Dorkington Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 http://www.forbes.com/sites/adamhartung/2014/09/05/obama-outperforms-reagan-on-jobs-growth-and-investing/ You'd think with his incredibly poor polling numbers, he'd have done significantly worse. Thoughts? Are Forbes and the BLS to be trusted? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 But "Historically most presidents have seen faster recoveries" --Our Completely Unbiased Posters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 I wish this board adopted the same policy towards Forbes as the main site does against the Bleacher Report. Corporate profits have grown not because of EBITDA expansion, but thanks to lower interest rates and lower taxes. Labor participation is still woefully low. No matter how much the Forbes contributor wants to polish his turd, it will still be what it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bowery4 Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 Sure why not? RR was a horrible president! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 Oh, there's those little things called GDP and wage growth that are not mentioned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 But "Historically most presidents have seen faster recoveries" --Our Completely Unbiased Posters Have you been satisfied with this recovery? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 (edited) Well, with 92,000,000 Americans giving up working or looking for work, of course things are swimming in prosperity for all. "Blurring the picture, a wave of Americans stopped looking for work, meaning they were no longer counted as unemployed. Their exodus cut the unemployment rate from 7 percent to 6.7 percent - its lowest point in more than five years." Economists differ over which single factor best explains the decline in labor force participation. But few dispute that the trend will likely persist. More than 1.3 million Americans lost these benefits when the program expired last month. An additional 800,000 will lose their checks in the weeks ahead. Economists say the likelihood of landing a job dims substantially after six months of unemployment. The economy remains 1.2 million jobs shy of the 8.7 million that disappeared after the recession struck. 'The bottom line: The economy is not creating positions for these people,' said Robert Shapiro, chairman of the economic advisory firm Sonecon. Here is a chart of changes in labor force participation in five-year increments: Labor Force Participation 1978 63.2 percent 1983 64 percent 1988 65.9 percent 1993 66.3 percent 1998 67.1 percent 2003 66.2 percent 2008 66 percent" It currently stands at 63.2 percent. Great Job creating jobs B. O. and your leftist allies. Edited September 10, 2014 by Nanker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 Obama, compared to Reagan is a joke. Reagan inspired while Obama lives out his dream of fooling the whiteys and scamming everyone else. Obama is a huckster and knows no better. Reagan was William Wallace compared to Obama's poor interpretation on Neville Chamberlain. Well, with 92,000,000 Americans giving up working or looking for work, of course things are swimming in prosperity for all. "Blurring the picture, a wave of Americans stopped looking for work, meaning they were no longer counted as unemployed. Their exodus cut the unemployment rate from 7 percent to 6.7 percent - its lowest point in more than five years." Economists differ over which single factor best explains the decline in labor force participation. But few dispute that the trend will likely persist. More than 1.3 million Americans lost these benefits when the program expired last month. An additional 800,000 will lose their checks in the weeks ahead. Economists say the likelihood of landing a job dims substantially after six months of unemployment. The economy remains 1.2 million jobs shy of the 8.7 million that disappeared after the recession struck. 'The bottom line: The economy is not creating positions for these people,' said Robert Shapiro, chairman of the economic advisory firm Sonecon. Here is a chart of changes in labor force participation in five-year increments: Labor Force Participation 1978 63.2 percent 1983 64 percent 1988 65.9 percent 1993 66.3 percent 1998 67.1 percent 2003 66.2 percent 2008 66 percent" It currently stands at 63.2 percent. Great Job creating jobs B. O. and your leftist allies. You need to edit your post and make the print size larger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 Obama, compared to Reagan is a joke. Reagan inspired while Obama lives out his dream of fooling the whiteys and scamming everyone else. Obama is a huckster and knows no better. Reagan was William Wallace compared to Obama's poor interpretation on Neville Chamberlain. You need to edit your post and make the print size larger. I did. I've noticed that on some other posts. The UK's Daily Mail includes tags when you copy & paste from their articles - as well as adding a "read more online at the DM..." Didn't see the teeny tiny type it produced here in the august forum till after I posted it. Looks okay now - does it? It does to me, Arial 14 pt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 The only valid Forbes reference ever was used by Hans Gruber. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 Have you been satisfied with this recovery? Are you ever suppose to be satisfied? Gosh, if Obama had gone on the same government spending spree Reagan was allowed to do he'd really be killing the Gipper! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 http://www.forbes.co...-and-investing/ You'd think with his incredibly poor polling numbers, he'd have done significantly worse. Thoughts? Are Forbes and the BLS to be trusted? Forbes said the Bills wouldn't break $1b. That we would go for less then $900mm. Can they be trusted? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 Are you ever suppose to be satisfied? Good point. One should never satisfied with any kind of recovery. You know because robust economic growth sucks. Forbes said the Bills wouldn't break $1b. That we would go for less then $900mm. Can they be trusted? At this point of course they can't be trusted. Get back to me at the midseason point and I'll let you know for sure. Oh wait.......you meant Forbes not the Bills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 The only valid Forbes reference ever was used by Hans Gruber. [/thread] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 Good point. One should never satisfied with any kind of recovery. You know because robust economic growth sucks. Ya, you are angry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 The only valid Forbes reference ever was used by Hans Gruber. :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 Ya, you are angry. I'm sure not happy with the economic growth in the past 5 1/2 years. But if you're happy with mediocrity, at best, that's your issue not mine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 I'm sure not happy with the economic growth in the past 5 1/2 years. But if you're happy with mediocrity, at best, that's your issue not mine. Please. Mediocre would be be a dream at this point. Wages have dropped, and the ever-important middle class only looks good because it sits right next to the embarrassingly high number of minorities joining the ranks of poverty. It's impossible to imagine American's first black president's policies would be so detrimental to the quality of life for blacks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 Obama can't win http://theweek.com/article/index/264151/obamas-greatest-failure-the-rapidly-falling-deficit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted September 10, 2014 Share Posted September 10, 2014 Obama can't win http://theweek.com/a...falling-deficit And just like that, someone posts a link to a source even more brain dead than Forbes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts