Since May 2010 we've cut 1.024 million public sector jobs while adding 2.245 million private sector jobs. Theses are truly great numbers. Were at 8.4% unemployment. Just sucks the unemployment numbers have to be made higher to shrink govt. You know, it makes things look worse than they really are while shrinking government. 4 more years!!!!!!

Now all those government jobs are on contract and the contract pays double what the original job did.

Obama and me. Duh

Galt should be thrilled. I know you want to cut millions of more jobs from the public sectors and temporarily shoot unemployment to 13-14 percent but hey Obama is getting things going in the right direction. Smaller government =win win. Right?

 

Originally Posted by dolphin13

Obama and me. Duh

Galt should be thrilled. I know you want to cut millions of more jobs from the public sectors and temporarily shoot unemployment to 13-14 percent but hey Obama is getting things going in the right direction. Smaller government =win win. Right?

Unemployment is really closer to 20% but whatever. The country is better off with 50% uemployment where the employed make things that people want as opposed to 0% uemployment where the employed dig ditches and then fill them back up.

Well there's a million less people digging and filling holes, so go suck on a rock

 

Originally Posted by Mr Galt

At least unemployment never got above 8%. Thank God we borrowed that $3 trillion.

The economy turned even worse than anyone expected. We nearly collapsed under a credit crisis. Ship happens. Deal with it

I'm having a problem with the fact that I have to deal with it, my kids will have to deal with it, and my grand kids if they ever exist will have to deal with it as well.

Thanks Bush/Obama.

 

Originally Posted by dolphin13

Bailout was a good thing. It saved a total collapse. Maybe you can argue we needed the collapse to start from scratch. But personally, im glad i havent spent the last three plus years shooting people for a can of corn. (maybe this will happen in the future, but at least my son could fight with me then) Sorry I dont agree with you.

Love to see you pushing the propoganda.

 

Originally Posted by Dyzalot

Unemployment is really closer to 20% but whatever. The country is better off with 50% uemployment where the employed make things that people want as opposed to 0% uemployment where the employed dig ditches and then fill them back up.

Haha this is so true

So many useless public dot jobs in wash state it makes you puke

Hey let's replave an intersection we just paved 6 years ago just so people stay employed
Solid use of taxpayers money

Dammmmmmmmmmn. Dyzalot is the No. 1 most frequent poster in the last month with 1,438 posts. Amartin is second with 589.

I take it you don't have a job or a gf

you can tell when my consulting work is slow, this is one of those times

 

Originally Posted by dolphin13

Love to see you keep pushing your hippy free love views.

I remember when skisteve talked about how he was at a point where he might not even get 100 percent of his money in his money market account in his brokerage account.

I think you simply don't remember or don't understand how things were seizing up back in 08

Anyways, all you do is push Libertarian Propaganda on here, but hey it's your kind of propaganda so it's okay.

Oh noz! Someone who had money in the market might take a loss? The horrors! What should we do? Lets bail out all the investors and dump the bill on the general public! Great idea!

 

Originally Posted by dolphin13

Over 60 months, that's like 350 a month. 1,438 is a huuuuuge number

What's 12,000 divided by 80? I bet its less than 350...

 

Originally Posted by dolphin13

Skisteves money wasn't in the market per say. These were essentially savings accounts that were not supposed to lose money. But the redemptions were coming in so fast and furious the banks didn't have the money. It's called a run on the bank. Sorry you don't understand that

Savings accounts that aren't supposed to lose money are FDIC insured. If they aren't insured then there is a risk of losing money.

A defender of the bailout? You people are still out there? C'mon man.

 

Originally Posted by dolphin13

You're so smart when it comes to finance. You're gonna make a mighty fine catch for some young lady.

LOL at me being a "mighty fine catch for some young lady" under any circumstances. I doubt we'd ever get to the point where I could turn her off due to my lack in knowledge of finance. Of course, savings accounts have nothing to do with finance...

 

Originally Posted by dolphin13

Can't believe there are people out there who don't understand the implications of letting AIG and GM fail followed by not propping up any of the banks. Guess its revisionist history

Its revisionist history to reject the propoganda of the day? LOL