Although I disagree with your facts, your premise, and your conclusions, even if I give them to you, it's only one small part of the overall larger economic picture... and the last thing we need is more Bushonomics that pushed this country into the state it is.sundaymorningstaple wrote:That's the scary part. While Romney is switching position, Obamy isn't! And his position for the past 4 years hasn't helped anybody. In fact, the man on the street is worse off. Once net figures are taken into account, he's not created any net jobs as once jobs lost are subtracted, those who have dropped of the unemployment rolls (so are no longer counted as unemployed as that is the only measure so far) and those who have "tried" to enter the workforce and are unable to find meaningful employment (new Graduates) don't show up in the "unemployment" figures just released. And he's planning on doing more of the same? Blaming the trebling the deficient on what "Bush" left him, is a bit of a red herring and a tired old joke. I'm not in favour of either one of them, but I do know that the US cannot endure 4 more years of the same.
I stand by my reasons for electing Obama... cutting of the social extremists, controlling military spending, and creating a sound fiscal policy that creates jobs, not kills them.
(Ball smashed over net... in your court... will there be another volley?)