I noticed that the economy is starting to edge up a little now that all "hope" of more obama stimulus has been crushed and business is forced to get back to business rather than waiting for more easy money. A overfed cat wont chase rats. :)

Ever hear of Google? Know how to search what his policies are and have been passed? Or do you need them to be spoon fed to you?

Let's see, he provided life-saving loans to the US car companies GM and Chrysler. The Repugs would have let them rot and liquidate 2M jobs w/them.

He provided the stimulus package, with almost HALF of the stimulus package were tax cuts! A big chunk was to help bail out the states. The rest were actual stimulus (tiny portion). That saved 2M jobs at least!

He extended the Bush tax cuts which...are a bit dubious in helping the economy, but didn't hurt.

Mortgage program helped hundreds of thousands from foreclosing.

Stimulus in green energy/economy.

And what are the GOP's answer? Austerity measures. CUT CUT CUT! Ya, that will grow the economy. That's what they're doing in Europe now and the economy and jobs have stalled there.

Get a clue and do some research.

Also noticeably absent from the article was the fact that as more and more people run out of unemployment benefits or stop looking for work, they are no longer counted as "unemployed." There is no way 200,000 new jobs resulted in a net drop in the unemployment rate. Why not? Because the economy needs to add at least 250,000 jobs a month just to keep up with new people entering the workforce... and that's just to keep the unemployment rate the same. All this percentage drop really means is that we have more people than ever who have been without a job for over 99 weeks. Hooray? And you wait and see... next month or in March we will see another fairly large drop because most of these "new jobs" that were created were seasonal.

MSDNC - Wrong.

"The decline in the headline jobless rate could stall even if the U.S. economy continues to heal. The rate has fallen partly as a result of a decline in the official size of the workforce. If so-called "discouraged" jobless workers see better odds of getting hired, begin looking again and then get counted as having re-entered the workforce, the decline in the unemployment rate could slow or reverse course. "

msdnc- YOU ARE EXACTLY RIGHT. They forgot to mention how many of these jobs were "seasonal" due to Christmas. Bloody hell!!! Obummer must think we just fell off the turnip truck.

Exactly what part of 'Seasonally Adjusted" are you folks having a problem? That means Xmas jobs were excluded from the calculation.

The anti Obama crowd is brain dead and apparently don't understand what "seasonally adjusted" means.

The manufacturing industry is also showing real gains for the first time since 07. And the employment numbers continue to head in the right direction. Obama's policies are working which, AS AN AMERICAN, I'm happy to see. Wish I could say the same about Europe, even China has been struggling.

That is not really the case. Seasonally adjusted assumes a historic percentage of hires during the holidays and applies this percentage to the new jobs created. Unfortunately, when the actual numbers are calculated, there is no way to know how many "Xmas" jobs were actually created.

For example, if retailers expected a great holiday sales season, they may have hired more temporary workers than in previous years, which the calculations would have shown a number that is higher job creation than is actually the case. The flip side could also be true.

We will only know if they are real once we have several weeks starting after January 1 that show good job growth.

I guess the drop in unemployment to 8.5 is not a fact.

If in fact the economy is improving, how will Obama square that with his contention that the republicans are doing everything they can to keep the economy flat by blocking all his proposals. This would strongly imply that his proposals would have been counterproductive, and that by doing less meddling in the economy, it will improve on its own.

Thats it hardtostarboard, even with all the obstructionis, traiterous behavior of the Gaseous Old Pharts, President Obama at the helm is still sailing this country out of the depression that eight years of dubya got us into.

But all of us on the Left and the Center understand that no matter what President Obama does, you hateful racist on the right will continue to slander this great leader. It actually makes most of us on the Left and Center laugh at how really pathetic you are.

By the way hardtostarboard did you happen to see Morning Joe the morning after the Iowa Caucus. Here at this Republican enclave, where the show was being broadcasted, Debra Wasserman Schultz gave a shout out to the great job President Obama was doing and a noticeable group of the audience cheered.

The Gaseous Old Pharts are going doowwnn in November. Not to late to join the winning team.

I saw a comment that the Republicans would have let the auto industry liquidate and take 2M jobs with them. That isn't true. They would have saved the jobs too - if it was their responsibility. The problem is that the Republicans right now are a nasty deceitful crowd who will say anyting negative to discredit the president. That is why, despite being a lifelong Republican, I am vowing to never cast another Republican vote for as long as I live.

You wingnuts are pathetic, does it have to be told to you again and again that the BLS adjusts its numbers for seasonal hires and that most businesses hire for Chritmas season in October and November, NOT December. You wingnuts believe ANYTHING FUX noose tells you to believe.

MSDNC

Also noticeably absent from the article was the fact that as more and more people run out of unemployment benefits or stop looking for work, they are no longer counted as "unemployed."

Wrong. Running out of benefits has nothing to do with the numbers. But you are correct that if people choose to drop out of the jobs market, they are not counted as unemployed. Google it and get to the .gov site for details on the creation of these numbers... and BTW, NO, Obama didn't create the methods nor does he control the data.

But the article's headline "Better jobs data a mixed blessing for Obama" shows just how twisted our thinking gets in politics. It's not a mixed blessing. It's simply a good thing.

What part of small business and small banks are being suffocated to death with Dodd Frank regulations?

Perhaps big business can get back to hiring and working but I haven't paid myself in three years because I am my own bank for my small flower shop.

I don't even know what Obamacare is going to cost me I may be a dead man walking as it is already.

With 16% of people of color unemployed, 12 % of Latinos there is no reason for party time. Obama wasn't able to reduce the unemployment rate in areas where job is needed. This is a failure for the recovery plan of this administration, and this is why is so important for Obama ,extend unemployment benefits to protect his base in election time, instead to have real policies to generate more job.

Who is counted as unemployed?

Persons are classified as unemployed if they do not
have a job, have actively looked for work in the prior 4 weeks, and are
currently available for work.

This means, everyone who has "given up" are no longer counted! Daaaa!

The fact is that since the Republicans took control of the House and can filibuster in the Senate, very little of Obama's policies have been implemented this year. This includes the jobs bill he wanted passed "right now!" back in September. Gee...if his policies had worked so well, why did he want a new costly jobs bill a few months ago? Maybe realizing that the big government expansion has finally been ground to a halt and may be reversed has allowed the private sector to finally begin hiring? And this would have happened much sooner if it wasn't for Washington trying to "fix" the economy in 2008-10 while running up huge deficits.

he teahead

"Let's see, he provided life-saving loans to the US car companies GM and Chrysler. The Repugs would have let them rot and liquidate 2M jobs w/them."

Are you fnnnfnfnnfnfnfn kidding me?????? So you are in favor of giving a private company 50 billion dollars to bail out the bad perfomance and over pay of autoworkrs - you are actually praising a man who took over a private car company - pushed the volt on them - which is a collasal failure - and now the company is making mear millions in profit - you are such a dummy and such a hypocrite - if this were a bank you would complain but because its obama you praise and you took my money gave it to GM to compete against ford - what if I like ford??? you are such a dumbass - just move out of this damn country to a socialized one there are many out there greece spain take your pick

Look about 100,000 of the jobs counted are attached to hiring during the holidays. Messengers? Bar help? Wait staff? Retail merchandising, and accessories? I mean really. Yes, it is true some of that 100,000 might get to keep their jobs, but are they full-time jobs with benefits that have a future?

This says it all! Only Obama Fans can say 8.5% is on the road to "recovery" at the cost of $1 Trillion plus a year added on to the Federal Debt!

"People are still feeling like labor market is hurting and they're right," said Stanford economist Ed Lazear, who served as chief economist for George W. Bush. "Even if things are getting better, when you're at 8.5 percent unemployment, this a very different labor market than we saw in 2007 when the unemployment rate was 4.4 percent."

Here in Connecticut, the unemployment offices will be open this Saturday to handle all of the unemployment claims for the cancellation of all the seasonal Christmas retail jobs. Let's wait until the January unemployment #'s come out before we hail Obama and the recovery.

I see the Obama haters are bashing the information and the liberals a praising it. Figures.

@ME-sane (which I question)

Obama did not give the companies 5$50 billion dollars...he loaned the companies $50 billion dollars because the banks has mismanaged their business and didn't have the money to loan. And also those "high paid union workers" don't make any more than the non union workers at other automakers when you count the living expenses in the north.

What the doubters don't take into consideration is the supply and demand affect of the economy. As more people get work they buy items that have to be manufactured which puts more people back to work. The auto industry are hiring more people because they are making/selling more vehicles and their suppliers are also hiring to supply the needed parts to build the increase in demand for vehicles. It's a domino affect that is just reverse of the one that caused the near collapse of the economy.

Maybe some of you missed the figures of the past Christmas season which reported the best sales in years. All those items have to be replaced for the next group of buyers. Me...I spent $8500 dollars on Christmas gifts for the kids and grandchildren. A little more than last year.

"I can't give Washington, either Congress or the administration, any credit whatsoever," said Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn. "We just have not done things that need to be done. This (improvement is coming from) the private sector and its resiliency, in spite of the fact we've had very bad behavior out of Washington."

I believe he's talking about the do nothing actions of himself and the other Republican in congress that blocked all the jobs bills. Just think how many more jobs there may have been if they actually had passed a jobs bill.

he teahead

"Let's see, he provided life-saving loans to the US car companies GM and Chrysler. The Repugs would have let them rot and liquidate 2M jobs w/them."

Are you fnnnfnfnnfnfnfn kidding me?????? So you are in favor of giving a private company 50 billion dollars to bail out the bad perfomance and over pay of autoworkrs - you are actually praising a man who took over a private car company - pushed the volt on them - which is a collasal failure - and now the company is making mear millions in profit - you are such a dummy and such a hypocrite - if this were a bank you would complain but because its obama you praise and you took my money gave it to GM to compete against ford - what if I like ford??? you are such a dumbass - just move out of this damn country to a socialized one there are many out there greece spain take your pick

a) The loans have been repayed

b) All these GM employees and suppliers would have been unemployed, and that would have a HUGE ripple effect

c) had all these people lost their jobs, they would now be on unemployment

d) I fail to see why GM making millions in profit is a bad thing

If a company goes bankrupt, who pays? You think the company heads that ran it into the ground loses? Look at Trump. How many times has he filed for bankruptcy? When a company or individual goes bankrupt they are protected. They usually have to pay back some of their debts, but not all and at a slower pace.

If the car companies had gone bankrupt the ones hurt by it would be the employees (you're already crying about unemployment, imagine if the workers had all been unemployed as well), the businesses they owe money to and, in fact, the entire area where the car companies are located would have been hurt more than they already were.

I was initially upset about it also, but it turned out to be for the best after all.

hmmmm so the unemployment rate falls every year in december due to the holidays, yet they are calling this a win for obama? this happens almost every year, it has nothing to do with political policies. if i recall correctly, he said that his stimulus plan would have the unemployment rate at 6% by now, not over 8% like it is. bet they thought the rise in jobs for the caucus was due to his policies too... now if we could just get him to stop spending more money than any president in history and actually creat this revolutionary thing called a budget. if he truly cared about america, he would stop trying to just get votes at the expense of everyone else and step down. he's clearly unfit for the job... i just wish one of these days that someone worthy of being president will run, not this potpourri of idiots from both democrats and republicans.

pandas are awesome said "this happens almost every year, it has nothing to do with political policies."

Since 2006 the unemployment rate for December dropped only one year...2010. All the other it either raised or stayed the same. 2010 was when the unemployment started showing signs of falling by dropping .40% in Dec and another .30% in Jan. before leveling off at around 9.00% for a while.

wait a minute-how is that "mixed blessing"? i think you are trying not to give Obama the full credit the report deserves.

Pandas are awesome. The unemployment rate didnt fall december of 2009 and 2010 as well as too many years to mention. I suggest that before you make a statement you research it. Actually, if you did any level of research on unemployment historical data you would find that the Reagan administration only had an unemployment rate of 8.3% by this time in his administration. Now note, Reagan was not dealing with a totally financial based but a commodity based recession nor did he have a global economy where jobs and capital are much more mobile . If you ever took an econ class, you would know that financial base recessions are much more difficult to recover from such, 10 to 6 years tops, as the great depression and the lost decade of Japan. With regard to his economic policies, you would also notice that many European countries who didnt takes the steps we did are having zero growth in their GDP as well as significantly higher unemployment rates. The quarterly growth of our GDP is about 2.5 to 3.4, about the same rate of growth during the Bush 43 administration. However, spoil little kids (Most Americans) wants dad Obama to fix the mess they help created via the over use of credit (not just purchases but using homes as credit cards and etc.) overnight. These idiots sat back while our economy was being sent to Asia and didnt whince because they accepted the false economy and false sense of wealth (credit) created by phoney unregulated derivatives via legislation passed during the end of the Clinton administration and the related regulations issues by Bush 43 to implement the. Do you know that the SEC allowed wallstreet banks to increase their leverage 3 times between 2001 and 2007? This all resulted in $162 trillion unregulated junk credit default swaps (4 times the size of the US stockmarket) that blew up our economy in 2008. Where were people's head when all this money was chasing people that didnt cause them to question what was going on? You help created this insane mess by sleeping on the our sourcing hysteria, being greedy, and trying to keep up with the Jones now you want Daddy Obama to fix it overnight. What a joke!!!!!

As for the business owner who was whinning earlier, you probably started your business with credit that you would not have otherwise qualified for. I know cause I have many clients like you who made the assumption that credit was real equity like most of the other idiots in this country.

The 'tax' payers of this country did it. "He" did not do it. It does not matter which party claims responsibility.

As long as the government is doing the numbers we will never get the true figures.

Pam + numbers you hit the nail on the head, eloquently I might add. Thanks for giving us all clarity.

Wow Right Wing Wac as in Wacko, I guess your name says it all doesn't it? Talk about name calling! Didn't typing that long winded diatribe that just about missed every point I made and otherwise made no sense cut into your sheet ironing time?

And by the way since you missed the point about Debbie Schultz. Those were Republicans at this event cheering for Obama. One of my neighbors has a commercially made sticker in his window that says Republican for Obama. Sorry you guys are so pittiful that you have to steal, lie, and cheat to win elections but I suppose that is where the term "hell bent" comes from.

Michael,

Yes, as in "wacko"! I Didn't miss a single point. You race-bait, that's who you are. You just proved it again with the sheet ironing line. My name is assigned from people exactly like you. You have discourse toward the right no matter what and you use racism as a deceitful tool in your shed. You're right, I'll resort to every suitable name in the book as long as fools that race-bait like you are out there. Sometimes names fit...like now.

Based on your continual race-baiting and pointless misinformed second paragraph I think I'll leave it at; your too senseless to argue with.

"When we took over the administration, we were losing 800,000 jobs, hemorrhaging jobs, with major losses just short of a depression," said Labor Secretary Hilda Solis. "Now we see a better trajectory where we're moving in the right direction. I believe the public is supportive of the kinds of solutions that the president is talking about, but we need to do more."

And this people, is spinning and lying by Hilda! I don't know what trajectory she is talking about, but from where we are there is only one direction to go, after Dumbama and his clowns ruined the country, and that is up. And that is to no thanks to the administration either, Hilda Baby.

MSDNC said, "Also noticeably absent from the article was the fact that as more and more people run out of unemployment benefits or stop looking for work, they are no longer counted as "unemployed." There is no way 200,000 new jobs resulted in a net drop in the unemployment rate. Why not? Because the economy needs to add at least 250,000 jobs a month just to keep up with new people entering the workforce... and that's just to keep the unemployment rate the same. All this percentage drop really means is that we have more people than ever who have been without a job for over 99 weeks. Hooray? And you wait and see... next month or in March we will see another fairly large drop because most of these "new jobs" that were created were seasonal."

Sound the alarm!! Fox rant alert! Fox rant alert!

Now that you've posted that, go read the article and see how stupid you sound.

Michael......, you don't know anything about me other than I lean conservative in my political beliefs. Since you can assume I'm a racist, I can assume you are an ignorant jack ass, the only difference is, I'll be right, and you couldn't be more wrong.

Oh Please, don't send him back here.....Illinois is reallly in the soup-enough trouble already...if it weren't for Michigan and Ohio's manufacturing woes, we would be number 50 at the bottom of the heap instead of merely 48th. And what is absolutely amazing is that we have gone from a number 5 ranking down to this 48th rank in less than five years......I would leave, except you can't sell your house to go somewhere else.

OH THIS REALLY P!@$%'S me off when someone calls people who disagree with Obama a RACIST! I am SO tired of hearing that! I was a big Cain supporter until he ran into his troubles and quit and guess what...HE'S BLACKER than Obama!

I live on the Northside of Chicago, which is in Illinois, I'm doing just fine thank you.

emptyhead - "Do you not have a job? If you do, you should thank Obama for saving the economy. "

But if you don't it's not his fault, right?

John,

I'm guessing you like the new 66% increase in income taxes, the 100% increase in business income tax, the doubled tolls you pay on the interstate, increased rates on Metra, not to mention the increases in nearly every fee you pay in Illinois.

Are you one of the people who support the Obama/Blagojovich/Quinn/Daley/Emmanuel machine and think they are really doing a great job? Unless you are part of the machine, you can't be doing better in Illinois than you would have 5 years ago.

Somehow being a Cain supporter makes you unqualified to have a prejudice against this President huh AJ? That's like saying, "...I have a few Black friends..." How's that 9-9-9 crap working for you? Most African Americans was just sitting back waiting for the obvious...Cain to self-implode. Instaed of hanging your hopes on 'making sure Obama is a one term president' perhaps we (You and I) should chose that which works best for the nation.

Not saying anyone here is prejudiced but am saying racism ( which requires institutionalization ) is alive and well in the US and this President has been continuously buffeted by racists activities in policy disagreement clothing.

OH THIS REALLY P!@$%'S me off when someone calls people who disagree with Obama a RACIST! I am SO tired of hearing that! I was a big Cain supporter until he ran into his troubles and quit and guess what...HE'S BLACKER than Obama!

IF NOT OBAMA IN 2012 WHOM?

@Ron in Seattle-2190928-2190938

IF NOT OBAMA IN 2012 WHOM?

If there was a box on the ballot that said "none of the above" or "Nobody" that's who would get my vote.

@Ron in Seattle-2190928-2190938

IF NOT OBAMA IN 2012 WHOM?

If there was a box on the ballot that said "none of the above" or "Nobody" that's who would get my vote

Obama will get my vote, purely as a "lesser of two evils" candidate. My Christmas wish of a truly centrist, anti-corporate candidate has yet again went unfulfilled.....too bad Ron Paul is nuts on anything related to common sense "duties of the government" issues (like keeping the food we eat, medication we take, and cities we live in safe) His utopian image of human nature is skewed, as he doesn't take into account the ultimate coruption of power outside of government and widespread damage it has caused historically (most definitely trumps the in goverment coruption we are seeing today, see America 1890-1933) but he sure can diagnose problems we have in this country.

Biologically, Obama is more white than black. In a bi-racial union, the Caucasian genes are dominant. So, the black people accept Obama as a black man, and the white people accept Obama as a ..... wait for it.... black man. Um, who is racist? He is an American. No matter how incompetent he, and the rest of the politicians are, they are Americans, not black, white, Oriental, Arab, Italian,or anything else. Americans. we have the right to disagree with them, their policies, and their plans, but not one of us should pray for them to fail. It will be us, the citizen taxpayers who will suffer their failures, much as we are doing now.

That's been going on for years, you can thank your corporate lobbyists for that, Oh those so called job creators are creating jobs, only the jobs are not in America.

Corporate greed is a big reason why the recovery is slow.

So it's the government's fault that the 'job creators' aren't paying more or offering benefits? But I thought most Republicans wanted the government out of business? Which way do you want it? Government regulations mandating minimum wages and benefits or a free market? Can't have it both ways.

First off, it is hard to measure the success of an economy around the holidays and there were alot of jobs created just for that purpose, I also agree that the private sector is flourishing a little more because of the inginuity of the small business owner. Obama stimulus pachages are not going to help the economy by taking more taxpayer money and giving it to the poor. What I am talking about is Obama wants to stimulate the economy by extending unemployment again and other so called handouts. Overfed cats wont chase rats is a perfect saying for this. You cant continue to raise taxes on the middle class and in turn use that taxpayer money to fund the poor. While it is a sad issue to see sso many struggling this is not the solution. Asi far as the automotive industry being bailed out, there were no favors done there. Good ol American resolve has proven throughout history that when someone falls, another will rise up from the ashes and if there is that much demand for these vehicles then that will certainly prove to be true. If Obama wants to spend, and spend he will. He needs to start taxing imports and use that money. Maybe a few businesses thinking about taking their services overseas will think twice. Even if they do take their businesses overseas and increase their prices for their products due to the extra taxing, another business here will see the oportunity to flourish and in turn create some real American jobs. Its all about survival of the fittest people. Socialism by taxation is the wrong answer.

The General Motors and Chrysler bailouts are great examples of propaganda from the Obama Whitehouse and Democratic leaders. What the fail to mention is that they did not prevent a bankruptcy - General Motors went bankrupt, the stimulus just delayed it about 6 months. General Motors no longer exists! A new company, GM was created and bought the good assets from General Motors and left General Motors stock and bond holding the bag for the majority of losses.

Chrysler wasn't a great deal either. They are now an Italian owned company funded by taxpayers.

Neither is a good example of using tax money wisely.

Your post is a great example of propaganda from FUX snooze. It was Bush and NOT Obama that bailed out GM and Chrysler. The difference between the bankruptcy GM went through and the one they would have had to go through without the bailout is that GM was allowed to reorganize itself and its debts. If not, they would have had to liquidate and shut down. and allowing GM to shut down would not be a good example of trying to save jobs in this country.

Sue, I don't understand it either. It's supposed to trickle down. Shouldn't it have trickled by now?

I think it's a good thing that the small businesses are starting to increase. They, at least for now, won't take all they can get and then pull up stakes and move to a more profitable country.

It's time we stop coddling the large companies that do nothing but screw the American people. It doesn't work. We give them tax breaks and subsidies, and they thank us by taking the jobs elsewhere. So how do we punish them? We continue to use their products and give them more tax breaks and subsidies.

I have no problem with doing what we can to help the smaller, more local businesses be successful. It helps the entire community.

The problem is not really the quantity of jobs, but the quality of pay and benefits.

These multinational corporate criminals and the politicians who rubber stamp legislation from NAFTA to GATT are just sociopaths who distort the system for their benefit only. This is essentially class warfare being conducted against the middle class by the parasites on top who live off the labor of others.

We are being sold a bill of goods that we must remain competitive on the global marketplace by lowering the quality of living for all the workers, this is just another sham to increase the income gap between those on top of the economic ladder and rest of American society which is on a headlong race to the economic bottom.

Many people are wising up to this scam and they are not going accept this simple-minded form of exploitation. We need to remember that the founding of this country was based on resistance to tyranny of exploitation of our people. A second American revolution to re-establish justice, fairness and respect for those who really create the wealth for the few on top may be in order.

illunination facination what you are saying is so true, but unfortunately many people remain comatose. It's really funny that it was progressive republicans (Teddy Roosevelt and Taft) who set the path for the development of a thriving middle class in the United States and mostly their party as well certain Dems who are working to destroy it.

Indeed Illumination.

@raddave

It was an illegal reorganization where the legally bound preferred investors were totally screwed by Obama, not his administration but him. They did not receive the money that they were legally entitled to but the UAW and it's leadership did. It's a matter of legality and barack completely discarded the law when he did this. If you buy an investment based on a guarantee that you are paid first, even in the event of bankruptcy, and the president steps in and not only says you don't get your money but the unions get what was promised to you; that's a load of crap and it's illegal. Barack is nothing short of a white collar criminal because of it. I'm a GM guy and I'm glad they're still around but they would still be around if barack wouldn't have stepped in.

How about that Volt huh? Just make sure you have a good fire extinguisher...or two. Good thing the taxpayers pick up 250k per car or I might feel like we missed out on something. Another Barack wonderment.

Better jobs data a mixed blessing for Obama,,,, WHY?

Just asking!!!!!!

I agree bedbug he hasn't done anything i've seen.

Obama had stopped the economy from going down completely and was slowly turning the economy around and would do it faster, if the Republicans didn't try to stop him at every turn. They only want to unseat Obama, not create JOBS. The stimulus was working, SLOWLY but surely. It's just the Republicans took advantage of the slow working stimulus and did a razzle dazzle on impatient Americans and were able to squeeze out more tax breaks and tax loopholes for the super rich & corporations, AGAIN! (STILL NO JOBS) but they got MORE greedy and went after the seniors, the middle class and the poor. Now the tables are turning because even the Republicans that are seniors, and middle class, see that if they are not super rich, that their interests come LAST, IF AT ALL.

Obama's new jobs creator is actually Antonio Perez! He's the CEO of The Eastman Kodak Company! He hacked off 30,000 jobs from Hewlett Packard when he was CEO there and another 40,000 at Kodak! Kind of a poor choice if you ask me. Eastman Kodak is in the workings for filing for bankruptcy in the near future. They are trading at 37 cents a share!

It should be good news there Obama numbers not the truth

@ JH...I'd hate to be a repub right now. You guys are so pessimistic and down. Hoping for more economic bad news, instead of seeing anything as good. sad, man.

Any good news for our economy...is bad for repub's. So they can only discredit the news or the source.

Hey, It's MEEEEE Then vote for the jack ace again see what you have after another 4 years of this

Socialist pig. People like you who are too stupid to see the truth vote for Socialist pig Like Obama you don't know any better. You must be uneducated and uninformed you must be on welfare if your defending Obama.

raddave -

You are wrong on so much of your comment at 3.5 that it's hard to know where to start!

Yes, the bailout money for GM and Chrysler came from the same bailout package as went to the banks - HOWEVER, half of the bailout was reserved for Obama's use when he came into office. It was Obama's decision to bail those two companies out, not Bush's regardless of what you choose to believe. Do you honestly think that Bush would have allowed the unions to make out like the bandits that they are if he had been in control of those funds? At the expense of the bondholders?

Even then, it wasn't enough to save Chrysler!

Not only has Obama shown that he is a communist by his actions, he's got the liberals on this board actually hoodwinked into believing that he's as honest as a newborn babe!

He's as dirty as they come in my book.

Or JH, I could vote Republican....and watch our society go backwards. Less and less middle class, more taxes cuts for millionaires, taking regulation back to the early 1900's, MORE money spent on defense but less on American soil.

Smart debate, JH....if you don't agree with someone, just call them names. Brilliant argument.

Assault on America? WTF are you talking about? The Repug obstructionist are the ones who want the economy to fail so that Obama doesn't get elected.

Political elitists? Like Gingrich and Romney?

You guys on the right just hate for the sake of hating. Facts doesn't seem part of your guys' capability of understanding.

The fact is Obama is adding over a trillion dollars a year to our national debt and has added as much to it in three years as Bush managed to do in eight and, if we continue spending this much, the dollar will eventually be worthless. The fact is that over half of the "stimulus package" went to Obama's big labor union buddies and those "shovel ready jobs" -- jobs that Obama himself later admitted didn't exist. The fact is Obama now has an established history of doing end runs around Congress by appointing a record number of czards and issuing executive orders when he doesn't get his way which is totally destroying the system of checks and balances that has served this country so well since its inception. The fact is this "unifying" president has been anything but and routinely uses phrases like "we won," "sit in the back of the bus" and "bring a gun to a knife fight" and referring to anybody who disagrees with him as "enemies." Are those enough facts for you?

And of course Toasty has to pull out the obligatory liberal "race card" to define anybody that disagrees with Obama. So much for his election getting rid of the issue of race, huh? You guys doing a great job of keeping it alive and well all by yourselves.

Perhaps you should first explain what those policies are exactly.

You're right toasty, they claim they're not racists, unfortunately for them their true colors eventually show.

Uh oh did I just play the proverbial race card. Shame on me for telling the truth.

Simply pathetic. I'm not even going to waste my time responding to racial trolls such as yourselves.

I didn't think I'd get an answer. I never do when I ask that question...

Funny - I am a right wing conservative who was also for Cain until he ran into issues. Does that make me a racist too? I do despise Osama, so I guess it does. Right???

Tokenism at its worst, sad to say. A way to try and convince your critics that your party isn't really racist.

Excellent attempt to dodge my question, though.

OK - please outline what policies it is you are referring to that the Republicans are attacking. And I truly resent being referred to by you as a racist, a**hole. Since you like to accuse others, you must be one.

So Toasty, I'd like to hear your definition of racism. Based on your question, it seems that your definition is that all Republicans are racist.

Toasty,

I'm not sure why you confuse the issue with racism. People have been mistakenly calling Obama our first African American president, or black president. They are wrong, Obama is our first multi racial president. Guess what, that makes him half white, how can you inject racism into this arguement when he spans both races. Give me a break.

And here's the funny part, a person who wasn't a racist wouldn't even bother responding to racist generalizations, however a racist will bend over backwards to claim they are not a racist. I didn't see anyone here being called a racist personally. Don't be so defensive about your racism, you can't help it.

Chuckzul, you are right Obama is half black and half white, but he's not all white so he's not alright. It's the brother in him that angers you white wing whackos.

I'm not saying that ALL republicans are racist. Just that if you're racist, you're almost definitely a republican.

Give me one racist quote I've made, AA. And give me one anti-American one.

What's that? You can't?

Ease off on your weird obsession with me, AA. The mods are known for banning stalkers.

How is it NOT racism for republiCONS to oppose "Obamacare' when the very same policy was originally proposed by Lindsey Graham during the "Hillarycare" debate and implimented by Mitt Romney when he was governor? How is NOT racism for a republiCON President negotiate a troop withdrawal from Iraq and then attack Obama for honoring that agreement? How is it NOT racism for a ban of ineffecient incandescent bulbs be signed into law by Bush and Obama get blamed for it? How is it NOT racism for Bush to bail out GM and dodge and Obama get blamed for it? How is it NOT racism for wingnuts to claim Obama has added $5 Trillion to the debt when, in fact, he is responsible only for a little over $3 trillion of it (FY 2009's budget belongs to Bush)? How is it NOT racism for wingnuts to blame an economy that crashed a year before Obama became President on him?

Alwaysanother, this country was not built on capitalism, in fact, our first colonies were very socialistic. The fact is our country was not formed on any economic policy. and, it has been my experience that those complaining the loudest about the government dictating them on how to live are the ones that truely need someone telling them how to live, because they sure as hell can't do it on their own.

...because they sure as hell can't do it on their own.

Kinda hard to do much of anything on 'your own' these days without the government in your back pocket. Have you ever started up a business? Did you catch the part about the 14,000 new laws that went into effect this year? Go take a gander at the government regulations site, 145,000 plus pages of regulations.

Ahhhh, Toasty at it again......using the Liberal verbiage in almost every post.....RACIST. Getting REALLY, REALLY OLD !!!

The fact is that businesses face an uphill battle just opening their doors. Hundreds of regulations and rules for anybody and anything at your state, local and federal levels.

for an amusing look at just how bad it has gotten:

http://youtu.be/YQscE3Xed64

http://www.businessinsider.com/ridiculous-regulations-big-govt-2010-11

The fact is Obama is adding over a trillion dollars a year to our national debt and has added as much to it in three years as Bush managed to do in eight and, if we continue spending this much, the dollar will eventually be worthless.

Don't blame the disaster Bush created on Obama. Bush inherited a surplus, and his last year's deficit was higher than Obama's first year. You can't stop a gigantic rock rolling down a mountain on a dime.

The fact is that over half of the "stimulus package" went to Obama's big labor union buddies and those "shovel ready jobs" -- jobs that Obama himself later admitted didn't exist.

1/3 went to tax cuts, 1/3 went to infrastructure improvements, 1/3 went towards energy efficiency and reducing our reliance on foreign oil

The fact is Obama now has an established history of doing end runs around Congress by appointing a record number of czards and issuing executive orders when he doesn't get his way which is totally destroying the system of checks and balances that has served this country so well since its inception.

What is destroying our checks and balances is the republicans blocking/filibustering everything and screwing the American people just to try to get Obama unseated. As for appointing czars - Obama has appointed fewer czars than Bush, and all presidents issue executive orders.

@ToastyMcgrath

Seek out my previous post on this page...please, and include yourself in my target audience.

Barack wants a year of the social security coffer raid. Reid proposes two months, the House says we'll give you your year but we want you to not politicize the pipeline, get it in the works and create over 100k jobs. Barack says no, now I like the two month proposal even though he previously said that he wouldn't accept anything less than a year.

He's a game player and you are a pawn. Keep believing what you want but again, please seek out my previous post up higher on this page. Play your race card and kiss my ass.

@John

Why do "we" get up in arms about the jack-asses that pull the race card? Because ignorant fools that are allowed to vote buy into that BS and the simple minded people who hear someone accused of racism will accept that. That's how the republican party got labeled in the first place. Liberal liars baiting simple minded sheep.

I'm sick and tired of it and I'll go head to head with you or any other jack ass who wants to play the game. To say someone who is racist will be the one to respond and defend themselves is as false as it gets. I can say in this blog 100 times that you like to sleep with animals so if you defend yourself does that mean you really do? It's a stupid argument and a great way to keep the focus on the idea that you are falsely trying to promote so knock it off.

What a joke. The figures are MADE UP to make Obama look good. Just wait. In a month or so a report will come out and say, Oops we made a mistake, the numbers were'nt really that good, HONEST MISTAKE. It's all about fooling the stupid liberals into believing they weren't duped by a Communist. Did you hear him the day he FORCED an appointment on the American taxpayers. "I won't take no for an answer!" REALLY? Gee I could have sworn the President was supposed to represent THE AMERICAN PEOPLE not his own agenda.

Try studying U-6 versus U-3 and maybe, one might get a more accurate reading of employment, or lack thereof in the US!

http://www.davemanuel.com/investor-dictionary/u6-unemployment-rate/

Bill: you sure are good at repeating what they tell you. Do a little more research. Ain't all black and white, there's lots of democrat malfeasance, ain't all republicans being the bad guys. Open up a tad, look at both sides rather than just following one party line. BTW: If you do dig you're going to discover that there is really no difference between the parties, they play this game for votes, look what they do after they get elected. Insider trading???

mygirl1, repeating what who tells me? Who is they?

There is a huge difference between the parties. Maybe YOU need to dig.

mygirl,

It's interesting that you tell me to look at both sides - looking over your posts, they all seem pretty one-sided to me.

You are truely and idion alwaysanother. Businesses make more profits off less workers because they cut labor expense. You have no idea how economics work. Businesses hire workers only when demand dictate that they do so, and NOT just because they have the money to do so. Germany does not have a 19% sales tax on every thing (sic). It is not that high on necessity items such as food. And it is a VAT, not a sales tax. the 41% income tax on Germany is not on the middle class, that is the rate for the upper class and that includes the unification tax. See, Germans know that to live in a first rate country, it costs money. Unlike you wingnuts, who want to live in a first rate country on 3rd world rates of revenue for the government. BTW, Germany is the 2nd largest exporter of manufactured goods in the world, ahead of even us.

Good for you Alan.

And what if Ron Paul isn't on the ballot?

America will never vote for a man who opposes the First Amendment and the Civil Rights Act. Paul is never going to be president.

I'll voter for him under the Libertarian party. When did he oppose the first amendment?

He votes pretty consistently against the Establishment Clause.

well thats one vote for Ron. you may as well stay home, he cant win and you merely dilute the other dopey gopeys out there

I actually couldn't give a rats a$$ who wins. My opinion is that there is not one person or party who can save this country now. I think we've gone too far down the slippery slope to recover. All the stimulus's, recovery plans, etc, are only delaying the inevitable. Go ahead and vote for Obama or Romney. It really will make no difference. The only difference in the candidates is in the amount of time they can forestall the collapse.

Chuckzul: Now your one of the most sensable people i've her on this forum. Your dead on! a collapse is all but inevitable soon enough. Lets start with the housing market taking another round in the butt in Feb. or Mar., by then Gas will be around $4-$4.50 a gallon, but wait if you act now we'll double your pain with a round failed stimulus breaks from the IRS. I'm not one to say the sky is falling, but when the numbers don't lie, i say "RUN" motherfu*#er and don't look back!!!

always -

All Toasty has ever done is pull the race card to try to defend his idol. He has no facts to back himself up, so he can't defend his adulation of Obama any other way.

Personally, I think he's really insecure in his own racial identity.

So when the news was all bad for three years it was because the republicans would not let Obama do anything. If all the bad news was explained by him not being able to do anything then you can't point at good news and say it's thanks to Obama. He hasn't been able to do anything. You can't have it both ways. Also, the Republicans took control of the House and you were asking almost immediately, "Where are the jobs?" Here they are. Thank a republican.

John, all this has been accomplished in spite of the republicans. They've been trying to kill the captain by sinking the ship.

Toasted - Is that why Americans gave Republicans the largest party swap since WWII in the November midterms?

Stifling Obama and his yes-mens spending orgy and union payoffs is the only reason the downward spiral slowed down.

It's amazing how the tea partiers will bring up 2010... And conveniently ignore the massacre they had in 2011.

I would say that the improvements to the economy are due to the newly elected Republican Congress the last year by putting some brakes on the overspending done by the Democrats.

The Tea Party congress hasn't done anything, Oh wait their failure to compromise caused the credit rating to be downgraded. Thanks for nothing teabaggers.

The downgrade was because we didn't cut spending enough. So let me get this straight, the tea party wants to spend more...

No, the downgrade is because we were willing to let the country default. You know how we know this? THEY TOLD US WHY THEY DOWNGRADED US.

I'm not an expert on everything, AA, I just read books that don't involve coloring in them.

armurray, the downgrade was because of Congress' failure to adaquately raise revenue to go along with proposed cuts.

john we've had 23 straight months of job creation without a single republican jobs bill being signed and the obstructionism was known and applauded by the right so pretending it didnt take place is ridiculous. also in 2011 (without a single republican jobs bill) more private secter jobs were created than in 7 of the 8 years Bush was in office and repubs controlled both houses for 6 of them and began with a surplus. Obamas policies are working have been working and will continue. The only thing really slowing us down right now is the european economy.

The Tea Party congress hasn't done anything, Oh wait their failure to compromise caused the credit rating to be downgraded. Thanks for nothing teabaggers.

That's not true John. The tea party also got us deeper in debt by refusing to let the Bush tax cuts expire.

Typical teabag argument. Anything that makes the black man look good is forged.

Marvin is angry at the good news, he like most republicans would rather have the economy in the crapper, than have American's working again.

Toasty I DID NOT bring race into this YOU DID!

Nope John, you are wrong.

Sure Marvin... I suppose I forgot to use the GOP code words.

Toasty - what is your problem? You want to inject race into any discussion that has been attempted here today. For me, I don't like Obama because he has zero leadership skills, was sadly unprepared to be the president of our country, has no clear policy on the economy other than to raise taxes on the "rich" and "private jet owners" and thinks that the government create long term lasting jobs. I could go on. Race has absolutely nothing to do with why I don't like him. So stop it - come up with something new for once.

You mean like the stellar leadership of Bush and his band of warmongering idiots. Bush was intent on invading Iraq BEFORE 9/11 Do think we could have better spent that 1 trillion dollars better, you know building our crumbling infrastructure. The President has only so much power, tell me Rick what proposals have the GOP come up with concerning jobs and the economy zero zilch nadda.

Get rid of the loopholes that the lobbyists bought by lining the pockets of almost every politician in Washington.

My problem is that suddenly conservatives attack their own policies the second the president agrees with them. There's only one explanation for this: his skin color.

So Rick Kyle:

1.) Could you please give us a few examples of what you call leadership? Just curious. 2.) How do you prepare for that which you have no clue? Are there college courses now on how to be the President of the greatest nation (with even greater challenges) on earth? 3.) Do you have a problem with the economy going from loosing 700K wage earners per month to 22 months of private sector growth? 4.) Government policy is single-handedly responsible for creating the infrastructure (and thereby longterm jobs, created by corporations that took advantage of government subsidies...) of the economy of the US. Look at the A$$^&*() in Washington if you need another example of government creating longterm jobs.

So is that new enough for ya...?

For me, I don't like Obama because he has 1.) zero leadership skills, 2.) was sadly unprepared to be the president of our country, 3.) has no clear policy on the economy other than to raise taxes on the "rich" and "private jet owners" 4.) and thinks that the government create long term lasting jobs. I could go on. Race has absolutely nothing to do with why I don't like him. So stop it - come up with something new for once.

The individuals that post lies and negativity on this forum have forgotten how bad the economy, wars, deficits, job losses, etc, were from 2005 through 2009 when W. Bush was in-charge.

They've forgotten that their 401K's lost 40% to 80% overnight because of W. Bush and the Republicans Trickle Down Economic Policies. Their 401K's have now regained most of what they lost because of President Obama's Economic Policies.

The President's leadership has proved that you can correct "Arrogant and Stupid Mistakes" made by a predecessor.

"Keep Up The Great Work President Obama."

Toasty

You absolutely have to go to my previous post...I think it's better directed at you than the bone-head I responded to. You need to get behind the three mice because they can see better than you. Barack hasn't agreed with anything that the right has wanted. The only time he's pretended to is when the mix was already so screwed up that he knew it wouldn't work. Man, I've got 1,000 acres right outside of Disney World that I'd love to sell you really cheap. I'll send you the deed right after you wire me the money into a foreign account. Then you'll be able to live near a fantasy land on your own fantasy land.

If you were a fish you wouldn't have made it a day due to your "I'll take the bait on anything" attitude. You're ignorance is honestly making me laugh...thanks I needed that. But you still play the race-card every time your fingers move and for that again, I will tell you with all do un-respect to pucker up and kiss my ass.

They are fudging the numbers to make Obummer look good.

How did you determine this? Or are you just spouting off negative comments without any basis for your statement?

Toasty I DID NOT bring race into this YOU DID!

I don't know if race is behind what you said or not, but saying that it is is not nearly as outrageous of a claim as your saying they're fudging the numbers.

None. It's called "seasonably adjusted". Please, look it up.

EXACTLY! You can't give a good indication of job growth based on the holiday season. Let's see what happens this time next month.

As a matter of fact, you can't really ACCURATELY determine the unemployment rate as it is because there are so many people that either don't report for unemployment, have exhausted benefits or have given up looking altogether. If you add that to the ones that are reported in the media, you would actually be looking at a 16-18% unemployment rate.

Not to mention those who were being paid what they were worth and then getting laid off, and then rehired but for far DRASTICALLY lower pay. teabag up there says if you have a job, thank Obama...yeah..THANKS for the job where I am making 10K less a year with minimal benefits than I did in 2008.

But then we have seasonal summer jobs and seasonal winter jobs. Someone said 200,000 wouldn't be seasonal. That was much better than in Jan2009 when Bush policies caused the loss of 741,000 in 1 month. That is about 1 million jobs in one month.. And that was seasonal too. Imagine if it hadn't been Christmastime that would shown exactly what the Bush policies were doing wouldn't it. I don't understand why the republicans won't work with the president and go along with him for 1 more year. If his policies don't work then the other side will be elected. I think however, they know the truth and his policies will work and he will be handily reelected. Too bad at this time the republicans are only concerned about getting reelected and beating Obama and not concerned about the people they claim they want to represent. Or even concerned about looking presidential. What president in their right mind would say we do not want our citizens to have a college degree? Who would say that the president shouldn't be smart. Who would talk down to the people they want to represent. Who wants to ban contraception? That is what you will get folks with this bunch!

AJ-1965668 said, "As a matter of fact, you can't really ACCURATELY determine the unemployment rate as it is because there are so many people that either don't report for unemployment, have exhausted benefits or have given up looking altogether"

Actually receiving unemployment benefits or not doesn't factor in at all. Unemployment rates are determined by:

• People with jobs are employed.
• People who are jobless, looking for jobs, and available for work are unemployed.
• People who are neither employed nor unemployed are not in the labor force.

See the Department of Labor site for more details (I can't paste the link). But basically, a sample of households are interviewed each month. There is obviously much more detail involved such as illness, seasonal hires, etc. It isn't perfectly accurate, but provides a reasonable estimate.

All this in spite of Obama.

Thank goodness we put in people to slow down the destruction after Democrats made it clear they were loyal to one man, not the taxpayers or the nation.

Excpet the jobless rate feel during the period of "obstructionism" So, the jobless rate fell when Obama's desires were thwarted? When Obama had free reign the jobless rate went up?

Sounds like you need a new talking point. This one is weak.

The jobless rate also fell before the teabaggers. It fell faster back then, too.

So the jobless rate was falling when it climbed over 9%?

It "climbed" there when we looked at the math and had to adjust just how badly the teabaggers had damaged the economy under Bush. It was already worse when Obama stepped in, we only just found out about it later.

Easy: there's nothing populist, fiscally conservative, or libertarian about it. It's just the same re-branded conservative movement we've seen for the last thirty years; albeit with a catchier name this time. The teabaggers are nothing more than useful idiots for billionaires as they march against their own interests and the interests of the country. They've done nothing but big government intrusions upon personal liberty in the year they've had in office, and America sees the mistake they made in 2010.

Toasty??? hello???? No response? I answered your question like you were standing on a soap box begging for. I believe you are the worst kind of liberal. You base your arguments on headlines found on sites like this one. That's as far as you go and if you do go deeper you sure don't know how to illustrate your knowledge. Which is more unforgivable than not having the knowledge int he first place.

You really have no clue as to what you're commenting on. You know less about the Tea Party than you do about our countries birth. It's definitely time for you to become a commentator on msnbc like so many other ignorant people do. Your computer probably is rigged so you can't even look at another site or dig to find any factual information about this country. I would love to live in your blissful ignorant world but my common sense just won't let it happen.

Tea Party - hard working Americans who want the government off their back and want to keep more of what they've worked hard for. Taking responsibility for themselves and being charitable to their neighbors.

Liberals - proponents of massive entitlements, massive regulations, elitist leadership and every person gets the same pie for dessert mentality. If you get ahead well damit I need to take some more of what you've got to make my life more like yours. That's the liberal way. Individualism is out the window and faceless portraits of mindless robots take the place.

"Big government intrusions upon personal liberty? You really are a fool...what are you 10 or do you just think like a 10 year old? That statement has absolutely no merit at all. It's almost comical if it weren't so sad that someone is out there who actually thinks this way. You just made a statement that's the equivalent of me saying "The ocean is pink". It makes no sense, there's no basis for it, and you couldn't back it up with a single fact. What you just stated is the liberal montra and no where close to what the tea party stands for. Ahhh, go back and watch your Rachel Maddow show. What a boob.

Thinker - your facts are wrong. Obama said he needed to spend the Stimulus so unemployment didn't go any higher than 8%. Base on his own words, he has created more unemployment WITH the stimulus than if he had done nothing.

Factually speaking the unemployment rate spiraled out of control before Obamas policies started taking effect. We have sinced had 23 straight months of job creation and last year created more private secter jobs that in 7 of the 8 years Bush was in office. Also these employment figures are seasonally adjusted. Oh and Joe the stock is UP whats wrong with you people.

It is adjusted for seasonal hiring binges. I can't say how effectively it is done, but they do try to factor that in.

If it were at 7% what would your response be? 6%? does it really matter? no i dont think so . The number one priority for repugs and baggers is to see that he doesnt get re elected. period. thats very sad. although i didnt care much for Bush Jr, the thought never crossed my mind that I wanted to see him fail because if he failed America failed. We are Americans first, rest of the world is "laughing at our superior intellect" (James T. Kirk)

I dont know any liberals who wanted Bush to fail. Republcans no longer have any sence of patriotism. The way they attacked Clinton and Obama. Voting against thier own policy proposals. Complete disdain for working americans. Its truly very sad.

Lou

Which lack of regulation under Bush?

And don't confuse stimulus with bail-out.

As for profit motive, that has nothing to do with slow recovery.

Lou

The Republicans tried in 2003 2005 2006 to REGULATE Freddie and Fanny but were stopped by the Democrats. Now why wouldn't Regulations put on Freddie and Fanny allowed to be put into place??? The Dodd-Frank Bill didn't put Regulations on Freddie and Fannie. Looks like Regulations on BANKS is GOOD but Regulations put on FREDDIE AND FANNIE are BAD. Again WHY??? And there are several Economist who say the Freddie and Fannie had a LARGE part in the Housing Bubble and Bust.

slodon, quit spewing that FUX nonesense. In 2003, 2005, and 2006 the Democrats were in the minority in the house and could not block anything. Fanne and Freddie had minimal part in the housing bubble, the subprime mortgage companies and investment banking have the lion share of the blame.

raddave. Then how do you explain all of the libby's on here claiming that even though the Republicans were in the minority they blocked all of Oblameya's policy's. You can't have it both ways. Dang, don't you hate when someone points out your hypocrisy.

Wiz, repubs have used the fillibuster at unprecedented levels which is how they have obstructed without a majority. At no time in our nations history has the filibuster been used in this manner. Honestly how is it some of you on the right dont understand these things. Its like you do no independant research on your own. Turn off the television and READ READ READ. Im serious, The distortion of right wing media is treasonous

Whogot, did you even bother reading the post above mine that I was replying to? Evidently not as your post proves. Maybe you should take your own advice and READ, READ.

Lou

Deregulation doesn't necessarily lead to bubbles. Bad business, and perhaps greed, leads to bad bubbles. Also government involvement in the private sector can also create bubbles.

Now ask yourself why we haven't heard more about the results of the investigations into the financial meltdown?

My opinion is that the U.S. Government involvement in the house lending markets was the largest factor in the financial collapse.

Your opinion is based on no fact, except for the ones you pulled from your 4th point of contact.

One thing I know for sure, the boys at Enron sure enjoyed energy deregulation......for a while.

Unemployment benefits don't factor into the calculations for the unemployment rate. If someone is unemployed and looking for work, they are unemployed (see my post above for more details).

It almost sounds like you're implying that if someone's unemployment benefits run out they'll STOP looking for work? That's counter to the posts of most conservatives that imply that people are NOT looking for work BECAUSE they're on unemployment, which actually makes much more sense than what you're saying here. Also, the administration has nothing to do with how it is calculated. So, who's doing the spinning?

You spend a trillion dollars more than you take in a year, darn well a few people will be employed. We have a very sick individual in the white house. 9 more months and this toad is gone.

"First of all you can't count government jobs they are counter productive"

tell that to a soldier, idiot.

@Jolly Joker: When a nation spends its money on imports it eventually runs out of money. The way the government keeps the money from running out is by spending more than they take in. That extra money is "borrowed" from the federal reserve and it replenishes the money supply. The debt is to the federal reserve. So the federal government owes the money to the federal reserve. They pay the federal reserve interest and that money is returned to the government after taking out a litle to run the federal reserve. Before you get all your knickers in a knot over "debt" you should go read up on the subject and it would be better to not listen to the politicians. If anything, they're trying to keep you in the dark so that they can manipulate the vote. The sick individual is the individual that is too lazy to go learn about money and how it is created. Debt isn't nearly as bad as you are thinking it is - it is actually essential to keep money in our system.

GCV its enlightening to see someone post that actually understands something about the Federal Fractional Reserve Banking System. All too often I hear the mantra of paying off the national debt. This is the biggest joke on the people that can't read I've ever seen. There is more debt than dollars because everytime money is issued debt is incurred with interest. The debt is normal in the system and that's how the FED regulates the economy and money supply. It may not be the best system in the world but it has worked well for many years. These yahoos manipulate the propaganda to fill their political agendas. If no money was poured into the system there would be no dollars to pay anyone and nobody would have a job. If the money is tightened less dollars circulate and there are less jobs. If large corporations hold onto huge amounts of cash the job market declines. If banks don't loan jobs decline. I think the FED should flood the economy with money to encourage the horders to spend or invest by devaluing their funds with inflation. It may not be the best answer but it works. After all why would the banks and investment firms hold onto cash that was losing value? When you pinch them in the right spot, they will bring the ball back to play-just get em in the pocket book!

GVC thanks much for your post. I believe the biggest problem with this country is the ignorance of many people which allows them to be so easily manipulated. They take so much at face value from so called "trusted" sources without fact checking or researching.

yabecoo, no one knows how to accurately calculate that number so how you managed to do it is remarkable. Unless of course your COMPLETELY MAKING IT UP.

And the FED actually HAS TO print money at a rate this is proportional to the increase in our society (capitol, goods, services, etc). That money is introduced into the system as debt. If they didn't we would run out of money and each generation would make less than their parents. The trick is to keep it proportional, otherwise you get inflation if they print too much.