No Jobs Lost in August

Arlen wrote: It would seem to me that 17000 minus 17000 is zero. Maybe new math might give you some other answer. Seems to me that you are the one who would cling to any explanation that would make Obama seem more than the results that he produces.

Arlene..Zero is better than the negative numbers the Republicans gave us. It's a lot better darlin...If I can call you that?

Must be so hard for them to see those Bush numbers...going down...and the Obama numbers....going up....

LadyJazzer wrote: Must be so hard for them to see those Bush numbers...going down...and the Obama numbers....going up....

They act like they don't see it all all?

Just like they keep talking like the Repubkllicans are fiscally conservative when at no time in history have they been that..its all talk.....Or as I like to call them: outright lies..

LadyJazzer wrote: What part of "17,000 jobs created" are you having trouble with? Is it the "created" part?

What part of 17000 jobs went away do you not understand? Grade school math, lady. Is that a skill that you never developed?
What you are doing is "spin" in its undiluted form. It is deceitful and immoral.

Arlene...What do you say about the graphs? Are they deceitful and immoral too?

Your argument is "Bush did it". Obama needs to "man-up" and take responsibility for HIS administration. This childish argument of "he did it too" is deflection and does not change the results given by Obama.

Vice Lord wrote:

Arlen wrote: It would seem to me that 17000 minus 17000 is zero. Maybe new math might give you some other answer. Seems to me that you are the one who would cling to any explanation that would make Obama seem more than the results that he produces.

Arlene..Zero is better than the negative numbers the Republicans gave us. It's a lot better darlin...If I can call you that?

Hey dip s**t and LJ, look at the chart. You say it was the Republicans, but it is when the dems had TOTAL control of both houses! AND when the housing bubble burst thanks to the deregulation that Clinton signed in 1999. You guys are so fricken clueless!

The Viking wrote: Hey dip s**t and LJ, look at the chart. You say it was the Republicans, but it is when the dems had TOTAL control of both houses!

More Viking Lies.

Your credibility just went into negative numbers Viking..Noone even reads your posts anymore. You might want to go back into hiding again

VL, Viking's post was no lie.

Vice Lord wrote:

Local_Historian wrote: Proof that sometimes breaking even is NOT a win.

Did you even look at thr graph? We were making jobs untill you guys took over with your debt ceiling bill that cut government investment into the economy. You wanna go back to 1928?

1928 was an ok fiscal year, which we mirrored several years back. 1929 was the very bad year, and things did not get better for a long time. Learn your history, silly boy.

BTW? We have already surpassed 1928 - we are full on into the same situations as the early 1930s. Only real serious difference is the level of technology we command.

And who is YOU GUYS? No one here is a politician that I know of, currernly serving in office as a state rep, senator or congressmen. Us guys didn't do crap all, darling.

More paying attention to the history of it - making jobs- oh yeah - and building houses on spec, lending money on spec (the real way to look at it) with balloon rates, and then suddenly - balloon popped - half built houses stand empty, thousands more foreclosed upon and empty, storefronts empty, and jobs gone.

But yep - those of us who were paying our bills on time, not taking risky loans, etc - we're to blame. Right. Cause we here on 285Bound are so powerful, we caused a near economic collapse for the country and large parts of the world by just thinking about it.

All hail the mighty and powerful 285Bounders -a group that didn't even exist when all this crap started. Perhaps we are time travellers, too! oooOOOOooo!

Done sounding ridiculous yet?