Try 3 months for $3

At every rally, during every speech, during many cabinet meetings and often on Twitter, President Donald Trump asserts a fact as evidence of the nation’s strong economy: Unemployment rates for black and Hispanic Americans are at record lows. This is largely correct.

John Crisp mug

John Crisp | Tribune News Service

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, in January the unemployment rate for Hispanics was 4.9 percent; for blacks, 6.8 percent; and for whites, 3.5 percent. All are close to all-time lows.

This sounds like good news for blacks and Hispanics, but these figures call for context:

For at least 50 years, the BLS has monitored unemployment rates for whites, blacks and Hispanics, which track together in predictable ways. But for nearly all of that period, the unemployment rate for blacks was approximately double the rate for whites.

For example, in February 2009, President Obama’s first full month in office, the white unemployment rate was 7.6 percent; for blacks it was 13.7 percent, a ratio almost identical to the current one.

And while the unemployment rate for all groups is healthy, the current decline in the rate began in 2010, which calls into question the impact of Trump’s policies on the overall rate, as well as on the rates for blacks and Hispanics.

So Trump is probably taking more credit than he deserves for the impact of his policies on the overall employment rate, and there’s nothing in his program that is particularly conducive to more employment for blacks and Hispanics.

In fact, I always cringe a little when I hear Trump make that particular claim. Why do we crow about a labor structure that always has a higher unemployment rate for minorities, and in the case of blacks, typically double?

Of course, the unemployment rate describes only who has a job and says nothing about how much money they make. Here, again, there’s not much to brag about: According to Census Bureau data, in 2017 the median income for whites was $68,145; for Hispanics, $50,486; and for blacks, $40,258.

But the most staggering differences among these demographic groups are exemplified by wealth accumulation, the most revealing index on economic well-being.

Last month, the Institute for Policy Studies, a progressive Washington, D.C., think tank, published “Dream Deferred,” a report on wealth accumulation based on data from the Federal Reserve Board’s Survey of Consumer Finances.

“Dream Deferred” describes in considerable detail the comparative wealth of Americans according to ethnicity, as well as the striking increase in recent decades in the wealth of the richest .1 percent. It discusses the sources of this disparity and suggests methods of reducing the wealth gap.

The report depicts the racial wealth divide in various ways, but the starkest version is embodied in these staggering numbers: In 2016, the median household wealth of all American families — that is, what they own minus what they owe — is $81,704. The median household wealth for white families is $146,984; for Hispanic families, $6,591; for black families, $3,557.

How do we account for this stunning disparity?

It’s tempting to blame individuals or even imagined differences among the races. But the accumulation of wealth depends largely on public policies that support fair wages, access to education, access to dependable financial markets for savings and investment and fair housing — home equity represents two-thirds of household wealth.

Unfortunately, very little attention is paid to public policies that could reduce the racial wealth divide, or, for that matter, the widening divide between our richest citizens and our poorest, of whatever race.

“Post-racial” is a term that is as elusive as it is aspirational.

After the election of President Obama some fantasized about a post-racial era, but the arrival of that happy dispensation has been delayed; we still await the day when the unemployment rate no longer needs to be described according to racial demographics.

In the meantime, President Trump should stop bragging about an unemployment rate for black Americans that is twice the rate of whites. It rings hollow against the backdrop of our enormous wealth disparities.

More than anything, those disparities reflect the persistent vile legacy of our nation’s original sin: racism.

Subscribe to Breaking News

* I understand and agree that registration on or use of this site constitutes agreement to its user agreement and privacy policy.

Tribune News Service columnist John M. Crisp can be reached at jcrispcolumns@gmail.com.

0
1
1
0
0

(68) comments

Climatehoax

Martian you said Amazon didn’t pay fed taxes last year. Who’s fault is that?? Certainly not theirs, if they’re breaking the law someone should be arrested. The way tax is collected needs to be changed, I bet if Trump came up with a no loophole tax code, liberals would scream the loudest about how unfair it is.

Redwall

Actually, marian said Amazon paid no taxes, which is demonstrably false as they paid over a billion $ in taxes. When proven wrong, marian then redefined his comment narrowing to federal income tax, which is true they paid no federal income tax.

They paid no federal income tax due to heavy capital spending and the accelerated deductions that result. The accelerated deductions reverse themselves in future years and result in higher future taxes. All this is beyond marian and his prog-babble. Marian needs to take a pill now and go rest.

martian2

oh that crystal ball of yours can tell well into the future does it? You don't know what the tax laws will be in the future. All that is beyond redwall and his gibberish. The facts are they made almost 12 billion in profits last year. Zero federal taxes is the result of the tax laws skewed in favor of rich corporations and individuals. Even you dear leader says it unfair. I will believe they will pay higher future taxes when I see it. Your palm reading argument holds no weight what so ever. What's next, you gonna read tea leaves too?

martian2

Never said it was amazon's fault hoaxer. Of course it the tax laws that allow it. This is the second year in a row of no fed tax for them. Even you leader Trump says its wrong. There should to be a minimum tax all wealthy corporations and individuals should pay. Glad you agree with me.

Redwall

Dems are nervous. The economy is going gangbusters and minorities are finding they dont need the welfare offered by the Dems, they CAN make it on their own.

You can have socialism or you can have freedom, not both.

Climatehoax

BUT, if the unemployment rate was high, I’ll GUARANTE you Trump would be blamed. Typical liberal hypocritical hit job on a president doing a great job! You can’t have it both ways bozo’s.

DMoney

BREAKING NEWS! Politician takes credit for positive results occurring during their term!!!

What matters is, more people are employed of all races.

Cassandra2

So to you it the systemic unemployment and lack of opportunity for minorities are unimportant. That's exactly what this commentary was pointing out.

DMoney

The alternative is unemployment. Which is better?

martian2

House hold wealth for blacks is but a fraction of what it is for whites. The working poor may be working, but they are still poor. What's the alternative you ask. Equality would be one alternative, equal opportunities is another, less disparity is another. We have a ways to go, best not to sit idly by and think things are just peachy. Recognizing that there is work to do is the first step. Something you right winger simply don"t want to admit.

DMoney

No, the alternative is unemployment. With employment comes skills, experience, networking, advancement, opportunities and growth. In today's labor market, companies can't afford to factor in personal bias into their staffing strategy. Everyone has equal opportunity under law. It's up to them what they do with that opportunity.

martian2

hard to argue with that Dmoney, you live in a fantasy world. This country has a long way to go to achieve equal opportunity. Yes flipping burgers offer life sustaining skills to raise a family in a middle class life style. Man are you delusional!

DMoney

Why would someone with a family to raise be flipping burgers? If that's the only work they qualify for--that represents a lifetime of absolute individual failure. Not systemic--individual.

DMoney

Flipping burgers as a student, however, does teach many valuable lessons. Gotta show up to work on time. Gotta deal with stress when it's busy. Gotta have discipline to do a job that you may not like. Gotta meet standards. Gotta be consistent. Invaluable lessons for someone in their teens. Oh, also gotta learn how to stretch each dollar.

oldhomey

It used to be that fry cooks were legitimate members of society, people you'd see cooking at Con's Grill, Swede's and a lot of other great old cafes around La Crosse. They weren't terrifically paid, but they made a living and had families. They weren't failures, they were functional, tax-paying members of society, so don't denigrate them as losers, D. Now we have all the franchise giants like McDonald's, Hardees, Burger King, etc., and their fry cooks don't make a very good living at it. It is not a secure living, either, as it looks like artificial intelligence will replace their labor shortly. There will be no alternatives then, only unemployment. We can mourn, but that will not change the dynamics of shifting, improving technology that will replace labor of all kinds. We don't have to mourn in that regard, but instead we should be looking at how to shift and change how society will operate when income goes only to a lucky small percentage of the population, cutting everybody else off from the dignity of work, income, healthcare, means for housing and everything else.

DMoney

You've been inventing things a lot recently. It used to be that you would stretch the truth, and always from another board so to disprove your claim I'd have to do a little groundwork. But you've gotten lazy. You now lie immediately in the same chain.

I never classified fast food cooks as losers. I said that if they have a family and their only means to support that family is to flip burgers at $8/hr or whatever they are paid--if that's ALL they can get for work in today's labor friendly economy--it represents failure. Everybody fails. Failing is not equated with being a loser. This would happen to be a massive failure.

Nowadays, it's insane to believe someone could possibly make a "living" being a short order cook. Even in areas with $15/hr minimum wage. These jobs are not designed for that. I do not mourn for those who are at risk losing their below average paying jobs to technology. Instead I rejoice for them--as it will set some of them free to pursue more beneficial endeavors. For those who can't make an improvement for themselves--no amount of government/social policy can truly help them.

oldhomey

I'd say your attempt to squirm out in your 5:10pm retort has succeeded in digging yourself into an even deeper hole, D. Now you say these people are not losers, but they represent failure, and "Everybody fails". But you, you humanitarian you, celebrate the fact even the gigantic failed endeavor they are trapped in -- when it drops them off the cliff -- is an excellent opportunity you "rejoice" in "as it will set some of them free to pursue more beneficial endeavors. For those who can't make an improvement for themselves--no amount of government/social policy can truly help them."

No need for you to do any groundwork to search through old posts to find that quote, right, D? These poor dupes, if they can't jump at an opportunity like that, well, what the heck, nothing can be done for them. Let them and their families starve and go to rot, or maybe private charity will look after them, avoiding the need of any tax revenue being wasted on losers like them. May Go Fund Me could help them out?

Redwall

They have the same opportunities as everyone else, probably more.

So whats your problem?

Redwall

...think about what you just said.

martian2

according to the washington post, 400 of the wealthiest Americans have tripled their share of the nation's wealth since the early 1980's. Those 400 wealthiest Americans now have more wealth than the bottom 150 million Americans. As wealth consolidates at the top, billionaires are increasingly using their wealth to purchase political power. Don't tell me we all have the same opportunities. If you are happy with this type of disparity in our society, then keep voting republican. If you want an equal voice in our democracy with sustainable living wages, don't vote republican. Simple as that.

DMoney

We absolutely all have the same opportunities. It's a right we all share. That right doesn't guarantee outcomes or economic equality. Read the Constitution.

Look up the number of legal immigrants who become millionaires here. They are 3-4 times more likely than natural born citizens. They have as much opportunity as anyone and they capitalize on it. LEGAL immigrants.

martian2

You didn't read a thing I wrote there dmoney. Look at the statistics I posted. Reality is we all do not have the same opportunities. My gawd you can't be that blind. Being wealthy, born into wealth, creates numerous more opportunities. Do you really think we all have the same opportunities to buy political influence? Again look at the statistics in the column written by Mr Crisp. House hold wealth for minorities is much less, and that is just no accident. Now maybe on paper somewhere we are told all are entitled to justice and liberty. but the real world often does not play out like that. I offered proof of what I said. You spew out statistics on legal immigrants, and give no proof at all. Wealth is consolidating towards the top one percenters, if you are satisfied with that then keep voting republican. You are no expert on the constitution, and no expert on social conditions in this country. Economic equality and social equality has a long ways to go yet in this country. Again, just look at the numbers.

DMoney

You are referring to outcomes. Results. There is nothing guaranteeing or even assisting others to achieve equal outcomes. To find something attempting to regulate outcomes, you need to read "The Communist Manifesto" by Karl Marx. Opportunity has nothing to do with results. What we achieve is up to each of us individually and the decisions we make and relationships we build. The Constitution DOES guarantee equal opportunity in the Pursuit of Happiness. Key word--pursuit. There's not a set path or guaranteed outcome. The fact that you refer to the Constitution as some "paper somewhere" tells me and anyone reading all we need to know. That "paper somewhere" is the only legal, binding federal document guaranteeing anything no matter how much you hate or disagree with it.

Are some people born into more convenient situations? Of course. Just like some people are born into terrible situations (or not, if aborted). But what situation someone is born into is in God's hands. What's next--you going to attack scripture as being unfair?

My reference to LEGAL immigrants being more likely to become rich shows that given an equal playing field in terms of legality and protections under the law--anyone can thrive if they have the desire and qualities. No special regulations needed.

DMoney

It appears to me that you are a tried and true socialist. There's nothing wrong with that. I disagree with the socialist system and it's values but I can't tell others how to live. You might find it frustrating to live in this country with your value system. If you have the resources, I'd consider looking to immigrate to a place that might offer you a more comfortable environment.

DMoney

*emigrate

martian2

that made very little sense Dmoney. sounds like something straight out of talk radio. Be honest, do you listen to Rush everyday? You and he are no experts on the constitution. We had slavery for many years after the constitution was ratified, where was the pursuit of happiness? Get real. People don't go around memorizing the constitution every day, maybe they should but the fact is they don't. Again read the stats, reread this article. Let it sink in. Again you offer no proof of what you say about immigrants. Go ahead and use Rush as your proof. Won't help much but at least you will be honest.

oldhomey

D, if you read the life stories of immigrants who become extraordinarily successful nowadays, they are not rag pickers who worked their way up to becoming major industrialists after a lifetime of hard work. That was the old American Dream fable. Rag pickers in reality remained at the bottom of the economic pile all their lives, but if they worked hard and got their kids through school, the kids had a better shot. Now we live in an increasing gig economy, and working hard may not get anybody further ahead unless you already have big, big bucks.

Nowadays, we see immigrants becoming captains of industry, not waiting for their kids to make it. But if you read their stories, they came to this country either as talented students sent here by wealthy parents, or they came here already highly educated and with a plan to tap into the American business infrastructure to build that plan out. They didn't come here in rags, and they arrived here with all sorts of advantages over those available to America's poor.

But seeing that you have read thousands of books literally, or at least figuratively, you already knew all this stuff, I guess.

I am much relieved to see that you do not want a government that can tell people how they must live. There is a tremendous effort these days to make the government outlaw abortion, in effect telling women what they may and may not do with their bodies. That is a horrible government overreach, I am sure you will agree, so I hope we can count on your help in opposing this evil movement in our society.

DMoney

I don't listen to Rush. Not like you really believe me. Are you claiming your political views are entirely a product of your own mind and soul? Wow, that's miraculous. Although, I'm quite sure they sound awfully familiar.

You do not need to memorize the Constitution. Just need to be able to read, and Google search. While you're at it, search the statistics on immigrants while you're at it. The stats you referenced earlier are probably true. But they are completely out of context, since wealthy people have full rights to seek increased wealth.

DMoney

Slaves were (horribly) considered property at the time. Property doesn't have rights. As much as a misstep as that was, and least the founders didn't tie slavery directly into the Constitution.

DMoney

Homey, I agree with your first paragraph. They indeed may not make it as outcomes aren't a protected right.

Kindly point me in the direction of some of these stories of modern day well off immigrants. I do not doubt they exist, I'm just curious to examine what you've read to give you the impression that they are the majority of success cases for immigrants who become wealthy here. Maybe I'll learn something.

Regarding abortion, give me an example that the federal government is seeking an over turn of Roe vs. Wade. I'm very suspicious of that one, as before the New York debacle, I hadn't heard or seen anything major on abortion. How you sleeping at night recently? You struggling picturing the killing of innocent healthy, viable babies carried by selfish and careless mothers? Hey, it's their decision! Because 100% of people always make 100% good decisions........

oldhomey

D, I spend entirely too much of my time tracking down things that explode your suppositions in your comments. So I am in this instance just going to point you in the right direction, and you can track down the stories of the immigrant pioneers who started these companies. To satisfy your desire (and crank's) for my sourcing, this came from Entrepreneur magazine:

"More than 40 percent of companies on the U.S. Fortune 500 list were launched by immigrants or children of immigrants. No one can deny the success and impact of ecommerce website eBay -- a credit to the ingenuity of its French founder Pierre Morad Omidyar. And how’d you find this article? Chances are through a Google search, whose co-founder Sergey Brin was born in Russia.

"Intel, AT&T, Tesla, Yahoo!, Pfizer, Huffington Post -- check out Free Enterprise’s infographic . . . to check out more companies launched by foreigners."

As for my observations on the federal government and abortion, D, I did not say the government is trying actively at this time to make abortion illegal, I said their are political forces in the country at this time (you are a part of this force, so you know I am right) that is angling to grasp the levers of power in the government so that they can use the government to criminalize abortion once again, which would be tantamount to the government having the power to tell individual women what they can and cannot do with their own bodies. Comprende?

DMoney

Thanks. From your own sources, there are plenty of "rags to riches" stories. No denying some (even the majority) of immigrants who become successful had advantages. But there are still a significant number who relied only on the freedoms and protections offered by the constitution, along with their own work, skill, drive, and ambition. They certainly didn't come here seeking social equality and programs.

I have conservative values and motives. If conservative politicians decide one day to attempt to alter Roe vs. Wade making it more conservative--I wouldn't object. It's certainly not a prime priority for me, nor any conservative leaders that I can see. We simply can't tolerate killing a healthy, viable baby for less than risk of death to mother. Which will absolutely, 100% guaranteed happen at a significant rate.

oldhomey

Which of those were the rags to riches stories, D?

DMoney

I believe it was sirjay brin and the founder of Intel.

oldhomey

Ahem, D, Sergey Brin "Brin immigrated to the United States with his family from the Soviet Union at the age of 6. He earned his bachelor's degree at the University of Maryland, College Park, following in his father's and grandfather's footsteps by studying mathematics, as well as computer science."

DMoney

Read the "Early life and education" section. Not exactly rich and prosperous going in.

martian2

" Politician takes credit for positive results occurring during their term!!!" You forgot to add " even though they don't deserve the credit". Half truths don't cut it. This column points that out beautifully. Try to tell the whole truth. What matters is, I am paying more taxes than Amazon is. Amazon with profits of over 12 billion, pays zero taxes. Bet I pay more taxes than Trump too, but we will never know will we.

DMoney

The point is, every politician in the history of organized government does this continually. One that stands out above all in my memory is Obama's announcement of killing bin Laden. You would have thought he personally, and with no assistance, raided his house and pulled the trigger. This is what they all do, it's not news.

Did you also pump billions into the economy like Amazon? I'm not convinced you contributed anything into the economy, let alone put it on your back and carry it.

martian2

what an awful example dmoney. Obama never said he personally got bin laden by himself. But he got a lot of credit by giving the go ahead on the mission that did get bin laden. Obama thanked the Seals for the success of the mission, sharing the credit with them. but as commander in chief yes he gets credit for his decision. Politicians often take credit for good things that happen during their tenure that they had nothing to do with. It is up to the press and the public to keep aware of that and to be able to pick out those inaccuracies. I guess its too much to ask of some people.

Even you dear leader cries out against Amazon paying no taxes, says its not fair. You must think its aok. I don't think its asking too much to have profitable corporations (they are people too) to contribute to the federal treasury. why shouldn't they help support the military that keeps our country safe, or support the many other worthwhile infrastructures that allows them to have a profitable business. Your deal leader is right on this point. One of the few times I agree with him. This country doesn't exist just so corporations can get a free ride. They should be good citizens and contribute just like a blue collar worker does.

oldhomey

Right on, martian. And, in fact, Obama in effect DID pull the trigger that killed bin Laden. He was the commander in chief who had to give the go ahead to the mission, knowing full well that, if successful, chances were that bin Laden would be killed. If it was not successful, if the commandos had been trapped on the ground and killed or captured, he would have had to take the blame for the failure. In this case, the trigger that was pulled that killed bin Laden would not have been pulled without Obama's authorization. It took guts to issue that authorization.

DMoney

Any president in history, and probably about 95% of US citizens would have pulled the trigger on that operation. It took no guts, no cajones, nothing but answering a phone call. It wasn't a special move--he was simply president when the circumstances allowed it. I recall reading an article where he used the term "I" like 49 times in the short address to the nation, which was like triple the record for all presidential addresses.

That's not my point. My point is, every politician from town council to POTUS is going to hype any half way positive result during their presidency. It's not news or column-worthy.

martian2

yes dmoney, don't you dare give that black president any credit what so ever for delivering on bin laden. If it would of gone wrong he would of been more demonized by you right wingers. But if it goes right, by golly don't give an ounce of credit. Can't win with you right wingers, way too partisan to think clearly. Of course it took guts, something that Bush two didn't have.

DMoney

.... really? Race baiting?....

oldhomey

I tell you what, D. In I believe 1979 Jimmy Carter listened to his intelligence people and his special ops people, and they convinced him that they could helicopter commando squads to the prison where Iran was holding American embassy personnel as hostages, and that they would have a pretty fair chance of freeing many if not most of them.

Do you remember that disaster? Carter was the president, and even though he was operating on advice of top people, it failed and he had to take the jacket as the foolish author of the whole enterprise. Are you telling the world that Obama had an easy decision to send commando squads into the heart of Pakistan, a nation bristling with a much more efficient military than Khomeini's revolutionary guards?

I guess I shouldn't disagree with you, a man so steeped in military history and geo-politics. Somehow, though, I don't think Obama's decision was an easy one. If you think it is easy, it is because you obviously don't have any realistic sense of what was actually at stake at all.

DMoney

I wasn't alive during Operation Eagle Claw, but I have read about it.....in a book.

Sometimes easy decisions are painful ones to make. Just because there are no-brainers doesn't mean they are all stress-free.

If he deserves any extra credit for that, it's no greater than the credit deserved for Trump for managing the NK situation. Which is my point--if a good result happens, a politician will be scooping up credit.

martian2

What you may not know dmoney about operation eagle claw, is that it failed miserably and the republicans played that to the hilt . they politicized it, blamed Carter, called him weak and ineffective. during the 79 election season republicans bad mouthed our military as inept and underfunded. Republicans played the fear factor by saying the Soviet union was stronger than us, we were vulnerable, and its all Carter;s fault. Of course non of it was true but that didn't matter. Oh yea I remember it well. Republicans made political hay out of the deaths of those 8 service men who died serving their country. It was shameful display of winning at all costs by republicans. Something they are still doing today.

DMoney

Yes I recall reading that too. But I've never claimed that failed decisions come without (sometimes unfair) finger pointing. That might suggest why politicians are so eager to give themselves credit when things go right (my entire point). I'm sure most people in Carter's position would have pulled the trigger too. I would have for sure.

oldhomey

Whew! I am SO relieved, D, to see that you would have "pulled the trigger" on the Iran rescue plan, too. I am surprised, however, since in hypothetical questions on historical events that you are too young to have lived through, you say you would have been an America Firster in 1940, opposed to getting into the war in Europe, or even taking sides by giving aid and comfort to Britain and other European democracies, all panty-waist milquetoasts to your mind.

By the way, did you know the America First movement back then had lots of connections with the American Nazi Party, and one of the most prominent America First spokespeople, Charles Lindbergh, was convinced Hitler and the Nazis were going to take over Europe and counseled living with that reality instead of going to war? Now we have a new president chirping "America First", but he is so ignorant, he has no idea the historical outrage of using that term as a political stance. But you, having read 5,000 books about WWII literally, or at least figuratively, know all this stuff. Just wondering if you forgot some of it. It would appear so.

DMoney

"When World War II began in September 1939, ninety percent of Americans hoped the United States would stay out of the war."
https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/the-united-states-isolation-intervention

That's a lot of neo-nazis...

oldhomey

I didn't say 90 percent of Americans were sympathetic to the Nazi cause (neo-Nazi was not a term then, so refer back to your history books on that, D). I said that the America First movement was heavily influenced by the American Nazi Party at that time. Of course most people would have been hoping against hope that we would not join the war at that time. Who would be cheer leading the idea of sending their sons and daughters and husbands and brothers off to war? Duh! But Americans generally are realists, and when the actual danger that the war presented to our future, overnight Americans were nearly unanimous in supporting joining the fight. Charles Lindbergh, deeply impressed by the Nazi war machine, by the way, was not fascist. He was deeply embarrassed by his own resistance to the war by the time we joined the fight, but the government would not let him personally join it. Still, he found ways to serve the war effort, and he did so admirably.

DMoney

And I never said I would have joined a certain group during that time. Simply that I would have preferred to be neutral and isolationist, until such time where our involvement was essential.

Redwall

The only thing more ignorant that AOC are those that actually believe what she says. That Amazon paid no taxes last year has been debunked.

And we all know you martian paid no taxes; that part we believe.

martian2

read it and weep redwall, or have someone read it to you. It is fact, no federal taxes for amazon: https://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-not-paying-taxes-trump-bezos-2018-4

Cassandra2

It's interesting that the wingnut crowd cried "fake news" about improving employment numbers throughout the Obama administration yet today see nothing but rainbows and sunshine.

Only1Green

I believe that had something to do with the Obama started the practice of leaving out the data/statistics of the unemployed workers who simply stopped looking for work. If that was the case then the unemployment rate would drop but it is not accurately taking into account all the unemployed. I also believe that closer to the end of Obama's last term, those no longer seeking were refigured back into the data.

oldhomey

Is that true, Only? Perhaps you could provide us with some evidence that the Obama administration was deliberately cooking the books on unemployment. It was a huge problem when he took office, do you recall? And why was that? Oh, yes, it was after a mortgage industry meltdown caused by the GOP stripping essential regulations on the banking and mortgage industries so the quick buck artists could make their bundle while undermining the entire world economy. But you say Obama engaged in some hanky panky while pulling the nation back from the brink of depression? Let's see your evidence of that.

Cassandra2

"I believe...", "I also believe ..." Interesting. Got any citations to back that up? I'm genuinely curious.

Only1Green

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/unemployment-rate-falls-to-8-6-percent
Yes Fox news

martian2

you have to do better there only1, fox news is not factual. try again.

Only1Green

martian, I was asked to cite a source which I did. You say it's not factual...cite your source

martian2

only1, you were asked to cite a credible source, one that is factually true. Anyone can look up a lie. I don't need a source, you are the one who makes the claim about Obama and unemployment statistics, not me. It is up to you to verify your claim with something other than a propaganda network that is widely known for not being factual.

martian2

not true only1green and you know it. Don't look for any proof homey, there is non. Only1 is just spreading lies and propaganda. Those that stopped looking for work were always left out of the unemployment rate figures. That started many decades ago. Know your history, recognize fabrications when you see one.

oldhomey

OOPS! You already answered Only, but I didn't see your response until after I wrote mine.

oldhomey

Hmm. That was a report in 2011 issued by the Obama administration, duly noted by everyone that it was an uptick in the economy in which it was readily conceded many had stopped actively looking for work. I don't believe this was a deception on the part of the Obama administration, Only. In fact, I think this sort of dichotomy exists every time the country struggles back from recession. By the way, why is it that recessions almost always occur when the GOP is in charge of the country and they happily strip away financial regulations that curb excessive corporate and individual greed to protect the economy from going into freefall?

Redwall

There are Help Wanted signs all over town. Seeing is believing and jobs are available.

So whats wrong with you?

random annoying bozo

I guess the left gets a little testy when blacks and other 'minorities' leave the dem plantation, and head out down the path to prosperity, instead of being content to wallow in the muck that dem policies have given them.

oldhomey

Where have you been, bozo? You have been scarce on these boards lately. So, by your estimation blacks and other "minorities" are about to make a transformative political switch away from the Democratic Party? Oh, yes. We saw that last November in the mid-terms. Once again, your self-indulgent perspicacity reveals you to be what you say you are, a bozo.

Cassandra2

Not racist at all, Bozo. Nope, definitely not racist. SMDH

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.

Thanks for reading. Subscribe or log in to continue.