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

Obama has a lot of gall claiming he handed off the current recovery...

Raoul_Luke

I feel a bit lightheaded. Maybe you should drive.
Obviously, changing the status of many from “illegal” to “legal” would increase the proportion of legal immigration while reducing the population of those whose immigration status is “illegal.”
What does any of that have to do with immigration policy going forward? Don't bother to answer that - we all know the objective of your post was to obfuscate the fact that the answer is, exactly nothing.
 

Raoul_Luke

I feel a bit lightheaded. Maybe you should drive.
1. Obama certainly never pledg d to “crack down on the evil business men.”
2. The deepening of the economic crisis always preceded Obama’s dilatory limps to the left.
3. In which he was merely acquiescing to overwhelming popular demand.
4. Marxists do not credit the president’s policies, except insofar as it is understood that the U.S. benefitted from other countries adopting more rightist policies and consequently being less able to compete with the U.S.
5. The conclusion that Obama improved the economy is actually that of a vulgar empiricism, which looks no farther than the inescapable empirical reality that even as the capitalist world remains mired in a depression for which capitalism has no solution other than mass death, the U.S. has enjoyed several years of (by modern capitalist standards) plenty beginning with a sharp reversal of fortune about when Obama’s first budget took effect. This empirical conclusion ignores the extent to which the U.S.’s strong economy was due not to Obama policies that fundamentally improved the economy but rather to unsustainable monetary stimulus, the one-time effects of the opening of China to capitalism, and the self-inflicted wounds to rival imperialist powers via economically destructive conservative fiscal policies.
1. Actually yes he didm over and over and over again.
2. Precisely - as I pointed out, people make economic decisions based on their perceptions of future economic conditions, and not the current condition.
3. Never let a crisi go to waste.
4. Um, actually, you most certainly have.
5. The conclusion that Obama improved the economy is simply a self fulfilling prophesy: GDP = C + G + I.
 

EatTheRich

President
What does any of that have to do with immigration policy going forward? Don't bother to answer that - we all know the objective of your post was to obfuscate the fact that the answer is, exactly nothing.
If your problem with illegal immigration is that it’s illegal, the obvious solution is to legalize it.
 

redtide

Mayor
We see that you're still irrationally hating on the black man. You need an attitude adjustment.
nobama's color has nothing to do with it. As a nation we are indeed fortunate that Trump was able to undo most of Nobama'a damage and get the US back on track.
 

EatTheRich

President
1. Actually yes he didm over and over and over again.
2. Precisely - as I pointed out, people make economic decisions based on their perceptions of future economic conditions, and not the current condition.
3. Never let a crisi go to waste.
4. Um, actually, you most certainly have.
5. The conclusion that Obama improved the economy is simply a self fulfilling prophesy: GDP = C + G + I.
1. Got an example?
2. So they knew what he was going to do before he was dragged into doing it?
3. The working class was certainly able to push the crisis, and more so the recovery, to push its interests. The ruling class did its best to take advantage as well in its own way.
4. Got an example?
5. Hard to find an economic indicator that didn’t improve during his tenure. Certainly much improved besides GDP. Anyway, if you had actually read my post you might have noticed that I was arguing against the idea that Obama should get much credit for the improvement of the economy while he was president.
 

Raoul_Luke

I feel a bit lightheaded. Maybe you should drive.
1. Got an example?
2. So they knew what he was going to do before he was dragged into doing it?
3. The working class was certainly able to push the crisis, and more so the recovery, to push its interests. The ruling class did its best to take advantage as well in its own way.
4. Got an example?
5. Hard to find an economic indicator that didn’t improve during his tenure. Certainly much improved besides GDP. Anyway, if you had actually read my post you might have noticed that I was arguing against the idea that Obama should get much credit for the improvement of the economy while he was president.
1. As the Democratic Party’s base has become increasingly progressive, its leaders have resorted to demonizing the “top 1 percent” and Wall Street bankers during campaign season. No one benefitted from such weaponized rhetoric more than Barack Obama during his 2008 presidential campaign. He smeared Wall Street “fat cats” time after time on the trail.

https://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/national-party-news/330806-obama-proves-democrats-anti-wall-street-rhetoric-a

2. Of course he did - he claimed he was the second coming of FDR for crying out loud. So why wouldn't rational people expect a depression to follow?

3. Agreed!

4. Marxists (progressives) here defend Obama like they would their hometown sports team every day.

5. Actually it isn't (industrial production, debt levels, trade deficit, labor force participation, median incomes, homelessness, poverty rates - interest rates remained at essentially zero his entire time in office!!!) - the only measures that "improved" under Obama were those that are distorted by big government (GDP, DJIA & other financial assets, the number of jobs as opposed to LFPR & incomes, etc.).
 

Raoul_Luke

I feel a bit lightheaded. Maybe you should drive.
If your problem with illegal immigration is that it’s illegal, the obvious solution is to legalize it.
And there you have it - the left's "fix" for the immigration problem is to open the borders to all comers (which, of course, was my original point).
 

EatTheRich

President
1. As the Democratic Party’s base has become increasingly progressive, its leaders have resorted to demonizing the “top 1 percent” and Wall Street bankers during campaign season. No one benefitted from such weaponized rhetoric more than Barack Obama during his 2008 presidential campaign. He smeared Wall Street “fat cats” time after time on the trail.

https://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/national-party-news/330806-obama-proves-democrats-anti-wall-street-rhetoric-a

2. Of course he did - he claimed he was the second coming of FDR for crying out loud. So why wouldn't rational people expect a depression to follow?

3. Agreed!

4. Marxists (progressives) here defend Obama like they would their hometown sports team every day.

5. Actually it isn't (industrial production, debt levels, trade deficit, labor force participation, median incomes, homelessness, poverty rates - interest rates remained at essentially zero his entire time in office!!!) - the only measures that "improved" under Obama were those that are distorted by big government (GDP, DJIA & other financial assets, the number of jobs as opposed to LFPR & incomes, etc.).
1. He never attacked capitalism as a system or the capitalists as a class. He blamed the crisis of capitalism on the greed of specific Wall Streeters in order to avoid calling the capitalist system into question, much as Trump has done.
2. Well, rational people might have noticed that the depression was 4 years old by the one FDR took office. Or that FDR’s “socialist” policies basically involved putting the U.S.’s welfare state on the same footing Germany had had for 40 years and continued to have under its far-right government.
4. Disagreed. I point out blatant lies and inaccuracies about him but that’s the extent of any “defense.”
5. Speaking of inaccuracies:

Industrial production rose 14% under Obama.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/IPMAN.

Debt grew at an annualized rate of 7% compared with 9% under Bush.
https://www.thebalance.com/us-debt-by-president-by-dollar-and-percent-3306296

The trade deficit grew at an annualized rate of 5% ... mostly due to a strong industrial recovery fueling a demand for imports, while countries with austerity policies remained poor and unable to purchase many American exports.
It has risen at 8% per year under Trump.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.marketwatch.com/amp/story/guid/F487DABA-95C3-11E8-AC96-8F0E51844F54

Median incomes went up under Obama.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/200838/median-household-income-in-the-united-states/

The homelessness rate was cut by nearly 2/3 under Obama.
https://endhomelessness.org/homelessness-in-america/homelessness-statistics/state-of-homelessness-report/

Poverty declined by 7% under Obama.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/200463/us-poverty-rate-since-1990/#0
 
Last edited:

EatTheRich

President
And there you have it - the left's "fix" for the immigration problem is to open the borders to all comers (which, of course, was my original point).
If I spoke for the left, the debate would be over and the majority would be using its power to put that program into effect. But I don’t. Not even close.
 

Raoul_Luke

I feel a bit lightheaded. Maybe you should drive.
If I spoke for the left, the debate would be over and the majority would be using its power to put that program into effect. But I don’t. Not even close.
You said Durbin supported limits to immigration. I asked for a link and you linked to the DACA legislation that only provides citizenship for illegals, and (in the version supported by Democrats) is silent on any actual reforms to curtail future illegal (or legal) immigration.
 

EatTheRich

President
You said Durbin supported limits to immigration. I asked for a link and you linked to the DACA legislation that only provides citizenship for illegals, and (in the version supported by Democrats) is silent on any actual reforms to curtail future illegal (or legal) immigration.
Incorrect. What I said (accurately) is that Durbin supports a particular policy proposal that would, as I put it, “slash illegal immigration.”
 

Raoul_Luke

I feel a bit lightheaded. Maybe you should drive.
Incorrect. What I said (accurately) is that Durbin supports a particular policy proposal that would, as I put it, “slash illegal immigration.”
And, in fact, it does no such thing. It merely makes a pathway to citizenship for illegals once they get here. If anything, that will lead to INCREASED illegal immigration.
 

EatTheRich

President
And, in fact, it does no such thing. It merely makes a pathway to citizenship for illegals once they get here. If anything, that will lead to INCREASED illegal immigration.
The amount of regulation is strictly regulated by the market. People immigrate because the alternative is starvation. The question is only whether they have opportunities to immigrate legally or not. The DREAM Act would create a new way to be a legal immigrant for people who would otherwise immigrate illegally.
 

middleview

President
Supporting Member
You said Durbin supported limits to immigration. I asked for a link and you linked to the DACA legislation that only provides citizenship for illegals, and (in the version supported by Democrats) is silent on any actual reforms to curtail future illegal (or legal) immigration.
DACA does not provide citizenship....
 

EatTheRich

President
The amount of regulation is strictly regulated by the market. People immigrate because the alternative is starvation. The question is only whether they have opportunities to immigrate legally or not. The DREAM Act would create a new way to be a legal immigrant for people who would otherwise immigrate illegally.
Sorry, should have said the amount of *immigration is regulated by the market.
 

Raoul_Luke

I feel a bit lightheaded. Maybe you should drive.
Sure it does ... it says that those eligible for DACA can no longer be illegal immigrants once they apply.
Precisely! And there you have it folks - the left's "solution" to "illegal" immigration, is to…wait for it, make it LEGAL!
 

Raoul_Luke

I feel a bit lightheaded. Maybe you should drive.
Only to point out that once again you posted something that was false.
Only in your constipated viewpoint. So exactly what the F*CK does it provide? A pathway to citizenship? How is that inconsistent with what I said?
 
Top