CSNbbs

We are doing very well. I look forward to the opportunities ahead. We have lost 1 contract due to mission change but have won 3 this year (all larger) and are waiting on 4 more decisions.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

(05-28-2017 06:41 PM)MJG Wrote: [ -> ]Does Trump have a magic wand?
Even if he actually did something to help the economy wouldn't it take longer to have an effect?
There is a cause (POLICY) then effect timeline politics


Sent from my SM-J700T using CSNbbs mobile app

Depends on the industry. Our industry is IT and cyber ops and the impact was immediate.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

(05-28-2017 08:35 PM)UofMstateU Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-28-2017 08:31 PM)swagsurfer11 Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-28-2017 08:10 PM)bullet Wrote: [ -> ]Obama did. He took a troublesome recession and forced it into a full blown one. He kept moaning about how bad things were and how they were getting worse and destroyed what was left of consumer confidence. Bill Clinton finally had to tell him in late February to just shut up. After that, things quit sinking so fast.

Link? Terrible when president blames his predecessor.

So you agree that under Obama, we had 8 years of terrible?

If you agree that it's still terrible.

(05-28-2017 08:31 PM)swagsurfer11 Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-28-2017 08:10 PM)bullet Wrote: [ -> ]Obama did. He took a troublesome recession and forced it into a full blown one. He kept moaning about how bad things were and how they were getting worse and destroyed what was left of consumer confidence. Bill Clinton finally had to tell him in late February to just shut up. After that, things quit sinking so fast.

Link? Terrible when president blames his predecessor.

Where the **** were you from Jan 2009 to Jan 2017?

You are gullible if you put any stock in these numbers, positive or negative.

(05-29-2017 04:26 PM)Rob Wrote: [ -> ]You are gullible if you put any stock in these numbers, positive or negative.

Yep. I'll be much more interested in job creation numbers for a president after 1 year or maybe even 2 years than I would be after 2 months. 2 months is way too much of a short sample size, not to mention you'd need to examine the context and general state of the economy each president walked into prior to their inauguration.

(05-29-2017 04:47 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-29-2017 04:26 PM)Rob Wrote: [ -> ]You are gullible if you put any stock in these numbers, positive or negative.

Yep. I'll be much more interested in job creation numbers for a president after 1 year or maybe even 2 years than I would be after 2 months. 2 months is way too much of a short sample size, not to mention you'd need to examine the context and general state of the economy each president walked into prior to their inauguration.

Well, lets go ahead and start a running total for all four of them then. This is the first 12 full months after they were president.

Trump +522,000
Obama -4,250,000
Bush -1,828,000
Clinton +2,783,000

I don't think this means what you think it means.......lol dumbassery.

(05-29-2017 06:30 PM)Machiavelli Wrote: [ -> ]I don't think this means what you think it means.......lol dumbassery.

Funny how an arbitrary and short time frame was picked in order to push an agenda. Here are the job numbers from the beginning of Clinton's presidency to the end to Obamas. That huge dip in the was the largest economic downturn since the great depression and started just months before Obama took over. Obama literally saved us from The Great Depression 2.0 by saving our banking system, housing market, and Auto industry and through that it's periphery industries. To claim Obama didn't inherit a **** show that drastically effected his job numbers at the start of his presidency would just be intellectually dishonest.



Taken directly from the Bureau of Labor Statistics website.
https://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet

(05-28-2017 09:22 PM)Kaplony Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-28-2017 08:31 PM)swagsurfer11 Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-28-2017 08:10 PM)bullet Wrote: [ -> ]Obama did. He took a troublesome recession and forced it into a full blown one. He kept moaning about how bad things were and how they were getting worse and destroyed what was left of consumer confidence. Bill Clinton finally had to tell him in late February to just shut up. After that, things quit sinking so fast.

Link? Terrible when president blames his predecessor.

Where the **** were you from Jan 2009 to Jan 2017?

America. You?

(05-29-2017 05:10 PM)UofMstateU Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-29-2017 04:47 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote: [ -> ]

(05-29-2017 04:26 PM)Rob Wrote: [ -> ]You are gullible if you put any stock in these numbers, positive or negative.

Yep. I'll be much more interested in job creation numbers for a president after 1 year or maybe even 2 years than I would be after 2 months. 2 months is way too much of a short sample size, not to mention you'd need to examine the context and general state of the economy each president walked into prior to their inauguration.

Well, lets go ahead and start a running total for all four of them then. This is the first 12 full months after they were president.

Trump +522,000
Obama -4,250,000
Bush -1,828,000
Clinton +2,783,000

Those numbers don't tell the whole story by any means, you and I both know that. If I just took those numbers without any context I would be inclined to believe Clinton is the greatest job creator of all time and must have been doing so many more pro business things at the beginning of his first term than any of the others combined. We all know that's not true he just inherited an economy that was on the verge of a boom and he rode that wave. Bush on the other hand caught the down side of that wave and that's why he looks so much worse than Clinton to start off. Now maybe you are just trying to argue that Clinton is an extremely underrated President and deserves to be up there with the greats.