Unemployment is worse for Blacks under Obama Administration

  • Koaa2

    Posts: 1558

    Jun 13, 2012 10:20 AM GMT
    credo saidI love the Republican cherry picking going on in this thread. OP, I'm sorry; I know it's a hard pill to swallow but you'll have to accept the fact that the American people voted for a black president.

    At the end of the day, the only thing the GOP has accomplished since President Obama took office is a good fucking of the American people, particularly the working poor and middle class.

    I sleep well knowing Romney won't be winning in November, regardless of the state of the economy.


    Couldn't agree with you more. Obama has done a pretty good job of getting things back on track after 8 years of Republicans and Bush, who ran this country into the ground. Had the Republicans wanted to do anything for the country, other than try to destroy Obama, a lot more could have been accomplished. I think young people see what the Republican party stands for, and it is not good, and they will support Obama again.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 22, 2012 3:30 PM GMT
    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/21/nyregion/blacks-miss-out-as-jobs-rebound-in-new-york-city.html?_r=2&ref=nyregion

    More than half of all of African-Americans and other non-Hispanic blacks in the city who were old enough to work had no job at all this year, according to an analysis of employment data compiled by the federal Labor Department. And when black New Yorkers lose their jobs, they spend a full year, on average, trying to find new jobs — far longer than New Yorkers of other races.

    Nationally, the employment outlook for blacks has begun to brighten: there were about one million more black Americans with jobs in May than there were a year earlier, according to the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics.

    But that is not the case in New York City, where the decline in employment since the recession began here, in 2008, has been much steeper for blacks than for white or Hispanic residents, said James Parrott, chief economist for the Fiscal Policy Institute, a liberal research group.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 22, 2012 3:48 PM GMT
    calibro saidperhaps, if you weren't so quick to jump on the president, you'd stop to ask the question of if one month's worth of unemployment change is indicative of overall increase of unemployment. yes, the figure rose, and is still higher than when he took office, but it has been dropping since the peak of the recession.

    chart-black-jobless-rate.top.gif


    Graph is meaningless unless it is compared to the other ethnic groups; Caucasians, Hispanic, Asian. I would like to see if the trend is across the board. If so Bush fucked up economy and Obama is applying corrective measures which do take time to rejuvenate economy. There is no instant fix to the problem. Most projection would say 5-10 years to see changes through complex system. So in Obama's year seven you may have an argument to accuse him of failed management. But even then he is only the Chief Executive not the legislator of the land. For that we have Bonehead I mean Boehner and Hairy Reeks oops, I mean Harry Reid.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 22, 2012 3:55 PM GMT
    Don't you just love when a forum response resemble a dissertation, LOL

    Didn't your six grade teacher ever tell you that newspaper articles are primarily written to give information in the first two paragraph because the typical reader lose interest quickly. icon_biggrin.gificon_biggrin.gificon_biggrin.gificon_biggrin.gificon_biggrin.gif

    ...but its nice that some response are long cause it shows the writers passion. icon_biggrin.gif

    calibro said
    riddler78 said
    calibro said
    riddler78 said
    calibro saidactually, i'd say equal rights is one of the few things worth dying for.


    OK I'll bite. Since you seem prone to the melodrama here - and while I'd cautiously agree, there are various degrees of rights. Is the differentiation between civil unions and marriage worth dying for? Is gay marriage worth dying for? Or are all rights worth dying for so long as there is "inequality"?

    For instance, do the differential in salaries between men and women count as rights?


    prone to melodrama? you're the one starting this thread based on a myopic month's downturn of jobs under the president for a particular sector of employment that's always been incredibly volatile and not in direct correspondence with other hiring trends-- common to all presidencies.

    and let's not get into the game of false analogies. mike is clearly off his rocker and just likes to stir the pot with his right hand, i.e., i don't believe we're going to die at the hands of obama if we choose him to be president again. i think we can both agree to the idea that whether one would die for an individual right does not discount the right, and that a right is specific to a context.

    presenting a false analogy of whether a female in contemporary america earns the same as her male counterpart is spurious for the reasons that, one, if you shift the context to some place like afghanistan, suddenly the issue does become part of a larger issue of women's rights in which many would argue for the value of dying for the right of equality, so the point is time and location based to a degree-- not it's absolute right, which is equality between the sexes, which taken in that light i would argue is worth in dying for-- and, two, cherry picking a context in which you feel a right isn't important enough to die for doesn't actually discount the inherent value of the right to be established at an all important cost that's less than death because rights are not in that diametric existence.

    and lastly, do you have a point? i made that statement in regards to another member's outlandish statement. do you feel the need to prove absolutism in everything i say until you find an exception? i mean, it would be one thing if you and i were chummy and this were some sort of a scholarly debate, but, correct me if i'm wrong, it feels as if you're doing this for the sheer sake of trying to find the pitfall in my statement-- a statement that isn't directly related to this thread. so unless you have a connection to this thread point and the thread at large, if you're just going to play devil's advocate for the sake of it, i'm probably going to stop responding out of boredom.


    I have pointed out that the Obama Administration's policies have hurt blacks disporportionately more than others. That's not melodrama, that's fact. As for cherry picking? Again, hardly.

    To make a blanket claim that equal rights are worth dying for - in response to a comment that pointed out how reckless the Obama Administration has been to intelligence data is absurd. What you choose to respond to is not my concern - it's yours. My point was made.


    Actually, you didn't prove that because you didn't prove that African Americans have suffered under Obama anymore than they have suffered under other presidencies in a relative comparison to circumstances and other factors that offset controls, i.e., historical trends of African American unemployment, unemployment trends amongst African Americans during recession periods, accounting of demographics for the jobs African Americans mainly comprise in specific industries in this time and their position during a recession, etc.... To prove that Obama is responsible for such a thing, you can't use a labor force participate rate graph, nor could you use the employment rate for African Americans. What you need to do is show that there has been a specific trend in African American unemployment that not only is inconsistent with the unemployment trends against other races in the same time period, but also, as a control, match both factors against other US presidencies to explicitly show that this pattern of disproportionate unemployment of African American only exists under Obama, and therefore it's his policies that are causing it (which it wouldn't definitively do either because that doesn't explore the specific job conditions in relation to current conditions of that work, but it would be a start). Otherwise, all you're saying is a half-truth of: BLACKS HAVE IT WORSE UNDER OBAMA without taking into consideration that African Americans have always had it worse, and the reason for that doesn't necessarily lie in executive powers as much as it does in a complex series of truths that deal with what it means to be African American in the United States. So yeah, you basically are drawing conclusions about a complex issue with zero methodology, drawing assumptions from places like the labor force participation rate, and have reduced a complex (and completely valid) question of whether African Americans are indeed suffering disproportionately into a ridiculous analysis. This is a question that becomes the focus of research projects, years if not decades of work, that are explored through volumes of pages of research... you honestly think you proved something without factoring in conditions, controls, externalities, etc.... because of a trend on one graph? I have no idea what you do for a living or what your educational pedigree is, but if you tried to pass this off in an academic community, you would be ridiculed with laughter. Notice how your original articles are blogs or commentaries or summaries of a cherry picked fact about the unemployment rate-- not a scholarly article or a study that asserts any correlations. You seem to think you're capable to mining a great deal from this one point. The lack of scholarly commentary on it is because you can't scientifically prove what you're claiming with what you're using. It's pure speculation, shoddy thinking, and poor research. You don't even come close to shaking off the burden of proof that even if there's a disproportionate level of unemployment of African Americans based on historical and expected trends, that it is directly the result of the president as opposed to being a mutually exclusive occurrence resulting from socioeconomic conditions that exist under Obama's tenure. If there's one problem in this world, it's people who think they're qualified to hold valid opinions without understanding what a valid formulation entails. I don't profess to be a scholar of social-economics or statistical analyses, but I do know a thing or two about scholarly rigor, and this point you're claiming to have proven is devoid of it. Without it, no matter how much you claim otherwise, you've proved nothing.

    And yes it's cherry picking because the original comment of Mike was a complete hot mess of logic. To bring into consideration gay marriage if you'r
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 22, 2012 4:04 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    While it's true that the President - and the Federal government - can't spend a country to a good economy, they can put into place policies that will hinder and/or cripple an economy.
    Yes, but the Republican congress doesn't seem interested in doing that, they're only interest is maintaining an do nothing legislature so as to try and make the executive branch look bad.

    You also have to consider that this is a global economy now also. How many times has our stock market nose dived because Greece or some other European nation has faltered on their responsibilities. Oh if the former administration would have been more on top of things, none of this would be an issue!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 13, 2012 4:04 AM GMT
    NashRugger saidtumblr_m4r2hfbQn91rnvwt1.gif

    no worries oprah will save u-no she won't she gave her money to make an African girls school. Except for the rape it's going well. But she said investing in the inner city blacks would be wasted money--bitch. She forgot where she came from.
    Blacks in this country are far worse off than 4 years ago, but many will vote for Obama because they did last time. According to Oprah they don't want to work anyway.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 13, 2012 4:24 AM GMT
    [quote]

    3) And while you're at it... please explain why the Democrat-controlled Senate hasn't passed a budget since the day Obama took office, even though they are required by law to do so each year.

    [/quote]

    Senate can't get anything done because the republicans and democrats refuse to compromise. Unless it's a kidney stone nothing is passing through senate.

    MikemikeMike said
    NashRugger saidtumblr_m4r2hfbQn91rnvwt1.gif

    no worries oprah will save u-no she won't she gave her money to make an African girls school. Except for the rape it's going well. But she said investing in the inner city blacks would be wasted money--bitch. She forgot where she came from.
    Blacks in this country are far worse off than 4 years ago, but many will vote for Obama because they did last time. According to Oprah they don't want to work anyway.


    The only job a republican has given black people is picking cotton.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 13, 2012 4:45 AM GMT
    riddler78 said
    MikemikeMike saidno worries it is no longer "cool" to vote for obama- younger people know it well now.


    I suspect that the younger people will just stay home. 2008 was anomalous because more young people came out and more older people stayed in... I suspect 2012 will be different and those that do vote will note the soaring unemployment rates particularly amongst the young.


    I think this is a valid point - Obama was the 1st Black President that the US has had, he was seen more as a celebrity and still is rather than a commander in chief able to direct this nation. Whether, he can muster the same enthusiasm to get the young black vote for him will be a challenge after 4 years. Also, I know that with the current executive order to not deport young latino who are attending school and not having a criminal record was a big political move on his part to ensure the vote within the Latino community. He could have done it on his first term, but did not. Whether it will be sufficient to keeping in the White House we will see, whether will folks really looks at the issues, policies and actions of this administration or will they just likely vote based on admiration of your culture and race; I am not advocating there is nothing wrong in seeing someone achieve as high office as this; but just that we should look deeply at the person and his policies to see if he or she is the better person for the job based on his performance.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 13, 2012 5:18 AM GMT
    The last God-approved administration fucking tanked the global economy, then its surviving flying monkeys declared open treason on the President and decided to prolong the national agony for their own gain.

    Hence the misery.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 13, 2012 5:27 AM GMT
    fours years later and Obama supporters are still blaming Bush? Surely you cant be serious????!!!!!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 13, 2012 5:29 AM GMT
    They've ground government to halt, trotted out the same tired policies, lowered the national intelligence, and basically decided to take the nation hostage.

    Newsflash: A couple hundred billionaires are not enough to carry an economy.

    There's a reason that the dread B-word (as in "Bush") is never uttered and his reign has been cognitively erased from the party's memory bank.

    It's because he did exactly the same things that the Romney/Ryan American Psycho campaign are hard for.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 17, 2012 8:04 AM GMT
    uombroca said
    riddler78 said
    MikemikeMike saidno worries it is no longer "cool" to vote for obama- younger people know it well now.


    I suspect that the younger people will just stay home. 2008 was anomalous because more young people came out and more older people stayed in... I suspect 2012 will be different and those that do vote will note the soaring unemployment rates particularly amongst the young.


    I think this is a valid point - Obama was the 1st Black President that the US has had, he was seen more as a celebrity and still is rather than a commander in chief able to direct this nation. Whether, he can muster the same enthusiasm to get the young black vote for him will be a challenge after 4 years. Also, I know that with the current executive order to not deport young latino who are attending school and not having a criminal record was a big political move on his part to ensure the vote within the Latino community. He could have done it on his first term, but did not. Whether it will be sufficient to keeping in the White House we will see, whether will folks really looks at the issues, policies and actions of this administration or will they just likely vote based on admiration of your culture and race; I am not advocating there is nothing wrong in seeing someone achieve as high office as this; but just that we should look deeply at the person and his policies to see if he or she is the better person for the job based on his performance.


    This is all Americans should do is vote on performance and their candidates political stance on key issues that are important to them. Obama himself said in 4 years if the economy is not better the American people should hold him responsible. It's not. He can no longer count on the celebrity and newness for votes. Less and less are showing up at his campaigns. So many more lost their homes, jobs. People are getting wiser as voters and not buying into the hype. Biden's comment about Mitt wanting people back in chains backfired. What a dope. People want a man with a plan and real change. Not "change" the spare change in their pockets.icon_idea.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 17, 2012 8:11 AM GMT
    MikemikeMike said

    I think this is a valid point - Obama was the 1st Black President that the US has had, he was seen more as a celebrity and still is rather than a commander in chief able to direct this nation.


    I do not believe his ability as commander-in-chief is in question. He has rarely put a foot wrong in that particular role.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 17, 2012 8:15 AM GMT
    MikemikeMike saidno worries it is no longer "cool" to vote for obama- younger people know it well now.


    lol but you're old as fuck, so as if you'd know what young people find to be "cool."

    too bad in 2008 young people came out in droves to vote for president obama, and just as many young people (if not more) like me who weren't able to vote last time will come out to vote for him again.

    we're energized and ready for change and equality. and the useless, selfish baby boomers who have already had their time to fuck things up royally won't be able to do anything but cry themselves to sleep at night.

    deal with it.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 17, 2012 8:55 AM GMT
    eightball said
    MikemikeMike saidno worries it is no longer "cool" to vote for obama- younger people know it well now.


    lol but you're old as fuck, so as if you'd know what young people find to be "cool."

    too bad in 2008 young people came out in droves to vote for president obama, and just as many young people (if not more) like me who weren't able to vote last time will come out to vote for him again.

    we're energized and ready for change and equality. and the useless, selfish baby boomers who have already had their time to fuck things up royally won't be able to do anything but cry themselves to sleep at night.

    deal with it.


    ...and you're naive as fuck. I know many, many young men and woman in their 20's all the time. I have nieces, nephews, cousins and my last f/b was 25. He is not voting for Obama- none of them are voting for him this time around. You haven't learned enough about economics and government to know better.icon_idea.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 17, 2012 9:01 AM GMT
    They may not be voting for Obama but they are not voting for Romney.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 17, 2012 9:08 AM GMT
    MikemikeMike said
    NashRugger saidtumblr_m4r2hfbQn91rnvwt1.gif

    no worries oprah will save u-no she won't she gave her money to make an African girls school. Except for the rape it's going well. But she said investing in the inner city blacks would be wasted money--bitch. She forgot where she came from.
    Blacks in this country are far worse off than 4 years ago, but many will vote for Obama because they did last time. According to Oprah they don't want to work anyway.


    Stop making up shit. Oprah has given so much to inner city blacks. You are watching too much Fox News. Obama will win a second term even though that Ryan guy is cute as hell.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 17, 2012 9:34 AM GMT
    eightball said

    lol but you're old as fuck, so as if you'd know what young people find to be "cool."

    too bad in 2008 young people came out in droves to vote for president obama, and just as many young people (if not more) like me who weren't able to vote last time will come out to vote for him again.

    we're energized and ready for change and equality. and the useless, selfish baby boomers who have already had their time to fuck things up royally won't be able to do anything but cry themselves to sleep at night.

    deal with it.


    I'm sure Obama will once again draw a good amount of young voters to the polls, but to say that just as many, or more will come out for him this year is silly at this point. Recent polls show young voter interest is waning this time around. That could absolutely change as the election gets closer, but I just don't see it happening.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 17, 2012 10:37 AM GMT
    T_Flex said
    eightball said

    lol but you're old as fuck, so as if you'd know what young people find to be "cool."

    too bad in 2008 young people came out in droves to vote for president obama, and just as many young people (if not more) like me who weren't able to vote last time will come out to vote for him again.

    we're energized and ready for change and equality. and the useless, selfish baby boomers who have already had their time to fuck things up royally won't be able to do anything but cry themselves to sleep at night.

    deal with it.


    I'm sure Obama will once again draw a good amount of young voters to the polls, but to say that just as many, or more will come out for him this year is silly at this point. Recent polls show young voter interest is waning this time around. That could absolutely change as the election gets closer, but I just don't see it happening.


    Who are you, Ms. Cleo? Polls show that, do they? Polls also showed that during the last presidential election but, boy, were those polls wrong.

    Well, my crystal ball tells me that the only reason to believe that there will be less voters out for Obama in November is because of the Republican's making it damn near impossible for young, elderly and minority citizens to vote (particularly in swing states).

    Poll taxes are back ,,, but Republicans will lose no matter how many cogs they throw into the works.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 17, 2012 9:52 PM GMT
    Surely Obama will win in November again. Remember what democrats think about conservatives and republicans. we should vote for Obama because Romny/Ryan hate......

    women, seniors, children, the poor, the armed services, the middle class, the blacks, the latinos, any other ethnic group not mentioned, education, gays, will end medicare, end social security, make college kids pay for school, end welfare, end food stamps, end free cell phones for those who cant afford them but can afford to buy cigarettes and lottery tickets, end EBT cards.... I am sure there are many more reasons, funny how its a toss up election with all the things republicans supposedly hate.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 18, 2012 12:57 AM GMT
    lmfao @ the OP being so butthurt that i read him for filth he felt the need to send me a rude comment.

    grow the fuck up old man.

    his actions perfectly illustrate that republicans are inbred morons.
  • conservativej...

    Posts: 2625

    Aug 18, 2012 2:34 AM GMT
    southbeach1500 saidUnemployment is worse for Blacks under Obama Administration

    It's also much worse for Hispanics.

    And Asians.

    And Whites.

    And even for illegal immigrants.


    The "Obama Economy" is truly a disaster.

    Closedfactory.jpg


    That's such a sad photo to me. Very much like the image below. I spent two years in the plant below as a Division VP. That time was part of the process I went through learning the family business. This particular plant generated about $370 MM in revenue in 1985. Times have changed. The 1960's have bled into a new world.

    I wonder how many are happy with their dream.

    Photobucket
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 18, 2012 2:44 AM GMT
    It is honestly truth that people are not interested Obama as they was in 2008. There is no way I can see Mitt Romney winning the election. Romney has no platform except for let us retract everything Obama did and help the 1% out. I bet Mitt Romney was pretty dashing back in the day but his tone pretty square face can't me or other American to the polls for him.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 29, 2012 6:38 PM GMT
    nycusa05 saidObama is the worst President in modern American history


    He knocked carter out of that spot!!!!
  • tuffguyndc

    Posts: 4437

    Aug 29, 2012 6:52 PM GMT
    riddler78 saidhttp://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2012/06/03/unemployment-increase-worse-for-blacks/

    Last Friday’s unemployment news crashed the stock market and upended the presidential race. Lost in the excitement, however, was the news that African-American unemployment, already significantly above general levels, rose by much more.

    Nationally, unemployment in May rose from 8.1 percent to 8.2. This is bad, especially considering how much time has passed since our economic troubles began, but it is less than catastrophic. As the Root reports, for African-Americans, however, the news was much, much worse. Unemployment among Blacks rose from 13.0 percent to 13.6 percent.

    This is serious news for a population that is already under great economic strain.


    Also noteworthy:
    http://m.usatoday.com/article/news/politics/707388

    One fallout from Friday's poor jobs report: President Obama will almost surely have to win re-election with a record high unemployment rate for modern incumbents.


    Which is why the GOP is having a field day with ads like this:
    seriously, that is ridiculous. blacks and other minority always suffers when we have a down economy. it was the same way with bush and regan.