Monday, December 8, 2014

Job Growth in US Economy Under Obama

Spent eight years destroy the economy and making the rich richer, as somewhere suggest, then Obama had the dubious distinction of picking up and putting back the pieces. This article looks at employment, and unemployment, and had some interesting facts. It would seem that job growth hasn't been this robust since the Clinton era. This is of course evidence but only the evidence that some people may want to pay attention to. It's ironic that under Democrat Presidents the economy has been better off job wise. Where is under Republican control the rich get richer and everybody else seems to suffer. The middle class is eroded. That's not to say that it's been reclaimed under Obama by any means, yet to see the job growth that we have it's in the very least a positive sign. Couple that with housing market and a slow uptake in housing starts and you have the impression that there is sustained growth.

http://www.politicususa.com/2014/12/05/thanks-obama-2014-year-job-growth-bill-clinton-president.html

Wednesday, March 19, 2014

Obama on Funny or Die is pretty funny

<iframe src="http://www.funnyordie.com/embed/18e820ec3f" width="640" height="400" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen webkitallowfullscreen mozallowfullscreen></iframe><div style="text-align:left;font-size:x-small;margin-top:0;width:640px;"><a href="http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/18e820ec3f/between-two-ferns-with-zach-galifianakis-president-barack-obama" title="from Funny Or Die, Zach Galifianakis, Between Two Ferns, Brian Lane, Scott Aukerman, BoTown Sound, BJPorter, rachelgoldenberg, Aaron Ulrich, and President Barack Obama">Between Two Ferns with Zach Galifianakis: President Barack Obama</a> from <a href="http://www.funnyordie.com/funnyordie">Funny Or Die</a>      <iframe src="http://www.facebook.com/plugins/like.php?app_id=138711277798&amp;href=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.funnyordie.com%2Fvideos%2F18e820ec3f%2Fbetween-two-ferns-with-zach-galifianakis-president-barack-obama&amp;send=false&amp;layout=button_count&amp;width=150&amp;show_faces=false&amp;action=like&amp;height=21" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" style="border:none; overflow:hidden; width:90px; height:21px; vertical-align:middle;" allowTransparency="true"></iframe>
</div>

Wednesday, October 24, 2012

Round 2 - Obama

The 1970s called, they want their crappy Presidential candidate back.

Apart from not actually offering any legitimate idea, and despite the obvious attempt to turn everything to the economy (just like a Family guy episode where everything erupts in applause when someone says...... "NINE ELEVEN"), but at least one innovative idea beyond vague hums and hahs would've been nice.

Obama took this one, and if the Republicans continue making incredulous statements like rape = the will of God, or binders of women, well there's no chance on this one, or at least I hope. America can be pretty backwards at time, and the extent voter intimidation goes on in poor areas could sway this one the wrong way. (Or is there even a right way?)

Tuesday, October 9, 2012

Round 1: Point Romney

Presidential debates do little to alter election results, but my oh my they are entertaining. The sheer number of billions of dollars that go into elections these days boggles the mind (in excess of 6 billion). In the very least it provides exceptional entertainment for those who chose to tune in.

The final run up to November's election has an exciting preamble with the Presidential debates. Everyone was wondering whether the speaking power of relatable Obama would run rough shod over prim and proper Romney.

Round one was a bit of a shocker, and for the sake of all those involved, a bit of a welcome addition to what was once perceived as a one horse raise.

Mitt handedly took round one in the Presidential debates asserting himself as a viable candidate by charming his way to a win. Over a seemingly lacklustre and perhaps tired President, Romney lead with confidence and seemed to be in his element on the offensive.

WE can expect a very focused and better showing by the Democrat camp in Round 2. But for now we've been thrown a curve ball. Whether that's a good thing or not, or whether it even matters at thi spoint, that remains to be determined.

Thursday, December 1, 2011

Labor Law for the 1%

to vote republican = less government. that much is so true, and heck, they're doing a good job sticking to their guns (at the expense of many others of course). but now we have more labor laws rolling out that, it seems, benefit a very select bunch of folks (and it's not the blue collar worker I'm talking about). http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/labor/194083-labor-law-for-the-1

Wednesday, October 5, 2011

One quick benefit of two party system

The USA will never really have a federal party outside of the Democrats and Republicans. It's just too hard for someone to emerge. But there are pros to the problem. Take for example, Canada and their political system. On any given federal election there could be 6 parties in the running. The right-wing Conservatives, the central Liberals, the left-wing NDP, the Green Party, and any independent (if in Quebec then the Bloq). Usually it's only 4. Regardless, the Greens don't fair well, but between the two left leaning parties (NDP & Liberals) They split the left vote. The left would always win in Canada if it wasn't for this split. Although in america the party lines are really iterations of centralist parties, at least you can make a clear decision (or least the options are severely limiting thus forcing you to chose).

Friday, September 23, 2011

Double Dip Recession

Maybe not double dip, but there's certainly another period of downturn in our economy.

The problems that have lead to this point have to do with issues of wealth distribution. I don't believe anything illegal is going on at wall Street btw. I would rather say that Wall Street is inherently greedy, and they're inherently good at making money. Two and two together and you have a system that rewards short term gains. That system was one predicated by politicians on both spectrums over the periods since Reagan.

We permitted this by electing these officials. If you don't vote then shut up. If you do vote vote for change. But when I see everyone getting upset about losing their money and this and that, steal from the rich, I say, well you want to be the 1%. Maybe we need to adjust the way we look at things ourselves. The American dream can't lead to everyone getting rich, maybe we're after the wrong things. Personal choices need to adjust.

Sure, fine, increase regulations on some industries. Evidently we can't trust private enterprise to pass along wealth and act for anybody's best interests except their own. But is giving government that cash better? Doubt it.

Rant over.