You are aware that Bush had 46 consecutive months of job growth when they were enacted? So no, it does not take 8 years....I would say results come just a tad quicker.

 

There was growth but it was most anemic in 60 years. The economy was growing before the cuts, and then we started having job loss.

There was growth but it was most anemic in 60 years. The economy was growing before the cuts, and then we started having job loss.

 

Wrong as usual.

It's not like he can help his middle name. The reason he doesn't want it mentioned is because people (not naming any names) make a big deal out of it for no apparent reason. If my last name was McCarthy, does that mean I am going to accuse people of having communistic values? And don't turn around and be like "WHAT?! All I am saying is that he should be proud of it!" Everyone knows where you're going...

 

You do know that Kennedy's father was supposedly anti semantic ? Does that mean that JFK is secretly a Nazi sympathizer?

 

i am going the same place as everyone else with this administration, to the toilet.

You might as well be agruing with the wall.

 

Walls don't argue back!

How about: Four more years of record unemployment, deficits, and debt.....

 

Duh... Winning? :lol:

Wrong as usual.

 

While you can and should disagree with an opinion it is not good form to say "wrong - as usual." Can you provide a link that shows how the economy was NOT growing before the tax cuts, and I don't mean just one or two low quarters. I can provide plenty that show the growth in wages, jobs, and GDP that will support my "wrong" assertion.

There was growth but it was most anemic in 60 years. The economy was growing before the cuts, and then we started having job loss.

 

Will you give credit where credit is due? Ever?

Will you give credit where credit is due? Ever?

 

What do you mean?

 

Job growth per president:

 

http://www.davemanuel.com/2010/11/08/non-farm-payroll-job-growth-by-president-1948-2010/

 

GWB added 1.8 million jobs over 8 years.

 

Jimmy Carter added almost 10.5 million in only 4 years.

 

Job growth by decade from the 1940s

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2010/01/01/GR2010010101478.html

Edited April 5, 201115 yr by acemona

While you can and should disagree with an opinion it is not good form to say "wrong - as usual." Can you provide a link that shows how the economy was NOT growing before the tax cuts, and I don't mean just one or two low quarters. I can provide plenty that show the growth in wages, jobs, and GDP that will support my "wrong" assertion.

 

Quit posting your opinion like it is fact, especially when it's wrong. I have provided proof, repeated times and most of the time to your incorrect claims like the one in this thread. Bush inherited a mess from Clinton and for basically 2 years the economy was heading down. The Bush tax cuts were implemented in 2003 and we enjoyed steady growth for the next 4-5 years until the housing bubble exploded.

Quit posting your opinion like it is fact, especially when it's wrong. I have provided proof, repeated times and most of the time to your incorrect claims like the one in this thread. Bush inherited a mess from Clinton and for basically 2 years the economy was heading down. The Bush tax cuts were implemented in 2003 and we enjoyed steady growth for the next 4-5 years until the housing bubble exploded.

 

So I need to say, in my opinion in every post? By the way, I don't see a refutation of the links I posted. 1.08 million jobs in 8 years seems pretty anemic to me.

Seems like a bunch of jobs added during Ford, Carter, Reagan. Wondering if this number reflects women heavily populating the work force?

Seems like a bunch of jobs added during Ford, Carter, Reagan. Wondering if this number reflects women heavily populating the work force?

 

It is interesting, I thought maybe we were heading OUT of recessions during most of those. I am not sure.

So I need to say, in my opinion in every post? By the way, I don't see a refutation of the links I posted. 1.08 million jobs in 8 years seems pretty anemic to me.

 

While jobs were being added, jobs were also being lost, like woodsrider said, because of the housing market. Those jobs that were lost subtracted from those jobs that were created. 1.08 million jobs is not a lot but its still job creation. You have to consider all problems. You can't just look at one statistic and go "Welp! There it is. Only X many of jobs were created therefore he sucks." You have to look at reason behind it.

Edited April 6, 201115 yr by marvel

McDonald's is looking to hire 50,000 in one day! That should help this quarters stats a tiny bit.

" I THOUGHT we could!" :confused::confused: