Bill Clinton Is Right: The Economy Really Does Do Better Under Democrats

page: 2
46
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 05:32 AM
link   
It was Bill Clinton who created the "Quadrennial Defense Review" where they started axing entire military units and replacing them with a few low paid contractors.....he also fired alllll the Federal Civil Service Wage Grade (Blue Collar) workers and replaced them with a couple guys making minimum wage.

The money he freed up was then used abroad to buy off countries/people. We all learned about this when Hillary Clinton became Secretart of State and went before the Council on Foreign Relations saying she wanted to do exactly what her husband did to DOD with the "Quadrennial Review". She said she's going to fire all the State Department workers and use a few low paid contracted workers instead so she can use the money abroad to buy off countries/people.

Just like her husband did. They've been robbing America and got rid of the middle class.....they ain't Democrats...they're power players toppling nations for their own gain.

Haiti was doin good after the French got them farming and growing their own food....they all had jobs and were exporting products. Billy boy sent 20,000 US troops down there and stopped that after putting that Apartheid guy in charge. Then all those Arkansas farmers with their heavily subsidized by the Feds sent their crops into Haiti and dropped them on their market for cheaper than they were even growing it. Sucking alllll of Haitis money into Arkansas and collapsing Haiti long before the earthquake hit them.

The Clinton's ain't Democrats......the Haiti escapade robbed us of alllll those hundreds of Billions in Ferderal subsidizies that made Arkansas crops cheaper than Haitian grown crops. Toppling nations requires screwing over millions in your own country.




posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 06:57 AM
link   
Wow what liberal drivel? It is HUMAN NATURE to not want to pay more taxes so people who make money in business take their company elsewhere when one government becomes bad for the bottom line. The real problem is the people in charge of overseeing that laws are followed are allowed to ignore high level power plays by the rich and both parties make a tidy profit from going along. LAWLESSNESS is the problem not a fake Conservative or Liberal political leaning.

Both sides have agents for a one world gov takeover and having us quibble between ourselves over the minor details of whom "THEY" have put in charge of their slaves, the 99.99% of the people of this planet!

Our only true hope is to quit voting for either of these thieving party's an choose Libertarian or Green party but the sheeple are brainwashed so bad I am looking for the pods like the movie "Invasion of the Body Snatchers". Money is being made for someone and if you follow the money trail is the way to clarify what is happening to us. Solyndra made certain people a lot of money who are in position to filter it back to the demoncraps and destroyed a very good idea because of greed. Not a poor idea to fund solar panels as they will last 100 years at 50% efficiency, but flat out criminal money laundering greed stole the day.

We need to wake the hell up and smell the corruption as time is running out. THIS TIME the sheep WILL vote for Romney to get rid of the socialist who are certainly following the tenants of the "Communist Manifesto". We need to dissolve both parts of the same beast and start with the ones needing kicked out now, the dems. THEN NEXT TIME do away with the NEO-CONS. They are neo cons and the reason the Tea party every got started was to throw the republican bums out. A holes like Gingrich claiming falsely that they represent tea party is a ruse to make the left leaning citizens feel like they are justified in calling us "tea-baggers". Gangreen , as I call him, is an example of the reasons we have a tea party. We need to keep his type out!

Jerry Garcia of the Grateful Dead reminded us, "the lesser of two evils is still evil". And people, were getting sold out by both party's. If you don't believe it start right now and keep a log of when you are hosed by a new law by either party. Liars will spin but the truth will win.



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 07:03 AM
link   
reply to post by thesungod
 


My post was on tax cuts for gigantic corporations in order to create jobs and trickle down, not cutting public programs. You're trying to compare two different things.

But guess what, Reaganomics failed miserably, nothing trickles down. Wake up. Didn't work in NJ, doesn't work 99% of the time. How many times does it have to fail for you to realize the idea is garbage?
edit on 7-9-2012 by RealSpoke because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 07:37 AM
link   
The economy isn't even real. It is made up and 100% fraudulent.



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 08:33 AM
link   
Had posted this topic as well, rather than continue that post I'll repost it here in this thread (sorry if this repeats some of the things in the OP):

Bill Clinton's Stunning Jobs Claim At DNC Actually True
(huffingtonpost.com)

Clinton mentioned during his speech at the DNC convention that during the past 51 years, Republicans were in office 28 years, versus Democrats in office for 23 years. Yet job growth under Democrats was 42 million jobs, versus 24 million under Republicans. Republicans have held the Oval Office longer, but produced half as many jobs.


Former U.S. President Bill Clinton highlighted a stunning fact during his speech at the Democratic National Convention on Wednesday: Democratic presidents have overseen the creation of nearly twice as many jobs as Republican presidents since 1961.

"What's the job score? Republicans, 24 million; Democrats, 42 [million]," Clinton said to cheers and applause.



Job Creation Under Democratic Presidents Roughly Double That Of GOP: Report
(huffingtonpost.com)


Democrats sure know how to create jobs, if recent history is any indication.

Since John F. Kennedy was elected president in 1961, job growth under Democratic presidents has outnumbered that under Republicans by a nearly 2-to-1 margin, according to a Bloomberg Government analysis. During that period, non-government payrolls grew by almost 42 million jobs under Democratic presidents, compared to 24 million when a Republican party member was in power .



Bloomberg - Private Jobs Increase More With Democrats in White House
(bloomberg.com)


The BGOV Barometer shows that since Democrat John F. Kennedy took office in January 1961, non-government payrolls in the U.S. swelled by almost 42 million jobs under Democrats, compared with 24 million for Republican presidents, according to Labor Department figures.

Democrats hold the edge though they occupied the Oval Office for 23 years since Kennedy’s inauguration, compared with 28 for the Republicans. Through April, Democratic presidents accounted for an average of 150,000 additional private-sector paychecks per month over that period, more than double the 71,000 average for Republicans.


You can't bury, obscure, or obfuscate this simple fact - job growth under a Democratic administration has been roughly twice that of a Republican one.



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 08:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Mickierocksman
 


How much of that 16 trillion debt is from short-sighted GOP policies?

The Breakdown of the Deficit

81.2% Increase in National Debt under Bush:

$5.871 Trillion in 2001
$10.640 Trillion in 2008
= $4.769 Trillion Increase (81.2% Increase in National Debt)

44% Increase in National Debt Under Obama:

$10.569 Trillion Jan 31st 2009
$15.223 Trillion Jan 14th 2012
= $4.659 Trillion Increase (44.1% Increase in National Debt)

Increase Since 2001 = $15.223 - $5.871 = $9.532 Trillion

Bush's PERCENTAGE of increase $4.769 Trillion / $9.532 Trillion = 50%

BUT:

$3.56 Trillion or 76% (3.56/4.659) of the increase was Bush CARRY OVER:

$910 Billion = Interest on BUSH Debt 2009/2011
$360 Billion = BUSH Iraq War Spending 2009/2011
$319 Billion = BUSH TARP/Bailout Balance from 2008 (as of May 2010)
$419 Billion = Bush Recession Caused Drop in Taxes
$190 Billion = Bush Medicare Drug Program 2009/2011
$211 Billion = Bush Medicare Part-D 2009/2011
$771 Billion = Bush Tax Cuts 2009/2011

$4.769 TRILLION from 8 YEAR's BUSH
$3.560 TRILLION of Bush Carry Over

$8.329 TRILLION - Due to BUSH

Bush's PERCENTAGE (Corrected) $8.329 Trillion / $9.532 Trillion = 87.4%

87.4% of National Debt Increase caused By Bush's Programs (2001 to 2012)
12.6% of Increase caused by Obama’s Programs.



Republican National Convention: The one graph you need to see before watching



On the Republican convention stage tonight, you're going to see a really large clock. But the clock isn't for keeping time. The idea isn't to stop speakers from going over their allotted time, or the convention from running late. It's a debt clock. And the idea is to blame President Obama and the Democrats for the national debt.

But in doing so, the Republicans will end up blaming Obama for the policies they pushed in the Bush years, and the recession that began on a Republican president’s watch, and a continuation of tax cuts that they supported. They’ll have to. Because if they took all that off the debt clock, there wouldn’t be much debt there to blame him for at all.



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 09:29 AM
link   
See this is exactly what I'm talking about. People are still stuck on stupid. There is no difference between Repubs and Demos and why would anyone cheerlead for either side blows my mind. You guys sound like that team crap from Twilight. The country is burning ladies and gentlemen and superman doesn't have a R or a D on his chest.



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 09:34 AM
link   
reply to post by RealSpoke
 


Which Scott Walker also did and Wisconsin is stealing all sorts of jobs from Illinois. In all fairness though Minnesota is booming in comparison to Illinois also.

Worked in Wisconsin, not in NJ. Why?

As for Reaganomics, well if you read my post I provided sources and papers pre-clinton that shows that trickle-down does work it can just take time. Again I cited sources POTUS 41 and POTUS 42 got a ray of sunshine from the Reagan era and a tech boom. You got any numbers to back your claims or just "Real Speak"?



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 09:41 AM
link   
I can't argue with the numbers. Unfortunately the numbers don't add up for Obama. It would appear he isn't cut from the same mold as previous Democratic Presidents. Clinton got things accomplished working with a Republican House so stuff that excuse. Obama is just clueless. We need to vote him out so he can spend the whole week on the golf course instead of just every weekend.



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 09:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by buster2010
Bill Clinton Is Right: The Economy Really Does Do Better Under Democrats


Clinton pointed out that under Democratic presidents since 1961, the economy has added 42 million private-sector jobs, while under Republicans it has added just 24 million. He used the same concept to argue that President Obama has outscored both congressional Republicans and his GOP presidential opponent, Mitt Romney, in terms of creating jobs. Clinton has some intriguing facts on his side. Aside from a rounding error, his historical numbers are accurate (figures from the Bureau of Labor Statistics show that the tally under Democrats since 1961 rounds to 41 million, not 42 million). I crunched the numbers a few different ways to see if Clinton was cherry-picking the best numbers. His figures measure job gains from the month a president took office until the month he left. Since it takes a year or so for any president's policies to go into effect, I also measured job gains from one year after each president took office till one year after he left. Here's the score by that measure: Democrats: 38 million new jobs, Republicans, 27 million.


No wonder the GOP hates fact checking. It shows how much they fail at their jobs small wonder why they always scream Reagan created 16 million jobs.


Yep.

Another one of my favorites is that 84% of the National Debt is due to Republican presidential administrations. Those soundbites about Obama's "record setting debt and deficit" numbers fail to take into account the trillions of dollars in interest which accumulated THIS year from spending during Reagan, Bush 1.0, and Bush 2.0 wild spending sprees.

But hey...since when do republicans need facts? They all have Jesus Christ on speed dial.



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 09:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Blackmarketeer
 


Amen to the part about the deficit. One of your sources puts it very simply.



If we didn’t have all that? If there’d been no Bush tax cuts, no wars, no financial crisis and everything else had been the same? Debt would be between 20 and 30 percent of GDP today, rather than almost 100 percent.


Source

Tax cuts = Bush
Wars = Bush
Financial Crisis = Clinton
TARP = Bush
ARRA = Obama



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 09:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by jjkenobi
I can't argue with the numbers. Unfortunately the numbers don't add up for Obama. It would appear he isn't cut from the same mold as previous Democratic Presidents. Clinton got things accomplished working with a Republican House so stuff that excuse. Obama is just clueless. We need to vote him out so he can spend the whole week on the golf course instead of just every weekend.


...and at what point did the Republican Congress even ONCE try to work with him?



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 09:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by wardk28
See this is exactly what I'm talking about. People are still stuck on stupid. There is no difference between Repubs and Demos and why would anyone cheerlead for either side blows my mind. You guys sound like that team crap from Twilight. The country is burning ladies and gentlemen and superman doesn't have a R or a D on his chest.


Nope.

That's why I'm voting for a guy with an "L" on his chest.
edit on 7-9-2012 by milominderbinder because: formatting



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 09:47 AM
link   
reply to post by milominderbinder
 


The one time they did, Obama blew it. The Grand Bargain.



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 09:49 AM
link   
Bill Clinton is wrong.

There are no Democrats or Republicans in Office just businessmen and businesswomen. Politics doesn't exist in DC , just business. Those Democrats and Republicans have the same goals and that is to appease their bosses and the American voters are not them. That is why you see Democrats and Republicans acting alike and they BOTH want bigger gov't.

Obama is Bush II and Romney is Obama II.

Wake up and stop fighting among each other on which party is better. Both party have had full control at one time or another and the same issues still exists today (Healthcare,taxes,SS,Energy,jobs,etc...) that existed yesterday.



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 09:50 AM
link   
reply to post by wardk28
 


We could all learn a little something from Superman.




That ideal, that what he does is reflected as a policy for the United States government has Superman say that he will be renouncing his U.S. citizenship at the United Nations. Superman will in effect become a man of all nations, an icon that every one who looks up to the messages of peace and protection can embrace as their own.


Source

And I say this as a "Thunder Runner".



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 09:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by AwakeinNM

Originally posted by wascurious

Originally posted by AwakeinNM
Same with republican administrations where policies were enacted, then the democrat gets elected - he takes all the credit for the results of the Republican efforts.


Such as?


Taking this into consideration, it is likely that the opposite is true - democrats have done more to destroy jobs and republicans have done more to create jobs.


Taking your factless example of an idea you have based on so far what seems to be nothing into consideration? Why would you.


Your response is typical lefty propaganda - forcing someone to "prove" something that doesn't need proving. If you have a brain in your skull you will know what I am talking about. The people with brains DO know what I am talking about, so I will disregard your response.


How is that response "lefty propaganda"? You made a specific claim, that democrats have done more to destroy jobs and republicans have done more to create jobs. Do you have evidence to back up that claim, or are we supposed to use our "special" mind power to just believe it?

Because anyone with a brain would not believe a word you or I say unless it's backed up with evidence. Do you have that evidence?

So since you have a brain, and the rest of us do not....I would be grateful if you could provide some substance to your statement. Because as you know, you are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts.



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 09:52 AM
link   
reply to post by buster2010
 


The country works best when we have a democratic president and a majority republican in either the house or senate.

Look at how well the country did under clinton and who was majority in congress.

uspolitics.about.com...



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 10:02 AM
link   
What makes me laugh is that if any of these people could actually create jobs, or make a great economy, it would be done already. The fact that the 1990's was built upon a bogus dot-com industry is the only reason things were booming. Enron, Qwest, etc...all products of the 1990's fake economy. Bottom line is that NO president, Republican or Democrat can "fix" and economy. If they could, Obama had 2 years to fix it, with a Democrat controlled House and Senate. It didn't happen, and regardless of whether Romney wins, or Obama is reelected, the economy will only do what the private sector has it do....



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 10:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by crazyguy2012
reply to post by buster2010
 


I agree with you. Yet I disagree at the same time. The economy is a complicated BEAST... Something that happened in the 80s can seem to have no effect at the time yet years later have an enormous impact. The problem with economists and economics is that it is not a science. There are no written rules. There is no way to predict the future and future events. Good businessmen can predict that a product will be desirable. The balance between politics and business is a strange and complicated equation. I do not believe we have come to even having a basic understanding of this yet. Businesses are about making money. The government should be about protecting people. It is a difficult tightrope to balance upon. Yet I still have no idea what I am saying here... LMAO


LOL.

Well...at least you are living up to your moniker. Although...I will give you props for not taking yourself too seriously and at least being light-hearted about it. There's no shame in not knowing something and I wish more people could just sort of 'fess up like you did instead of just ranting and repeating whatever they heard on TV.

Let me see if I can help you out here a little bit:

1. Economics IS a science.- However, it's not an EXACT science because the systems are too large and complex to modeled with 100% accuracy...we simply do not have the computational power and likely won't until we are at least a couple of decades into mainstream quantum computing. Think of it like the science of meteorology. As much as we complain about it...the weather man really does do a pretty amazing job of telling us if we will need a raincoat or not. However...the weather man doesn't PREDICT the weather...he FORECASTS it. Subtle difference...but one of these implies magical powers, crystal balls, and prophetic visions...the other draws upon historical data, statistical analysis, and higher mathematics to produce outlines of what will PROBABLY happen tomorrow.

2. We have very, very, good understandings of how this stuff all works- However...in recent years we have simply chosen to ignore the parts that our political ideologies find inconvenient. Take the whole "Free Market" fanatics for example. They are correct in stating that free markets operate more efficiently than controlled markets and that they have a tendency to self-correct themselves via the laws of supply and demand. However...EVERY SINGLE ECONOMICS TEXTBOOK IN THE WORLD will ALSO tell you that "free markets" ONLY operate at their optimal efficiency in a state of "Perfect Competition" in which all firms selling a product or service have zero advantages over their competitors....followed quickly by the disclaimer that utopian "perfection" is unattainable and that this should be looked at as commentary against monopolies and oligopolies instead of as philosophical ideal. Thus...a COMPLETE understanding of "free market" economics means that we need a couple of thousand oil companies instead of only 5 in the entire world and the media empires desperately need to be shattered into a bajillion little pieces...BY GOVERNMENTAL DECREE. Yes...real "free market" economics doesn't just allow governmental regulation and intervention...IT REQUIRES IT.

3. If you want a to read a really great book on how we just up and decided to abandon all of the regulatory policy which the FREE MARKET ECONOMISTS put into place after the Depression and turn a blind eye to the things that had been working pretty much flawlessly for 70+ years...check out "Griftopia" by Matt Taibbi. I have it on audiobook and if you send me a private message I will shoot you a link where you can download it if you like.

All of these economic "problems" can be solved in an afternoon if we just address the endemic corruption, bribery, and favoritism in our system of governance.





new topics
top topics
 
46
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join