOME KIND OF MENTALLY RETARDED HANDICAP.
Listen very closely. The WORKING AGE 25-54 LABOR PARTICIPATION RATE is exactly where it was in Reagan's 2nd term.
HERE IS THE CHART:
>>>67802151
Here is the link:
https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/LNU01300060
What don't you fucking understand?
You're using a measure of LFPR that includes EVERYONE from 16 years old to DEATH. You're including millions of 60,70,80 year olds and you think they're unemployed. THEY'RE NOT. They're out of the labor force. What don't you understand about that?
>You keep going back to "unemployment rate" and forgetting this statistic doesn't count those who give up looking for work.
YES IT DOES. The U4 unemployment rate INCLUDES discouraged workers. It's 5.3%.
LOOK AT THE CHART:
>>67800656
Here I even attached a fresh one for you of just U4 by itself.
https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/U4RATE
Why is this so complicated for you people
>>67810855
I have been hearing about this and I will give it a read. Thanks for the link. I just perused the first page.
>Though there has been
some recovery from the Great Recession, there were still fewer working-age natives holding a job in the first
quarter of 2014 than in 2000, w
>working-age natives
I'll be interested to see their data. To see how they are counting "natives". Do they just mean American born?
They are saying since 2000 and I know that's when the earliest baby boomers started retiring. It obviously kicked into high gear since 2010. So that's probably a part of it. But I will look into it. Thanks.
Most likely I can debunk it like most failed right wing talking points but perhaps they do have a point here. I'll give it a read this evening. Thanks. I'm always open to new information. That's why I'm a liberal.
>>67810502
Funny how the economy keeps crashing under Republicans and thriving under Democrats.
We should totally elect Republicans then...
Yes my argument is that the economy does better under Democrats because of policy. If your argument is that it does better under Democrats because of luck, shouldn't you vote for Democrats?
>>67810215
>And even with that there's 90 million people in this country who don't work
Jesus Christ you think 70,80 and 90 year olds are unemployed. You're legitimately a moron.
>>67811192
republican controlled house/senate
>>67811192
https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/LNU01300060
1) When did "working age" become 25-54?
2) Even if we use this metric, why is it an accomplishment that this cohort has backslid to Reagan era levels of employment?
Do you realize that the middle class has shrunk, wages are lower, and that people desperately want jobs, but all they can find are shitty part-time service jobs because this country has lost 40,000 factories since NAFTA?
Are you getting that through your mentally handicapped brain? I am not a Republican defender, but you are DEFINITELY a brainwashed Obama cock sucker. Have a nice day.
>>67812076
but economic policy is retroactive. who is president in a given moment is completely irrelevant to the economy too.
You're also completely ignoring congress compositions over time, and basically peddling job creation as somehow the only proof needed to justify a wonderful US economy when pretty much every other piece of economic and social information about the US points otherwise.
>>67809033
>The working age labor participation rate is exactly where it was under Reagan.
so? idgaf about reagan
its a bad labor participation rate and it should be higher also younger workers are getting fucked and older people are getting cucked into pushing off retirement
>>67807304
Was about to say this. When someone wants to lie, they'll pull out percentages.
>>67805140
Clinton signed NAFTA into law literally cucking the entire US job market out to any country on the continent.
>Well the US is the only major country in North America so the jobs didn't go any where.
Signing that agreement practically begged American companies to leave the country, move to Mexico, and pay pedro and jaun 5 cents an hour to do the same jobs that Americans had been doing. The only companies that didn't leave, were the ones that didn't have the outright money to build the factories down there.
>So your'e saying those companies grew and are still in the US providing jobs?
No. They have one major factory in the US that they spent what money they had on to build enough money to expand into Mexico. As soon as they had the capital, they fucking left. They left that one major hub in the US in case some president wised up and got rid of NAFTA.
Aside from all the cucking bullshit being spewed about
>muh unemployment rate (which doesn't count a multitude of different groups of people who can but aren't working for any number of reasons) and
>muh number of jobs created
these jobs won't stay for very long. They are all low paying, part time, no benefit jobs that will be moved out of country as soon as possible. Theres literally no penalty to do so and it makes good business sense because of the laws that have been written and the trade agreements that have been made.
>>67809475
Recessions occur regardless of who is the head of government at the time. The business cycle is impacted by government policy, in so far as becoming more and more turbulent as the government interferes in the economy to a great and greater extent, but the government does not directly set the business cycle's wave length or height, and certainly not in any constructive way.
>>67812553
>Do nothing Congress
Remember what they called Obama?
>Imperial President
>>67801428
>government is there to create jobs
>dude weed lmao
>>67800656
Yes, because the situation is so bad that people have stopped looking for jobs.
>>67813021
Don't forget the repeal of Glass-Steagall by Clinton which was a primary driver of the 2008 financial crisis.
>>67800126
what is 14 minus 90
>>67812254
Let me guess, you've only seen the stats that factor out those that have stopped searching for work and those that have been searching for more than 6 months. This point has been covered already. You didn't come here to debate, you came here to recite leftist propaganda and post a bunch of heavily manipulated charts.
>>67813285
The only people who have stopped looking for jobs are Trumptards because they are not employable.
There are a record 5.6 million job openings. If you can't find a job in this economy, you will never find a job.
http://money.cnn.com/2016/02/09/news/economy/america-5-6-million-record-job-openings/
>>67813360
What's the 90 for?
Are you talking about the tens of millions of 60,70,80,90 year olds+ who aren't in the labor force?
>>67813349
As a conservative you're arguing FOR heavy government intervention into the marketplace, particularly the banking industry? Is that correct? You're against deregulation?
>2016
>caring about wage slave jobs
>not being a neet
>>67808030
Shit tons of people work after the age of 54 you dumb piece of shit, or want/need to.
Older workers are also a higher proportion of the workforce today, so your cherrypicking of the 25-54 bracket not only leaves out all the 16-24 year olds unemployed, but everyone older too, which, again, is an all time historically large proportion of said workforce's total.
DISHONEST
LYING
BEADY EYED
FLAPPING HEAD
LEAF
>>67814066
Actually I think it depends. Reasonable is reasonable. Even though I'm a conservative I don't adhere to the "pure capitalism or else" bullshit because it doesn't work in the same way pure socialism or pure communism doesn't work. There's always a mix that best fits the society, it's culture, it's culturally derived thought processes, and laws derived from that.
Some government regulation isn't government regulation but rather corporate interest creating a unnatural market in which they operate better than some competitors. In that regard, it's a synthetic environment where a business doesn't have to be good at the industry it's in, but rather better at navigating the compliance regulations better than the next guy.
The articles of Glass-Steagall that separate investment banks from commercial banks made sense from an ethical and economic standpoint.
The reason why Marx's postulates regarding capitalism were wrong is because he doesn't really account for the society to be self determined and responsible for itself. Personal responsibility and the responsibility that derives from that notion is the very core of the US constitution.
I'd say the US is losing some of that ethos.
>>67800126
B.....b.b.b.But Obama economy, uh healthcare, uh commie...uh African Dindu, uh fuck. HOW CAN WE MEME IT TO LOOK LIKE HE WAS A TERRIBLE PRESIDENT??!!!!
>>67800126
This would make sense only if the party of the president had any bearing on over speculation into house-flipping
>POST YFW WATCHING TRUMPTURDS MENTAL GYMNASTICS ITT
Obama is literally GOAT.
He should be President for another 4 years.
>>67800126
Obama came in right after a huge recession and financial crash.
Of fucking course there's gonna be a rebound.
If you look at the numbers however, it's been one of the weakest rebounds in US history.
>>67815014
That's what's considered working age. You're so fucking stupid that you think millions upon millions of 60,70,80,90+ year olds are unemployed. That's how fucking retarded you are. They're out of the labor force for a reason.
There are a record 5.6 million job openings right now.
The only people who can't find jobs in this economy are Trumptards and right wing nut jobs.
http://money.cnn.com/2016/02/09/news/economy/america-5-6-million-record-job-openings/
>>67815264
Easy. By claiming that millions upon millions of 60,70,80,90+ year olds are unemployed. Rather than out of the labor force because they're retired.
>>67816522
He should be. Republicans could only dream of having this kind of record. Every time they're in charge, they crash the economy.
>>67804251
Wal-Mart workers usually make more than minimum wage. Some of them make like 13-15 and hour depending on time with the company and job title. I actually think the starting wage is around 9.50
>>67800126
Thanks Obama, I always wanted to be a fry cook.
>>67816738
If only we elect Republicans, they can crash the economy again!
>>67818783
Bill Clinton is one of the key people who encouraged banks to sell these sub-prime mortgages int he first place, which is what caused the housing collapse and recession.
>>67800126
Honestly, Americans are all idiots so this works really well for Trump assuming he doesn't fuck it up. I am fucking old so I remember that everyone gave Bush I credit for the Clinton economy until the end of Clinton then he started getting credit around year 6 or so.
Trump has a good first year everyone will begin believing that it was his policies that caused the good economy. If Trump ends up being an excellent president then he will get all of Obama's credit for the economy, Obama will be largely forgotten and Trump will be regarded as a top 10 president ever.
>>67819331
Not only encourage. CRA gave HUD enforcement to stop regulatory approval for bank activities if they did not comply.
>>67800126
5.6 million in 2 years?
Is that even keeping up with the population growth?
>>67820997
The US only takes in about 1 million immigrants per year. Not all of them are working age.
So yeah Obama job growth is many times population growth.
>>67800656
LFPR
>>67818783
I love how you keep completely ignoring the points that were repeatedly raised ITT that lay your bullshit partisan reading of economics completely down the gutter.
