New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

Disappointing.....

Zam-Zam

Senator
Good Friday turned into bad Friday after the disappointing news from the Labor Department that employers created just 120,000 jobs in March. Economists were expecting a number north of 200,000, and while the unemployment rate dipped to 8.2% from 8.3%, it was because workers gave up looking for work and dropped out of the workforce altogether.

Stock futures traded for a brief 45 minutes Friday on the news and their reaction was swiftly negative. The full reaction is being seem this morning, and it is looking just as bad, with Dow futures indicating a triple-digit loss at the open, and Nasdaq and S&P 500 futures lower by a full percent.

The morning declines piggyback what was the worst week of the year on Wall Street. The Dow fell nearly 1.2% last week, the Nasdaq Composite fell 0.4% and the S&P 500 dropped 0.75%.

While the disappointing March jobs report is now behind us, first-quarter earnings season is not, and things unofficially kick off on Tuesday with aluminum giant Alcoa (AA: 9.51, -0.09, -0.94%).

Analysts have been dramatically downgrading their expectations for corporate growth at the start of the new year -- Thomson Reuters now expects first-quarter earnings growth of 3.2%, while fourth-quarter growth was 9.2%.

The CEOs of General Motors (GM: 23.65, -0.55, -2.27%), AIG (AIG: 32.25, +0.26, +0.81%) and Ally Financial will not see a pay raise this year. The government says that's because the companies received huge taxpayer bailouts during the financial crisis and still haven't repaid them.

Don’t feel too bad, though, for the trio of CEOs; they're still taking home total compensation of between $9 million and $11 million each.






http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2012/04/09/friday-jobs-data-slamming-stocks/
 

degsme

Council Member
Yawn. Markets fluctuate. Yes and? Pretending there is a direct causal relationship to the economy has been debunked so many times it is tiresome to repeat.
 

Lapcat

Governor
When we stop hearing about more planned layoffs from US companies....maybe then (big maybe) we can believe we are recovering. Until then, it's just more leftist lies, BS and propaganda.

Lockheed Martin is laying off, Best Buy, Procter & Gamble, American Airlines
and others. Hell, even Yahoo is laying off employees.

And the socialists are all about blaming capitalism...that eeeevil system that they seek to "replace".

Does this sound like a ""recovery"" to anyone?

Only to a Stuck-On-Stupid or an avowed dishonest leftist.
 

degsme

Council Member
One hopes that we are spared a third "Summer of Recovery" similar to the last two.
Yup. And the only way to do that is to get rid of the Conservative Fiscal policies the nation has been underperforming on since 2002 when they were implemented.

Go look it up 2002-2007 we UNDERPERFORMED historic GDP growht by 22%. Despite all the conservative fiscal policies you would want.

And Obama basically got The Stimulus and NO OTHER FISCAL POLICY that he proposed because of the unprecedented Filbuster by the GOP http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/reference/cloture_motions/clotureCounts.htm and then the Just Say No GOP Congress.

We are running on CONSERVATIVE FISCAL POLICIES, and that is PRECISELY why our growth rate is more like conservative Switzerland's rather than dynamic Germany's or Norway's or the PRCs.
 

Zam-Zam

Senator
Yup. And the only way to do that is to get rid of the Conservative Fiscal policies the nation has been underperforming on since 2002 when they were implemented.

Go look it up 2002-2007 we UNDERPERFORMED historic GDP growht by 22%. Despite all the conservative fiscal policies you would want.

And Obama basically got The Stimulus and NO OTHER FISCAL POLICY that he proposed because of the unprecedented Filbuster by the GOP http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/reference/cloture_motions/clotureCounts.htm and then the Just Say No GOP Congress.

We are running on CONSERVATIVE FISCAL POLICIES, and that is PRECISELY why our growth rate is more like conservative Switzerland's rather than dynamic Germany's or Norway's or the PRCs.



From the day Barack Obama became President to the midterm elections, Democrats controlled both the House and the Senate by fairly substantial numbers. If the President was unable to his fiscal policies enacted, I would venture to say the blame can hardly be leveled at the minority party. If you can't govern with a majority, you can't govern.
 

degsme

Council Member
From the day Barack Obama became President to the midterm elections, Democrats controlled both the House and the Senate by fairly substantial numbers.
Irrelevant. The GOP Enagaged in a historically unpredented rate of filibuster http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/reference/cloture_motions/clotureCounts.htm And the Dems only had a Filibuster-proof majority for 30 days (from when Franken was sworn in on July 7 2009 to when the Senate went into recess in August 2007 - after that Kennedy died).

And since NO OTHER PRESIDENT has EVER faced a minority filibuster like that - not even GWB after having not been elected by the majority of voters yet who still engaged in aggressive rewriting of Fiscal Policy - its more than dishonest to suggest that Obama was EVER given the opportunity to implmenent any fiscal policy other than the most rudimentary of TEMPORARY emergency stimulus.
 

Zam-Zam

Senator
Irrelevant. The GOP Enagaged in a historically unpredented rate of filibuster http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/reference/cloture_motions/clotureCounts.htm And the Dems only had a Filibuster-proof majority for 30 days (from when Franken was sworn in on July 7 2009 to when the Senate went into recess in August 2007 - after that Kennedy died).

And since NO OTHER PRESIDENT has EVER faced a minority filibuster like that - not even GWB after having not been elected by the majority of voters yet who still engaged in aggressive rewriting of Fiscal Policy - its more than dishonest to suggest that Obama was EVER given the opportunity to implmenent any fiscal policy other than the most rudimentary of TEMPORARY emergency stimulus.


It is relevant.

Both Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton worked with a legislative branch that was controlled by the opposition party. Both were able to get legislation passed and promote their agendas. According to you, Barack Obama could not effectively work with a House and Senate run by his own party, and its everyone elses fault but his.

That dog won't hunt.
 

degsme

Council Member
It is relevant.

Both Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton worked with a legislative branch that was controlled by the opposition party.
And Obama tried as well. The difference is that Dems have invariably been one's willing to give the Elected POTUS "a chance to govern as he was elected". They even said that with Reagan.

And Clinton
1) was not filibustered from day 1 forwards. He had 2 years of control of both houses - as did Obama - but Clinton WAS NOT FILIBUSTERED

And its not becuase the votes were any less party line votes against him. The Difference is that the GOP Senate in1993 did not come out and say "our #1 Priority is to make Bill Clinton a 1 Term PResident - even though they were in the midst of an economic recession. They made getting out of the recession the #1 priority.

But Obama was not given that opportunity. Obama worked fine with his own House and Senate. The claim he didn't is a dog that won't hunt.

The unprecedented - and I don't mean a 10% or 20% increase but a whopping 100% INCREASE in Filibusters by the GOP is the difference. http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/reference/cloture_motions/clotureCounts.htm

Bottom line. The GOP vetoed every Obama Fiscal Policy except the original Stimulus. That's a matter of public record.

That also means that the CURRENT FISCAL POLICIES, are CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN POLICIES. And that is EXACTLY why we have such anemic growth rates.
 

Zam-Zam

Senator
And Obama tried as well. The difference is that Dems have invariably been one's willing to give the Elected POTUS "a chance to govern as he was elected". They even said that with Reagan.

And Clinton
1) was not filibustered from day 1 forwards. He had 2 years of control of both houses - as did Obama - but Clinton WAS NOT FILIBUSTERED

And its not becuase the votes were any less party line votes against him. The Difference is that the GOP Senate in1993 did not come out and say "our #1 Priority is to make Bill Clinton a 1 Term PResident - even though they were in the midst of an economic recession. They made getting out of the recession the #1 priority.

But Obama was not given that opportunity. Obama worked fine with his own House and Senate. The claim he didn't is a dog that won't hunt.

The unprecedented - and I don't mean a 10% or 20% increase but a whopping 100% INCREASE in Filibusters by the GOP is the difference. http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/reference/cloture_motions/clotureCounts.htm

Bottom line. The GOP vetoed every Obama Fiscal Policy except the original Stimulus. That's a matter of public record.

That also means that the CURRENT FISCAL POLICIES, are CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN POLICIES. And that is EXACTLY why we have such anemic growth rates.




Obama tried, you say.


Reagan and Clinton succeeded.


Success requires no excuses. Failure does.


Since you're offering excuses on his behalf, I must assume you believe Obama failed where others had succeeded.
 

degsme

Council Member
Obama tried, you say.


Reagan and Clinton succeeded.
Takes two to tango.

Clinton WAS NOT FILBUSTERED
Reagan was given the benefit of the doubt.

Success requires no excuses.
Bullsh!t. You don't blame a woman for being raped (well perhaps you do), or the black girl who got shot over the weekend for getting shot by a racist thug driving around shooting black people.

When the GOP Minority in the US Senate opted to VETO EVERYTHING - they took ownership of the consequences. When you do nothing but obstruct - you get the responsibility for that. And its about tiem Conservatives TOOK RESPONSIBILITY for their actions.
 

Zam-Zam

Senator
Takes two to tango.

Clinton WAS NOT FILBUSTERED
Reagan was given the benefit of the doubt.

Success requires no excuses.
Bullsh!t. You don't blame a woman for being raped (well perhaps you do), or the black girl who got shot over the weekend for getting shot by a racist thug driving around shooting black people.

When the GOP Minority in the US Senate opted to VETO EVERYTHING - they took ownership of the consequences. When you do nothing but obstruct - you get the responsibility for that. And its about tiem Conservatives TOOK RESPONSIBILITY for their actions.



To sum up your position, Obama has failed, and we should blame someone other than Obama.


A lot of conservatives will happily accept at least the first half of your conclusions, if not the second half.
 

degsme

Council Member
To sum up your position, Obama has failed, and we should blame someone other than Obama.
Want some oats with all that straw?

Obama didn't fail. The GOP refused to be responsible in hopes of making Obama APPEAR as a failure. They have actually failed at doing so.

And the fiscal Policies that we have been living under for 14 or so years, are taking their toll. Pretending otherwise is dishonest. And yet you propose MORE OF THE SAME???!!!??
 

Zam-Zam

Senator
Want some oats with all that straw?

Obama didn't fail. The GOP refused to be responsible in hopes of making Obama APPEAR as a failure. They have actually failed at doing so.

And the fiscal Policies that we have been living under for 14 or so years, are taking their toll. Pretending otherwise is dishonest. And yet you propose MORE OF THE SAME???!!!??



So now you claim Obama did not fail. He therefore must have succeeded. Is that what you're claiming?


If he, on the other hand, did not succeed, then he failed. This is basic English. So pick one.
 

degsme

Council Member
So now you claim Obama did not fail. He therefore must have succeeded. Is that what you're claiming?
He suceeded in digging the nation out of a crash.
And he has succeeded incrementally where possible.

He has not been given the opportunity to succeed or fail in the Fiscal Policiy side beyond the Stimulus (which succeeded) and the PPACA
 

haree

Council Member
When we stop hearing about more planned layoffs from US companies....maybe then (big maybe) we can believe we are recovering. Until then, it's just more leftist lies, BS and propaganda.

Lockheed Martin is laying off, Best Buy, Procter & Gamble, American Airlines
and others. Hell, even Yahoo is laying off employees.

And the socialists are all about blaming capitalism...that eeeevil system that they seek to "replace".

Does this sound like a ""recovery"" to anyone?

Only to a Stuck-On-Stupid or an avowed dishonest leftist.
Well I agree with your post, we should to aware about it already. Particularly the paragraph which I really appreciate to you about that...That is given bellow...

"Lockheed Martin is laying off, Best Buy, Procter & Gamble, American Airlines
and others. Hell, even Yahoo is laying off employees".

personalized koozies
 
Top