Results 21 to 30 of 38
-
01-26-2012, 09:00 AM #21
-
-
01-26-2012, 09:02 AM #22
-
01-26-2012, 09:03 AM #23
Some of the people on the board need to take a economics 101 and come back on here and let us know what they learned.
Drug and smoke free trading.
Hidden Content
Hidden Content cardscomicsmoviesandgames
Hidden Content darkdemon202404
-
-
01-26-2012, 09:10 AM #24
And you have yet to acknowledge it. Your very rude and a know it all but from i see you know very little and just like to argue. I do know a lot about the Canada health care system as i have a cousin who lives in London Ontario and he lets me know all the time just how bad the health care system is. For the RICH i am sure its fine but for the rest it SUCKS. I thought you were all about fairness but yet you say you will spend YOUR BIG BUCKS and get treatment. What about the rest of the people you all ways refer to for fairness??
-
01-26-2012, 09:30 AM #25
When are you going to acknowledge the situation Obama came into? I do not need to acknowledge how much he has spent, we can all see it. The issue is WHY he is spending it. Speak to that issue.
As for health care, EVERYONE is covered. It certainly does not suck. For people living paycheck to paycheck, needing money to pay for a doctor's visit would SUCK. Ask your cousin what NOT being covered would be like for him. That's the part you do not understand.
Many of us have additional coverage through employer insurance plans and private insurance plans. Just like people in the States.
-
-
01-26-2012, 09:38 AM #26
1. Would have happened no matter who the Prez was. But +1 Obama anyway.
2. Deceptive number as this is based on those who are applying for unemployment benefits and are seeking work, not those who are actually unemployed. Many have run out of benefits and are no longer counted but are still unemployed. This number also does not reflect those who lost full-time jobs and took part-time jobs just to have some income.
3. Would like to know where this number comes from. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, since Obama took office there has been a loss of 4,303,000 jobs and a gain of 2,654,000 jobs. I am no math guru but my calculator comes up with a net loss of 1,649,000 jobs.
4. Deceptive data. For 22 months, yes. Since he took office, no. 5 of the first 6 quarters of Obama's presidency were economic decline including the biggest economic decline in years during the first quarter of 2009.
5. Again. Would have happened with any president. But +1 Obama.
6. +1 Obama
7. Deceptive wording. Tax hikes? No. Elimination of tax breaks? Yes. Net result is an increase in certain tax areas.
8. +1 Obama. Not exactly a presidential accomplishment tho. Clinton proved that fidelity is not a presidential requirement.
9. Even tho the numbers from #3 are deceptive, this is funny. Obama claims to have created 1.6 million jobs total and 1.5 million were in the auto industry? So if one believes the Dem numbers, he only created 100,000 non-auto industry jobs?
10. +1 Obama
11. Sorry. This was a joke. Not a +1 for him since he did nothing to earn or deserve it. Other presidents received it after they left office because they received it for their accomplishments as president. Obama getting it right after he took office was nothing more than a PR stunt.
12. Mortgage mod doesn't work. Most mortgage companies don't do them and the few that do only do it for long-term homeowners, not new homeowners, which is the ones who were losing their homes from the Fannie/Freddie lending fiasco.
13. I am neutral. I am middle class and will pay more in taxes this year than ever. Perhaps I am the wrong middle-class.
14. Yes, he reformed health care, in spite of 2/3rds of America opposing it, he reformed it. -1 Obama
15. I am unaware of him reforming the financial system. Could someone explain?
-
01-26-2012, 09:42 AM #27
This says enough for me!
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=46404
-
-
01-26-2012, 10:11 AM #28
The "He spent more money than every other president combined" if a pretty flawed argument. I'm not sure about early U.S. government budgets, but the with inflation and the increased volume of the U.S. population and services that they provide of course any current president is going to spend ay more than a bunch of our early U.S. presidents. It's like comparing movie box office numbers from now to movies of the past. You can't do it because movies cost so much more these days. I do agree that spending has to be reigned in but this comparison is a faulty comparison simply because of inflation and population size.
-
01-26-2012, 10:19 AM #29
Can you post the link for the top 10 green initiative successes that this website has found? Surely, there are some successful initiatives out there.
-
01-26-2012, 10:21 AM #30
Stop trying to defend Obama by MAKING SENSE. It will get you nowhere.
-
















