fjl2nd Posted April 9, 2012 Share Posted April 9, 2012 (edited) You know what that means in April? About the same as GHWB's 92% approval rating in February did. Mr. Obama better hope Romney's staff continues to as inept as they've been so far because he can't run on his own "successes". Obama will probably become a "job creator" by the election. A pretty big deal after such a horrible downturn. Job Creator = more jobs created than lost Edited April 9, 2012 by fjl2nd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted April 9, 2012 Share Posted April 9, 2012 The fact of the matter is it's 30 years worth of deregulation by both parties' fault. Which deregulations, specifically, were to blame? Which sectors in the economy are/were under-regulated? Community Reinvestment Act had nothing to do with subprime crisis I think this is what you are referring to... That's kind of like saying the earthquake had nothing to do with the devastation of Japan, it was the tsunami that did it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fjl2nd Posted April 9, 2012 Share Posted April 9, 2012 (edited) Which deregulations, specifically, were to blame? Which sectors in the economy are/were under-regulated? SEC. They relaxed standards, specifically on the Net Capital Rule allowing investment banks to increase their financial leverage and issued many more mortgage backed securities. Risk continued to skyrocket along with debt loads. Edited April 9, 2012 by fjl2nd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted April 9, 2012 Share Posted April 9, 2012 Obama will probably become a "job creator" by the election. A pretty big deal after such a horrible downturn. Job Creator = more jobs created than lost Not based on anything tangible. But politicians and the drones who apologize for them have never really been good with reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fjl2nd Posted April 9, 2012 Share Posted April 9, 2012 Not based on anything tangible. But politicians and the drones who apologize for them have never really been good with reality. I'm talking actual numbers here. 4.3 millions jobs lost after Obama took office. Since then, 3.6 million jobs have been gained back. 700k before November isn't impossible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted April 9, 2012 Share Posted April 9, 2012 I'm talking actual numbers here. 4.3 millions jobs lost after Obama took office. Since then, 3.6 million jobs have been gained back. 700k before November isn't impossible. Especially if we ever see the 400,000 that were supposed to occur the moment Obamacare became law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorldTraveller Posted April 9, 2012 Share Posted April 9, 2012 Obama will probably become a "job creator" by the election. A pretty big deal after such a horrible downturn. Job Creator = more jobs created than lost Actually that would be quite a feat, considering that the labor participation rate just this past month hit a new 30 year high. Meaning that when you include the entire pool of employed workers, those looking for work, long- term discouraged workers looking for employment ( who don't count in the u3 gauge that we all follow ) and those who dropped out of the labor force completely ( who also aren't included in the U3), the overall percentage of people out of work is continuing to rise. In other words, things are continuing to go in the wrong direction. What I would suggest is that you look up labor participation rate and educate yourself a little. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted April 9, 2012 Share Posted April 9, 2012 SEC. They relaxed standards, specifically on the Net Capital Rule allowing investment banks to increase their financial leverage and issued many more mortgage backed securities. Risk continued to skyrocket along with debt loads. Why is it every time I try to lure BFMF into backing his own words someone has to bail him out. As for you, you should know better than I how much more involved it was than that. Posting articles absolving GSEs and The fair housing policies that grew out of the CRA just tells me you're starting with the conclusion and working back from there. Can you explain how all this plays out without FDIC and GSEs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorldTraveller Posted April 9, 2012 Share Posted April 9, 2012 I'm talking actual numbers here. 4.3 millions jobs lost after Obama took office. Since then, 3.6 million jobs have been gained back. 700k before November isn't impossible. That doesn't count population increase. If you have a population increase of let's say 750,000 of able working folks, then that is counted into the mix as well. So maybe the jobs report shows a net loss of 700k, but if you factor a population increase of able working folks of 2M over the past three years then that is 2M plus 700k, making it a net loss of 2.7M. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted April 9, 2012 Share Posted April 9, 2012 I'm talking actual numbers here. 4.3 millions jobs lost after Obama took office. Since then, 3.6 million jobs have been gained back. 700k before November isn't impossible. Lets, Unemployment Rate Or Unemployment Reality?By Andrew C. McCarthy April 9, 2012 Through the magic of Washington Math and the Obama Labor Department, the metric “unemployment rate” has become as nonsensical as “jobs created or saved” by the stimulus. The Obamedia creates a free campaign ad out of the purported drop from 8.3% to 8.2% (i.e., from appalling to marginally less appalling), but meantime millions have been added to the black-hole category of “Not In the Labor Force” — people who are so discouraged that they are not looking for work. That number is at an all-time high: 88 million. Thus the labor force participation rate, at under 64%, is lower than it’s been in 30 years. Mish Schedlock concludes, “Were it not for people dropping out of the labor force, the unemployment rate would be well over 11%.” Instead of giving the Left ammunition by bizarrely implying that our outlook is improving, maybe the Romney campaign could give some thought to breaking through the fudged “unemployment rate” chatter. Something like: Total Population of Germany: 82,000,000 Population of U.S. Not in Labor Force: 88,000,000 NRO . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WorldTraveller Posted April 9, 2012 Share Posted April 9, 2012 Lets, NRO . This is what I was referring to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted April 9, 2012 Share Posted April 9, 2012 Disrespectful to call him Barry IMO. And.... Obama average of +4.9 vs. Romney Who said I had to respect Barry? As for Barry's slim lead over Romney, that's while there are still challengers in the field. Wait until Romney gets the nom. You know what that means in April? About the same as GHWB's 92% approval rating in February did. Mr. Obama better hope Romney's staff continues to as inept as they've been so far because he can't run on his own "successes". It's good that they get the "Etch-A-Sketch" comments and such out of the way now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fjl2nd Posted April 9, 2012 Share Posted April 9, 2012 Actually that would be quite a feat, considering that the labor participation rate just this past month hit a new 30 year high. Meaning that when you include the entire pool of employed workers, those looking for work, long- term discouraged workers looking for employment ( who don't count in the u3 gauge that we all follow ) and those who dropped out of the labor force completely ( who also aren't included in the U3), the overall percentage of people out of work is continuing to rise. In other words, things are continuing to go in the wrong direction. What I would suggest is that you look up labor participation rate and educate yourself a little. I know these numbers very well. The employment-to-population ratio is still not where it should be. It's actually not even close. It has remained pretty stagnant since the recession ended. It has hovered around 58%, when historically it has been around 62%. I think a lot of factors go into this - technological advances, extended unemployment benefits, and less than strong economic growth. I was more referring to POLITICALLY, the numbers for Obama look good on the surface. Before they've even really started campaigning against each other. Wait until the debates and see then. Now the numbers are useless. It should be a great race. I still think Romney will struggle on the health care issue and endorsing the Ryan budget. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted April 9, 2012 Share Posted April 9, 2012 I know these numbers very well. The employment-to-population ratio is still not where it should be. It's actually not even close. It has remained pretty stagnant since the recession ended. It has hovered around 58%, when historically it has been around 62%. I think a lot of factors go into this - technological advances, extended unemployment benefits, and less than strong economic growth. I was more referring to POLITICALLY, the numbers for Obama look good on the surface. The "not in the work force" numbers look horrible for him. And that is the rebuttal to "look, the unemployment rate went from 8.3% to 8.2%!" It should be a great race. I still think Romney will struggle on the health care issue and endorsing the Ryan budget. Most Americans don't want Obamacare. There will be no struggle there. As for the Ryan budget, the poor weren't going to vote for him anyway, and Romney can talk about the $500B that Barry cut from Medicare to help pay for Obamacare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted April 9, 2012 Author Share Posted April 9, 2012 This is what I was referring to. It's gained something like 8-9 million since Obama took office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 I'm talking actual numbers here. 4.3 millions jobs lost after Obama took office. Since then, 3.6 million jobs have been gained back. 700k before November isn't impossible. Actually, by the employment statistics, the economy's created a net million jobs since January 2009. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigfatbillsfan Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 Community Reinvestment Act had nothing to do with subprime crisis I think this is what you are referring to... Good luck getting him to understand that. Rush has told him otherwise so no matter how much proof you throw at him he'll stick his hands in his ears. Disrespectful to call him Barry IMO. And.... Obama average of +4.9 vs. Romney I wouldn't say deregulation is completely out of play. There basically was no oversight on banks and they were making very risky bets bundling mortgages. Lots of predatory lending going on as well. This was happening because they weren't regulated. Why is it every time I try to lure BFMF into backing his own words someone has to bail him out. As for you, you should know better than I how much more involved it was than that. Posting articles absolving GSEs and The fair housing policies that grew out of the CRA just tells me you're starting with the conclusion and working back from there. Can you explain how all this plays out without FDIC and GSEs? Because I have a job, and a family to take care of and I don't have all day to be on here they way you guys do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 I wouldn't say deregulation is completely out of play. There basically was no oversight on banks and they were making very risky bets bundling mortgages. Lots of predatory lending going on as well. That's not even accurate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 That's not even accurate. Leave him alone. At this pace he should be bringing up "the Clinton surplus" before the day is done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fjl2nd Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 That's not even accurate. So predatory lending is a myth? Regulation was tight? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts