kkibak, gutting the military and intelligence to create the illusion of a projected budget deficit isn't anything to marvel at.
projected? there's been a deficit every year bush has been in office. and i am not sure how i suggested it was something to marvel at..
Since you're too ignorant and blind I'll point out the obvious difference for you: Wages rising fastest in years for clinton...On the other hand with bush it's only the rich getting a raise and the poor continuing to make $7.00/hour. Sort of changes the outlook on things doesn't it
Wow... not just paying to put stories in newspapers anymore.. now they're paying gay cowboys to be cheerleaders. What kind of silly propaganda will you post next? I prefer bush at his best.... talking nonsense and making an ass of himself constantly....And the impersonations....and lettermans top 10 fav bush moments being an idiot.... and more of bush being himself...
Still no source for those burger king jobs? Surely you can find something? Oh, the doom and gloom! You'd bitch about a free lunch! Wipe your nose, boy
What we are witnessing is the destruction of America middle class. Unemployment rate is one of the mechanisms to convince everyone who can be convinced that economy is on the rise. It is part of 'just think positive' propaganda distributed by the government and corporate mafia. Bush is a talking head whose job is to read propaganda produced by the corporate mafia speechwriters to the public. What happens to the economy is neither his fault nor achievement, because distributing propaganda is the only task he and his goverment perform. Everything else is managed by corporate mafia. That includes inflating housing bubble, overtaxation, and everything that serves the goal of destroying the middle class.
DP seems to be a magnet for the deranged! It's all a big conspiracy! All the economists and news sources say the economy is thriving, but it just can't be so because it's a propaganda campaign. I can't help but wonder if Medicare covers delusion!
The reason why DP seems to you like a magnet for people whose opinion interferes with your state of happiness is because DP is temporarily not censored. This is abnormal for information sources that you are used to rely on. The result is that what you see here may contradict to the belief system implanted into you. The % of people whose opinion you are encouraged to reject in real world is roughly proportional to their % on DP. As far as anyone can tell, there is no reason why DP would attract people of certain political views, but I encourage you to look for it. The above is for educational use only, I don't suggest that you try to abandon your current belief system as it appears to serve you well.
Bush sucks really hard, take a look at this: Seriously, he's better than the avarage american president. You are lucky to have him.
I have no intention of doing so. Setting aside reality in favor of delusion is not healthy. Opinions are nothing more than opinions, without substance to back them up.
It's mostly destroyed and what's left is insanely difficult to obtain. You can only pray that one day it will fall in your lap my friend. On the other hand, what proof would you accept? As it would be sufficient for our purposes.
Most claims by politicians that have to do with their impact on the jobless rate are bogus. During Clinton's period in office there was a long period of progress from a recession, a tech boom, huge (in fact over investment in tech) and at the end of his time in office- a recession as the cyclical part of the economy turned sour. No matter what he said about balancing the budget impacting jobs ...it was hogwash. Similarly, Bush tax cuts have little impact on job growth. Mostly, this economy is thriving on low interest rates and enormous growth in real estate markets. Should the real estate portion of the economy slow down...we got job problems. The claims by Bush or Clinton to positively impacting the economy are as silly as the first post in this thread.
Source, please? I ask for several reasons. First, a score of 55.2 in the manufacturing index is nothing to write home about - it is barely over stagnant. And this is well below what would have been expected in any recovery from a recession. This, however, is apparently itself old news. At least according to NACM the manufacturing credit index, as of January, 2006, is at 50.6. As the NACM goes on to say, "readings for both (manufacturing and service) sectors are at their lowest since 2002 and 2003, respectively....the manufacturing index has declined for seven consecutive months and is now in neutral territory." I agree with the National Association of Manufacturers: - As I have argued elsewhere, there is an amplifier effect from the manufacturing sector which is critical to the long run health of the economy overall; - overall output has increased, which is to be expected off a recession; but at a recovery rate much slower than would be expected, from historical models (of the last 80 years, in NAM's time frame of analysis; see also Manufacturing Growth Slower Than Expected). This supports the NACM's conclusions, above; And growth has been much less than the service sector (which is part of the problem, in my mind, of "service as panacea" as an economic principle). -productivity has increased, a good thing; but manufacturing jobs continue to decline (According to NAM, since July, 2000, a loss of 2.8 million jobs). Some might argue that manufacturing has "engineered its way" out of continued growth in employment. (See: Cleveland Fed for a look at this issue). But the real decline in manufacturing employment is likely due to a simple decline in demand for U.S. manufactured goods. The Cleveland Fed goes on to say: In 1990, roughly 30% of U.S. Gross purchases were domestically produced (manufactured) goods, and 52% were domestic services. Now (as of 1/1/2006), only 25% of U.S. goods purchases were domestically produced - which the Fed explains as a twofold problem - the rise in imported goods, and a switch out of demand from goods generally to services. This is supported by NAM: "Manufacturing exports as a share of GDP have contracted since 1997, reflecting increased global competition, an overvalued dollar and slow growth overseas." To me, these all point to a long-run problem and it is structural in nature. I don't lay this at the feet of the current president, obviously, as it has been long in the making. But I do blame this president, for one, for blithely ignoring this essential weakness while pursuing an expansionist fiscal and military policy. Now, before flaming with some inane response that this is just "Bush hatred" at work, or sweeping generalizations that this is "just history upside down" - how about responding to the facts as presented?
I've highlighted a few things from the CNN source you provided that seem to contradict what you are saying: The 55.2 is noted in your source. Anything above 50 is growth, not stagnation. In further reading, more interesting details are revealed: More interesting reading on manufacturing from just two years ago (keep in mind, 34 months (almost three years) of continued growth): http://www.forbes.com/newswire/2004/06/01/rtr1390735.html Highest in 31 years. Two decade high of 63.6. 34th straight month of growth. It begs to question: When Is Good News Bad News?