i dont think bush is doing a good job.... only because the war was point less.
yes he is alot better than clinton anyway
The brighter a light shines, the thicker the shadows fall
i dont think bush is doing a good job.... only because the war was point less.
Jees, think you have enough facts, I agree, he is better than clinton, but we need a new president, thats what everyone says at my school.
For three years in college I majored in political science and global studies. This stuff is my forte.Originally Posted by Zeffervelli
I think George Bush has done an awful job. Under his leadership we have entered in a pointless war that is just eating up all our hard earned cash. Gas prices have risen at an extrodinary rate and he's not helping in anyway. It is my opinion that soon we shall have another great depression. Maybe in five to ten years. He has not handled national crisis very good like when hurricane Katrina hit it took a long, long time for any form of assitance from the government to arrive. I don't see how he way able to win his second election.
he did some good things like what nvm he hasnt done anything right so far
92% of teens moved to rap. I am one of the 8% rebelions
As a percentage of GDP, the budget deficit is nothing. We are at historical lows, and we are in a better spot than the rest of the world when it comes to having the ability to withstand debt. Also, maybe you want a government that hordes all of your money and runs on a profit, but I don't. I don't want a government that has stockpiles of "surplus". That money belongs to us - THE TAXPAYERS - and should be stockpiled in our bank accounts or under our mattresses. lolOriginally Posted by Badlywornshoes
You might want to check those figures again. Maybe you meant to write "million"? It certainly is not $200 billion per month. Do the math. That figure isn't right.Originally Posted by Badlywornshoes
As far as being there, you're right. If the UN wasn't an emasculated piece of spineless garbage, this would've been dealt with back in the 1990s. Unfortunately, 19 UN Security Resolution later and the coalition (lead by the US and Great Britain) decided enough was enough.
Audits of average, every-day people are actually lower than before. More audits have been conducted on businesses and on people filing returns with a large amount of deductions.Originally Posted by Badlywornshoes
No, the unemployment trends I spoke of started after the stock market crash in 2000-2001 and after 9/11 which rocked our economy and put tourism and the airline industry on the brink of oblivion. The ability to turn that into an economy as boisterous as it has been deserves a lot of credit. The tax-cut package that was passed played a significant part in the turn-around.Originally Posted by Badlywornshoes
As for the "projected surplus", it was only that - a projection. There was no actual REAL DOLLARS in surplus. And, I refer back to my comment earlier in this thread about government running a profit. That is not a good thing. That is our money, not the government's.
BS. Take a look at the census reports when they come out each month. Everytime there is growth in average pay. That means the jobs coming back are higher than they were before. Another indicator, have you heard the ads for job-placement companies on the radio lately? They are on all the time. That is significant because they were on all the time in the late 90s and then nothing during the first few years of the 2000s. Now that unemployment rate is so low, companies are turning to job-placement companies to find new hires and/or temps. The job-placement companies have the ability to spend on advertising again because their industry is booming again. These are REAL JOBS, not summer jobs, man. You and your Democratic Underground talking-points are sad, sad, sad. Get your head out of the sand, and pay attention to the real world. Are you really trying to spin the fact that we are at statistical unemployment - as if that's a bad thing?Originally Posted by Badlywornshoes
Certainly he has made money from oil prices, but so have every single politician. So have lots of people. The oil companies are PUBLICLY TRADED - this means that you and I and anyone else can purchase their stock. When their profits go up, your return on your investment goes up.Originally Posted by Badlywornshoes
And what more can a President do to lower fuel prices? He's asked Congress to open up drilling in order to bring more product to market. The Democrats in the Senate filibustered. They don't understand the simple economics equation. When you increase supply, price of a product drops. When you decrease demand, price of a product drops. The President has offered ways of increasing supply and decreasing demand. It's up to CONGRESS to get this stuff done - not the President.
And I certainly don't fault a company for making a profit. And the oil company's profit margins are only in the 6% range, which is not very high. The amount of money they are profiting is enormous, but their return on investment is not due to the huge sums they payout in order to get their product to market.
I'm not sure what you mean by this. There still is Social Security. People are still getting the same checks they've always been getting. New retirees are getting their SS checks just like they should. The problem is with the Congress to pass something that will help to resolve the long-term outlook of SS. The long-term outlook of SS isn't good, but that's not Bush's fault. It's been a problem for a long, long, long time, and its up to Congress to fix it.Originally Posted by Badlywornshoes
Bush's tax cuts were enacted, I think you are trying to say if they are made permanent. Looks like you need to brush up on your current events. Oh, and the tax cuts were responsible for the fast economic turnaround after 9/11. That event had the ability to really throw us into chaos. We were on the verge of collapsing into Depression Era numbers, but the tax cuts spurred on business investment and spurred on consumer buying. The tax cuts are the reason why unemployment is at historical lows now and why the stock market is nearing all-time highs.Originally Posted by Badlywornshoes
Statistically and historically speaking, there seems to be a greater chance that unemployment will go up and not down, but only because there isn't much lower we can go. However, economic indicators do not point to any major increase (if any increase at all) in the unemployment rate. Unemployment isn't at 6%, its at 4.7%. Again, you need to brush up on your current events. Also, the jobs that have increased the most lately are in financial services, health care (as always), and MANUFACTURING! You can get all of this by clicking here http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htmOriginally Posted by Badlywornshoes
TO BE CONTINUED....
Dude, its May 2006 now. I can't quote you the job numbers from a year ago, but the unemployment rate was hovering around 5% back then. The private sector jobs are in total INCREASE during the Bush Presidency. You can take your year-old negative talking points and give them back to John Kerry. Just like him, they aren't useful anymore.Originally Posted by Badlywornshoes
The same Janice Rogers Brown who came from a dirtpoor family and his risen to the Federal Bench. This woman is an inspiration to every young child in America who is living on meager means and might think there is no hope. She is proof of the American Dream. This same woman who is vilified by the left and was FILIBUSTERED by Democrats in her nomination to a federal judgeship. The Democrats in Congress have absolutely no shame.Originally Posted by Badlywornshoes
As for the class-action lawsuits being moved to federal courts, that is in order to stave off the number of FRIVOLOUS lawsuits. Legitimate lawsuits will still be heard in court and will still have the ability to compensate the complainant of any damages that are due. But it helped to control the frivolity that has plagued our courts - and still plagues our courts today.
Wait, so you are upset that the budget deficit is so large (in terms of dollars, without taking into consideration percentage of GDP) and now you are upset with Bush because he wants to cut some domestic programs? You can't have it both ways.Originally Posted by Badlywornshoes
Also, once again your information is about a year old. We are into the 2006 budget already, and have seen proposalsl for the 2007 budget. Spending on K-12 Education under Bush has inreased every year. He spent more on Education during his first 4 years in office that Clinton did in his entire 8 years. Bush is increasing Title I spending and proposing a new program to help at-rish high schoolers.
And he has asked Congress to pass laws to allow drilling for new oil in Alaska and off-shore Califoria, Florida, and in the Gulf of Mexico. All of this has the great potential of increasing supply, which would allow for lower prices at the market. It also would reduce some of our dependancy on foreign oil. But the Democrats in Congress filibustered and so we are yet again without the ability to drill for new oil in the US. Meanwhile, China in consortium with Cuba will be drilling just off of Florida for potential sources of fuel. Way to go Democrats!! You are letting China and Cuba beat us to the source. Now, if we want to purchase that fuel source, we'll get to pay them for it INSTEAD OF PAYING OURSELVES FOR IT!!!!Originally Posted by Badlywornshoes
Dude, what year are you stuck in? By the way, Bush has nothing to run for, so the approval ratings don't mean anything. I'm sure he would like them to be higher, but really, what do they mean? He's not trying to win approval so that he can run for re-election. He's trying to establish a Democracy in Iraq, hunt down international terrorists, stave off concerns at home about gas prices (about which he can do literally nothing - its up the Congress to get something done in that regard), and carefully navigate the extremely sensitive issue of immigration reform. He's got a lot on his plate, and the average American would crumble under similar circumstance.Originally Posted by Badlywornshoes
Just because the predictions were high doesn't mean there hasn't been job growth. We have the highest number of citizens employed than ever before in our history. We are at historical unemployment lows. We have net increase in average pay during Bush's Presidency. How is that BAD? I'm not sure what Utopian society you think we should be living in with 100% employment where everyone is making $1mill per day, but this real world information is pretty darn good.Originally Posted by Badlywornshoes
TO BE CONTINUED...