posted on June 10, 2004 12:39:04 PM new
Now this isn't mine, I post it here from another site. How do you Bush loyalists answer these points? It's a pretty damning list, even excluding the editorial opinion embodied at the end.
***
George W Bush Track Record
1. Presided over the loss of approximately three million American jobs in his first two-and-a-half years in office, the worst record since Herbert Hoover.
2. Overseen an economy in which the stock market suffered its worst decline in the first two years of any administration since Hoover’s.
3. Taken, in the wake of the terrorist attacks two years ago, the greatest worldwide outpouring of goodwill the United States has enjoyed at least since World War II and squandered it by insisting on pursuing a foolish go-it-almost-alone invasion of Iraq, thereby transforming almost universal support for the United States into worldwide condemnation. (One historian made this point particularly well: “After inadvertently gaining the sympathies of the world 's citizens when terrorists attacked New York and Washington, Bush has deliberately turned the country into the most hated in the world by a policy of breaking all major international agreements, declaring it our right to invade any country that we wish, proving that he’ll manipulate facts to justify anything he wishes to do, and bull-headedly charging into a quagmire.”)
4. Misled (to use the most charitable word and interpretation) the American public about weapons of mass destruction and supposed ties to Al Qaeda in Iraq and so into a war that has plainly (and entirely predictably) made us less secure, caused a boom in the recruitment of terrorists, is killing American military personnel needlessly, and is threatening to suck up all our available military forces and be a bottomless pit for the money of American taxpayers for years to come.
5. Failed to follow through in Afghanistan, where the Taliban and Al Qaeda are regrouping, once more increasing the threat to our people.
6. Insulted and ridiculed other nations and international organizations and now has to go, hat in hand, to those nations and organizations begging for their assistance.
7. Completely miscalculated or failed to plan for the personnel and monetary needs in Iraq after the war, so that he sought and obtained an $87 billion appropriation for Iraq, a sizable chunk of which is going, without competitive bidding to Haliburton, the company formerly headed by his vice president.
8. Inherited an annual federal budget surplus of $230 billion and transformed it into a $500+ billion deficit in less than three years. This negative turnaround of three-quarters of a trillion dollars is totally without precedent in our history. The ballooning deficit for fiscal 2004 is rapidly approaching twice the dollar size of the previous record deficit, $290 billion, set in 1992, the last year of the administration of President Bush’s father and, at almost 5 percent of GDP, is closing in on the percentage record set by Ronald Reagan in 1986.
9. Cut taxes three times, sharply reducing the burden on the rich, reclassified money obtained through stock ownership as more deserving than money earned through work. The idea that dividend income should not be taxed—what might accurately be termed the unearned income tax credit—can be stated succinctly: “If you had to work for your money, we’ll tax it; if you didn’t have to work for it, you can keep it all.”
10. Severely curtailed the very American freedoms that our military people are supposed to be fighting to defend. (“The Patriot Act,” one of the historians noted, “is the worst since the Alien and Sedition Acts under John Adams.”)
11, Called upon American Armed Service people, including Reserve forces, to sacrifice for ever-lengthening tours of duty in a hostile and dangerous environment while he rewards the rich at home with lower taxes and legislative giveaways and gives lucrative no-bid contracts to American corporations linked with the administration.
12. Given an opportunity to begin to change the consumption-oriented values of the nation after September 11, 2001, when people were prepared to make a sacrifice for the common good, called instead of Americans to ‘sacrifice’ by going out and buying things.
13.Proclaimed himself to be a conservative while maintaining that big government should be able to run roughshod over the Bill of Rights, and that the government must have all sorts of secrets from the people, but the people can be allowed no privacy from the government.
Items numbered to make it easier for Bear to follow along.
[ edited by bob9585 on Jun 15, 2004 01:15 PM ]
posted on June 10, 2004 12:51:25 PM new
Oh, that's easy! They'll either ignore all that and post a long tirade against Clinton and/or Kerry. OR they will say that none of that matter, that Bush is a moral man, who sticks to his guns...
____________________
We are not afraid to entrust the American people with unpleasant facts, foreign ideas, alien philosophies, and competitive values. For a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people. -- John F. Kennedy
posted on June 10, 2004 12:56:04 PM new
Whenever a Republican is faced with facts one of the following happens:
A) They start shouting
B) They start shouting insults
C) They go off on another subject
D) They say, "Well, Clinton..blah blah blah
E) They disappear.
Peace
LOL! How right you are. It always goes back to Clinton. Linda should be here soon to post something she has cut and pasted from the Internet and sure as heck she will not have read the entire article. A traite of the right is to believe everything they read as long as it bends in their direction. They don't believe what they see if they see anything at all. The Reagan thread is a perfect example. Bush lacks leadership skills. He cannot speak without a script because when he opens his mouth nothing but gibberish escapes. He once said himself that he is not a politician. Then he was appointed president. How convenient that was. An election stolen holds no honors.
posted on June 10, 2004 05:52:29 PM new
They will respond by saying:
The econonmy has improved over the past 2 months. Look at all those jobs that have been created.
The war is almost over.
Bush and Kerry are neck and neck in the polls.
Re-defeat Bush
------------------------------
June is Gay Pride Month
------------------------------
Change is constant. The history of mankind is about change. One set of beliefs is pushed aside by a new set. The old order is swept away by the new. If people become attached to the old order, they see their best interest in defending it. They become the losers. They become the old order and in turn are vulnerable. People who belong to the new order are winners.
James A Belaco & Ralph C. Stayer
Off subject, but I noticed your tag line. I'm not gay, but I am marching in the gay pride parade coming up here in a week. Actually, there's a festival and everything. It's really loads of fun.
posted on June 11, 2004 07:28:31 AM new
Cheryl, good for you. Pride parades are a lot of fun. The gay pride parade here in Chicago is at the end of June. I get a kick out of what the media shows on TV. It is usally the most bizzare events of the parade. It should be interesting this year to see how many politicans show up since this is an election year. Usually the 1st 20 minutes of the parade is filled with the politicians.
Re-defeat Bush
------------------------------
June is Gay Pride Month
------------------------------
Change is constant. The history of mankind is about change. One set of beliefs is pushed aside by a new set. The old order is swept away by the new. If people become attached to the old order, they see their best interest in defending it. They become the losers. They become the old order and in turn are vulnerable. People who belong to the new order are winners.
James A Belaco & Ralph C. Stayer
posted on June 11, 2004 07:29:40 AM new
Interesting article on Bush advancing the "gay agenda"
Bush Advances the "Gay" Agenda
Despite repeated statements about being a Christian and expressing the desire to restore honor to the White House during his 2000 presidential campaign, President George W. Bush is advancing the homosexual agenda as much as any other President in history.
Re-defeat Bush
------------------------------
June is Gay Pride Month
------------------------------
Change is constant. The history of mankind is about change. One set of beliefs is pushed aside by a new set. The old order is swept away by the new. If people become attached to the old order, they see their best interest in defending it. They become the losers. They become the old order and in turn are vulnerable. People who belong to the new order are winners.
James A Belaco & Ralph C. Stayer
posted on June 11, 2004 12:01:42 PM new
Where do you think Bush learned how to be president? His father...
In his nomination speech on August 19th, 1988, George Bush (Sr.) famously declared, "I'll say no and they will push, and I'll say no, and they will push again, and I'll say to them, 'Read my lips: No new taxes.'" (This promise, of course, was quickly broken.)
Just like Bush Sr, Bush Jr. tell lies and breaks promises.
Re-defeat Bush
------------------------------
June is Gay Pride Month
------------------------------
Change is constant. The history of mankind is about change. One set of beliefs is pushed aside by a new set. The old order is swept away by the new. If people become attached to the old order, they see their best interest in defending it. They become the losers. They become the old order and in turn are vulnerable. People who belong to the new order are winners.
James A Belaco & Ralph C. Stayer
posted on June 14, 2004 08:38:55 PM new
What a cop out, Linda! You always post a link to that stupid site in answer to anything and everything about your Bush-God.
Why don't you answer bob9585's question and respond to what he posted up above? Is it because you know what he posted is true but you don't want to admit it or is it because you have your head so deep in the sand that you can't even smell a whiff of truth anymore?
The media and Democrats keep repeating it over and over: "2.3 million jobs lost" since President Bush took office. His could be the worst job record since before World War II, they claim.
One little problem: It's not true.
Not only has there been no net loss of jobs during the Bush administration, there has been a net gain, even with the devastation of 9/11. At least 2.4 million jobs have been created since the president took office, 2 million of those in 2003. The gains more than offset the losses.
While Democrats continue to beat their election-year drums about outsourcing, manufacturing losses, unemployment and slow growth in employment, America’s economy has been steadily creating jobs.
At least 366,000 jobs have been created in the last five months, over 100,000 of those in January, White House press secretary Scott McClellan has noted. And though the eight-month recession “officially” ended in November, economic indicators are surprising economists and pointing toward a take-off in the recovery.
The signs:
# The 5.6 percent unemployment rate is the lowest in two years and below the average of the 1980s (7.3 percent) and '90s (5.8 percent), and still continues to drop.
# The nation's economic output revealed the strongest quarterly growth in 20 years. The data for the fourth quarter of 2003 show that the civilian labor force rose by 333,000, while the number of unemployed in the labor force dropped by 575,000, and the number of so-called discouraged workers is less than .3 percent of the workforce, according to Paul Kersey of the Heritage Foundation.
# Consumer spending grew between 4 percent and 5 percent last year, and real hourly earnings rose 1.5 percent. Real earnings have risen over the last three years.
# Exports doubled to 19 percent in the fourth quarter, compared to less than 9 percent in the third.
# The number of American workers is at an all-time high of 138.5 million, a level never before attained in U.S. history.
# Jobless claims are 10 percent below the average of the last 25 years and still falling.
# Hiring indices are up, even in manufacturing.
# Productivity growth is extremely high.
Now the doomsayers are criticizing the validity of the unemployment rate, which at 5.6 percent does not fit their gloomy story.
Faulty Counting
The problem is the areas of biggest job growth are usually not even being counted at all.
Though 75 percent of jobs are created by small companies, according to the Small Business Administration, this sector’s entrepreneurial activity and the jobs it creates are left out by Washington bean counters when calculating official new job numbers.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) does its Payroll Survey by phoning businesses to crunch the number of jobs that have been gained or lost. This is where Democrats grabbed onto their lifeline, the 2.3 million figure. Look only at the Payroll Survey, and there has been a gain of only 522,000 jobs since Bush took office.
But here’s the rub. The Household Survey is used to determine the unemployment rate and accounts for those who are self-employed, and small emerging businesses that might be overlooked by the Payroll Survey. But the number of U.S. firms isn’t static, and the "fixed list" used by the BLS for phoning established businesses does not reflect new entrepreneurial activity.
People are called at home and asked if they have jobs, or if they are in the market for a job. In contrast to the Payroll Survey, the Household Survey shows that 2.4 million jobs have been created so far during Bush's time in office.
As Economy.com writer Haseeb Ahmed recently wrote, "something is amiss in the [Payroll] survey."
Credit Where Credit Is Due
That’s not all. When doomsayers, and media spoiling for a fight in an election year, laughed at Bush’s prediction of 2.6 million new jobs this year, not everyone was scoffing.
Ahmed, Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan and others hardly batted an eye. Greenspan said it was "probably feasible" the economy would reach the Bush administration's forecast of adding 2.6 million jobs this year, provided growth continues and the productivity rate slows to more typically levels.
"I don't think it's 'Fantasyland,'" Greenspan said.
"I agree with him," said John Ryding, chief market economist at Bear Stearns. "I think that we will create 2.5 million, possibly more, jobs over the balance of the year."
Ahmed is convinced that "the revision patterns of the early-1990s recovery cycle" will be repeated. A total of 1.4 million job gains were revised upward to 2.9 million in the first 21 months after the end of the last recession, just after Bush Sr. was voted out of office.
Next: If elected, will John Kerry get credit for the jobs created under the Bush administration? And find out why so many workers are not being counted.
--------------------
I included the graphics for all you leftists that have trouble reading
--------------------
New Jobs Help U.S. Extend Hiring Spree
Email this Story
Jun 4, 1:45 PM (ET)
By LEIGH STROPE
WASHINGTON (AP) - U.S. employers added almost a quarter million workers in May, extending a nine-month hiring spree and accommodating enough new jobseekers to hold the unemployment rate steady at 5.6 percent.
Payrolls swelled by almost 1 million in the last three months alone, the Labor Department said Friday. Employment figures for March and April were revised up to reflect the addition of 353,000 and 346,000 jobs respectively.
Tens of thousands of jobseekers are renewing their searches in an improving labor market, so the overall, seasonally adjusted civilian unemployment rate did not improve from April's 5.6 percent figure.
Nevertheless, the snapshot of America's employment situation in May met the expectations of most private analysts and fueled anticipation of an increase in interest rates when the Federal Reserve meets at the end of this month. The Fed's main interest rate has been at a 46-year low of 1 percent, but analysts expect that to end with the jobs market steadily gaining steam
On Wall Street, the report sent stocks sharply higher, giving investors confidence that continued job growth is sustainable.
Hiring last month was widespread, with businesses adding an overall 248,000 new jobs across the economy. Industries that posted the biggest gains included construction, health care, professional and business services and hotels and restaurants.
"What is really key is that every major sector had improvements," said John Silvia, chief economist for Wachovia Securities. "That suggests these gains are sustainable."
The struggling manufacturing sector also is reawakening, adding 32,000 new jobs last month. Based on revised figures, it was the fourth straight month of payroll increases after almost three years of continuous losses.
Friday's report was good news for President Bush, who has been counting on continued employment growth to boost his re-election prospects. The economy was expected to be a major drag on his campaign, but that may prove otherwise.
Bush, in Rome on a three-day European visit, told reporters the jobs report "shows that our economy is vital and growing."
"The policies in place are working, the entrepreneurial spirit is strong and the small business sector of the economy is vibrant," Bush said.
"What a difference a year makes," said Commerce Secretary Donald Evans, noting the big payroll gains in the past three months. "A wakeup call has been sent that the United States economy is back."
Bush still is on track to be the first president since the Great Depression to have lost jobs during his watch - but those losses are shrinking. His administration was widely criticized for an overly optimistic forecast that 2.6 million new jobs would be created this year. But economists now say the chugging economy could approach that mark.
"I'm pleased to see strong job growth and that's what I am concerned about," said Labor Secretary Elaine Chao. "Every month of strong job growth is good news to me and it's good news for America."
Still, the economy is far from the booming 1990s. Last month, 8.2 million people remained unemployed. While the overall jobless rate stayed at 5.6 percent, it was much higher among blacks, at 9.9 percent and Hispanics, at 7 percent.
Allison Dobson, spokeswoman for Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry, said, "Any step forward in the job market is good news for workers but America is still in the worst job recovery since the Great Depression, with 1.9 million private-sector jobs lost in the Bush presidency."
The report "is welcome news for American workers who are enduring the most prolonged jobs slump since the 1930s," said Rep. Pete Stark of California, the top Democrat on Congress' Joint Economic Committee. "But we still have a jobs deficit, and most of the economic growth we have seen has fattened businesses' balance sheets, not workers' paychecks."
The average duration of unemployment rose to 20 weeks last month, up from 19.7 weeks in April. Almost 22 percent of all jobless workers have been without work for 27 weeks or more.
Construction employment rose by 32,000 in May, with 91,000 new jobs added since January. In services, professional and business services added 64,000 new jobs, fueled by hiring increases in temporary employment firms. Hiring at such firms has grown by 14 percent since April 2003.
Hotels and restaurants added 33,000 jobs over the month, and financial services boosted payrolls by 15,000.
But some industries lost jobs, including telecommunications, which shed 5,000 positions last month. Also, there were fewer government jobs last month, as employment in that sector decreased by 27,000.
------------------
June 12, 2004, 8:08PM
We have seen the job-taking enemy, and 'they' are us
By LOREN STEFFY
Copyright 2004 Houston Chronicle
IT turns out "they" aren't taking as many of our jobs as we thought.
Depending on what industry you work in, "they" are in India or China or Mexico or are any other foreign workers willing to do jobs that pay far less than comparable employment in the United States.
"They" have been taking work from us for years. "They" used to be the Japanese, and "they" took our auto industry from us back in the 1980s. Now, "they" build Toyotas and Hondas here in America, employing thousands, and "they" are us. For a while, back in the 1960s, "they" weren't even people. "They" were robots, automated manufacturing equipment that was going to supplant human employment.
But more recently, "they" have been workers in places like India, where white-collar jobs such as tech support and even – gulp – business news reporting have been "shipped" by companies looking to save money.
With unemployment at 5.6 percent, up from 4.6 percent in July 2001, we need a villain, and "they" are it. Sensing a political opportunity, John Kerry even proposed eliminating tax incentives to companies that sent jobs offshore, fretting that the "bleeding of American jobs" would undermine the recovery.
On Thursday, the Bureau of Labor Statistics released a report that shows the bleeding is a pin prick. More than 182,000 jobs were lost in the first three months of this year. Of those, about 4,600 – only 2.5 percent – were lost to jobs shifted overseas. In other words, most jobs that are being cut are simply going away, not going to someone in a foreign land.
As with any economic study, there are caveats. The report studied only a three-month window, which may be too short a period to be meaningful. And it only covered companies that eliminated 50 or more jobs at the same time, so companies that are moving jobs offshore gradually may not have been counted.
Even so, the percentage of jobs actually sent overseas is so small, those issues probably aren't significant.
The biggest losses were in manufacturing industries such as computers and electronics, food and transportation equipment. Farther down on the list were the professions we've heard so much about: call centers, tech support and – whew! – business reporting.
There's another set of numbers that factors into the debate about "offshoring." U.S. productivity, the amount of goods our workers produced, rose 3.8 percent in the first quarter, compared with the last quarter of 2003. Productivity is important because it underscores the changes we're experiencing in our economy. Businesses are finding ways to produce more with fewer workers. It's easy for us to think that they're doing that because big, bad corporations are always looking to make a buck, regardless of the human toll. But in fact, they're responding to a more powerful force: us. Consumers.
Whether we know it or not, we like the benefits of increased productivity. We show that every time we shop at Wal-Mart or take a two-week vacation at Disney World or hire somebody to cut our lawn. We shop at Wal-Mart or Home Depot because it's cheaper than the old family-run hardware store on the corner. We may hate to see small business disappear, but it disappears because we aren't willing to pay more for hammers and nails.
Another benefit of increased productivity is more leisure time. We can laugh at this, because our lives seem more hectic than ever. Didn't Andy Griffith and Ward Cleaver have a much easier time? Ward came home, fired up the pipe and opened his newspaper until June had dinner ready.
Now, we race around, trying to get our kids to soccer and band and gymnastics, hitting the drive-through on the way. More people juggle two jobs and spend the weekends doing household chores.
It may not seem like it, but that's a choice. Our parents couldn't afford to pay for their kids to participate in so many activities, and they couldn't afford to eat out just because it more convenient.
The cost of food, clothing and many other household goods has fallen in the past 30 years because of gains in productivity.
What we choose to do with our leisure time is a benefit of productivity, too. More people are taking longer vacations because productivity has made it easier to take time off.
And increased productivity doesn't mean people are being forced to work longer hours. Bureau of Labor Statistics figures show the hours worked in 2003 decreased.
Productivity, of course, doesn't benefit everyone equally at the same time. Lots of people still struggle in low-paying jobs with no benefits. Some even want us to erect barriers to keep jobs in the United States, even if it means curbing productivity gains. In other words, let's have more jobs and less output.
The problem is, less output means less for everyone. The people making lower wages now have to pay more for shoes at Wal-Mart because Wal-Mart can't import cheaper shoes from China.
The end result is that people wind up spending more of their meager incomes on products that would otherwise cost less.
Which is why trade barriers and tax penalties like those Kerry suggested ultimately don't work. We want the cheaper goods more than we want inefficient production. In the long run, we would be hurt more by fear-based policy than by "them," whether "they" are in Mexico or India or China.
Another interesting statistic from Thursday's report: More than twice as many jobs — almost 10,000 — were lost because the work was being moved to other parts of the United States.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - America's employment outlook brightened on Thursday after the government said jobless claims dropped last week to their lowest since 2000, bolstering expectations for strong numbers in the April jobs report.
U.S. Treasury bond yields hit a two-year high on the unexpectedly rosy number and the dollar climbed 1 percent against the yen as markets bet heavily the Federal Reserve will hike interest rates this summer as the economy warms.
The picture of a better jobs climate was also backed by an unexpected increase in unit labor costs in the first quarter, alongside respectable productivity growth of 3.5 percent.
First-time claims for state unemployment benefits shrank 25,000 to 315,000 in the week ended May 1, the Labor Department said. It was the third straight week of declines.
Wall Street analysts had forecast a slight fall in claims to 335,000 from a revised 340,000 the previous week.
Grant Wilson, vice president of foreign exchange at Mellon Bank in Pittsburgh, said the jobless numbers were a good omen on the eve of the April employment report.
"We weren't expecting anything as (good) as this. It bodes well for the unemployment number tomorrow," Wilson said.
April non-farm payrolls are set for release at 8:30 a.m. EDT (1230 GMT) on Friday and are forecast to show creation of 173,000 new jobs. That would be a marked moderation from March, when 308,000 were added, but still evidence that labor conditions are tightening.
Last week's jobless claims data will make no difference to the April report, which was drawn from a survey in the middle of last month. But the upbeat tone chimed with a broad sense that the outlook was bright.
WAGE PRESSURES?
"The abundance of risks to our forecast of an employment gain of 150,000 for April is to the upside," Bank of America economist Gary Bigg warned clients in a note.
In Thursday's data, in addition to lower initial claims the four-week moving average of insurance filings, which smooths weekly fluctuations to provide a better picture of trends, retreated by 3,750 to 343,250.
Also, the number of unemployed on the benefit rolls after claiming an initial week of aid dropped 69,000 to 2.935 million in the week ended April 24, the latest for which figures are available. This was the lowest since June 2001, in the middle of the recession, when 2.933 million people were drawing unemployment insurance.
The drop points in a positive direction for the jobs market since the number had been indicating that while layoffs had slowed, firms were not rushing to hire new workers and had been utilizing greater productivity to meet rising demand.
Labor said productivity rose again in the first quarter, increasing at a 3.5 percent annual rate, as expected. But unit labor costs turned 0.5 percent higher, defying market forecasts for costs to be flat.
"The rise in unit labor costs is not worrying, but it is the least good performance in a year, and the chances are that the next few quarters will see bigger increases," said Ian Shepherdson, chief U.S. economist at High Frequency Economics in Valhalla, New York.
Powerful productivity growth has helped companies keep a lid on compensation costs but the pick-up in employment had been expected to signal the end of this cycle, and the Fed likely will take note of the uptick in costs.
The central bank is expected to hike interest rates for the first time in four years in the months ahead. However, after a regular meeting on Tuesday at which it left rates at a 1958-low of 1 percent, it announced it would be "measured" in removing policy accommodation.
Kerry Campaign Tries to Throw Cold Water on Job Recovery Numbers
(CNSNews.com) - Despite the addition of about one million jobs in the last three months, including 248,000 jobs in May, Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry's campaign blamed President Bush for losing 1.9 million private-sector jobs.
"Any step forward in the job market is good news for workers but America is still in the worst job recovery since the Great Depression," said Allison Dobson, spokesperson for Kerry, in a statement issued Friday.
"Families are still struggling in this economy. Jobs are scarce and those lucky enough to have one are making $1,500 less each year. Meanwhile, their budgets are being squeezed by skyrocketing costs of healthcare, college tuition and gasoline," Dobson said.
She said Kerry "has a real economic plan to create 10 million new jobs in his first term as President. He will end special tax breaks for companies that outsource jobs, help companies and families address the skyrocketing costs of healthcare and move America towards energy independence."
But Labor Secretary Elaine Chao pointed out that under the Bush administration, the job market is gaining strength and May's increase of 248,000 payrolls jobs exceeds market expectations and is the 9th straight month of job creation, with 1.4 million jobs created since August 2003.
"Employment gains were widespread across nearly all sectors. Job growth for the previous two months was revised upward by 16,000 in March for a revised total increase of 353,000 jobs and by 58,000 in April for a revised total increase of 346,000," Chao said in a statement.
"In the last 4 months, 91,000 manufacturing jobs have been created, reversing a 42 month job decline in manufacturing employment. Also, manufacturing employment was revised upward from the previous two months: 14,000, for a positive 23,000 jobs gained in March, and by 8,000 in April for a positive gain of 29,000," she added.
"The President's economic policies are improving the lives of millions of Americans," Chao concluded.
Even economists heaped praise on the administration for the economy's upsurge.
"Rising wages will keep consumers spending and ensure the economy continues to expand for the rest of the year," the Bloomberg news service quoted economists as saying.
"This is great news for America's workers and consumers," said House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.). "Our economy is robust and will remain strong as more Americans who want a job find one. Republican economic policies based on tax relief are working for the American people," he said in a press release.
Treasury Secretary John Snow told Fox News the president's tax cuts "put a lot of oxygen back in the system."
AND THAT'S WHAT I THINK ABOUT YOUR TOTALLY LAME INANE UNSUBSTANTIATED POST
"The Secret Service has announced it is doubling its protection for John Kerry. You can understand why — with two positions on every issue, he has twice as many people mad at him." —Jay Leno
I gave your link about 5 seconds on my time. Meaningless propaganda!
Bear,
It only took me about 3 seconds to scroll down to the bottom of your long and boring post.
What do Bush supporters say? Like Linda, a job is a job! (Even if that is at the Dairy Queen for 5.50 an hour) In her new jobs thread.
True Americans do not exclude anybody. They recognize that everyone should have the same rights. Bigotry, intolerance and hatred are cancers of the mind.
posted on June 15, 2004 01:09:18 PM new
Well, at least Bear finally responded. Lamely, all cut and paste; insultingly, with his cute little comments ( jeez, at least he came up with something in his own words) and cartoons, but he responded.
Let me mention here that I have been voting since the 60's and have NEVER voted for a Democratic presidential candidate -I haven't voted for ALL the GOPers running- I have voted at times for some lunatic fringe candidate as a protest. I did vote for Bush last time around, but won't this time.
Let me also preface by saying that the post I put up initially was from a survey of historians commenting on Bush's record so far and how they believe history will judge him. I suspect they are as a group towards the liberal side but we have no way of proving or disproving that. Of course, if you aren't a NeoCon, THE STATE IS ALWAYS RIGHT and GEORGE W BUSH IS THE STATE, then you're a Liberal in the eyes of Bear et al.
Discounting the quotes and comments from GOP operatives (congressman, senators, et al)and Newsmax
(hell bear, you might as well quote Limbaugh as an unbiased source) we do find some useful data. As Bear and others accuse "liberals " of doing, they attack the quality of the data when it doesn't suit their needs. Half the Newsmax story is
attacking the validity of the employment survey.
Nevertheless, there is some good news in there from a source I'm willing to buy, Alan Greenspan, nobody's patsy, says the 2.6 million new jobs figure is a possibility this year. That IS good news, and along with some of the other items mentioned augers well for the economy.
However, in the middle of the AP story is some gloom.
"Bush still is on track to be the first President since the Great Depression to have lost jobs during his watch..."
and that ain't such good news.
This occurs after the stats on Productivity, the WORST measure of employment - productivity is a measure of output per man/hour and has NOTHING to do with economic well being except for shareholders. Consider this example - I run a factory that is the only big employer in town. We turn out 1000 widgets a day. I decide our profits aren't high enough, so I lay off 500 workers with the word going down that if production drops I'll close the plant. Can the remaining workers do it? Can they continue to turn out 1000 widgets a day? Sure, but they'll work like dogs to do so- and if they do, productivity has DOUBLED! How is that a measure of a good economy? I can also increase productivity by cutting wages or benefits - since productivity is measured in dollars per man/hour reducing costs increases productivity- again,not a measure of a good economy, just of profitability for the owners.
Below construction spending, we see some other bad news- 8.2 million people remain out of work, a big chunk of the "new" jobs are in hotel/restaurant and temp agencies, (not exactly great jobs)and the duration of unemployment continues to lengthen although more slowly than in the recent past. Almost a quarter of those out of work have been so for 6 months or longer.
The next item is about how many of the jobs lost are going overseas- and is totally irrelevant to the matter at hand. It does however have one interesting tidbit from an unbiased (or Bush controlled) source, the Bureau of Labor Statistics -
"More than 182,000 jobs were lost in the first three months of this year."
It goes on to say that they were NOT lost overseas - the man who is now unemployed doesnt really care - HIS job is gone.
Finally, a Reuters story on New Unemployment Claims and how new claims hit a low not seen since 2000. Put another way, it means claims have been higher EVERY month since 2000 until now. Who was President during this period of rising joblessness? W, that's who, so what the GOPs are saying is " hey , we screwed the economy royal for the last 3 years but now were doing better".
More from Elaine Chao, Bush cheerleader extroadinaire:
"In the last 4 months, 91,000 manufacturing jobs have been created, reversing a 42 month job decline in manufacturing employment." Plenty of news lately about how many of those jobs are based on spending for equipment and supplies for the Iraqi war- jobs that will evaporate as soon as we're out of there.
Regardless, there is a 42 MONTH DECLINE that they're so proud of ending. As of this month, Bush has been President for 42 months. That's 42 months of fewer manufacturing jobs, 1 month of more- Whooey!!
Again from Chao:
"The President's economic policies are improving the lives of millions of Americans," Chao concluded" and I add, after screwing their lives up for the last 3 years.
These two quotes are from BUSHITE spinmaster and that's the BEST they could do?
And so ends MY response to Bears cut and paste response.
There is one more matter, though.
The original post cited 13 points, these cut and pastes of Bears address exactly 1 - the first 1.
Bear, to make it easier for you I'm going to go edit that first post and put numbers by each alleged shortcoming of the Bush Administration so you can cut and paste some more answers to us, unless you're actually willing to try and say something on your own.
Hint: # 2 and 8 are irrefutable, # 9 is indefensible if you believe in Equal Taxation, something Conservatives used to clamor for.
It only took me about 3 seconds to scroll down to the bottom of your long and boring post.
I’m supprised you attention span lasted that long. Guess I should have added cartoons to match your IQ.
bob9585
Lamely, all cut and paste; insultingly, with his cute little comments ( jeez, at least he came up with something in his own words) and cartoons, but he responded.
Excuse me, DA, but didn’t YOU start this thread with a CUT & PASTE of opinions you agree with. At least I included the url’s so what I posted can be verified
"The Secret Service has announced it is doubling its protection for John Kerry. You can understand why — with two positions on every issue, he has twice as many people mad at him." —Jay Leno
posted on June 15, 2004 02:17:45 PM new
bob - It's a pretty damning list.....no it's not - it's a pretty inaccurate list.
The unemployment numbers were wrong....they weren't that high...that's a figure the dems have throwing out that has been proven to be incorrect. Check out factcheck.org and the US Department of Labor and verify them for yourself. And currently approx. 1/2 of those jobs have been replaced.
Everyone mentions the 8M still without jobs....well there were 11M without jobs in clintons administration and it improved. It's improving now too.
And on your #2....again...why did they set their perameter for only those two years? The stock market started declining in mid 2000 BEFORE this President took office. It was the tech boom that caused it....not this President. Check the NYSE to verify that fact.
I thought your post was from old information since the NYSE is just about where it was on 12-31-00 before Bush took office. It's had a great recovery too.
As far as the economy read this url and learn what happened and how well our economy has been managed since the world wide tech boom sent many countries economies reeling.
And with more jobs being added we now have many states who are running surpluses again. And the Federal deficit is projected to be $100B lower than was expected because of the fact our economy IS improving.
This wasn't just an American recession we had...it was a world recession that happened and this President did nothing to start it. But he's had to deal with it and he's done a great job, imo.
We've had the BEST recovery of all of them under this President. And they didn't have the expense of 9-11 and two wars, refunding our military that clinton cut financing for in 7 of his 8 years in office, HomeLand Security, etc. to deal with like we did.
Besides that this President has given funding to many programs like education and [those on my previous url] all the while he was doing so, the dems have only complained he didn't give enough.
So you want to vote for kerry because our deficit is so high? Fine - Hope you've been reading about all the new programs he's saying he's going to start....and the additional funding he's saying he's going to give to others. His health care program....estimated to cost close to $100Billion dollars - and that's just a start - it will only cover 1/2 of the already uninsured. More taxes or a higher deficit when we need to pay for the other 1/2. Lots of money for a small number of people. It will do nothing but INCREASE our deficit....or he'll raise our taxes to pay for that and all his other promises.
But of course, he's not saying how he plans to pay for all these programs......let alone cut our deficit in 1/2 in the four years he's promising.
George Bush As Herbert Hoover? Oh Come On!
Liberal ad pushes a Democratic theme: exaggerate the severity of the economic downturn
December 5, 2003
Modified: January 13, 2004
eMail to a friend Printer Friendly Version
Summary
In what it called the first salvo in a $10-million advertising campaign aimed at defeating President Bush, the liberal group Moveon.org released a TV ad it said would run in 16 cities in 10 states starting Thanksgiving week.
The ad states that ?George Bush is going to be the first president since Herbert Hoover to lead an economy that loses jobs. ?Didn?t George Bush say his tax cuts would create jobs??
The ad is misleading on several counts. It falsely implies that tax cuts failed to create jobs, falsely implies that the economy is still losing jobs, and exaggerates the severity of an historically mild economic downturn.
This has been a common theme among several Democratic candidates, who have not always gotten their facts straight (see 'related articles' below)
Analysis
The ad says Bush has lost 2 million jobs ?so far,? implying that more losses are coming. In fact, the economy has been gaining jobs since July, when the total decline in jobs since Bush took office hit nearly 2.6 million. That figure has now declined to 2.3 million and is predicted to keep shrinking in months to come.
The ad?s central claim ? that Bush will finish his term with the economy employing fewer people than when he took office ? probably will turn out to be correct ? but barely. Private economists are projecting that the economy will continue to gain jobs over the next year, according to Blue Chip Economic Indicators, a survey of private economic forecasters. The average forecast is for a gain of 146,000 jobs per month, which would leave Bush at the end of his term with an economy employing nearly 400,000 fewer workers than when he took office. On the other hand, the most optimistic private economists see the economy gaining enough jobs between now and the end of Bush's term to leave him with a gain.
Ten of the 51 surveyed predicted an average gain of 213,000 jobs per month over the next year, which if continued through January 2004 would leave Bush more than half a million jobs to the good. That remains a minority view, however.
Whether Bush gains or loses jobs during his tenure, the fact is that unemployment has been compared to past downturns relatively mild. In fact, the economy lost a smaller percentage of jobs in the Bush downturn than in seven of the ten previous downturns going back to 1945 when the federal government began keeping the statistics on total nonfarm employment. (see table)
Job Slumps Since 1945
Date (m/y)
Percent of jobs lost
2/01-8/03
2.0%
6/90-5/91
1.5%
7/81-12/82*
3.1%
3/80-7/80
1.3%
7/74-4/75*
2.8%
3/70-11/70
1.5%
4/60-2/61*
2.3%
4/57-6/58*
4.4%
7/5-8/54*
3.4%
9/48-10/49*
5.2%
2/45-9/45*
8.1%
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics
Total Nonfarm Employment, Seasonally Adjusted
*Indicates job losses exceeding most recent slump
And Bush?s unemployment rate, even at its worst level of 6.4% in June, was much lower than the previous four spikes in the jobless rate: 9% in the Ford administration (May, 1975), 7.8% in the Carter administration (July, 1980), 10.8% in Ronald Reagan?s first term (November and December of 1982) and 7.8% in the administration of Bush?s father (June, 1992).
Economists are virtually unanimous in saying that the tax cuts that have taken effect so far have created jobs. Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, for example, said in a recent speech: ?Economic activity perked up in late spring and then accelerated further this summer as tax cuts provided a substantial boost to the disposable incomes of households.? And when the Blue Chip asked economists why they had failed to predict the size of 126,000-job gain in October, the reason they gave more than any other was underestimating that consumers would spend such a large proportion of ?additional after-tax income resulting from tax cuts.?
Comparing the Bush economy to Hoover's Great Depression is just silly, and implying that tax cuts are not contributing to job growth deserves an "F" in Freshman economics.
Sources
Blue Chip Economic Indicators: Top Analysts? Forecasts Of The U.S. Economic Outlook For The Year Ahead Vol. 28, No. 11, 10 Nov. 2003
Alan Greenspan, Chairman, Federal Reserve Board, Remarks at the Securities Industry Association annual meeting, Boca Raton , Florida Nov. 2003
Related Articles
Kerry Makes Bogus Comparison to Great Depression He claims US suffers greatest job loss since the 30's, which is not true
posted on June 15, 2004 04:54:22 PM new
I just want to know HOW MANY of those wonderful new jobs created are in the service economy--in others words, jobs that don't provide a living wage.
When our son graduated from Evergreen State College in Olympia WA 10 years ago, the class motto was "Do you want fries with that?"
I see more and more senior citizens working at Wal-Mart. I hear of families where a jobholder has taken a second, service-industry job to help his family make ends meet.
If someone has the service-industry "job creation" statistics, I'd like to see them here.
___________________________________
As I've matured, I've learned . .
#2. . . that the people you care most about in life are taken from you too soon and all the less important ones just never go away. And the real pains in the butt are permanent.
You are correct- I did start with a cut-and-paste - but I generally speak for myself, how often do you do so? Mostly I see you use your own words when it comes to insults or misstatements of fact.
I could have included the URL (and I will at the end of this post)but I didn't do so intentionally because of the length of the article and the author's obvious bias against Bush. Instead, I took the summation, edited it to remove SOME of the editorializing and then posted it.
You still have only responded to item #1 and did so poorly . You also ASSUME that the opinions in that post mirror my own. You have no idea whether that is true.
I was interested in how the blind devotees of GW would respond to these criticisms - and yours matched my expectations.
source -http://hnn.us/articles/5019.html
[ edited by bob9585 on Jun 15, 2004 05:10 PM ]
posted on June 15, 2004 05:07:41 PM new
roadsmith - Living wage?? Guess it depends on how much everyone decides what a living wage is. But according the the US Department....the hourly wage is UP...even though that's not what one normally hears in the media.
---------------
bob - That's why I don't like wasting my time anymore to answer a long list of FALSE charges....because all it ever ends up getting is rude comments from the lefties here....like yours. You pretend you are honestly asking questions because you want to hear the answers....when all the time it's some type of sick set-up.
We are not blind. We have formed different opinions than you have. That doesn't make us blind to what the facts are. But don't let the facts get in your way.
posted on June 15, 2004 05:35:41 PM newLiving wage?? Guess it depends on how much everyone decides what a living wage is. But according the the US Department....the hourly wage is UP...even though that's not what one normally hears in the media.
Kansas: $2.65
Ohio: $4.25 (Except employers with gross annual sales from $150,000 to $500,000: they pay $3.85) AND (Except for employers with gross annual sales under $150,000: they pay $2.80
SEVEN States have no minimum wage laws: Alabama, Arizona, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina and Tennessee.
So Washington pays the most for minimum wage, at $7.16. Working 8 hours a day would get you $57.28 per day before taxes. Even if you worked 7 days a week, with no days off, you would only gross $400.96 per week, and $1603.84 per month.
The great majority of the jobs that the administration is bragging about are minimum wage jobs.
Tell me, Linda, can you live off of $1603.84 (before taxes) per month? Much less raise a family?
In states that use the Fed minimum wage of $5.15 a person working 8 hours a day, 7 days a week, with no days off would earn $1153.60 before taxes.
____________________
We are not afraid to entrust the American people with unpleasant facts, foreign ideas, alien philosophies, and competitive values. For a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people. -- John F. Kennedy
