Hillary Clinton

• gut

  ZWICK 4 PREZ;1783659 wrote: We we lost what, 11 million jobs? We gained 7 million or so?

  Yeah.....I don't think your numbers are right.
• ZWICK 4 PREZ

  

  gut;1783667 wrote:Yeah.....I don't think your numbers are right.

  Yeah doesn't look look like they are. 11 mil were unemployed in 2007 but only 8.7 mil jobs were lost.
• gut

  ZWICK 4 PREZ;1783675 wrote:Yeah doesn't look look like they are. 11 mil were unemployed in 2007 but only 8.7 mil jobs were lost.

  8.7M was what I read. That's an interesting difference, though, as "full-employment" is generally considered in the neighborhood of 5%, which is something like 7M people. But I think the job losses continued into 2008-9, peaking around 15M unemployed.
  
  But labor participation has become a better indicator because of the prolonged recession and snail's pace recovery...even Obama admitted recently the participation rate is still low even with adjusting for boomers retiring, so the current 5.1% is probably understated by at least a few points.
  
  I'd agree most of the jobs created have not been good jobs.
• ZWICK 4 PREZ

  

  gut;1783678 wrote:8.7M was what I read. That's an interesting difference, though, as "full-employment" is generally considered in the neighborhood of 5%, which is something like 7M people. But I think the job losses continued into 2008-9, peaking around 15M unemployed.
  
  But labor participation has become a better indicator because of the prolonged recession and snail's pace recovery...even Obama admitted recently the participation rate is still low even with adjusting for boomers retiring, so the current 5.1% is probably understated by at least a few points.
  
  I'd agree most of the jobs created have not been good jobs.

  Agreed. I still maintain we haven't replaced the jobs lost at all. We lost a ton of well paying jobs with a ton of poorly paying jobs. The companies that suffered the most jobs lost aren't the ones who have replaced said 8.7 mil jobs.
• Al Bundy

  ZWICK 4 PREZ;1783679 wrote:Agreed. I still maintain we haven't replaced the jobs lost at all. We lost a ton of well paying jobs with a ton of poorly paying jobs. The companies that suffered the most jobs lost aren't the ones who have replaced said 8.7 mil jobs.

  Thanks Obama.
• ZWICK 4 PREZ

  

  Al Bundy;1783682 wrote:Thanks Obama.

  Yeah... the market just knew Obama was going to be the next president and collapsed.
• Al Bundy

  ZWICK 4 PREZ;1783691 wrote:Yeah... the market just knew Obama was going to be the next president and collapsed.

  He's had over 7 years to improve things and has done a very poor job
• queencitybuckeye

  ZWICK 4 PREZ;1783659 wrote:Google?
  Wait you actually question this? Lol.
  
  We we lost what, 11 million jobs? We gained 7 million or so? Looks like we're still down 4 million jobs from pre-recession. The overwhelming majority of the jobs are minimum wage service industry. Spending is down 70%. It literally blows my mind you'd question that. That's pretty much ccrunner territory. I already pointed of a few examples of companies who employment is down. I'd looooooove to hear your refute. I'll be waiting.
  
  
  
  ***We've gained back 8.7 mil jobs according to Forbes.

  You said "nearly every corporation is a fraction of its size a decade ago". Those words mean exactly what they say. Nothing you said later proves that this statement is true. Please provide a source that proves exactly what you claimed. I'll be waiting.
• ZWICK 4 PREZ

  

  Al Bundy;1783692 wrote:He's had over 7 years to improve things and has done a very poor job

  What would you like him to do? get rid of the EPA and trash our country? Makes us work for $3 a day? Lets hear some ideas of how we cant match our 3rd world counterparts....
• ZWICK 4 PREZ

  

  queencitybuckeye;1783694 wrote:You said "nearly every corporation is a fraction of its size a decade ago". Those words mean exactly what they say. Nothing you said later proves that this statement is true. Please provide a source that proves exactly what you claimed. I'll be waiting.

  provide a source that says I'm wrong. you're disputing the claim.
• queencitybuckeye

  ZWICK 4 PREZ;1783701 wrote:provide a source that says I'm wrong. you're disputing the claim.

  Is that what they teach at safety schools? At real ones, the burden of proof is on the person making the claim.
• ZWICK 4 PREZ

  

  queencitybuckeye;1783702 wrote:Is that what they teach at safety schools? At real ones, the burden of proof is on the person making the claim.

  so you have nothing either?
• queencitybuckeye

  ZWICK 4 PREZ;1783703 wrote:so you have nothing either?

  IOW, you said something untrue, and you don't have the integrity to just admit it and move on.
  
  Your lack of intellect puts you correctly in the Bernie camp, but your disregard for the truth is more Hillary-like.
• ZWICK 4 PREZ

  

  http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-jobs-20140607-story.html
  

  Compared to January 2008, jobs in construction are down 20%, manufacturing 11.7% and banking 4.8%.
  Some lower-paying fields have seen increases. Temp jobs are up 16% and leisure and hospitality positions have risen 8.1%. Retail sales jobs are down slightly from the 2008 peak, but that masks an increase of about 925,000 positions since the labor market bottomed out in early 2010.
  "It is a quality game much more than it is a quantity game," said Lindsey Piegza, chief economist at brokerage Sterne Agee.
  "We're really not seeing that high-wage recovery that is indicative of a strong consumer lining their pockets with wages and going out and spending," she said.
  It's typical for lower-paying jobs to lead the way out of a recession, economists said.

  What do you take away from that?
• ZWICK 4 PREZ

  

  queencitybuckeye;1783704 wrote:IOW, you said something untrue, and you don't have the integrity to just admit it and move on.
  
  Your lack of intellect puts you correctly in the Bernie camp, but your disregard for the truth is more Hillary-like.

  you haven't proved its untrue, so you can't make that claim.
• queencitybuckeye

  ZWICK 4 PREZ;1783705 wrote:http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-jobs-20140607-story.html
  
  
  
  What do you take away from that?

  Nothing that proves your claim.
• Al Bundy

  ZWICK 4 PREZ;1783706 wrote:you haven't proved its untrue, so you can't make that claim.

  At least Trump loves you. He said he loves the poorly educated.
• ZWICK 4 PREZ

  

  queencitybuckeye;1783707 wrote:Nothing that proves your claim.

  nope. Nothing that proves otherwise either, eh?
• ZWICK 4 PREZ

  

  Al Bundy;1783708 wrote:At least Trump loves you. He said he loves the poorly educated.

  that's rich coming from a guy who blames the president for a global recession lol
• Al Bundy

  ZWICK 4 PREZ;1783712 wrote:that's rich coming from a guy who blames the president for a global recession lol

  Once again your lack of education and reading comprehension shows. I'm not blaming Obama for a global recession, I'm blaming him for a recovery that is slower than that after the Great Depression.
• ZWICK 4 PREZ

  

  Al Bundy;1783715 wrote:Once again your lack of education and reading comprehension shows. I'm not blaming Obama for a global recession, I'm blaming him for a recovery that is slower than that after the Great Depression.

  And once again you fail to realize how idiotic that is.
• Al Bundy

  ZWICK 4 PREZ;1783718 wrote:And once again you fail to realize how idiotic that is.

  7 years is plenty of time for recovery. You are getting destroyed in this debate. Even with your poor education, you must realize that the Great Depression was much worse, and the recovery was faster.
• ZWICK 4 PREZ

  

  Al Bundy;1783721 wrote:7 years is plenty of time for recovery. You are getting destroyed in this debate. Even with your poor education, you must realize that the Great Depression was much worse, and the recovery was faster.

  It was also at a completely different economic period, dipshit. You're really going to compare the 30's with 2010?
• Al Bundy

  ZWICK 4 PREZ;1783722 wrote:It was also at a completely different economic period, dipshit. You're really going to compare the 30's with 2010?

  He has policies in place that slow down recovery. I'm sorry that this is so confusing for you, my poorly educated friend. He has been in office over 7 years, yet you want to give him a free pass. I know that you are easily swayed by empty promises (your crushes on Obama and Sanders prove that).
• ZWICK 4 PREZ

  

  Al Bundy;1783724 wrote:He has policies in place that slow down recovery. I'm sorry that this is so confusing for you, my poorly educated friend. He has been in office over 7 years, yet you want to give him a free pass. I know that you are easily swayed by empty promises (your crushes on Obama and Sanders prove that).

  Yes of course it's his polices (could you be anymore vague? no b/c that's what know-nothings thrive in) . To you, I guess it has nothing to do with the fact that we don't have the luxury of just putting people back to work now in well paying jobs. In 1930, coporations weren't manufacturing in China. Companies have other options than hiring Americans. Is this Obamas fault? You can give stimulus and job packages, none guarantee it will put Americans back to work now. We haven't replaced well paying jobs with more well paying jobs, we've replaced well paying jobs with cheaper service industry jobs. As a result, spending is way down and consumer confidence inherently is way down. Companies don't grow when people aren't buying. to compare a recovery in 2010 vs one in 1930 given the differences in global economies is beyond laughable.