Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Newspaper contacts | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Obama 'stimulus' claims don't mesh with harsh reality

September 23, 2013

President Barack Obama likes to boast that trillions of dollars in “stimulus” spending of various types has put more Americans back to work. It has not....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(10)

FortySixand2

Sep-29-13 8:31 AM

What have Republicans done to improve the jobs situation? Benghazi! More tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations. They've been singing that supply side tune for 3 decades to the detriment of our nation. Benghazi!

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrShaman

Sep-24-13 9:23 AM

"I as a petty commoner didnt need any extra sources as I could see clearly myself the economy was fluttering months before bush took office..." - Garben78

*

Yeah...sure...of course you did.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Garben78

Sep-24-13 9:05 AM

I as a petty commoner didnt need any extra sources as I could see clearly myself the economy was fluttering months before bush took office all you have to do is pull your head out of your or whoever a as@ it's in shammy

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrShaman

Sep-24-13 8:57 AM

"Actually Bross as soon as obumbler was elected business knew what was in store for them." - Bobbie2

*

Ah, yes...."business" (no specificity required)...the original "conservative-psychics"!!

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrShaman

Sep-24-13 8:45 AM

"And by the way David when bush took office the economy was on a downhill spiral from August the previous year..." - Garben78

*

Aw, c'mon...his "campaigning" began, long-before-that...

*

"Repeatedly, President-elect, and then President, Bush talked about how the economy was in trouble. Arriving in office following the longest continuous economic upturn in generations, President Bush seized on a stock market that had faltered some in the uncertainty following the 2000 Presidential election."

*

See:

Could Bush Really Be To Blame For Running The Economy?

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrShaman

Sep-24-13 8:38 AM

"The author may indeed have a point. However, the evidence used to support their point seems weak. First, the number of people working at the time Obama was first elected was at the beginning of the economic collapse. It went even lower in the following months. Using data from say, January of 2009 would show a greater difference in the number of people working compared to today which would give more support to Obama's plans. Second, picking the month a person is elected is strange. Obama didn't take office until late January." - DavidBross

*

...AND, any moves (his Admin made) never occurred until March!

*

See:

Obama Dismantles Republican Caucus Part 1 of 7 - YouTube

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrShaman

Sep-24-13 6:54 AM

"For those who are listening to the liberals propagating the fallacy that everything is "Bush's Fault", think about this January 3rd, 2007 was the day the Democrats took over the Senate and the Congress..." - Bobbie2

*

You REALLY want the general-public to see how much debt was accumulated, by BU$HCO??

*

See:

National Debt Graph by President

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Garben78

Sep-23-13 5:15 PM

And by the way David when bush took office the economy was on a downhill spiral from August the previous year not that I did or didn't support bush and then we got a black eye on 9/11 so I believe with this presidency what has happened to get things right is doing nothing to help so far

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Garben78

Sep-23-13 5:12 PM

Here's some truth . Unemployment numbers do not cover those who've exhausted their weeks payable. And in Philly alone that is over 47,000 people so do the math is it he put people to work or is it they just aren't getting any more benefit money?

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

DavidBross

Sep-23-13 10:07 AM

The author may indeed have a point. However, the evidence used to support their point seems weak. First, the number of people working at the time Obama was first elected was at the beginning of the economic collapse. It went even lower in the following months. Using data from say, January of 2009 would show a greater difference in the number of people working compared to today which would give more support to Obama's plans. Second, picking the month a person is elected is strange. Obama didn't take office until late January. From November to January he was only the president-elect. Imagine if the White Star Line had announced before the Titanic's maiden voyage that a new captain would be taking over several months after the the initial trip. One could hardly blame the captain-elect for the disaster that ensued on the maiden voyage.

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 10 of 10 comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web