Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Mesa to furlough approximately 150

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Register   Log in
PCL_128 said:
And how 'bout the rest of the economy? Unemployment has skyrocketed to over 6%. It was 4% under Clinton. The average household income has dropped by $1,000 per year during the Bush administration. It went up under Clinton. Banks are collapsing left and right, and we're bailing out insurance giants. We're about to spend $700 billion to save ourselves from the housing collapse.

So, tell me again who's ushering in the Carter years all over again?
Click to expand...

Average unemployment under 8 years of Clinton was 5.2%. Average unemployment under 7 years of Bush was 5.2%. http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/histinc/h11AR.html

Median household income under Bush has increased by $778 adjusted for inflation. http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/histinc/h11AR.html

Not happy about our gov't bailing out our economy? Neither am I - I believe it is not within the government's constitutional powers to do so. But for all the talk you hear about corporate greed and deregulation causing this mess, it was gov't intervention in the form of the Community Reinvestment Act that seeded this whole crisis in the first place. I get tired of hearing about the "failed economic policies of GWB" from people who can't name one. And I never voted for the guy!
 
fastback said:
Average unemployment under 8 years of Clinton was 5.2%. Average unemployment under 7 years of Bush was 5.2%. http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/histinc/h11AR.html
Click to expand...

The average doesn't matter. What matters is how things look after 8 years of his policies. In the last month of Clinton's administration, unemployment was at 3.9%. It dropped steadily and consistently during his administration, thanks to his economic policies that led to surpluses and consumer confidence. After 8 years of Bush, it's now at 6.1%. The numbers speak for themselves.

Median household income under Bush has increased by $778 adjusted for inflation. http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/histinc/h11AR.html
Click to expand...

This is only true if you count retired families. If you look at working families, the real measure of economic policy, it's down by over $1,000.
 
PCL,

Why would the average number not matter if, "The numbers speak for themselves?"

In the last month of a presidency, a president can do very little real influence due to being a lame-duck.
 
Caspian27 said:
PCL,

Why would the average number not matter if, "The numbers speak for themselves?"

In the last month of a presidency, a president can do very little real influence due to being a lame-duck.
Click to expand...

Because the average number includes the first few years in which his policies haven't taken effect yet. It's the same reason that I don't blame Bush 41 for the bad economy during his administration. Economic policy takes a few years to show an impact. Watching the trend over the entire length of an administration gives a much better picture.
 
CX880 said:
How far do the furloughs go?
Click to expand...

Just curious, why do people seem to always ask this? Someone said that it goes back to a DOH of Jan 08 but 150 furloughs at another airline may mean a DOH of Jan 98. So why does it matter "how far" the furloughs go? Why isn't the total number of furloughs enough informations? Just curious.
 
PCL_128 said:
The average doesn't matter. What matters is how things look after 8 years of his policies. In the last month of Clinton's administration, unemployment was at 3.9%. It dropped steadily and consistently during his administration, thanks to his economic policies that led to surpluses and consumer confidence. After 8 years of Bush, it's now at 6.1%. The numbers speak for themselves.



This is only true if you count retired families. If you look at working families, the real measure of economic policy, it's down by over $1,000.
Click to expand...

The Clinton economy, buoyed by the tech bubble, finally showed the strain of higher taxes and led us into a slowdown around the time of 911. It took aggressive tax cuts to get out of this rut. Bush deserves credit for that. Our economy would still be strong were it not for the rise in oil and this aberration in our credit system. Neither can be reasonably blamed on Bush. While GW has made plenty of mistakes, overall, his fiscal policy promotes GDP growth and job creation. And while Bush's irresponsible spending increases have increased our deficits, Obama's health care proposal will send our debt into the stratosphere.
 
PCL_128 said:
Funny, I'm already experiencing the Jimmy Carter years.

Unemployment has skyrocketed to over 6%. It was 4% under Clinton.
Click to expand...

How about under Carter?
 
Long Time Gone said:
Just don't forget who has control over the House and Senate. They make the laws, the President doesn't.
Click to expand...

Love the new avatar...reminds me of the Tweety Bird fixes:

ITAWT ITAWA PUDEE TTATT IDEED
 
fastback said:
The Clinton economy, buoyed by the tech bubble, finally showed the strain of higher taxes and led us into a slowdown around the time of 911. It took aggressive tax cuts to get out of this rut. Bush deserves credit for that. Our economy would still be strong were it not for the rise in oil and this aberration in our credit system. Neither can be reasonably blamed on Bush. While GW has made plenty of mistakes, overall, his fiscal policy promotes GDP growth and job creation. And while Bush's irresponsible spending increases have increased our deficits, Obama's health care proposal will send our debt into the stratosphere.
Click to expand...


He also doesn't know how to hold a rifle, author legislation, or govern. But heckfire, why should those be any qualifications to run a country?
 
If you watched the convention speeches you may have heard McCain say: "I will fight the unions." His economic policies are pro-business, pro-management, and anti-union, just like Bush's. You can throw all the numbers at me you want. The bottom line is: As a working class, dues paying member of society, how has my economic situation changed over the past 8 years? For me and a lot of people it's been worse and not better.

I think we as a whole (airline unions) have been bent over enough in the past 8 years. Don't you?
 
Last edited:
PCL_128 said:
The average doesn't matter. What matters is how things look after 8 years of his policies. In the last month of Clinton's administration, unemployment was at 3.9%.
Click to expand...

Actually, if you want to look at it that way, they started to increase dramatically in the final months. In the months after him leaving office they climbed back into the 4s and 5s. Or does the effect stop the day they leave office?
 
Just a few things I remember from the past 4 Presidents.
Carter-Iran hostage ordeal, long gas lines, Billy Beer
Reagan-tax cuts, large military spending, Cold War, Iran-Contra affair, pushing forward to break up the Soviet Union and the Berlin Wall, thus finally coming down in the beginning Bush's term of his presidency. "Just Say No" campaign.
Bush senior-Bush meets with Gorbachev, Manual Noriega finally ousted and convicted, Read my Lips: No new taxes campaign slogan. Large US debt leftover from Reagan's defense spending, Republicans wanted to cut Government spending but Democratic controlled Congress voted to raise taxes. Ratings for Bush dropped, spearheaded NAFTA despite democrats scrutinizing it and then Clinton later signing it. Unfinished Iraq war-Desert Storm
Clinton- blow job from Monica and probably other interns, a bomb explosion in basement garage of World Trade Center, attack on the the USS Cole, continued build up of the Taliban and the al-Qaeda terrorist network including Osama bin Laden who slipped into Afghanistan after an offer was made by Sudan to hand him over, NAFTA; signed by Clinton. Some good but mostly bad depends on how you look at it. Biggest problem with NAFTA is that US workers are losing jobs. Republicans held the House of Rep 1st time in 40 yrs, Whiterwater controversy, Milosevic, the Battle of Mogadishu; helicopters shot down and some soldiers' bodies were dragged through the streets and televised. Clinton's response was to withdraw from Somalia and use less soldiers for conflicts. Huh? Um the US backed away from being attacked and humiliated. Bush would have set them straight. Today Somalia is a lawless country and a hot bed for terrorist groups and even maritime piracy.
Bush- another Democratic Congress, Iraq war, one terrorist attack and numerous other stuff that I agree or disagree on.
Anyway-
Paul Newman was a class act. RIP
 
Last edited:
Nevets said:
Just curious, why do people seem to always ask this? Someone said that it goes back to a DOH of Jan 08 but 150 furloughs at another airline may mean a DOH of Jan 98. So why does it matter "how far" the furloughs go? Why isn't the total number of furloughs enough informations? Just curious.
Click to expand...

People ask because they probably used to work there and want to know if they would be affected if they still did. Also, they might know people there but don't know their seniority number; but they do know when they were hired.

Those would be the reasons I would ask, anyway.
 
1200-hr Seneca guy talking about lowering the bar: that's a lot of context to take in from the outside.
 

Share this page

Latest posts

Latest resources

Latest media

Carbon Cub FX-3 Shenandoah Valley
Carbon Cub at Kittyhawk
FX-3 in the backcountry
IFR Panel in a Carbon Cub FX-3
Cub-Provo-UT-c.jpg
Back
Top