General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsRomney: Anything Over 4% Unemployment “Not A Cause For Celebration” (updated)
At a campaign stop in Pennsylvania Friday, Mitt Romney set the bar for a good unemployment rate at 4 percent. Reacting to the lackluster April jobs report, which showed unemployment dropping to 8.1%, Romney said the number needs to be far lower than that before anyone hands out attaboys.
Just this morning there was some news that came across the wire that said that the unemployment rate has dropped to 8.1% and normally that would because for celebration, he said. But, in fact, anything over 8 percent, anything near 8 percent, anything over 4 percent, is not a cause for celebration.
Watch:
- more -
http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entries/romney-anything-over-4-unemployment-not-cause-for
Since the unemployment rate during the Bush years was higher than that, and his policies led to the crisis, why is Romney celebrating the Bush years?
There is an ad in there somewhere.
Romney on the Bush years: Not A Cause For Celebration
Updated to add:
A leading conservative economist took issue with Mitt Romneys claim that, anything over four percent (unemployment) is nothing to celebrate,
I understand the desire for low unemployment and the current 8.1 is unacceptable, Douglas Holtz-Eakin, president of the American Action Forum told TPM via email Friday afternoon. But 4% is not a realistic target.
Romneys comments, directed at President Obama, came in the context of a disappointing Labor Department employment report, which suggests the economy isnt experiencing a robust recovery.
http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entries/holtz-eakin-romneys-four-percent-unemployment-target-is
uponit7771
(90,347 posts)...based off these statements.
They lack credibility and common sense but will be mainstay for the conservative base who want to hear their thoughts of Obama's economic performance affirmed.
Johonny
(20,851 posts)through all the Bush people around him and yet the voters connect the dots. It's doubtful the low informed swing voters will buy a millionaire is bad at the economy. But it is possible to make them think he's a rich guy just like Bush was.
I wonder if low information voters remember that the previous president was also a millionaire, and bad for the economy.
Initech
(100,081 posts)Oh that's right - it gutted businesses of their assets, laying off hundreds of thousands in the process, destroyed companies left and right while Mitt and his buddies profited handsomely off their destruction. Fuck you Mitt - you're one of the main causes of this shitty economy we live in.
Wind Dancer
(3,618 posts)Rosa Luxemburg
(28,627 posts)jwirr
(39,215 posts)The gop is continually setting the bar too high without considering the level of damage done by their own economic policies since raygun.
AndyTiedye
(23,500 posts)I don't recall much celebrating among the Republicans or their media back then.
They were going on about a blue dress or something.
Arkana
(24,347 posts)EC
(12,287 posts)full employment? That's really unrealistic and I hope someone mentions it more than once.
Nikia
(11,411 posts)And lower in many localities.
The best thing about it, besides the ability of almost anyone to get a job, is that wages tend to go up.
Zalatix
(8,994 posts)It's not what you call an employee's market, where there are more jobs than workers.
Zalatix
(8,994 posts)1) bought KB Toys, then drained it dry and drove it into bankruptcy
2) was discussing this issue via an offshore call center
?
B Calm
(28,762 posts)would drop under 4%. . . LOL
SammyWinstonJack
(44,130 posts)politicasista
(14,128 posts)never has to worry about crime and unemployment in his neighborhood.