Crummy News for America --> Unemployment Rate back up to 9%

[ChasC5]

Originally Posted by Chris Fowler

So...back when the bottom was falling out of the stock market because of the .com bubble bursting and the media was complaining non-stop about Republicans allowing 5-6% unemployment or Sept. 11th?

Short than and short now ... don't tell me you were one of the scary who got out?

[RetiredSFC 97]

Originally Posted by ChasC5

I want the status quo of 2001.

Ah yes, the Clinton induced recession. I remember it well, but Bush never once mentioned Clinton and the economy he inherited. Hmmm, so much for the POS we have now.

Like a damn school girl blaming everyone else for being ugly!

[ChasC5]

Originally Posted by RetiredSFC 97

Ah yes, the Clinton induced recession. I remember it well, but Bush never once mentioned Clinton and the economy he inherited. Hmmm, so much for the POS we have now.

Like a damn school girl blaming everyone else for being ugly!

Yea when we had a surplus

Ok so let me get this straight, it's ok to blame backwards when you're a Republican, but not when you're a Democrat.

[Mark C5]

Originally Posted by ChasC5

Yea when we had a surplus

The national debt in 2001 was 5 trillion dollars. What surplus are you talking about?

[ChasC5]

Originally Posted by Mark C5

The national debt in 2001 was 5 trillion dollars. What surplus are you talking about?

Date - Dollar Amount
09/30/2010 - 13,561,623,030,891.79
09/30/2009 - 11,909,829,003,511.75
09/30/2008 - 10,024,724,896,912.49
09/30/2007 - 9,007,653,372,262.48
09/30/2006 - 8,506,973,899,215.23
09/30/2005 - 7,932,709,661,723.50
09/30/2004 - 7,379,052,696,330.32
09/30/2003 - 6,783,231,062,743.62
09/30/2002 - 6,228,235,965,597.16
09/30/2001 - 5,807,463,412,200.06
09/30/2000 - 5,674,178,209,886.86

Somebody doubled the debt on their watch!

And somebody was left with a Economic Collapse and 2 Wars.


Oh I forget to answer your question; President Clinton left a Budget surplus, not a Debt Surplus.

[Chris Fowler]

Originally Posted by ChasC5

Date - Dollar Amount
09/30/2010 - 13,561,623,030,891.79
09/30/2009 - 11,909,829,003,511.75
09/30/2008 - 10,024,724,896,912.49
09/30/2007 - 9,007,653,372,262.48
09/30/2006 - 8,506,973,899,215.23
09/30/2005 - 7,932,709,661,723.50
09/30/2004 - 7,379,052,696,330.32
09/30/2003 - 6,783,231,062,743.62
09/30/2002 - 6,228,235,965,597.16
09/30/2001 - 5,807,463,412,200.06
09/30/2000 - 5,674,178,209,886.86

Oh I forget to answer your question; President Clinton left a Budget surplus, not a Debt Surplus.

09/30/1999 - 5,656,270,901,615.43
09/30/1998 - 5,526,193,008,897.62
09/30/1997 - 5,413,146,011,397.34
09/30/1996 - 5,224,810,939,135.73
09/29/1995 - 4,973,982,900,709.39
09/30/1994 - 4,692,749,910,013.32
09/30/1993 - 4,411,488,883,139.38
09/30/1992 - 4,064,620,655,521.66

Which year?

[ChasC5]

Originally Posted by Chris Fowler

09/30/1999 - 5,656,270,901,615.43
09/30/1998 - 5,526,193,008,897.62
09/30/1997 - 5,413,146,011,397.34
09/30/1996 - 5,224,810,939,135.73
09/29/1995 - 4,973,982,900,709.39
09/30/1994 - 4,692,749,910,013.32
09/30/1993 - 4,411,488,883,139.38
09/30/1992 - 4,064,620,655,521.66

Which year?

Obviously the year he left office ...

Clinton left with a budget surplus, Bush left with a + Trillion dollar deficit + Doubled the national debt. Obviously the bush Tax cuts are a system that we can not afford. The Private sector is not adding jobs the way Republicans said they would. From the get go. I remember the Bush admin projected the tax cuts would add 20+ Million new jobs before 2010 during the debates back in 2002.

[Chris Fowler]

Originally Posted by ChasC5

Obviously the year he left office ...

He also left him with a recession and low tax receipts...gee...wonder why it actually ended up with a deficit.

[RetiredSFC 97]

clinton's surplus was a magicians allusion. It didn't exist but people sure are convinced it did.

[Chris Fowler]

Originally Posted by RetiredSFC 97

clinton's surplus was a magicians allusion. It didn't exist but people sure are convinced it did.

Oh, it might have existed based on projected revenues...but with the recession the projected revenues didn't exist...

[ChasC5]

Clinton didn't leave this 09/30/2008 - 10,024,724,896,912.49

[Chris Fowler]

Originally Posted by ChasC5

Clinton didn't leave this 09/30/2008 - 10,024,724,896,912.49

Nope...Bush and the Republicans own a huge part of that.

But Bush didn't run up the debt $4 trillion in 27 months...and growing faster every day...

[RetiredSFC 97]

Originally Posted by Chris Fowler

Oh, it might have existed based on projected revenues...but with the recession the projected revenues didn't exist...

can't have a surplus while in debt. Fuzzy numbers.

It was based on projected numbers done before the tech bust and recession.

[Joecooool]

Originally Posted by Chris Fowler

Sorry...I refuse to hold Bush blameless.

They had 6 years with both houses and the Presidency and the increased spending every year, even without including the military.

They had every opportunity to make the reforms that the right is calling out for now...and they failed.

I blame the Republicans from 2001-2006 for the crap we have now more than I even blame the Democrats. They set the climate for it. They created the "but you did it!" mentality...and they can't deny it.

Yup.

It's why we have to have the new blood like the Tea Party stand up and actually make something happen.

Sorry, lost me with that. Tea Party is just another name for republicans. There is no "new blood" there.

Originally Posted by RetiredSFC 97

What I hold them responsible for is reducing taxes in a time of war. That was stupid and caused most of the spending.

No doubt.

But back to topic, the President doesn't have any control over unemployment.

Personally I blame mid size and larger corporations exporting tens of millions of jobs overseas. I'm shocked there isn't more of an uproar over this issue.

What we need to do is eliminate all the tax breaks for these corporations and replace them with tax penalties.

[RetiredSFC 97]

Originally Posted by Joecooool

Yup.

Sorry, lost me with that. Tea Party is just another name for republicans. There is no "new blood" there.

No doubt.

But back to topic, the President doesn't have any control over unemployment.

Personally I blame mid size and larger corporations exporting tens of millions of jobs overseas. I'm shocked there isn't more of an uproar over this issue.

What we need to do is eliminate all the tax breaks for these corporations and replace them with tax penalties.

In a free market we need to make the atmosphere conducive to stay here.

But actually I doubt at the end of the day that would even be enough. Problem is Corporations are no longer in the business of making a product and a profit. Their only concern is making a profit for Wall Street.

That's why I buy local from Mom and Pop if at all possible, even if it costs a few more dollars.

Thank NAFTA for a lot of this. That's what allowed the massive exit of corporations allowing them to bring products back here for sale freely. When they passed that I said then, "well it now looks like we'll be buying our own products made in China"

I was correct. I wish I would have been wrong. I don't know the answer but I do know I could do better than those who make these decisions now!

[Chris Fowler]

Originally Posted by Joecooool

Personally I blame mid size and larger corporations exporting tens of millions of jobs overseas. I'm shocked there isn't more of an uproar over this issue.

What we need to do is eliminate all the tax breaks for these corporations and replace them with tax penalties.

So your argument to stop countries from exporting jobs to other countries with better tax climates is to make the tax climate here worse?

[RedLS1GTO]

Originally Posted by Joecooool

But back to topic, the President doesn't have any control over unemployment.

Wrong. The President doesn't have "direct" control of it obviously, but the policies put forth by a President and his administration have EVERYTHING to do with unemployment.

Originally Posted by Joecooool

Personally I blame mid size and larger corporations exporting tens of millions of jobs overseas. I'm shocked there isn't more of an uproar over this issue.

I don't blame the corporations one bit. Why wouldn't they send jobs overseas? If you were a business owner and could make twice as much profit, you would do the same thing. The point of a business is to make money. You want to keep the corporations here, give them a reason to stay. The simple fact is that America has made it almost impossible for a business to be sucessful here. Businesses are taxed to oblivion. They are forced to pay into an infinite amount of programs. They are forced to pay ridiculous union wages in many cases. Etc, etc, etc... The policies of this country make it a simple business decision to go elsewhere.

Again, you want businesses to stay. Give them a reason to stay. Or, you could keep up the trend we are on and keep driving them away with higher and higher taxes and more and more forced spending.

[Joecooool]

Originally Posted by RetiredSFC 97

In a free market we need to make the atmosphere conducive to stay here.

We live in a global economy and that most certainly isn't a "free market". You have countries like China and India with more than a billion people each with no minimum wage, environmental laws, or infrastructure to support. You have other countries with nationalized corporations like Citgo, and still others like Airbus with enormous government subsidies.

On top of that, how can we make the "atmosphere conductive to stay here" when over half the world's population is willing to work for less than a dollar a day?

Are you willing to drop the minimum wage, our environmental protections and everything else that makes this country great to be competitive with India and China?

To me this is a race to the bottom. It makes Wall Street rich and destroys the middle class. In the end it destroys America. Instead of racing to the bottom, I believe its better to force the other countries up to our standards.

But actually I doubt at the end of the day that would even be enough. Problem is Corporations are no longer in the business of making a product and a profit. Their only concern is making a profit for Wall Street.

That's why I buy local from Mom and Pop if at all possible, even if it costs a few more dollars.

Thank NAFTA for a lot of this. That's what allowed the massive exit of corporations allowing them to bring products back here for sale freely. When they passed that I said then, "well it now looks like we'll be buying our own products made in China"

I was correct. I wish I would have been wrong. I don't know the answer but I do know I could do better than those who make these decisions now!

The answer is to stop giving tax breaks to corporations that export the jobs overseas. We also need import taxes to protect American manufacturers. Sure, you might have to pay a few dollars more for a product but maybe your neighbor won't lose his job and go bankrupt.

[ChasC5]

Originally Posted by Joecooool

We live in a global economy and that most certainly isn't a "free market". You have countries like China and India with more than a billion people each with no minimum wage, environmental laws, or infrastructure to support. You have other countries with nationalized corporations like Citgo, and still others like Airbus with enormous government subsidies.

On top of that, how can we make the "atmosphere conductive to stay here" when over half the world's population is willing to work for less than a dollar a day?

Are you willing to drop the minimum wage, our environmental protections and everything else that makes this country great to be competitive with India and China?

To me this is a race to the bottom. It makes Wall Street rich and destroys the middle class. In the end it destroys America. Instead of racing to the bottom, I believe its better to force the other countries up to our standards.

The answer is to stop giving tax breaks to corporations that export the jobs overseas. We also need import taxes to protect American manufacturers. Sure, you might have to pay a few dollars more for a product but maybe your neighbor won't lose his job and go bankrupt.

It's that simple ...

[RedLS1GTO]

Originally Posted by Joecooool

The answer is to stop giving tax breaks to corporations that export the jobs overseas. We also need import taxes to protect American manufacturers. Sure, you might have to pay a few dollars more for a product but maybe your neighbor won't lose his job and go bankrupt.

This is part of it. I do agree that we need much higher import taxes.

At the same time we are taxing the living shit out of domestic companies, and increasing those taxes at an insane rate. Don't blame the corporations, blame the idiotic government that makes it a simple choice to leave.