1136 users online (198 members and 938 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 5 of 11 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 163
  1. #61
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Northwestern United States
    Posts
    4,575
    "*Zero Hedge is a financial blog that aggregates news and presents editorial opinions from original and outside sources. *In between the aggregated news there are crazy economic conspiracies and general right wing biases."

    https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/zero-hedge/


    So... Are "we" interested in facts?
    Unless specified otherwise and linked, my posts are simply random thoughts of mine, in no particular order, not directed at any post or poster, including but not limited to the ones directly above mine. My opinion only, yours may vary. IMO. JMO. IMHO. JMHO. MOO. Disclaimer, small print, asterisk, and etc.

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Where 1+1 = 3
    Posts
    15,889
    Quote Originally Posted by TMAN2014 View Post
    Since we are all interested in facts, what kinds of jobs did Obama create?

    Full time....mostly no.....Part time.

    Top Ex-White House Economist Admits 94% Of All New Jobs Under Obama Were Part-Time
    No Zero Hedge links.

    Most blogs are allowed as sources, for example, Breitbart, Huffington Post, The Daily Beast, Washington Post, etc. As of now, banned blogs include Zero Hedge and Info Wars.
    http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sho...and-Guidelines

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    663
    Quote Originally Posted by TMAN2014 View Post
    Since we are all interested in facts, what kinds of jobs did Obama create?

    Full time....mostly no.....Part time.

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-1...were-part-time

    Top Ex-White House Economist Admits 94% Of All New Jobs Under Obama Were Part-Time
    Try again, use a real site

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Ridley, PA
    Posts
    2,437
    "Investing.com -- A new study by economists from Harvard and Princeton indicates that 94% of the 10 million new jobs created during the Obama era were temporary positions."

    https://www.investing.com/news/econo...ct-work-449057
    Unless I provide a link, every one of my posts are to be considered rumor, Speculation, or simply MY OWN OPINION.

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Ridley, PA
    Posts
    2,437
    Obama, lowest worker participation rates since the Great Depression. Facts.


    http://freebeacon.com/issues/obama-e...t-labor-force/
    "
    Since President Barack Obama took office in January 2009, the number of employed Americans increased by 9.9 million, but there were 14.6 million more who left the labor force, according to the latest numbers from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
    From January 2009 through December 2016, there were 9,959,000 more Americans 16 years and over who became employed. In that same time frame, there were 14,573,000 more Americans 16 years and over who were not in the labor force, which means they did not have a job or look for one in the past four weeks."
    Unless I provide a link, every one of my posts are to be considered rumor, Speculation, or simply MY OWN OPINION.

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Southern Ontario
    Posts
    3,933
    Quote Originally Posted by TMAN2014 View Post
    Obama, lowest worker participation rates since the Great Depression. Facts.


    http://freebeacon.com/issues/obama-e...t-labor-force/
    "
    Since President Barack Obama took office in January 2009, the number of employed Americans increased by 9.9 million, but there were 14.6 million more who left the labor force, according to the latest numbers from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
    From January 2009 through December 2016, there were 9,959,000 more Americans 16 years and over who became employed. In that same time frame, there were 14,573,000 more Americans 16 years and over who were not in the labor force, which means they did not have a job or look for one in the past four weeks."
    UBM - who's fault is that?

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Ridley, PA
    Posts
    2,437
    https://www.forbes.com/sites/gregory.../#39c9e619532b

    Data Shows Clear Decline in Labor Force Participation Under President Obama





    Gregory S. McNeal , Contributor
    null
    Opinions expressed by Forbes Contributors are their own.
    Bureau of Labor Statistics data shows an unmistakable decline in the Labor Force Participation Rate under President Obama.* The rate dropped from 65.7% in January 2009 to 63.6% in September 2012.* The chart below depicts the decline during President Obama's time in office, and it demonstrates that the job situation became worse under his leadership.
    Unless I provide a link, every one of my posts are to be considered rumor, Speculation, or simply MY OWN OPINION.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    9,772
    Quote Originally Posted by TMAN2014 View Post
    https://www.forbes.com/sites/gregory.../#39c9e619532b

    Data Shows Clear Decline in Labor Force Participation Under President Obama





    Gregory S. McNeal , Contributor
    null
    Opinions expressed by Forbes Contributors are their own.
    Bureau of Labor Statistics data shows an unmistakable decline in the Labor Force Participation Rate under President Obama.* The rate dropped from 65.7% in January 2009 to 63.6% in September 2012.* The chart below depicts the decline during President Obama's time in office, and it demonstrates that the job situation became worse under his leadership.
    This is an opinion piece from 2012. Means nothing today.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Ridley, PA
    Posts
    2,437
    More FACTS about Obama's GDP ranking. But you all think O was just swell.


    http://www.weeklystandard.com/obamas...rticle/2003730

    Here is the complete list of average annual GDP growth ranked by postwar president (in descending order):
    Johnson (1964-68), 5.3%
    Kennedy (1961-63), 4.3%
    Clinton (1993-2000), 3.9%
    Reagan (1981-88), 3.5%
    Carter (1977-80), 3.3%
    Eisenhower (1953-60), 3.0%
    (Post-WWII average: 2.9%)
    Nixon (1969-74), 2.8%
    Ford (1975-76), 2.6%
    George H. W. Bush (1989-92), 2.3%
    George W. Bush (2001-08), 2.1%
    Truman (1946-52), 1.7%
    Obama (2009-15), 1.5%
    Unless I provide a link, every one of my posts are to be considered rumor, Speculation, or simply MY OWN OPINION.

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    A cool spot in the USA
    Posts
    2,458
    http://krueger.princeton.edu/sites/d...il_26_2016.pdf

    Here is the actual study that covered 2005-2015 by Harvard & Princeton.

    It discusses contract workers (my husband has been one for the 18 years in technology) entrepreneurial jobs so in other words more people working for themselves and added 5% growth.

    How bout a real world example? Corporations used to hire a janitor now they hire a janitorial service or agency, uber drivers, outsourcing etc.

    BTW none of these figures come from any governmental agency but from a 6000 member panel that hasn't changed in 10 years.

    ETA- excited about the jobs the pipeline created (42k) yeah those are alternative or contract jobs.


  11. #71
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    9,772
    Quote Originally Posted by TMAN2014 View Post
    More FACTS about Obama's GDP ranking. But you all think O was just swell.


    http://www.weeklystandard.com/obamas...rticle/2003730

    Here is the complete list of average annual GDP growth ranked by postwar president (in descending order):
    Johnson (1964-68), 5.3%
    Kennedy (1961-63), 4.3%
    Clinton (1993-2000), 3.9%
    Reagan (1981-88), 3.5%
    Carter (1977-80), 3.3%
    Eisenhower (1953-60), 3.0%
    (Post-WWII average: 2.9%)
    Nixon (1969-74), 2.8%
    Ford (1975-76), 2.6%
    George H. W. Bush (1989-92), 2.3%
    George W. Bush (2001-08), 2.1%
    Truman (1946-52), 1.7%
    Obama (2009-15), 1.5%
    Postwar? Post what war? We're still fighting the war GW started 16 years ago.

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    A cool spot in the USA
    Posts
    2,458
    This study shows something interesting about gdp by president...


    https://www.princeton.edu/~mwatson/p...n_July2015.pdf

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Ridley, PA
    Posts
    2,437
    More facts, Obama really likes the rich. I dare you to educate yourself on all the money printed, and it's effects.



    http://nypost.com/2014/10/12/obamas-...t-to-the-rich/



    "There’s one more thing that QE accomplished: it has made the stock market soar. Interest rates have remained so low for so long that investors have had no other choice but to move their money into the stock market, thus creating a bubble.
    Even those adverse to risk were forced to chase the better yields in stocks, no matter how dangerous that was.
    But for every winner in QE there are 99 losers. While the richest 1% of the US population has been loving the rise in stock prices and other QE amenities, Fed policy has been taxing on the masses of savers.
    In fact, “tax” is a perfect word. QE has been an invisible tax on savers beyond anything Washington could have ever conceived.
    Every dollar that has benefited a borrower during QE has come out of the pocket of a saver in the form of a lower return on their assets.
    In fact, QE is now widely recognized by both supporters and opponents as causing the single largest shift ever in wealth, from middle class savers to rich Wall Street investors.
    And that this should have happened under a Democratic president who came into office championing wealth redistribution in the other direction is both shocking and ironic."
    Unless I provide a link, every one of my posts are to be considered rumor, Speculation, or simply MY OWN OPINION.

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Ridley, PA
    Posts
    2,437
    Read that again. That's your hero, who likes to shift $ to the top 1%!


    "In fact, QE is now widely recognized by both supporters and opponents as causing the single largest shift ever in wealth, from middle class savers to rich Wall Street investors."
    Unless I provide a link, every one of my posts are to be considered rumor, Speculation, or simply MY OWN OPINION.

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Southern Ontario
    Posts
    3,933
    Quote Originally Posted by TMAN2014 View Post
    More facts, Obama really likes the rich. I dare you to educate yourself on all the money printed, and it's effects.



    http://nypost.com/2014/10/12/obamas-...t-to-the-rich/



    "There’s one more thing that QE accomplished: it has made the stock market soar. Interest rates have remained so low for so long that investors have had no other choice but to move their money into the stock market, thus creating a bubble.
    Even those adverse to risk were forced to chase the better yields in stocks, no matter how dangerous that was.
    But for every winner in QE there are 99 losers. While the richest 1% of the US population has been loving the rise in stock prices and other QE amenities, Fed policy has been taxing on the masses of savers.
    In fact, “tax” is a perfect word. QE has been an invisible tax on savers beyond anything Washington could have ever conceived.
    Every dollar that has benefited a borrower during QE has come out of the pocket of a saver in the form of a lower return on their assets.
    In fact, QE is now widely recognized by both supporters and opponents as causing the single largest shift ever in wealth, from middle class savers to rich Wall Street investors.
    And that this should have happened under a Democratic president who came into office championing wealth redistribution in the other direction is both shocking and ironic."
    UBM - isn't that what is said about Trump? Unsure what the argument is, or the value of the info. Is there some context for any of this?

Page 5 of 11 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. All Things Donald Trump
    By vanillasky in forum Celebrity and Entertainment News
    Replies: 413
    Last Post: 11-11-2016, 06:22 PM