American Politics during the Obama Presidency

[Esten]

1. I'm not sure how much of a factor the loss of unemployment benefits was on the December report, but to the extent that loss of benefits caused the unemployment rate to go down, all that tells me is that the rate could have dropped below 7% sooner if the benefits had not been extended so long. With regard to 1 Million fracking jobs, that's great if true, but one component of the 6 Million jobs created since the recovery began in 2009. These data easily demonstrate that Republicans were wrong when they said the Stimulus failed, and that the Affordable Care Act was going to be a huge job-killer. It is true we could have been lower than 6.7% at this point, but our challenges have been more with large government job losses (700 K), and the effects of Corporatism.

2. I think the number was more like 5 million policies cancelled, due to ACA and the decisions of insurance companies. Insurance companies have been cancelling policies for years before ACA came along. There are not millions of people who are now without insurance because of ACA. In December, it was estimated that fewer than 500,000 people who received cancellation notices have not yet signed up for new coverage. Why are you one of them, Dccpa? I don't think the cancellations and signups can be directly added / subtracted. It gets complicated to dissect the numbers. Ultimately, a key and simple number to follow is simply the overall uninsured rate. It was at 17.3% in December, and at 16.1% earlier this month. We should expect ACA will keep moving that number lower.

[Rock Harders]

Both Obama and Cristina were elected and re-elected with votes bought by promising free money to their supporters.

However, neither of them have the cash or the tax revenue to actually pay for the votes that they've promised to buy.

Nevertheless, Obama can borrow the money from the Chinese to pay for his votes, whereas Christina's only option is to print the money to pay for her votes.

Both strategies will result in the same failed economys, but the effects of the borrowed money take longer to develop.

Thanks,

Jax.

Jackson-.

Are you completely delusional? Under the Obama Administration the stock market is at an all time high and housing prices have rebounded from the utter destruction wrung upon them by the Bush Administration's gross mismanagement (two bankrupting wars, housing market collapse, wall street collapse, resultant unemployment). Yes, the middle class in the USA is declining but this is the continuation of a process that began over thirty years ago; the current underemployment is at its root structural in the sense that many people are unemployable because they are not trained / educated in the "jobs of today". Comparing Obama to any Argentine political figure simply makes you appear to be an ignorant misinformed racist. Instead of making such a ridiculous comparison, why don't you just admit that you despise Obama because he is black, that the very thought of a black president causes you to foam at the mouth in disgust, and that to this day you simply are incapable of accepting the results of two elections in which Obama was elected president by a majority of voters. You dismiss Obama voters as "people who vote themselves free money"; if this is the case, how do you explain the fact that ALL of the wealthiest and most highly educated states (by per capita income, percentage of population with college degrees, or use any yardstick you want) voted for Obama?

Thanks.

RH.

[Tiny12]

Only a propagandist of the highest order can make the same comparison. As usual, you are blaming Obama for the 1998 financial meltdown, and 50+ years of American partying. Plus every itch in your body.

Brother Black Shirt,

You are a very trusting individual. This has certain advantages. But it has its disadvantages as well. For example, when you encounter someone with an Adam's apple, large fingers and vagina who swears she(?) is not a post-op lady boy. Or when you start listening to what U.S. presidents say. You were a big Bush supporter until you realized the truth. Someday you will come to the same conclusion about Obama, because Obama is Bush on speed. Government deficits as a % of GDP under Obama have been the highest since World War II. The percentage of Americans in poverty is the highest since the early 1960's. Middle class incomes have fallen more than any period since World War II. And, at this point in time, 5 years later, it's ridiculous to blame it on George Bush. Kirchner and Obama make a big deal of helping the poor and middle class, but their policies in the long run do the opposite, by stifling economic growth and encouraging dependency.

I am slowly-but-surely reading the article you recommended by the way. I get the hardcopy New Yorker, and this week's edition is sitting in front of my commode.

[Jackson]

Only a propagandist of the highest order can make the same comparison. As usual, you are blaming Obama for the 1998 financial meltdown, and 50+ years of American partying. Plus every itch in your body.

On the contrary, I believe that it only takes a person of average intelligence, abet one who is NOT being bribed with free money, to see what's going on and subsequently draw the same conclusion.

FYI, I do not blame Obama for the 1998 financial meltdown, but I do blame him for pursuing his politically expedient socialist agenda instead of having the political balls to do what was really needed to fix the US economy.

However, I understand the angst in your comments, given that it is becoming clearer by the day that your emperor, like Christina, has no clothes.

Thanks,

Jax.

[Rev BS]

And yet you are completely unfazed by the fact that Obama is pursuing exactly the same course in the USA.

Only a propagandist of the highest order can make the same comparison. As usual, you are blaming Obama for the 1998 financial meltdown, and 50+ years of American partying. Plus every itch in your body.

[Gandolf50]

Both Obama and Cristina were elected and re-elected with votes bought by promising free money to their supporters.

However, neither of them have the cash or the tax revenue to actually pay for the programs they've promised to their supporters.

Nevertheless, Obama can borrow the money from the Chinese to pay for his votes, whereas Christina's only option is to print the money to pay for her votes.

Both strategies will result in the same failed economys, but the effects of the borrowed money take longer to develop.

Thanks,

Jax.

I thought you were comparing to Chavezland. Obama, while not my favorite also inherited a load $hit from Bush baby. But then so did Cristina, or at least Nestor did!

[Jackson]

And how do you figure that?

Both Obama and Cristina were elected and re-elected with votes bought by promising free money to their supporters.

However, neither of them have the cash or the tax revenue to actually pay for the votes that they've promised to buy.

Nevertheless, Obama can borrow the money from the Chinese to pay for his votes, whereas Christina's only option is to print the money to pay for her votes.

Both strategies will result in the same failed economys, but the effects of the borrowed money take longer to develop.

Thanks,

Jax.

[Gandolf50]

And yet you are completely unfazed by the fact that Obama is pursuing exactly the same course in the USA.

And how do you figure that?

[Jackson]

That is modeling it's policies on Venezuela where those same policies failed. I heard this this morning. Shudder!

And yet you are completely unfazed by the fact that Obama is pursuing exactly the same course in the USA.

[Dccpa]

There were some good headlines this month worth noting. It's OK to talk about good things too.

1. Unemployment fell below 7%, to 6.7%. We've come a long way from 10.2% in 2009.

2. Affordable Care Act signups now exceed 3 Million.

3. Obama made some favorable comments on marijuana. And Holder says he is planning to roll out regulations soon that would allow banks to do business with legal marijuana sellers. Maybe that's an example of some good regulation.

4. We got a bipartisan budget agreement with little fighting and no brinksmanship.

1. Most of the decline in the unemployment rate is due to the unemployed running out of benefits and no longer being counted and the million plus jobs created in the fracking industry. Although I personally consider fracking to be an economic lifesaver for America, the politically acceptable response is to put it in the negative category.

2. I believe it was 7 million people who lost their healtcare insurance due to Obamacare, myself included. So, you are saying that at least 4 million people are now without healthcare insurance? Yay?

3 & 4 I agree are good things.

[Don B]

If there was a regulation in place, why was there a spill?

Don.

I'm still waiting for answer from Mr. Know-it-all.

Don.

[WorldTravel69]

How Many Independents are in the Congress?

Since you Right Wingers have no New News other than bringing up old the Old News Word Benghazi.

Check out where The New World Started for Money and Greed.

http://dsc.discovery.com/tv-shows/klondike/videos

There were some good headlines this month worth noting. It's OK to talk about good things too.

1. Unemployment fell below 7%, to 6.7%. We've come a long way from 10.2% in 2009.

2. Affordable Care Act signups now exceed 3 Million.

3. Obama made some favorable comments on marijuana. And Holder says he is planning to roll out regulations soon that would allow banks to do business with legal marijuana sellers. Maybe that's an example of some good regulation.

4. We got a bipartisan budget agreement with little fighting and no brinksmanship.

[Esten]

There were some good headlines this month worth noting. It's OK to talk about good things too.

1. Unemployment fell below 7%, to 6.7%. We've come a long way from 10.2% in 2009.

2. Affordable Care Act signups now exceed 3 Million.

3. Obama made some favorable comments on marijuana. And Holder says he is planning to roll out regulations soon that would allow banks to do business with legal marijuana sellers. Maybe that's an example of some good regulation.

4. We got a bipartisan budget agreement with little fighting and no brinksmanship.

[Esten]

Tiny, I watched the video. Stossel does lots of programs like that, they are sometimes entertaining. They do showcase some apparently non-sensical regulations, but even with some of them, if you think about it you can see some downside if those regs didn't exist. For example, maybe it sounds ridiculous to regulate tour guides, or home improvement contractors. But maybe if they didn't set certain standards, you'd see tourists upset they got crappy tours and home owners upset they got crappy or fraudulant home repairs. You trade one set of 'victims' with another set. Sometimes people take consumer protections for granted, but remove them and something bad happens, and they'll be screaming why it isn't regulated. You have to weigh the pros and cons before making a judgement. I do agree there are most likely regs that could be abolished or implemented less onerously. You just have to do something to make it happen, like they changed the regs for the Mountain Man. Of course, Stossel has to portray it like the government is waging war on people, his program is paid by Fox News. You could easily do a program showing just the opposite.

[Rev BS]

Tearing the country apart? How about Bill Maher, Ed Schultz, Rachel Maddow, Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann, and Lawrence O'Donnell? Not to mention people in power -- Barack Obama, Harry Reid, and Nancy Pelosi for example. Your "tired old white men" like Boehner and McConnell have been more willing to compromise.

True. He's very pragmatic about winning elections. He doesn't much care about anything else.

MSNBC was a channel I had no time for when I was still in the USA. O'Donnell, Schultz & Maddow, totally no exposure to them. Olberman, I dislike him even when he only a sportcaster. Bill Maher can be funny but mostly obnoxious. Chris Matthews, I have seen but have no opinion.

Reid & Pelosi are career politicians, and answering to their masters and self interests. Same with Boehner & McConnell. The younger John McClain, I could vote for him. As you know, he was an advocate for campaign & immigration reform. Even in 2008, it was pretty much over for him even though he was able to run for president.

I am not going defend Obama against your opinion. You will never change your mind about him. Just reflect of what you thought of Clinton now, against back in 1996 when he had 2 years to go in office. Be at least truthful to yourself, if nothing else.