Discussion in 'Political Disputation' started by Double L, Oct 5, 2017.
I don't think anyone would make that claim.
Another false claim :
Since Obamacare Passed 50 Months Ago, Healthcare Has Gained Almost 1 Million Jobs
Who said jobs were lost in the health care sector? That is one area I'm sure the bill helped. lol. If a law is passed saying you have to have health insurance - yes, healthcare sector will grow.
You’ve said the bill upended the whole industry and was slowing job growth. You’ve also said Obamacare had a negative impact on growth, but you’re now saying the healthcare grew (of course hahaha). So by what mecanism Obamacare did slow US GDP growth?
I'm saying it fucked with job creation in non healthcare sector.
Did you read the article I’ve given you earlier? Did you read the part about job creation under Obama?
Yes. And the article also says Obama lowered deficits more than any other president.
No that's not what it says. Here's what it says :
while Bill Clinton is the only recent president to reduce the deficit more than Obama, as a percentage of gross domestic product (GDP).
And if you doubt the claim, you can easily verify it because they provide their sources, which are official us sources.
Your answer says a lot about you. When facts, and easily verifiable facts at that, don't fit in the narrative you believe in, you simply dismiss the messenger, using the lame ad hominem tactic. Basically the article says Obama was a job creation champion, providing proofs and sources, and your retort is to focus on a claim, that you incorrectly understood, you feel is doubious, without taking a second to verify it, to imply everything written there is trash. And then you wonder why cdogg can't help insulting you?
When a president increases the national debt by more than all previous presidents combined, and then is lauded for reducing the deficit based on the basis of some irrelevant metric, you are damn right I will dismiss it. lol. Says a lot about you that you haven't managed to take even a single step back from the minutia in your article to see the bigger picture.
Double L, you should keep focus here. You’re going on a tagent and you’re the one actually missing the big picture. I shouldn’t have to remind you but we weren’t discussing the merits of the interpretation of the various statistics provided in the article I’ve posted for you, we were discussing the fact that you base your conclusions on faulty premises. The article provides the data and the sources that contradicts what you seem to believe to be the truth.
You don’t believe reducing the deficit as a percentage of GDP is a valuable statistic, fine, but at the end of the day the statistic is accurate, whether you think it’s relevant or not. Same for the job creation figures. You can complain about their interpretation of these statistics if you want, but that doesn’t make them any less true. Basically, your point is totally irrelevant to the discussion we had. No, attacking their conclusions doesn’t nullify the statistics they provide. Most of the cited statistics are official statistics of the US.
If I have gone off topic, it is only in response to you. Bottom line is nothing you have posted refutes my claim that obamacare, and other regulations passed by obama administration, contributed to slow gdp growth.
Because of me, lol! Please, can you at least take responsibility for your own argumentative methods?
I haven't refuted your initial claim, I asked you to support it and then proceeded to show you that you've built your case on false premises. At the end of the day, I understand that you believe what you want to believe and nothing, even facts, will make you bugde an inch. So we'll leave it at that, that's a sterile discussion and I have much better things to do after all.
Dude, do you even bothered to read in that article their source for those neat statistics? I will quote it for you:
" Indeed, according to just such an analysis that was recently carried out by Bloomberg, Obama ranks in second position among the six most recent presidents dating back to 1977"
BLOOMBERG aka leaning toward the Left while claiming to be apolitical. Right...
Lol. Argumentative methods? You took issue with my claim that obama regulations caused slow gdp growth. Posted some general facts about obama's economy (which confirmed slow gdp growth), and then got frustrated and said i wouldn't accept facts? Weird thing here. Lol.
Bloomberg did the ranking, the statistics they relied upon come from various US governement agencies, official statistics. You obviously didn’t read the whole article. And, as Double L before you, you attack the source instead of looking at the data it provides. I’m not surprised though, all you do is parrot whatever Trump says without looking up whether he’s right or wrong. He’s the ultimate authority on everything for you. A real cultist you are...
As for Bloomberg, i’d categorize them as classic liberals with conservative leanings. They aren’t liberals in the sense you use it though, i.e. leftists. Still I can’t believe how wide the definition of liberal is becoming among people like you. The definition is becoming more and more : Whoever doesn’t suscribe to Trump views. It’s about to become totally meaningless in the public discourse.
Data doesn’t support what you advance, it’s as simple as that. Official stats don’t support what you advance. In fact, you’re so bad at this that I believe I could build a better case than you to support your views even though I disagree with them.
And yes, you’re using ad hominem attacks and setting up straw men when you point out, incorrectly btw, the interpretation of another statistic to dismiss everything written in the article. You’re the one going on tangents, not me. You’ve even admitted you did but accused me of forcing you to do so. lol. (and unlike you, I’m lol’ing for real).
Again, bottom line is, you challenged my claim that obama regulations contributed to slow gdp growth. But then failed to provide any evidence. You posted some unrelated facts and then tried to change the subject.
Are you talking to yourself?
I'm reminding you of actual events. Lol.
You've got the events right but the persons wrong. It's an improvement though, usually you have everything wrong. Congrats for the progress!
Here's the correct version for you :
You are incorrect, sir. And you must know it.
It already is meaningless in that sense
Maybe in the alternate reality you seem to live in. I actually feel pity for you.
You're probably right... The current state of the public debate is depressing. I didn't think it could get worse but it did, and a lot.
Yeah it's pretty much insane at this point
By agencies ruled by Obama loyalists who accommodated the data to their own party's benefit. Just look at those Democrat blue states and listen to the agency's heads talking on tv and you will get the impression that these people live in another dimension and that there is no way they have not manipulated their data.
Take your prescription pills and your mind might improve.
You’re the one that lives in another dimension. Your point is ridiculous. It reminds me of Trump that said the real unemployement rate was around 20% during the campaign but when the same agencies posted favorable numbers for him once he was president, he said they were now real. Maybe it was Spicer, but same difference...
And you rely on the same agencies to laud the ‘accomplishments’ of Trump but you can’t even get their numbers right when you post them here. You’re so full of shit. Think before posting, you’re embarrassing yourself.
The only way for yours to improve would be taking some cyanide
I am immune to that suggestion. However I can prescribe you something for your homicidal tendencies.
Separate names with a comma.