[johnforbes]

Near historic lows.

GDP growth pallid at 1.2 percent.

94 million Americans out of the workforce.

12 million illegals driving down wages.

U-6 unemployment 9.7 percent.

Granted, the Crash of 08 put things in a hole, but the job of any president is to try to make things better, and Obama's every step made them worse.

Average Americans have seen their real household income decline since the year 2000.

[Intrepid]

And just the other day Obozo claimed things have never been better.
He's the only president who has never had economic growth attain 3%. The closest he got was one year at 2.5%.
And yet he continues to blather about what a success he has been.

And the Useful Idiots stand up and cheer aso Killery Rotten Clinton promises more of the same.

We may as well all become Canadians, eh?

[Clownkicker]

Now for the truth of johnny's lying partisan propaganda:

Labor Force participation is nowhere near historic lows.

GDP growth pallid at 1.2 percent but a huge improvement over the negative growth when he took office.
Preventing a depression is a good thing.

94 million Americans out of the workforce, but a huge improvement over the 165 million when he took over.

12 million illegals driving down wages, which has not increased since Obama took office, and the trend may actually have reversed somewhat.

U-6 unemployment 9.7 percent, down from 14.2% when he took office. That's a good thing.

Granted, the Crash of 08 put things in a hole, but the job of any president is to try to make things better, and Obama's every step did just that.

Average Americans have seen their real household income decline since the year 2000.

[johnforbes]

Clowntoker is, as ever, incapable of rational discourse.

The facts are the facts, and it is the job of any president to make things better.

It is great that unemployment inched down, but the recovery was the slowest ever and left average Americans earning less, in real terms, than in 2000.

Meanwhile, inflation slumbered on at around 1 percent, as food prices, clothing prices, etc crept up.

[Clownkicker]

So let's see some rational discourse from you, johnny.

I gave you some facts and you ignore them.

Was the U-6 at 14.2% when Obama took office or not?
Is 9.4% "better" or not?

Is 1.2% growth "better" than a negative growth/recession or not?

Is 94 million Americans out of work "better" than 165 million Americans out of work?

These are simple questions that even you should be able to answer.
Let's keep it rational, johnny. No more reliance on innuendo and diversions from the simple questions presented here.

[johnforbes]

Clowntoker is, as ever, incapable of rational discourse.

The facts are the facts, and it is the job of any president to make things better.

It is great that unemployment inched down, but the recovery was the slowest ever and left average Americans earning less, in real terms, than in 2000.

Meanwhile, inflation slumbered on at around 1 percent, as food prices, clothing prices, etc crept up.

[johnforbes]

By the way, the labor force participation rate hasn't been this low in 40 yrs, so "historic" remains apt

[Intrepid]

AssClown Loser Lucky is unable to refute a single assertion I have made.
He relies on silly ass word games instead.
This has not been effective for a long time, but the fool sticks with what he knows.

[Clownkicker]

johnforbes is, as ever, incapable of rational discourse.
As we see, he couldn't answer even the simplest of questions about the incomplete data he presented.
And he couldn't refute the facts I posted. All he could do was admit I was correct, that the U-6 has indeed declined since January 2009.

As johnny said, the facts are the facts, and he isn't allowed to ignore the ones he doesn't like in order to 'prove' his obviously silly argument.
Obama has improved the economy by every measure johnforbes put forward many times in many posts, but he still can't answer the simplest, verifiable questions regarding his claims.

Now johnforbes clings desperately to a measuring tool that neither he nor anyone else here understands.
"By the way, the labor force participation rate hasn't been this low in 40 yrs, so "historic" remains apt"-johnfibs

But it has been much lower in the past 70 years. You're cherry picking your data.
62.8% is nowhere near the regular average historic lows around 59% that existed from 1948 to 1968, which included some of the best boom years for the U.S. economy. So your "labor force participation rate" is misleading as an indicator of a successful economy, isn't it, johnny.

Stop clinging to your partisan delusions and answer the few non-partisan questions I put to you above that only relate to objective data.
Please try to be rational about this, johnny.

[johnforbes]

Well, I woke up Sunday morning with no way to hold my head that did hurt.

And the OJ I had for breakfast wasn't bad, so I had one more for dessert.

Of course, the U-6 has improved and that is good.

But people who say the direction is improving are generally trying to divert people from the dismal reality.

Reality -- for an investor -- is where America is now.

In the inner city, black youth unemployment is running 58 percent.

This has been the slowest recovery ever, and that's became Obama and his "team" have done everything wrong.

94 million Americans remain out of the workforce.

Food stamp use is slightly better, where where is it today? At a shocking 43 million. FORTY THREE MILLION.

GDP growth is an anemic 1.2 percent.

China feels a slowdown in the 7 percent range.

The Democrats have made a miserable mess of the economy, and foreign policy, and that's why Hillary can't run on anything but attacking Trump personally.

[Clownkicker]

johnforbes is, as ever, incapable of rational discourse.

He confuses "rational discourse" with "droning repetition".

Yes, some things are better in China, but other things are far, far worse.
No American in their right mind would want to change places with them or want to hold them up as a model for economic development.
But China is irrelevant to the topic, so who cares?

johnfibs is so befuddled he is unable to admit that 9.7% is less than 14.2%, and thus an improvement.

He is so befuddled he can't admit that 1.2% growth better than a negative growth.

He is so clueless he can't understand that 94 million Americans out of work better than 165 million Americans out of work.

And he does not even understand what "labor force participation" means.

But I guess that is to be expected from a colossal dimwit.

[johnforbes]

Of course, the U-6 has improved and that is good.

But people who say the direction is improving are generally trying to divert people from the dismal reality.

Reality -- for an investor -- is where America is now.

Growth was just marked at 1.2 percent, with the prior two quarters revised down to under 1 percent.

Pathetic, anemic, pick your word.

In the inner city, black youth unemployment is running 58 percent.

This has been the slowest recovery ever, and that's became Obama and his "team" have done everything wrong.

94 million Americans remain out of the workforce.

Food stamp use is slightly better, where where is it today? At a shocking 43 million. FORTY THREE MILLION.

China feels a slowdown in the 7 percent range.

The Democrats have made a miserable mess of the economy, and foreign policy, and that's why Hillary can't run on anything but attacking Trump personally.

[RealJustme]

Clown, you were Trumped by John, so we're all waiting on your response.

[Intrepid]

Only the truly duped and deluded or the Useful Idiots (such as AssClown Loser Lucky) can continue to ASSert that Obozo has been a success.

In the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary notwithstanding, what are you going to believe, the facts or your own lying eyes?

Here AssClown Loser Lucky will once again employ Google Search to appear to be an expert on something that ten minutes ago he knew nothing about.

(In an effort to salvage something, ANYTHING, he will rail against my ending a sentence with a preposition, declare victory and do his silly ass dance)

[Clownkicker]

^^^^^^ I post something and this stupid fucker just can't help himself. He's compelled to service us all.

He has nothing to say on the topic, of course, but boy does he love dancing for me. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Loser Boy Assclown Insipid is so owned. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Intrepid]

AssClown Loser Lucky jumps when I crack the whip,
But he can't refute anything Forbes has asserted.
And he hopes nobody notices.
Fail.
Again.

[Clownkicker]

^^^^^^^One of these daays I'm going to return this clown's Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitor so he stands a fighting chance against his compulsion to dance for me whenever I post. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

But not today. Dance for me, Loser Boy! I command you! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[johnforbes]

Democrats have only one argument to make -- that Trump is bad.

Democrats cannot defend Obama's miserable record on the economy, or social unity, and Hillary's record on foreign policy is abysmal.

America is now at 1.2 percent growth, and the prior two quarters were revised down to under 1 percent.

Even the jobs created were mostly part-time.

It isn't Obama's fault that a part-time job is counted the same as full-time (that mistake predated him), but it is his fault that the dishonest mess of Obamacare caused many employers to cut full-time jobs in favor of part ones.

[Dogzilla]

Ummm....I do believe that that is a republican thing, JohnnieBoy.

[johnforbes]

Dogzilla, you misunderstand my comments.

This is just a matter of intelligent conversation.

An investor MUST continue to invest regardless of who is president, regardless what party is in.

Naturally, that means some presidents you will like and agree with on politics, and others you won't.

That's just investing.

No, the definitional matter of including a part-time job and counting it the same as full is NOT Obama's fault.

On the other hand, he didn't urge that this counting method be fixed either, and he didn't because Obamacare (which was rammed through with dishonesty as one of its architects Prof Gruber admitted) caused employers to lessen full-time jobs and replace them with part-time ones.

[Intrepid]

All of this is so far beyond the abilities of Dogshitzilla and AssClown Loser Lucky to comprehend it isn't even worth trying.

[elklindo69]

The unemployment rate is at 4.9%.

Labor force participation rate is 62.8%.

Coming shortly....johnie will provide insight on this wide gap...

:lol:

[johnforbes]

Unlike you, Elkin, I actually invest.

So, when I look at the economy, it is with a desire to understand what might be going on -- not to score partisan points.

I'll be investing this year, and next, regardless who is or isn't president.

Of course, there has been a very welcome drift downward in the headline unemployment rate, but everybody knows that isn't the full picture or the accurate picture.

Workforce participation has been lower in history, but you have to go back more than 40 years to discern that, and that's hardly the vibrant economy anybody -- Dem or Repub -- is looking for.

Nor is 1.2 percent GDP growth, with the prior two quarters revised downward to < 1 percent.

[Clownkicker]

"Workforce participation has been lower in history, but you have to go back more than 40 years to discern that, and that's hardly the vibrant economy anybody -- Dem or Repub -- is looking for."-johnforbes

You're honestly going to sit there and tell us the economy from 1948 to 1968 wasn't the "vibrant economy anybody is looking for"?
You wouldn't have invested in America in 1950? :lol:

You clowns are always going on about how that was our heyday and that you want America to get back to those halcyon days when America was still "great".
Just ask Trump.

Face it, johnny, you don't really understand what "labor force participation" means.

[elklindo69]

I find it entertaining to see how forbestardo, goes out and slopily cherry picks data. As with any type cursory data analysis, it all needs to be placed into context.

Interestingly, the rate is much higher now than it was back in the "heyday" that Trump wants to return to.

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united- ... ation-rate

[johnforbes]

Of course, what Elkindolt is doing is cherry picking data.

This is not a partisan issue, but partisan hacks like Elkin cannot comprehend that.

You want a vibrant economy, and NOBODY believes we have that now.

Nor is there any prospect of that if America continues its high-tax socialist ways under Hillary.

Looking now at unprecedented stimulus since 2009, what has it achieved?

1.2 percent econ growth.

[Clownkicker]

johnforbes is, as ever, incapable of rational discourse.

He simply ignores every indisputable point made by anyone else in the discussion just because it doesn't fit his droning partisan narrative.

So what is the point of "rational discourse" if you might as well be talking to a bratty three year old?

The sad part is, johnforbes is the best the Right has to offer.

[johnforbes]

Thank you for stating that I am "the best."

Still, that leaves one to wonder how anybody, anywhere can possibly defend the miserably awful economic record of Obama and his failed socialism.

Despite unprecedential stimulus, Obama will still end his failed presidency with the worst econ growth of any president.

Have things very slowly and slightly improved since 2008? Sure, and every investor if grateful that's the case.

But the anemic, weak situation is almost surely due to Obama's failure to understand the power of tax-cutting, his socialism, the burdens of Obamacare creating more part-time jobs, and the failure to secure the border meaning 12 million illegals are driving down wages.

[johnforbes]

unprecedented

[RealJustme]

Only 1.2 percent econ growth...I need say no more!

[Clownkicker]

Leave it to johnforbes to actually thank someone for calling him "the best of the morons".
His aspirations were never too ambitious.

"Democrats have only one argument to make -- that Trump is bad."-johnforbes

Of course, our simpleton johnforbes knows this is only true to the same extent that Republicans only have one argument to make -- that Hillary is bad.

The difference between the two is that since johnforbes only cares about his investing over his country, he should unload his equities before Nov. 8th if it appears Trump will win because the world markets will almost certainly go into a nosedive on Nov. 9th if he does.
But johnny should hold his equities if it appears Hillary will win because the world markets will likely go up the next day if she does.

johnforbes already knows this.
But conservative cognitive dissonance being what it is, he still thinks Trump will be good for America and its economy.

[johnforbes]

No, the Trump argument is to make America great again.

Hillary cannot defend Obama's miserably awful record, which has left the country in a shocking mess.

19 trillion in debt, 43 million on food stamps, growth at a shocking 1.2 percent (prior two quarters revised downward to less than 1 percent), uncheckable Syrians rolling in.

If Hillary wins, why wouldn't America soon be the same mess as Islamized Europe?

[Clownkicker]

Oh, well, Trumps slogan is "Make America Great Again". Heck, why didn't you say so?

So I will correct my statement to come into line with your claim, johnny:
The Republicans only have one argument to make -- that Trump has a catchy slogan.


Well hell, if that doesn't make him the best candidate, I don't know what does. :shock:

Do you ever bother to listen to yourself, dimwit?

[johnforbes]

There are bulbs more dim than CLowntoker, but we don't know watt their size is.

Do I listen to myself?

Well, yes and no.

In the Bishop Berkeley sense, sure.

Do I listen to myself sing?

Heck no.

However, my singing does contain the same driving, pounding beat as Perry Como's.