You know, at least Col gene seems to be working harder to prove his points and I commend him for it. Still it's like he starts off shooting small bullets, then someone else comes and shields themselves from those small bullets and shoot back bigger bullets but Col seems to like his small bullets and continues to shoot even if with no effect (hope you guys are good with metaphors).

But really, who the hell is this Jimmy (Anonymous user)? Could Col be playing the 2 screen name game or did he find someone who thinks like him and recruited him to help him fight the onslaught of people who contradict everything he says? And I thought one Col gene was one too many.

Okay, I admit it. I'm the colonel's brother, soon to become sister if I can raise enough cash for the operation.

If you believe not protecting our borders is a Small bullet, you have a strange outlook. If you believe a $10 Trillion national debt is a small bullet then what would you call a large bullet. If you believe the non solution that Bush put up for Social Sceurity is a small bullet again what is a large bullet. If you think the mess in Iraq is a small bullet I guess you must comparing it to WWII.

Now Jimmy has NOTHING to do with me.

If they are illegal, they are NOT paying taxes. That is why employers hire them. Lower wages and the employer does not have to pay their share of payroll taxes. The Bush Admin is NOT going after the employers that break the law. States like CA, AZ and TX are paying the price to pay for medical, education etc because these people are in this country and not obeying opur laws. W HY? Bush will not seek the needed funding to hire the guards required to help stop the illegals . His solution is to just make them legal.

Wouldn't making them legal citizens mean that conpanies will not be paying under the table wages, not getting away with not paying taxes and not make more money and that illegals who become legal will have to apply for a job, earn, at least minimum wage, pay taxes and therefor not hurt our medical, educational and security economy? And do you really think that putting more people to secure the borders will change anything? They are using state of the art technology to see them at night and they still get in.

I personally think that we need to control illegal immigration somehow, but those who are already here and hurting our economy, might as well put them to good use.

The only bullets that matter are the bullets used to kill Iraqi people and commit a genocide by coalition (of evil) troops.

homepage.mac.com/darkscooby9/iMovieTheater2.html

The Bush Admin is NOT going after the employers that break the law.

Hey clueless one it's not up to GW to go after them.....It's up to the IRS and the labor board! And like I said, "if" you bothered to read that unless they are being paid "under the table in cash", the employer has NO recourse but to extract taxes from their pay checks! Can you comprehend that? NO RECOURSE.

If you believe not protecting our borders is a Small bullet, you have a strange outlook. If you believe a $10 Trillion national debt is a small bullet then what would you call a large bullet. If you believe the non solution that Bush put up for Social Sceurity is a small bullet again what is a large bullet. If you think the mess in Iraq is a small bullet I guess you must comparing it to WWII.

Col, you are taking me too literal. It was not my intention to say that your ideas are small (although sometimes I can't say the same about you brain), it's just that most of the times other people here have bigger bullets than you, if you catch my drift. None of your arguments on this article are small complaints but some people can fight better than you and use stronger arguments.

I personally think that we need to control illegal immigration somehow, but those who are already here and hurting our economy, might as well put them to good use.

Personally I think that those that are here illegally should be sent the hell home. Illegal means they are "breaking" the law! What you're saying is that we should reward them for breaking it. So the next people who rob a 7-11 should get off?

You know, at least Col gene seems to be working harder to prove his points and I commend him for it.

BTW, your welcome.

Personally I think that those that are here illegally should be sent the hell home. Illegal means they are "breaking" the law! What you're saying is that we should reward them for breaking it. So the next people who rob a 7-11 should get off?

Maybe your right. I feel bad though. It's not like they all broke the law for the fun of it. But I guess better them than me. I can't help it DRmiler, I have a big heart and I just like to help the less fortunate.

drmiler

WRONG., The President has the responsibility to enforce Federal laws via the attorney general and FBI.

So... then why has unemployment as a percentage of population remained so low?

Unemployment was 3.9% in 2001. The issue is just not the numbers but what the jobs pay and what benefits they have. many of the new jobs pay far less and have less benefits.

Unemployment was 3.9% in 2001. The issue is just not the numbers but what the jobs pay and what benefits they have. many of the new jobs pay far less and have less benefits

Which makes sense, seeing as now Americans are competing with people overseas who are willing to work at a fraction of the cost. We're being outcompeted, you see. Morons go sue-crazy and sue people for stupid reasons... but win anyway. Insurance costs go up. Malpractice suits have made it hard for doctors to make money in private offices anymore, even charging the exhorbitant fees that we all hate.

The problem is that America has stopped producing. We've stopped innovating. We're not making enough things that other people want. In fact, I'd say we're living off an inheritance, and now we're getting ticked off now that the money is running out.

I say we deserve it. Let's start innovating again, shall we? Economy is just a tool, and we can use it for our own benefit.

Dan

WRONG., The President has the responsibility to enforce Federal laws via the attorney general and FBI.

Nope, once AGAIN, YOUR WRONG! GW is part of the "executive" branch of our government NOT the judicial branch. And as such DOES NOT and CAN NOT enforce ANY laws.

Unemployment rates below about 5% are unsustainable and generally have a negative effect on the economy. Most non-armchair economists describe ~5% unemployment as an almost ideal number, economically.

Unemployment was 3.9% in 2001. The issue is just not the numbers but what the jobs pay and what benefits they have. many of the new jobs pay far less and have less benefits

Again wrong answer. At best, unemployment was at 4.2% to 4.4% in 2001. Then came 9/11 and it's aftermath. GW has done a hell of a job bringing it back down. It was at 5.7% in Dec 2001 It highest since then has been 6.3% in June 2003.

In fact, according to this Wikipedia entry, "Staiger, Stock, and Watson found that the range of possible values of the NAIRU (from 4.3 to 7.3% unemployment) was too large to be useful to macroeconomic policy-makers."

Which strongly suggests that you are making a mistake by harping on the unemployment numbers so much (especially since 5% unemployment falls within the ideal range referenced multiple times in the Wiki).

Also, from the same paragraph: "Robert Eisner suggested that for 1956-95 there was a zone from about 5% to about 10% unemployment between the low-unemployment realm of accelerating inflation and the high-unemployment realm of disinflation. In between, he found that inflation falls with falling unemployment."

Note that when unemployment drops below the ideal range, it increases the rate of inflation.

It was 3.9% and Bush had done a hell of a job for his rich friends. CNN just had a poll that said only 29% of Americans feel the economy is good! That is just about the % of conservatives in the country

Population growth required 125,000 new jobs EVERY month just to stay even. During the past three months we have NOT added the 375,000 new jobs.

This month's

We are still 1.5 Million short since Jan 2001 and many on the new jobs are non-living wage jobs. I would like Bush and Cheney to live on $8 per hour. That is just about what their labor is worth come to think of it!

Unemployment was 3.9% in 2001.

Gene, The unemployment rate was 4.7% in 2001. I think you are talking about 2000 that was 4.0%, just before the tech bubble burst.

But yet again you fail to put every thing into historical context. 3.9% lasted for three months (again just before the stock bust), this was the lowest rate in over 35 years. By your definition a President should always hold the unemployment rate at a 35 year low? You need to keep things realistic Gene.

Now lets really look at the data provided by our good friends from the Bureau of Labor statistic: Link

The average unemployment rate since 1975 (to include this years average) is 7.55%.
The average unemployment rate for Clinton (1993-2000) was 5.2%.
The average unemployment rate for Bush (2001-2005) is 5.4%.

Now lets add in the tech bubble, 9/11 attack, and Katrina. I would have to say Bush has done very well with a 5.4% average, that is over 2% lower then the norm.

But IMO the president has very little to do with employment numbers. Because if it was the President’s fault, then Roosevelt would have been a miserable President. After 10 years in office and a major social welfare program, he was only able to move unemployment from 25% to 20.5%. A man named Greenspan has more power then the President to effect unemployment numbers. History has shown the economic up and downs that effect the country have little to do with Presidents. It is only the perception given by political pundits that make it seem that way.

When I can see excepting application signs on about half the businesses in my area, and the shopping malls packed with people, I would have to say the economy is doing rather well. And that's without a Political pundit from either side telling me what the economy is like.

Tell that to the 1.5 Million that can not find a job. The fact remains that the average worker is NOT seeing an economic boom like Bush claims. only 29% believe the economy is good. That is because for most it is not. Some big companies are doing well (oil) and the GDP is growing. That does not change the fact that the average weekly weage after inflation is down. Many companies are reducing benefits. Many companies are in real financial trouble. More and more good paying jobs are ending. That is why 71% of American workers believe the economy is either poor or at best fair. Given the Federal deficit, we should be in fat city. Only the wealthy are in Fat City and they are rolling in money. The poor are poorer and the middle income American is worse off in 2005 then on 2001.

In my humble opinion, I think if the actual rate of unemployment works out to only 1.5 million people in the whole United States, that's a pretty good figure.

But unfortunately it doesn't. Let's not look at unsubstantiated figures, let's look at the real figures, from the real reporters of government statistics...

As of December 2nd's Bureau of Labor Statistics Job Report, the numbers were thus:
Nonfarm payroll employment grew by 215,000 in November, and the unemployment
rate was unchanged at 5.0 percent, the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S.
Department of Labor reported today. Over the month, job growth was widespread,
with large gains in construction and food services.

The unemployment rate was unchanged in November at 5.0 percent. The jobless
rate has ranged between 4.9 and 5.1 percent since May. The number of unemployed
persons, 7.6 million, was essentially unchanged in November. The unemployment
rates for adult men (4.3 percent), adult women (4.6 percent), teenagers (17.2
percent), whites (4.3 percent), and Hispanics or Latinos (6.0 percent) showed
little or no change in November. The jobless rates for blacks (10.6 percent)
and, specifically, for adult black women (9.1 percent), rose over the month.
In November, the unemployment rate for Asians was 3.6 percent, not seasonally
adjusted.

Those unspun numbers come straight from the government. Unvarnished. Doesn't get more credible.