Why when there is bad news on some issue it seems to be "unexpected"? These weekly gyrations in unemployment figures during this recession should be expected I would think.
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20091217/D9CL3AOG1.html
It is not unexpected while we read about the latest business closings, foreclosures, bank closings, layoffs, revenue shortfalls, and budget cuts in governments and universities. Reading the article in the Tulsa news page, we learned that 1000 people showed up for 50 job openings. That's better odds than how many rich men will enter the kingdom of heaven, that's for sure.
http://cohort11.americanobserver.net/latoyaegwuekwe/multimediafinal.html
wow. Bush II results are in!
Quote from: FOTD on January 21, 2010, 02:49:53 PM
http://cohort11.americanobserver.net/latoyaegwuekwe/multimediafinal.html
wow. Bush II results are in!
Love the huge jump in unemployment AFTER stimulus passed.
Uh let's see, it went up 1.5 points under the Bush portion of that animation. How many more points has it gone up since January 2009?
Obama and Geithner need to keep their mouths shut when it comes to economic policy. They rode the market into the ground for the first six weeks of the administration by bad-mouthing the economy and making it even more difficult for companies to borrow money when they most needed it. They kept talking it down like they were still campaigning.
Now today the Dow is down 213 points led by threats to go after banks by Obama.
What is it with these arrogant idiots? Why do they think the majority of Americans want the government to beat up on non-union industries like medical, insurance, and now banking? All people really want right now are jobs. Making threats and dumbing down the very means by which non-government growth is possible is simply stupid. Let's see how much drier credit markets can get.
Again: Polls aren't saying people want Wall Street punished. They aren't saying we want more government control. They are saying we want jobs. What is so difficult to understand about that?
Lets see. Banks report that executives are to receive record bonuses. Banks that took tax payer money to survive. Not much response from voters, TN posters or Wall Street.
Obama says if the banks are doing that well, perhaps we should look at regulation. Regulation that would keep them from buying stocks in the banks name thereby jeopardizing depositor funds. Oh, well its all insured right? And the taxpayer baled us out once right? And the stock market tumbles and TN posters groan.
Yeah, that makes sense. ::)
Considering how the banks royally fjucked things up, when even a Joe Sixpack as I was telling folks four years ago on this very forum that something was going seriously awry in lending practices, I'd say that more bank regulation should be applauded, not derided.
Quote from: rwarn17588 on January 21, 2010, 07:43:49 PM
I'd say that more bank regulation should be applauded, not derided.
As long as the focus is on what the Dow is at rightthissecond, anything day traders don't like will be derided by a significant portion of our society. That's one of the biggest downsides to the sea change towards 401(k)s.
What is in the best interest of the short term earnings of large corporations is very likely not in the best interest of our country as a whole on occasion. That's OK. Not everybody gets what they want all of the time. These people have gotten so used to getting their way in government 100% of the time, the prospect of them only getting what they want 90% of the time upsets them. I can only imagine the tantrums they would throw if they were like the rest of us and rarely got what we wanted out of government.
Dow slides another 200+ pts today...Not a sign of confidence
Quote from: guido911 on December 17, 2009, 09:41:18 AM
Why when there is bad news on some issue it seems to be "unexpected"? These weekly gyrations in unemployment figures during this recession should be expected I would think.
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20091217/D9CL3AOG1.html
The fluctuations in unemployment are actually caused by global warming and environmental racism due to the policies of the Bush administration.
Quote from: Gaspar on January 25, 2010, 10:48:59 AM
The fluctuations in unemployment are actually caused by global warming and environmental racism due to the policies of the Bush administration.
You part of the cover up?
Quote from: FOTD on January 25, 2010, 11:06:08 AM
You part of the cover up?
Vast right wing conspiricy. . .We meet every Thursday for coffee at Starbucks.
Quote from: Conan71 on January 22, 2010, 07:26:14 PM
Dow slides another 200+ pts today...Not a sign of confidence
But didn't all the pro republican business guessers like Jim Kramer predict that with the election of Brown the Stock Market would boom upwards, so where is that upward movement? Or is Kramer just full of gas.
Quote from: joiei on January 25, 2010, 04:47:20 PM
But didn't all the pro republican business guessers like Jim Kramer predict that with the election of Brown the Stock Market would boom upwards, so where is that upward movement? Or is Kramer just full of gas.
I don't pay attention to Kramer. He's a c*nt and a sell-out. I have no idea what his political affiliation is either. Actually a lot of big shot Wall St. types are Dems contrary to what one would think.
Quote from: joiei on January 25, 2010, 04:47:20 PM
But didn't all the pro republican business guessers like Jim Kramer predict that with the election of Brown the Stock Market would boom upwards, so where is that upward movement? Or is Kramer just full of gas.
FAILAccording to Jim's political contributions last year he's a "D" . . . and a big bundler no less!!!!!
SCHUMER '98 $2,000 (under The Street)
DNC SERVICES CORPORATION/DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE (D) $20,000 (under "The Street")
DNC-NON-FEDERAL INDIVIDUAL (soft-money donation) $80,000 (bundeled under "The Street")
DNC SERVICES CORPORATION/DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE (D) $20,000 (under "Cramer & Company")
Going down the list he's given $261,000 to Democrats, $0 to Republicans.
Quote from: Gaspar on January 26, 2010, 10:20:40 AM
FAIL
According to Jim's political contributions last year he's a "D" . . . and a big bundler no less!!!!!
SCHUMER '98 $2,000 (under The Street)
DNC SERVICES CORPORATION/DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE (D) $20,000 (under "The Street")
DNC-NON-FEDERAL INDIVIDUAL (soft-money donation) $80,000 (bundeled under "The Street")
DNC SERVICES CORPORATION/DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE (D) $20,000 (under "Cramer & Company")
Going down the list he's given $261,000 to Democrats, $0 to Republicans.
Quit posting facts, Gaspar. It's getting in the way of trying to prove how bad all those greedy Republicans on Wall Street horked the economy.
Quote from: Conan71 on January 26, 2010, 10:22:53 AM
Quit posting facts, Gaspar. It's getting in the way of trying to prove how bad all those greedy Republicans on Wall Street horked the economy.
Sorry. My bad!
Lack of patience?
It's been a year. 187 speeches, 2 vacations, an Olympic junket, a Climate junket, a Nobel prize for something, and trillians of dollars spent with nothing to show for it.
We are waiting. . . and yes we have grown impatient.
Ok here's a scenario that even the most corrupted economic mind can process.
You are the president of a company that is floundering.
You have the most innovative workforce in the world. You need to increase business and get out of the red.
Do you:
A. Incentivize your least productive workers with bonuses for non-enterprise functions in an effort to gain their continued support?
B. Incentivize your most productive workers with bonuses for innovation and increased production?
Do you:
A. Reward innovation by allowing workers to develop new channels of production, distribution and sales?
B. Curtail expenditure of resources used for innovation in an effort to appear in control?
Do you:
A. Allow your proven business minds to participate in company planning and steering?
B. Preserve your power at all costs by keeping a firm grip on the reigns and blaming outside influences for every problem, misstep, and backlash.
Do you:
A. Say you are listening?
B. Hear?
To preserve our independence, we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our election between economy and liberty, or profusion and servitude. . .I place economy among the first and most important of republican virtues, and public debt as the greatest of the dangers to be feared. – President Thomas Jefferson
Quote from: Gaspar on January 26, 2010, 03:20:57 PM
It's been a year. 187 speeches, 2 vacations, an Olympic junket, a Climate junket, a Nobel prize for something, and trillians of dollars spent with nothing to show for it.
We are waiting. . . and yes we have grown impatient.
Ok here's a scenario that even the most corrupted economic mind can process.
You are the president of a company that is floundering.
You have the most innovative workforce in the world. You need to increase business and get out of the red.
Do you:
A. Incentivize your least productive workers with bonuses for non-enterprise functions in an effort to gain their continued support?
B. Incentivize your most productive workers with bonuses for innovation and increased production?
Do you:
A. Reward innovation by allowing workers to develop new channels of production, distribution and sales?
B. Curtail expenditure of resources used for innovation in an effort to appear in control?
Do you:
A. Allow your proven business minds to participate in company planning and steering?
B. Preserve your power at all costs by keeping a firm grip on the reigns and blaming outside influences for every problem, misstep, and backlash.
Do you:
A. Say you are listening?
B. Hear?
To preserve our independence, we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our election between economy and liberty, or profusion and servitude. . .I place economy among the first and most important of republican virtues, and public debt as the greatest of the dangers to be feared. – President Thomas Jefferson
It took twenty years to get us in this mess...you think it's going to take just a year to get us out? It sure as hell didn't take just a year to get out of the Great Depression.
Typical right-wing rhetoric.
Gaspar takes the hand off from Guido.
Sick puppies to think this mess should be cleaned up by now. As an employee of the corporation, you are fired for cause being that you failed to do any real number crunching and for negligence in not stopping this mess from occurring in the first place. That's how stupid that analogy you drew was knowing the UCSA can print money whereas a corporation can not. But hell, corporations can do as they wish....they just can't extend their loans out for three generations.
Print more money and spend more in stimulus funds. Get this economy moving again....only this time regulate the abusers.
Ugh. It's like pounding nails into water!
Here's another one: New homes sale fell "unexpectedly" in December.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/35098179
Zeledyne layoffs...Baker Hughes layoffs....not good for Tulsa.
http://www.newson6.com/global/story.asp?s=11888914
BH is on good rumor....relocations to Texass
Quote from: FOTD on January 27, 2010, 02:49:44 PM
Zeledyne layoffs...Baker Hughes layoffs....not good for Tulsa.
http://www.newson6.com/global/story.asp?s=11888914
BH is on good rumor....relocations to Texass
Hmmm, I wonder how upset Price is about that investment now? Though I admire him for keeping the plant going close to full speed a lot longer than Ford, er Visteon would have. Word around the campfire is this plant was a tax hedge for Price.
Where exactly is this recovery some of the more dense members on here are claiming?
Unemployment claims have risen "unexpectedly" again. "Horde the Change":
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100204/ap_on_bi_go_ec_fi/us_jobless_claims;_ylt=AqS2pz0ovOnMdQCGLt_OcKiyBhIF;_ylu=X3oDMTJpcm44cGJiBGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMTAwMjA0L3VzX2pvYmxlc3NfY2xhaW1zBGNwb3MDMQRwb3MDMQRzZWMDeW5fdG9wX3N0b3J5BHNsawNmaXJzdC10aW1lam8-
THEY TOOK OUR JOBS!
Quote from: guido911 on February 04, 2010, 02:52:59 PM
Unemployment claims have risen "unexpectedly" again. "Horde the Change":
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100204/ap_on_bi_go_ec_fi/us_jobless_claims;_ylt=AqS2pz0ovOnMdQCGLt_OcKiyBhIF;_ylu=X3oDMTJpcm44cGJiBGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMTAwMjA0L3VzX2pvYmxlc3NfY2xhaW1zBGNwb3MDMQRwb3MDMQRzZWMDeW5fdG9wX3N0b3J5BHNsawNmaXJzdC10aW1lam8-
It surprises you that unemployment would still be going up given the current lack of any real economic rebound?
Quote from: nathanm on February 04, 2010, 02:55:47 PM
It surprises you that unemployment would still be going up given the current lack of any real economic rebound?
That was the author's words, not his. What happened to the glee club that was on here earlier in the week proclaiming the recession was over and we are in a strong recovery?
Quote from: nathanm on February 04, 2010, 02:55:47 PM
It surprises you that unemployment would still be going up given the current lack of any real economic rebound?
Come on Nate, I started this thread mocking the media's continued use of the word "unexpectedly". Go back and read my first post, it will sound eerily similar to what you just posted.
Quote from: Conan71 on February 04, 2010, 03:12:48 PM
That was the author's words, not his. What happened to the glee club that was on here earlier in the week proclaiming the recession was over and we are in a strong recovery?
There are some signs of possible recovery. This has not yet had an impact on unemployment, however. Presuming it keeps up, we should see some modest decreases in unemployment in the next few quarters. It doesn't help that there's a lot of fear amongst business owners of a double-dip. I think it could easily go either way. The late 2009 inflation numbers do provide some hope that we at least won't end up in a deflationary spiral, but it's still too early to tell where we're headed.
My apologies, guido, for misunderstanding your post. I agree that it's stupid to describe increases in unemployment as "unexpected," at least for the magnitude of increase we are seeing.
Quote from: nathanm on February 04, 2010, 03:39:46 PM
It doesn't help that there's a lot of fear amongst business owners of a double-dip.
Anecdotally, I'm starting to see a thaw of the hiring freezes in the local tech industry.
Quote from: Conan71 on February 04, 2010, 03:12:48 PM
That was the author's words, not his. What happened to the glee club that was on here earlier in the week proclaiming the recession was over and we are in a strong recovery?
The recession is over. Does this demon have to keep telling you just like in 2007 when he claimed we were entering it? Nobody has ever said we are in a strong recovery. After sopping up the financial disaster there will be no strong recovery...so sorry. :'(
Quote from: FOTD on February 04, 2010, 03:55:30 PM
The recession is over. Does this demon have to keep telling you just like in 2007 when he claimed we were entering it? Nobody has ever said we are in a strong recovery. After sopping up the financial disaster there will be no strong recovery...so sorry. :'(
Sure by the two quarters of growth standard, yes we would be. Let's see what this next quarter shows before we crow too loudly. For those of us who actually work in B-2-B situations, many of us still are not seeing growth.
Quote from: nathanm on February 04, 2010, 03:39:46 PM
There are some signs of possible recovery. This has not yet had an impact on unemployment, however. Presuming it keeps up, we should see some modest decreases in unemployment in the next few quarters. It doesn't help that there's a lot of fear amongst business owners of a double-dip. I think it could easily go either way. The late 2009 inflation numbers do provide some hope that we at least won't end up in a deflationary spiral, but it's still too early to tell where we're headed.
Nathan gets it
DING, DING DING, DING!
We have a winner!
Fear is a big driver in recessionary trends, that's why I've been especially hard on the Obama Administration for not inspiring more confidence in the economy. The most effective of all the tools a President has at their disposal in helping or hurting an economy, the ability to talk it up or down is probably the most effective. I realize you cannot blow smoke up peoples asses and paint it rosier than it is, but I simply have not seen great leadership or real "hope" come out of them. I honestly felt like he was still campaigning against the GOP the first two months he was in office. I don't think his efforts are "shameful" I simply don't think he's inspired as much confidence as he is capable of, especially with his oratorial skills.
It's a good day, only 36,000 people lost their jobs:
"Today is a big day in America, only 24,000 new people filed for initial unemployment benefits, which is really good."
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/weekly-jobless-claims-jump-24000-to-484000-2010-04-15-83140
Quote from: guido911 on April 15, 2010, 09:28:05 AM
"Today is a big day in America, only 24,000 new people filed for initial unemployment benefits, which is really good."
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/weekly-jobless-claims-jump-24000-to-484000-2010-04-15-83140
That's goodish news, isn't it?
Quote from: Conan71 on April 15, 2010, 09:31:50 AM
That's goodish news, isn't it?
It is if you are Harry Reid.
Wow! And that's with all of the new employment spurred by the Census hire and temporary tax season employees. Subtract that quarter of a million and you've got another "UNEXPECTED" outcome.
Here we go again, jobless claims rise "unexpectedly". Stop it with the expected/unexpected crap and just report the freakin story.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/05/20/new-weekly-jobless-claims-rise/
Quote from: guido911 on May 20, 2010, 10:05:17 AM
Here we go again, jobless claims rise "unexpectedly". Stop it with the expected/unexpected crap and just report the freakin story.
I bet some expected it. It's just a way to make the story somewhat "holy cow"...or just more annoying.
Why do guido and gaspar relish in posting as much bad news as possible?
Do they hate America?
I didn't expect it. I thought the Stimulus's worked. I thought we had pulled out of the recession.
This can't be.
Wow! I am so surprised. I figured the 19% growth in government and the promise of new regulations on private industry would cause a boom in employment.
Crap!
I thought that a trillion new dollars in debt burden and an estimated 12 trillion over the next 10 years would really perk us up and get the wheels of industry rolling.
It will really be a surprise if they tell me that we are going to experience some significant inflation over the next few years. That will completely take me off-guard.
Perhaps, if we create a Blue Ribbon panel to study this and propose additional regulations, we can get back on track?
Quote from: Gaspar on May 20, 2010, 11:07:57 AM
I didn't expect it. I thought the Stimulus's worked. I thought we had pulled out of the recession.
This can't be.
Wow! I am so surprised. I figured the 19% growth in government and the promise of new regulations on private industry would cause a boom in employment.
Crap!
I thought that a trillion new dollars in debt burden and an estimated 12 trillion over the next 10 years would really perk us up and get the wheels of industry rolling.
It will really be a surprise if they tell me that we are going to experience some significant inflation over the next few years. That will completely take me off-guard.
Perhaps, if we create a Blue Ribbon panel to study this and propose additional regulations, we can get back on track?
So, to clarify: the stimulus and government spending is to blame for a stubbornly high unemployment rate?
Because all that Census hiring last month didn't boost the job numbers by 10k or more, right? Just making sure I'm clear.
Quote from: Gaspar on May 20, 2010, 11:07:57 AM
I didn't expect it. I thought the Stimulus's worked. I thought we had pulled out of the recession.
This can't be.
Wow! I am so surprised. I figured the 19% growth in government and the promise of new regulations on private industry would cause a boom in employment.
Crap!
I thought that a trillion new dollars in debt burden and an estimated 12 trillion over the next 10 years would really perk us up and get the wheels of industry rolling.
It will really be a surprise if they tell me that we are going to experience some significant inflation over the next few years. That will completely take me off-guard.
Perhaps, if we create a Blue Ribbon panel to study this and propose additional regulations, we can get back on track?
America hater.
Quote from: RecycleMichael on May 20, 2010, 10:55:01 AM
Why do guido and gaspar relish in posting as much bad news as possible?
Do they hate America?
Oh that's right, I hate America. Put your head back in the sand and think happy thoughts.
The "unemployment" filings can increase during a recovery because more people file and look for jobs. If they have gone a long time without work they often give up going.
Quote from: Gaspar on May 20, 2010, 11:07:57 AM
I didn't expect it. I thought the Stimulus's worked. I thought we had pulled out of the recession.
This can't be.
Wow! I am so surprised. I figured the 19% growth in government and the promise of new regulations on private industry would cause a boom in employment.
Crap!
I thought that a trillion new dollars in debt burden and an estimated 12 trillion over the next 10 years would really perk us up and get the wheels of industry rolling.
It will really be a surprise if they tell me that we are going to experience some significant inflation over the next few years. That will completely take me off-guard.
Perhaps, if we create a Blue Ribbon panel to study this and propose additional regulations, we can get back on track?
What is the budget for 2010? I read it was about 2% higher than last years. But that might have been changed.
Quote from: Gaspar on May 20, 2010, 11:07:57 AM
This can't be.
Wow! I am so surprised. I figured the 19% growth in government and the promise of new regulations on private industry would cause a boom in employment.
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/108xx/doc10871/historicaltables.pdf
Year Government Outlays
2008 2,982.6
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/108xx/doc10871/economicprojections.pdf
2009 Actual 3,518
2010 Projected 3,524
You were right it was 18%.
Of course 350 billion of that was stimulus money that BUSH chose to put off until 2009 (And I agree with him).
Bush goes ahead and spends that 350 billion that he signed for and approved and 2008 is at 3,332.6 and 2009 would be at 3168.
However, 2010 would still be 3524 so its 18% no matter what.
Quote from: guido911 on May 20, 2010, 11:17:59 AM
America hater.
Love your country but fear its government. ;) Regulation has the ability to produce nothing. The natural evolution of government is to assume the responsibilities of the governed. This cannot be stopped, but it can be slowed. With each slouching step, liberty and prosperity are diminished. Economic growth is traded for false security.
This administration is demonizing the producers and that is a very dangerous path to take.It is much cheaper and enormously more profitable for the special interests to purchase the regulatory favors of Washington's political harlots than to compete in a fair, unsubsidized markeplace. – Lee Robinson
Quote from: Gaspar on May 21, 2010, 07:57:32 AM
Love your country but fear its government. ;) Regulation has the ability to produce nothing. The natural evolution of government is to assume the responsibilities of the governed. This cannot be stopped, but it can be slowed. With each slouching step, liberty and prosperity are diminished. Economic growth is traded for false security.
This administration is demonizing the producers and that is a very dangerous path to take.
It is much cheaper and enormously more profitable for the special interests to purchase the regulatory favors of Washington's political harlots than to compete in a fair, unsubsidized markeplace. – Lee Robinson
Help me again with this "producers" thing. I really want to know specifically what it means.
Quote from: we vs us on May 21, 2010, 08:51:57 AM
Help me again with this "producers" thing. I really want to know specifically what it means.
Not really that hard. . . Here, I have a dictionary on my desk. . .
–noun {pruh-doo-ser}
1. a person who produces.
2. Economics. a person who creates economic value, or produces goods and services.
Quote from: Gaspar on May 21, 2010, 09:25:47 AM
Not really that hard. . . Here, I have a dictionary on my desk. . .
–noun {pruh-doo-ser}
1. a person who produces.
2. Economics. a person who creates economic value, or produces goods and services.
But it can't be that simple. In another thread you labeled Jon Stewart as "not a producer," and I'm genuinely curious what makes him "not a producer" in your book, since, based on the above definition, he's in actuality a producer of a profitable television show.
Quote from: we vs us on May 21, 2010, 09:37:39 AM
But it can't be that simple. In another thread you labeled Jon Stewart as "not a producer," and I'm genuinely curious what makes him "not a producer" in your book, since, based on the above definition, he's in actuality a producer of a profitable television show.
Now, now ... don't you know that moving the goalposts is allowed? ::)
I can think of some mayoral staff members who should be added to the U/E line.
At the risk of being accused of hating America, jobless claims rose "unexpectedly" last week:
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE65G2D720100617?feedType=RSS&feedName=businessNews&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+reuters/businessNews+%28News+/+US+/+Business+News%29&utm_content=Twitter
I don't remember you posting any bad news about America's economy until Obama became President. Now it seems that is all you post.
I guess you just started hating America when your party lost elections.
Quote from: RecycleMichael on June 17, 2010, 12:15:08 PM
I don't remember you posting any bad news about America's economy until Obama became President. Now it seems that is all you post.
I guess you just started hating America when your party lost elections.
And when did you start loving America? When your party won an election?
Edited to add: I was in service in part during Clinton's presidency. I had no problem with that. How about you?
Why do you feel compelled to constantly post bad economic news? Why do you start threads about any Democrat who has any trouble (including divorce)?
You just want to focus on the negatives, especially when you believe it hurts Democrats.
Quote from: RecycleMichael on June 17, 2010, 12:28:38 PM
Why do you feel compelled to constantly post bad economic news? Why do you start threads about any Democrat who has any trouble (including divorce)?
You just want to focus on the negatives, especially when you believe it hurts Democrats.
RM, go to my very first post in this thread when I introduced this thread and again I believe on page 2. My point is not about pointing out bad news (that's your take). My point is that I am tired of this "expected"/"unexpected" crap from economists who apparently are unaware that we are in a recession (although I did tease a little about stimulus failure and Reid's insipid "only 36,000 people lost their jobs" crap). Try to know a little about the thread before calling someone an America hater.
I don't really think you hate America...but you do seem obsessed with posting more and more negative news than before. You also have started many threads about any Democrat you can make fun of.
When did you become so partisan? Why the need to find anything negative about the economy or the President?
Quote from: RecycleMichael on June 17, 2010, 01:00:57 PM
When did you become so partisan? Why the need to find anything negative about the economy or the President?
If you want this debate, we can start another thread. Just this, please link to all the positive things you said about Bush because I have given Obama his due when I thought he deserved it.
Quote from: RecycleMichael on June 17, 2010, 12:28:38 PM
Why do you feel compelled to constantly post bad economic news? Why do you start threads about any Democrat who has any trouble (including divorce)?
You just want to focus on the negatives, especially when you believe it hurts Democrats.
Uh, you weren't even through the second sentence of a thread you created on the governor's race before you mentioned 12 year old allegations of an affair by a GOP gubernatorial candidate.
You've been a pretty good pot-stirrer when it's gone the other way.
It's our turn now. ;)
Why give any time to any economists being surprised about anything?
Does anyone really think they're able to see the future of the economy?
Every time something happens with any part of the economy..."surprise"...
I would like to see some good economic news. I just spent 10 minutes looking and besides the 19% public sector growth numbers and 5% public sector salary increase numbers, I don't see any.
That kinda sad.
I'd like to have some good economic news if someone would be so kind as to share.
Dems had no trouble beating down the economy until Bush left office. Heck, President Obama and Secretary Geithner continued to beat it down for a couple of months after assuming office as if they were still campaigning against President Bush, whom they never ran against to start with. That's the difference between a campaigner and a leader. I'll let you guess which I think President Obama is.
Much of a recession is psychological. Bad news or creating fear will get businesses and consumers to start hoarding cash which helps create a self-fullfilling prophesy. I realize there are real-world issues at work in the run-up to a recession, but constant harping on impending doom does not help.
Quote from: Gaspar on June 17, 2010, 01:55:00 PM
I'd like to have some good economic news if someone would be so kind as to share.
Check the latest inflation numbers. They're not "deflation numbers," so that's excellent news.
Quote from: Conan71 on June 17, 2010, 01:58:36 PM
Dems had no trouble beating down the economy until Bush left office. Heck, President Obama and Secretary Geithner continued to beat it down for a couple of months after assuming office as if they were still campaigning against President Bush, whom they never ran against to start with. That's the difference between a campaigner and a leader. I'll let you guess which I think President Obama is.
I guess it's really relative. I suppose there are many relish public over private sector growth and view this economy as some form of revenge. It is "Change."
Quote from: Gaspar on June 17, 2010, 02:10:12 PM
I guess it's really relative. I suppose there are many relish public over private sector growth and view this economy as some form of revenge. It is "Change."
I guess you haven't noticed pretty much everybody expressing a desire for the private sector to "take up the slack"?
Quote from: nathanm on June 17, 2010, 02:01:26 PM
Check the latest inflation numbers. They're not "deflation numbers," so that's excellent news.
You're correct. That is good for now, or at least it doesn't suck. I like to look at inflation by sector, rather than the larger conglomerate number. Fuel and materials cost is the major factor when you look at inflation as a whole. Demand doesn't change much on consumables like food, and those have risen by about .2%.
Unemployment also affects demand (like I'm telling you something you don't know). With our growing unemployment inflation/deflation is a far less important statistic. A $100 grocery bill is little different from a $102 grocery bill if you can afford neither.
It's kinda like saying Mr. Gaspar you have cancer, and 1 month to live, but your hair smells terrific.
Quote from: Gaspar on June 17, 2010, 02:10:12 PM
I guess it's really relative. I suppose there are many relish public over private sector growth and view this economy as some form of revenge. It is "Change."
Sure: "Let's hope for the absolute worst outcome for as many Americans as possible so we can win enough votes to regain power."
Quote from: nathanm on June 17, 2010, 02:18:54 PM
I guess you haven't noticed pretty much everybody expressing a desire for the private sector to "take up the slack"?
Oh, no I have, it's just that the private sector cannot print money or take it by force. The private sector must be free to produce in order to "take up the slack."
The banks are so afraid of "THE GREAT REGULATOR" that lines of credit have been frozen or suspended, and operating capital tied to credit is very slim or non-existent.
No pay, produce, no work, no demand, no pay, no produce, no work. . .
At the risk of repeating myself. . .IT'S SIMPLE.
Quote from: Townsend on June 17, 2010, 01:31:03 PM
Why give any time to any economists being surprised about anything?
Does anyone really think they're able to see the future of the economy?
Every time something happens with any part of the economy..."surprise"...
Bingo. You hit the nail right on the head. Like I posted a while back; just post the facts and don't editorialize/embellish them. We adults can easily figure things out without a political spin one way or the other.
Quote from: Gaspar on June 17, 2010, 02:28:09 PM
Oh, no I have, it's just that the private sector cannot print money or take it by force. The private sector must be free to produce in order to "take up the slack."
The banks are so afraid of "THE GREAT REGULATOR" that lines of credit have been frozen or suspended, and operating capital tied to credit is very slim or non-existent.
No pay, produce, no work, no demand, no pay, no produce, no work. . .
At the risk of repeating myself. . .IT'S SIMPLE.
The regulators have nothing to do with the banks being unwilling to lend. Banks failing left and right due to bad loans and IBs like Bear Stearns and Merrill Lynch going bust put the fear of God into bankers. That's why they refuse to lend.
What the hell can the government do more than they have? They backstopped big institutions and have been trying to give away money for next to free left and right so the bankers can make a killing on their lending book, but they still refuse.
Well, actually, I'm lying. They aren't refusing so much anymore. In the last six months I've seen a major easing of both consumer and small business lines. They're much more concerned about credit risk than they used to be, though. The government isn't doing that.
Funny how no matter what we're talking about, it's the government's fault.
Quote from: Gaspar on June 17, 2010, 02:28:09 PM
Oh, no I have, it's just that the private sector cannot print money or take it by force. The private sector must be free to produce in order to "take up the slack."
The banks are so afraid of "THE GREAT REGULATOR" that lines of credit have been frozen or suspended, and operating capital tied to credit is very slim or non-existent.
No pay, produce, no work, no demand, no pay, no produce, no work. . .
At the risk of repeating myself. . .IT'S SIMPLE.
I really can't help but wonder where you get your information. You're describing a situation that doesn't exist. In fact, there has been no new regulation yet, aside from whatever structure was put in place around the TARP funds and most of the regulation in place -- in some cases by admission of the regulators themselves -- has been bent, corrupted, and in some cases out and out ignored for years. In other words, almost all the reporting and scholarship about the crash to date has indicated that the financial industry wasn't regulated enough, and in some cases (as with derivatives) not at all.
So I'm actually interested if you can point me to something that talks about how are regulatory system is choking off investment.
Quote from: we vs us on June 17, 2010, 03:53:57 PM
I really can't help but wonder where you get your information. You're describing a situation that doesn't exist. In fact, there has been no new regulation yet, aside from whatever structure was put in place around the TARP funds and most of the regulation in place -- in some cases by admission of the regulators themselves -- has been bent, corrupted, and in some cases out and out ignored for years. In other words, almost all the reporting and scholarship about the crash to date has indicated that the financial industry wasn't regulated enough, and in some cases (as with derivatives) not at all.
So I'm actually interested if you can point me to something that talks about how are regulatory system is choking off investment.
He is saying that the possibility that some day there might be regulation the banks think it is better to not make money.
Quote from: we vs us on June 17, 2010, 03:53:57 PM
So I'm actually interested if you can point me to something that talks about how are regulatory system is choking off investment.
By "The Great Regulator" I was alluding to President Obama and the gavel he threatens over private industry. And Trog, the threat is important.
You are correct it is currently skittishness on credit that is causing the reluctance on the part of the banks. It is also, as Bank of America President Ken Lewis mentioned, not knowing the timing of the recovery or when unemployment will peak.
Again, no pay, produce, no work, no demand, no pay, no produce, no work. . .
If we were to (heaven forbid) lower taxes on businesses, we would do far more reduce unemployment, lower prices, increase profits, increase production, and spur additional enterprise than by increasing taxes. When banks see businesses growing they want to be part of that. They're not seeing any of that now.
Quote from: Gaspar on June 17, 2010, 04:30:51 PM
If we were to (heaven forbid) lower taxes on businesses, we would do far more reduce unemployment, lower prices, increase profits, increase production, and spur additional enterprise than by increasing taxes. When banks see businesses growing they want to be part of that. They're not seeing any of that now.
You missed that part of the stimulus bill, I take it?
Quote from: guido911 on June 17, 2010, 01:05:35 PM
If you want this debate, we can start another thread. Just this, please link to all the positive things you said about Bush because I have given Obama his due when I thought he deserved it.
April 20th of this year in a thread about Tea Party Activists, I wrote, "I also think of myself as a good liberal and I really appreciated Bush's stance and actions on immigration. He tried to find ways to create jobs and get illegal citiizens paying into the system and become legal."
Your turn.
Quote from: Gaspar on June 17, 2010, 04:30:51 PM
By "The Great Regulator" I was alluding to President Obama and the gavel he threatens over private industry. And Trog, the threat is important.
You are correct it is currently skittishness on credit that is causing the reluctance on the part of the banks. It is also, as Bank of America President Ken Lewis mentioned, not knowing the timing of the recovery or when unemployment will peak.
Again, no pay, produce, no work, no demand, no pay, no produce, no work. . .
If we were to (heaven forbid) lower taxes on businesses, we would do far more reduce unemployment, lower prices, increase profits, increase production, and spur additional enterprise than by increasing taxes. When banks see businesses growing they want to be part of that. They're not seeing any of that now.
First companies hire and keep employees because they need them to do the work. If they don't need them then they can get rid of them. If try do need them and get rid of them then they will make less money. A company doesn't care about an employee as they are only liabilities that the company must have in order to create profit. What threatened regulations are you claiming makes banks unwilling to lend money?
Quote from: RecycleMichael on June 17, 2010, 06:05:35 PM
April 20th of this year in a thread about Tea Party Activists, I wrote, "I also think of myself as a good liberal and I really appreciated Bush's stance and actions on immigration. He tried to find ways to create jobs and get illegal citiizens paying into the system and become legal."
Your turn.
I applauded Obama's visit to Iraq shortly after his inauguration, I applauded his initial reaction to the AIG bonuses, his praise for Gen. when he passed, and that he donated his Nobel prize winnings to worthy charities. Your turn.
group hug
Quote from: Gaspar on June 17, 2010, 04:30:51 PM
If we were to (heaven forbid) lower taxes on businesses, we would do far more reduce unemployment, lower prices, increase profits, increase production, and spur additional enterprise than by increasing taxes. When banks see businesses growing they want to be part of that. They're not seeing any of that now.
But I thought inflation was good. At least that is what is expressed here. Aren't lower prices deflation? You guys are confusing me.
131K jobs lost in July and nearly 90K more jobs lost than originally reported in June. I am unsure if those numbers were expected or not.
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm
If memory serves, the increase in jobless claims released yesterday was unexpected, though.
Actually "TurboTax" was interviewed the other day and said that unemployment was expected to rise unexpectedly.
(http://www.rightontheright.com/files/related-images/geithner.jpg)
. . .and Woop there it is.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - New claims for unemployment benefits unexpectedly rose last week to the highest level since early April, highlighting a weak labor market and the fragile economic recovery.
I don't know why you guys feel so compelled to get your one-sided claims of the "sky is falling" posted here so regularly. You are obsessed with finding any claim of how the economy is tanking, obviously just so you can blame the democrat President.
I read a more balanced report on July jobs.
CNN said this...
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Two employment reports released early Wednesday gave a mixed picture, showing better-than-expected job growth in the private sector but continued weakness in government and non-profit payrolls.
Private-sector employers added jobs for the sixth month in a row in July, according to a report by payroll processing firm Automatic Data Processing (ADP). ADP said private-sector employers added 42,000 jobs to their payrolls during the month, following an upwardly revised 19,000 increase in June.
http://money.cnn.com/2010/08/04/news/economy/job_cuts_challenger/index.htm
Less government jobs (especially the 500,000 census workers being laid off) and more private sector jobs.
...you see and hear only what you want to see and hear...
Quote from: RecycleMichael on August 06, 2010, 01:52:20 PM
I don't know why you guys feel so compelled to get your one-sided claims of the "sky is falling" posted here so regularly. You are obsessed with finding any claim of how the economy is tanking, obviously just so you can blame the democrat President.
I read a more balanced report on July jobs.
CNN said this...
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Two employment reports released early Wednesday gave a mixed picture, showing better-than-expected job growth in the private sector but continued weakness in government and non-profit payrolls.
Private-sector employers added jobs for the sixth month in a row in July, according to a report by payroll processing firm Automatic Data Processing (ADP). ADP said private-sector employers added 42,000 jobs to their payrolls during the month, following an upwardly revised 19,000 increase in June.
http://money.cnn.com/2010/08/04/news/economy/job_cuts_challenger/index.htm
Less government jobs (especially the 500,000 census workers being laid off) and more private sector jobs.
...you see and hear only what you want to see and hear...
It has nothing to do with unemployment, we expect that to get worse.
It's the use of the term "Unexpected" in every report. All of the indicators are there, but the media feels compelled to insert the word "Unexpected." It's just plain funny.
Quote from: Gaspar on August 06, 2010, 01:55:50 PM
It has nothing to do with unemployment, we expect that to get worse.
It's the use of the term "Unexpected" in every report. All of the indicators are there, but the media feels compelled to insert the word "Unexpected." It's just plain funny.
No, RM's correct. It's why Guido posted it.
Quote from: Townsend on August 06, 2010, 02:20:14 PM
No, RM's correct. It's why Guido posted it.
Bullcrap. This is what I posted in response to RM's first attempt at castigating me:
QuoteRM, go to my very first post in this thread when I introduced this thread and again I believe on page 2. My point is not about pointing out bad news (that's your take). My point is that I am tired of this "expected"/"unexpected" crap from economists who apparently are unaware that we are in a recession (although I did tease a little about stimulus failure and Reid's insipid "only 36,000 people lost their jobs" crap). Try to know a little about the thread before calling someone an America hater.
Maybe you too should know more about the thread. Now if it would make you feel better, I can rehash all the rosy employment numbers Obama talked up pre-stimulus, or what Jokin Joe Biden said a few months ago about 250-500k jobs coming down the pike.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2010/04/biden-predicts-economy-will-cr.html
That stuff should be in a different thread though. This was intended to be a media spin thread.
Quote from: guido911 on August 06, 2010, 02:30:34 PM
Bullcrap. This is what I posted in response to RM's first attempt at castigating me:
Maybe you too should know more about the thread. Now if it would make you feel better, I can rehash all the rosy employment numbers Obama talked up pre-stimulus, or what Jokin Joe Biden said a few months ago about 250-500k jobs coming down the pike.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2010/04/biden-predicts-economy-will-cr.html
That stuff should be in a different thread though. This was intended to be a media spin thread.
Bullcrap right back on ya.
what would be unexpected is if you set up the dominoes properly, but one of them in the sequence refused to fall after it was fallen upon by its predecessor..........
Quote from: rhymnrzn on August 06, 2010, 02:34:21 PM
what would be unexpected is if you set up the dominoes properly, but one of them in the sequence refused to fall after it was fallen upon by its predecessor..........
(http://www.motifake.com/image/demotivational-poster/0902/captain-obvious-captain-obvious-dumb-superhero-internet-meme-demotivational-poster-1234392340.jpg)
^yeah, its was obviously my way of illustrating how that the rich are the ones setting up the dominoes, using feigned speeches to cause the borders and standards of the poor and working class to fall in the manner of their design: and the precision they use is not to be expected against.
Only if the people would give themselves to keep these words, after this spirit, then we might have some stability, and our expectations would not be in jeopardy:
Deuteronomy 26:12
"When thou hast made an end of tithing all the tithes of thine increase the third year which is the year of tithing and hast given it unto the Levite the stranger the fatherless and the widow that they may eat within thy gates and be filled; (13) Then thou shalt say before the LORD thy God I have brought away the hallowed things out of mine house and also have given them unto the Levite and unto the stranger to the fatherless and to the widow according to all thy commandments which thou hast commanded me: I have not transgressed thy commandments neither have I forgotten them. (14) I have not eaten thereof in my mourning neither have I taken away ought thereof for any unclean use nor given ought thereof for the dead: but I have hearkened to the voice of the LORD my God and have done according to all that thou hast commanded me."
And all of Leviticus chapter 25, concerning the year of release.
But the spirit of these words are telling the matter, really:
Ezekiel 16:28 "Thou hast played the whore also with the Assyrians, because thou wast unsatiable; yea, thou hast played the harlot with them, and yet couldest not be satisfied."
Ezekiel 22:12
"In thee have they taken gifts to shed blood; thou hast taken usury and increase, and thou hast greedily gained of thy neighbours by extortion, and hast forgotten me, saith the Lord GOD. (13) Behold, therefore I have smitten mine hand at thy dishonest gain which thou hast made, and at thy blood which hath been in the midst of thee."
Well there it is
Quote from: rhymnrzn on August 06, 2010, 04:51:58 PM
^yeah, its was obviously my way of illustrating how that the rich are the ones setting up the dominoes, using feigned speeches to cause the borders and standards of the poor and working class to fall in the manner of their design: and the precision they use is not to be expected against.
Only if the people would give themselves to keep these words, after this spirit, then we might have some stability, and our expectations would not be in jeopardy:
Deuteronomy 26:12
"When thou hast made an end of tithing all the tithes of thine increase the third year which is the year of tithing and hast given it unto the Levite the stranger the fatherless and the widow that they may eat within thy gates and be filled; (13) Then thou shalt say before the LORD thy God I have brought away the hallowed things out of mine house and also have given them unto the Levite and unto the stranger to the fatherless and to the widow according to all thy commandments which thou hast commanded me: I have not transgressed thy commandments neither have I forgotten them. (14) I have not eaten thereof in my mourning neither have I taken away ought thereof for any unclean use nor given ought thereof for the dead: but I have hearkened to the voice of the LORD my God and have done according to all that thou hast commanded me."
And all of Leviticus chapter 25, concerning the year of release.
But the spirit of these words are telling the matter, really:
Ezekiel 16:28 "Thou hast played the whore also with the Assyrians, because thou wast unsatiable; yea, thou hast played the harlot with them, and yet couldest not be satisfied."
Ezekiel 22:12
"In thee have they taken gifts to shed blood; thou hast taken usury and increase, and thou hast greedily gained of thy neighbours by extortion, and hast forgotten me, saith the Lord GOD. (13) Behold, therefore I have smitten mine hand at thy dishonest gain which thou hast made, and at thy blood which hath been in the midst of thee."
You and shadows must have been baptized in the same river...the River of FAIL.
Unemployment claim rise again unexpectedly:
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE65M2WK20100812
I didn't see that coming.
We are at a half mil now and at a 9 month high, and yes, it was unexpected:
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE67I2A020100819
Countdown for RM to be more upset with me about posting bad news rather than being upset about the state of the economy 3...2...1
I am not upset, but curious.
Your posting of anything negative about the economy is odd behavior to me. You seem to think it gives you points. Of course, I realize that it is your little effort to embarrass America because we voted for Obama.
Be the fragrance of the rose petal, not the prick on the stem.
Quote from: RecycleMichael on August 19, 2010, 09:24:10 AM
I am not upset, but curious.
Your posting of anything negative about the economy is odd behavior to me. You seem to think it gives you points. Of course, I realize that it is your little effort to embarrass America because we voted for Obama.
Be the fragrance of the rose petal, not the prick on the stem.
Huh..huh....he said....stem.
;D
Quote from: RecycleMichael on August 19, 2010, 09:24:10 AM
I am not upset, but curious.
Your posting of anything negative about the economy is odd behavior to me. You seem to think it gives you points. Of course, I realize that it is your little effort to embarrass America because we voted for Obama.
Be the fragrance of the rose petal, not the prick on the stem.
As I recall you had no trouble participating in running down the state of the economy when President Bush was still in office. You are also usually the first to cast GOP candidates in a bad light using cheap shots, one recent example was bringing up an alleged 12 year old affair Mary Fallin supposedly had.
Quote from: Conan71 on August 19, 2010, 10:49:39 AM
...12 year old affair Mary Fallin supposedly had.
Thanks for bringing this up again. I have been wanting a way to bring this up in conversations...
Quote from: RecycleMichael on August 19, 2010, 11:20:28 AM
Thanks for bringing this up again. I have been wanting a way to bring this up in conversations...
I've got pictures if a slide show would be an effective tool, just let me know...
Quote from: Conan71 on August 19, 2010, 11:28:35 AM
I've got pictures if a slide show would be an effective tool, just let me know...
Please, not if they include Fallin. I have sensitive eyes.
Quote from: Conan71 on August 19, 2010, 11:28:35 AM
I've got pictures...
You have pictures of Mary Fallin having an affair with her assigned state trooper while she was still married?
Quote from: RecycleMichael on August 19, 2010, 11:34:48 AM
You have pictures of Mary Fallin having an affair with her assigned state trooper while she was still married?
Yep, they are in the same album as the ones with Santa Claus having an affair with the Easter Bunny.
Quote from: Conan71 on August 19, 2010, 11:43:13 AM
Yep, they are in the same album as the ones with Santa Claus having an affair with the Easter Bunny.
Fanciful beastiality is wrong.
(http://trevmurphy.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/lineup_sm-300x180.jpg)
We have an "expected" alert!! Existing home sales fell 27% in July, but fortunately it was expected:
http://www.realtor.org/press_room/news_releases/2010/08/ehs_fall?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+creditwritedownsnews+%28Credit+Writedowns%27+News+Feed%29
Quote from: guido911 on August 24, 2010, 11:18:39 AM
We have an "expected" alert!! Existing home sales fell 27% in July, but fortunately it was expected:
http://www.realtor.org/press_room/news_releases/2010/08/ehs_fall?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+creditwritedownsnews+%28Credit+Writedowns%27+News+Feed%29
Quote"Consumers rationally jumped into the market before the deadline for the home buyer tax credit expired. Since May, after the deadline, contract signings have been notably lower and a pause period for home sales is likely to last through September," he said. "However, given the rock-bottom mortgage interest rates and historically high housing affordability conditions, the pace of a sales recovery could pick up quickly, provided the economy consistently adds jobs.
"Even with sales pausing for a few months, annual sales are expected to reach 5 million in 2010 because of healthy activity in the first half of the year. To place in perspective, annual sales averaged 4.9 million in the past 20 years, and 4.4 million over the past 30 years," Yun said.
Quote from: Townsend on August 24, 2010, 11:26:29 AM
I am hoping that part is right, because it is "expected" and all.
Quote from: guido911 on August 24, 2010, 11:28:20 AM
I am hoping that part is right, because it is "expected" and all.
Apparently we'll find out in a "few months".
Good news on employment. Jobless claims fell "sharply" last week. No news on whether it was expected or not.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100826/ap_on_bi_go_ec_fi/us_economy
(http://sas-origin.onstreammedia.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/6xgjxgzyxey_m7aup4ygxg.gif)
Rising at an aggressive pace now.
Under-employment rising too.
(http://sas-origin.onstreammedia.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/jlunr1d_wko1j2bys_e9ew.gif)
Buzzkiller. :D I heard that new unemployment filings were down last week.
Hurrah, Republican controlled house to the rescue with Tea Party Express lending a hand.
Amazing effect that had.
Quote from: Townsend on March 03, 2011, 05:11:26 PM
Hurrah, Republican controlled house to the rescue with Tea Party Express lending a hand.
Amazing effect that had.
How many months did/has Obama blamed Bush?
Well, it's certainly possible to look at non seasonally adjusted UE numbers if you want to..not real bright (unless you're intimately familiar with the seasonal nature of the unemployment numbers), but it's certainly possible.
Unemployment now down to 8.9%, which is a surprising improvement. The three month pace is the fastest drop in 28 years, and economists had projected that we'd be at 9.2%.
http://money.cnn.com/2011/03/04/news/economy/february_jobs_report/index.htm?hpt=T1&iref=BN1
Quote from: we vs us on March 04, 2011, 08:20:34 AM
Unemployment now down to 8.9%, which is a surprising improvement. The three month pace is the fastest drop in 28 years, and economists had projected that we'd be at 9.2%.
OK, now I can do the...Yay, Obama did it in spite of the republican controlled house and the tea party express trying to screw things up...yay. Finally cleaning up some of the previous administration's messes.
O-Bam-A
O-Bam-A
O-Bam-A
Edited to add:
http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2011/03/04/134258014/boehner-good-jobs-data-due-to-tax-cuts-not-obama-stimulus?ft=1&f=1001&sc=tw&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter (http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2011/03/04/134258014/boehner-good-jobs-data-due-to-tax-cuts-not-obama-stimulus?ft=1&f=1001&sc=tw&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter)
QuoteEconomists at the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office may credit the economic stimulus enacted by President Obama and the previous Congress for boosting economic growth and jobs through the end of last year (and presumably into this year.)
But Speaker John Boehner and the House GOP won their majority in part by arguing that the stimulus was a bust.
Because congressional Republicans view federal spending as the economy's main threat and tax cuts as the real stimulation for economic growth, Boehner credited the December deal to extend the Bush tax cuts for February's positive jobs data.
The U.S. Labor Department reported that the economy produced 192,000 jobs in February with the jobless rate falling to 8.9 percent, dropping below 9 percent for the first time since Spring 2009
If you're college educated, the unemployment rate is barely noticeable. If you've got a HS diploma or less, it's all around you.
(http://cr4re.com/charts/chart-images/UnemployedEducationFeb2011.jpg)
Apparently Alan Greenspan is no fan of dumpsters full of stimuli and more regulations. What he says explains a lot of the reasons companies have sat on cash and not been interested in significant hiring or growth. Granted, Greenspan is but one voice and from one school of thought. However, he understands human behavior and fear are the most relevant movers in this economy, not esoteric theory.
"Greenspan, as could be expected for a free market economist, takes a dim view of Obama administration economic policy. Everything from stimulus spending to the heavy issuance of treasury bonds to an overabundance of regulations to housing subsidies are combining to hold back the economic recovery."
"Greenspan believes a lot of private investment money is on the sidelines as businesses fear Obama administration policies will erode the return of any investment. This has a vicious cycle. Obama administration attempts to "fix the economy" makes private investors more skittish, which causes the economy to continue to be anemic, which causes the Obama administration to try to "fix the economy."
Scrub, rinse and repeat.
The solution implied by Greenspan's assessment would be for the federal government to stop trying to be so helpful. If private investors were no longer afraid of what the Obama administration is going to do, they would be more willing to invest money in new business ventures, then the economy would start to expand, hiring would pick up, and at last the current recession would be an unhappy memory."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ac/20110307/pl_ac/8011586_alan_greenspan_obama_economic_policy_slowing_recovery
Yes, Greenspan, the one whose easy money policies put us in the dumper is the guy we ought to listen to on how to get out. I'd read the article, but I'd need to take it with a grain of salt so large it would probably trigger a heart attack.
Greenspan - the one who promised 'enlightened self interest' as monetary policy would be good for the economy. Which is why we are here;
http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thelookout/20110223/ts_yblog_thelookout/separate-but-unequal-charts-show-growing-rich-poor-gap
Vapor lock.
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on March 08, 2011, 10:09:51 AM
Greenspan - the one who promised 'enlightened self interest' as monetary policy would be good for the economy. Which is why we are here;
http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thelookout/20110223/ts_yblog_thelookout/separate-but-unequal-charts-show-growing-rich-poor-gap
Vapor lock.
Again. . .Fannie Freddy bubble.
Again - AIG, Citibank, Lehmen Brothers (allowed to crash), financial bailout. All brought to you by 'you know who'. And for the clueless among us, no, it was not Obama.
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on March 08, 2011, 10:24:47 AM
Again - AIG, Citibank, Lehmen Brothers (allowed to crash), financial bailout. All brought to you by 'you know who'. And for the clueless among us, no, it was not Obama.
Chris Dodd and Bawney Fwank?
All the above!
That is exactly why I keep saying "Vote NO"! On any incumbent.
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on March 08, 2011, 11:51:54 AM
All the above!
That is exactly why I keep saying "Vote NO"! On any incumbent.
Well, I was thinking of supporting President Obama, but I think I'll take your recommendation instead. ;)
Exactly! Obama, too.
And even closer to home and much more important - Inhofe.
Coburn is self limiting as he promised.
9.1% Unemployment.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/job-growth-slows-to-54000-in-may-rate-up-to-91-2011-06-03
Welcome to recovery summer...
Quote from: guido911 on June 03, 2011, 01:25:47 PM
9.1% Unemployment.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/job-growth-slows-to-54000-in-may-rate-up-to-91-2011-06-03
Welcome to recovery summer...
Wow! So if not for the McDonalds mass hire of 50,000, we would have only had 4000 new jobs created in May? ;)
Change you can believe in!
Economists have been predicting this static situation so why is this thread worthy?
Scapegoating for Shrub's follies won't help. Anyone who pays attention knows the unemployment situation is not going to change quickly unless:
1) a new "big development" i.e. green energy technology OR some other big advancement ...
2) There's 2 trillion dollah in infrastructure demand, lousy money velocity, and ugly political games. Print more money and reinflate the economy. Get money moving instead of hoarding (which may mean getting rid of fear by censoring Boortz, Hannity, Beck, Limbaugh, and FOX all of whom seem to be compounding the angst by propagating their political agenda).
Quote from: guido911 on June 03, 2011, 01:25:47 PM
9.1% Unemployment.
Didn't we have 9.6% unemployment the second year of the Reagan presidency?
Quote from: Teatownclown on June 03, 2011, 01:48:38 PM
Economists have been predicting this static situation so why is this thread worthy?
Scapegoating for Shrub's follies won't help. Anyone who pays attention knows the unemployment situation is not going to change quickly unless:
1) a new "big development" i.e. green energy technology OR some other big advancement ...
2) There's 2 trillion dollah in infrastructure demand, lousy money velocity, and ugly political games. Print more money and reinflate the economy. Get money moving instead of hoarding (which may mean getting rid of fear by censoring Boortz, Hannity, Beck, Limbaugh, and FOX all of whom seem to be compounding the angst by propagating their political agenda).
Uh, economists were predicting an uptick of 125,000 jobs in May according to the article posted.
President Obama had promised he would mitigate unemployment. He's going nowhere with it. Nearly 2 1/2 years after the Bush Administration left, all the lefties with their failed policies can do is continue to blame the Bush administration. Next joblessness will start growing again because the mean old GOP refused to raise the debt ceiling. Now you are advocating the Fairness Doctrine as some way to mute the opposition to these failed policies? That's really rich.
Liberals don't understand how the private sector creates jobs outside of trying to protect unions. And the unions have made a nice contribution to the Chinese economy by helping to make manufacturing in the United States too expensive of a proposition. Nope all the liberal mindset comprehends is more government to create more jobs and more intervention in our lives which also stifles growth of public sector business.
I read what economists say will happen 6 months out and further. I pay no attention to these short term periods.
The hypocrisy of Republicans in dealing with the debt they created and blamed on someone else. Now as the logjam continues we are confronted with more of that hypocrisy. You see, these hypocrites simply cannot accept a balanced approach to debt reductions. They want to balance the budget on the backs of workers, children, the poor, and seniors.
These are people that staple teabags to their hats and get really MAD if you call them TeaBaggers. People who lecture US on the Constitution while misquoting it. Trouble is defaulting on your credit and getting a friendly visit from Louie and his boys. Only in this case, it would be the Chinese and the Arabs.
Quote from: Teatownclown on June 03, 2011, 02:23:55 PM
I read what economists say will happen 6 months out and further. I pay no attention to these short term periods.
The hypocrisy of Republicans in dealing with the debt they created helped create and blamed on someone else. Now as the logjam continues we are confronted with more of that hypocrisy. You see, these hypocrites simply cannot accept a balanced approach to debt reductions. They want to balance the budget on the backs of workers, children, the poor, and seniors.
These are people that staple teabags to their hats and get really MAD if you call them TeaBaggers. People who lecture US on the Constitution while misquoting it. Trouble is defaulting on your credit and getting a friendly visit from Louie and his boys. Only in this case, it would be the Chinese and the Arabs.
Factual correction.
Even if we raise the debt ceiling to borrow more money to pay on previously borrowed money, at some point the ponzi scheme will end. Our creditors will eventually call in our debt and we will be royally screwed.
Raising the ceiling is the pussy way out and solves nothing other than putting off the inevitable for awhile longer. Asking everyone to sacrifice something should not be so freaking hard to come up with across the board budget cuts and tax increases. Instead it's a game to protect each party's sacred interests while trying to bring down the sacred interests of the other party.
Raising the ceiling is not a permanent solution and is not a good temporary fix either.
Quote from: Conan71 on June 03, 2011, 02:28:42 PM
Factual correction.
Even if we raise the debt ceiling to borrow more money to pay on previously borrowed money, at some point the ponzi scheme will end. Our creditors will eventually call in our debt and we will be royally screwed.
Raising the ceiling is the pussy way out and solves nothing other than putting off the inevitable for awhile longer. Asking everyone to sacrifice something should not be so freaking hard to come up with across the board budget cuts and tax increases. Instead it's a game to protect each party's sacred interests while trying to bring down the sacred interests of the other party.
Raising the ceiling is not a permanent solution and is not a good temporary fix either.
You're hopeless with pussy ranting.....surprising you stoop so low. :)
What happened in the 1960's ? Why didn't we have opposition to raising the debt ceiling in the past? Partisan hacks with no patriotism grabbing for straws on their stick ponies trying to derail our leadership....such hypocrites with nothing to lose. Upside down and inside out...it's all a false alarm to the uneducated far side of the GOP.
Quote from: Conan71 on June 03, 2011, 02:17:42 PM
Uh, economists were predicting an uptick of 125,000 jobs in May according to the article posted.
President Obama had promised he would mitigate unemployment. He's going nowhere with it. Nearly 2 1/2 years after the Bush Administration left, all the lefties with their failed policies can do is continue to blame the Bush administration. Next joblessness will start growing again because the mean old GOP refused to raise the debt ceiling. Now you are advocating the Fairness Doctrine as some way to mute the opposition to these failed policies? That's really rich.
Liberals don't understand how the private sector creates jobs outside of trying to protect unions. And the unions have made a nice contribution to the Chinese economy by helping to make manufacturing in the United States too expensive of a proposition. Nope all the liberal mindset comprehends is more government to create more jobs and more intervention in our lives which also stifles growth of public sector business.
More to the point! http://www.pensitoreview.com/2011/06/03/republican-path-to-victory-in-2012-take-down-the-economy/
Republican Path to Victory in 2012: Take Down the Economy
"Republicans don't want the economy to recover. What else have they got?"
More unexpected headlines today, but that's not the interesting part.
President Obama's senior political adviser David Plouffe's comments are. When asked whether rising unemployment will affect President Obama's 2012 campaign bid he answered with some disregard:
(http://www.dailypolitical.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/david-plouffe-300x210.jpg)
"People won't vote based on the unemployment rate, they're going to vote based on: 'How do I feel about my own situation?"
So, basically it sounds like we are in for another emotion-centric campaign with no focus on the issues. . .again!
Not sure how much longer this country can run on Hope alone?
Okay, I'll say it. We had higher unemployment under Reagan. There. Can we move on now?
Quote from: guido911 on July 08, 2011, 01:15:37 PM
Okay, I'll say it. We had higher unemployment under Reagan. There. Can we move on now?
Yeah, but didn't he do something about it?
::)
Quote from: Gaspar on July 08, 2011, 01:23:36 PM
Yeah, but didn't he do something about it?
::)
NO! Oh wait, YES. I was channeling my inner RM earlier.
Quote from: Gaspar on July 08, 2011, 01:23:36 PM
Yeah, but didn't he do something about it?
::)
How cooperative were the members of congress with Reagan? I'm asking. I don't remember.
I'm sure more could be done with a bit less grand standing on either side of the aisle or branch.
Quote from: Townsend on July 08, 2011, 01:38:49 PM
How cooperative were the members of congress with Reagan? I'm asking. I don't remember.
I'm sure more could be done with a bit less grand standing on either side of the aisle or branch.
Tip O'Neal was speaker and he actually had a very good relationship with Reagan. They fought like cats and dogs, but at the end of the day they remained friendly. At the time the Dems had old Phil Gramm as the leader of what was called the "Boll Weevil" alliance. This was a group of Conservative Southern Democrats who believed that private sector growth was the key to stimulating the economy and therefore were in agreement with Reagan's philosophy of fueling the economic engine.
Both Republicans and Democrats celebrated Reagan's success, with the exception of many on the ultra-left that ultimately filled the leadership vacuume in the Democrat party producing the philosophy we have today.
Upset with the direction of the democratic leadership towards a more socialist government model, Phil Gramm became a Republican, and has been since 1983.
Quote from: Gaspar on July 08, 2011, 02:02:50 PM
Tip O'Neal was speaker and he actually had a very good relationship with Reagan. They fought like cats and dogs, but at the end of the day they remained friendly. At the time the Dems had old Phil Gramm as the leader of what was called the "Boll Weevil" alliance. This was a group of Conservative Southern Democrats who believed that private sector growth was the key to stimulating the economy and therefore were in agreement with Reagan's philosophy of fueling the economic engine.
Both Republicans and Democrats celebrated Reagan's success
Sounds like it'd help if everyone would rally 'round the president then.
If it worked before it could work again.
Quote from: Townsend on July 08, 2011, 02:10:22 PM
Sounds like it'd help if everyone would rally 'round the president then.
If it worked before it could work again.
I think they would if the President embraces any of a number of solutions that will:
1. Cut spending dramatically
2. Stimulate the economic engine.
3. Do no harm to the fragile economic growth we have.
In an interview today, Herman Cain put it very well, "Small business is the engine of the train. We need to add fuel to the engine and stop adding cars to the train." You go pizza man!
Quote from: Gaspar on July 08, 2011, 02:16:42 PM
I think they would if the President embraces any of a number of solutions that will:
1. Cut spending dramatically
2. Stimulate the economic engine.
3. Do no harm to the fragile economic growth we have.
In an interview today, Herman Cain put it very well, "Small business is the engine of the train. We need to add fuel to the engine and stop adding cars to the train." You go pizza man!
They won't in any case. It'd be harmful for them politically. "damn the torpedos"
Quote from: Townsend on July 08, 2011, 02:19:44 PM
They won't in any case. It'd be harmful for them politically. "damn the torpedos"
No, it wouldn't.
They aren't facing any political pressure. They simply have to make difficult choices. The can has been kicked as far as they are willing to let it go. The pressure is now on the administration, and it seems from the president's most recent comments that he is willing to entertain some of the options that were "off limits" just a few months ago. His most recent comments indicate that meaningful cuts will be discussed.
I am very hopeful. A victory in the direction of reason will be a victory for both sides.
QuoteNo, it wouldn't.
They aren't facing any political pressure.
(Spit take)
QuoteThey simply have to make difficult choices. The can has been kicked as far as they are willing to let it go. The pressure is now on the administration, and it seems from the president's most recent comments that he is willing to entertain some of the options that were "off limits" just a few months ago.
Apparently, per NPR, the same can be said of the other side. Maybe there will be room to move however, they'll claw and spit all the way so the unwashed masses will believe they fought tooth and nail for them.
QuoteI am very hopeful. A victory in the direction of reason will be a victory for both sides.
I'll leave that one.
Interestingly enough, within the debate and coverage to follow you will hear another new term "Revenue Positive Measures." It turns out that the focus groups frowned on the administrations most recent term "Spending Offsets."
The spending train is about to hit the wall, and at this point new taxes will cause a backlash that the economy cannot absorb. There are only two choices.
1. Fix the problem.
2. Kick the can.
The republicans, at least for now, are unwilling to kick the can. That may indeed change to some extent with negotiation and compromise, but the President has little wiggle room, and an increasing number of Americans now realize that. So there is this mad struggle (as usual) to change terminology, and alter measurement criteria. I just don't think that redefining the problem is going to work for President Obama this time.
Who precisely are the unwashed masses T that you are referring to?
Quote from: Gaspar on July 08, 2011, 02:57:18 PM
That may indeed change to some extent with negotiation and compromise, but the President has little wiggle room, and an increasing number of Americans now realize that.
Once the ceiling is raised that increasing number of Americans will go on washing their cars and bitching about their chosen sports team.
The "they" will think of something else to rile us up about and use that for the next soap box.
I'm hoping something good can come out of this but it won't. The 24 cycle will get bored and the next generation of politicians will take up another cause.
Quote from: guido911 on July 08, 2011, 02:58:57 PM
Who precisely are the unwashed masses T that you are referring to?
I was wondering when your pain killer fog would lift a little.
I expect nothing of consequence from you.
Quote from: Townsend on July 08, 2011, 03:04:41 PM
I was wondering when your pain killer fog would lift a little.
I expect nothing of consequence from you.
Ah, wattah matta, can't answer the question? Because as I understand the definition of "unwashed masses" or the "great unwashed", they are the uneducated and uninformed.
Quote from: guido911 on July 08, 2011, 03:07:28 PM
as I understand the definition of "unwashed masses" or the "great unwashed", they are the uneducated and uninformed.
Have you seen Palin audiences or the people waiting in line to get into the Anthony trial?
Quote from: Townsend on July 08, 2011, 03:12:00 PM
Have you seen Palin audiences or the people waiting in line to get into the Anthony trial?
Were they fainting?
Quote from: Gaspar on July 08, 2011, 03:15:36 PM
Were they fainting?
Only after the verdict. Those are perfect people for the "they" to rile.
Quote from: Townsend on July 08, 2011, 03:12:00 PM
Have you seen Palin audiences or the people waiting in line to get into the Anthony trial?
Yes, and I have seen/heard people like this too.
But oh, they aren't the great unwashed.
Oh good, more videos.
Quote from: Townsend on July 08, 2011, 03:19:43 PM
Oh good, more videos evidence of your dooshy hypocrisy.
fify.
Anyway, nice talking to you Gaspar.
Sorry the thread crapper had to jump in here and waste our time.
Clean up on aisle 9. Someone's got Guido's head squeezin's all over the place.
Quote from: Townsend on July 08, 2011, 03:23:29 PM
Anyway, nice talking to you Gaspar.
Sorry the thread crapper had to jump in here and waste our time.
Clean up on aisle 9. Someone's got Guido's head squeezin's all over the place.
As usual, taking his ball and going home. Par for the course, quitter.
Back O/T. I read earlier about Plouffe's opinion on the importance of the unemployment rate. Looks like that position will be what Obama campaign message may be since Carney is parroting Plouffe.
Quote from: guido911 on July 08, 2011, 03:26:30 PM
As usual, taking his ball and going home. Par for the course, quitter.
Would you want to talk to Veruca Salt? I'm waiting for you to blow up into a giant blueberry and be rolled away.
Self loving, bitchy little girl.
Try again later.
Quote from: Townsend on July 08, 2011, 03:29:54 PM
Would you want to talk to Veruca Salt? I'm waiting for you to blow up into a giant blueberry and be rolled away.
Self loving, bitchy little girl.
Try again later.
And I'm waiting to learn whether your Obama knee-pads have been surgically implanted.
O/T a bit. Does anyone know whatever happened to that Julio guy in the first video and Henrietta Hughes, two struggling people that spoke to Obama? I know Hughes, who was apparently homeless, had gotten housing. And what about the non-worrying about paying her mortgage woman? These were people symbolic of Obama's message and I'm just curious.
As for the unemployment rate increase, why is this happening? I do not want to demagogue this issue. But increasing unemployment is worrisome to me.
Quote from: guido911 on July 08, 2011, 03:31:23 PM
And I'm waiting to learn whether your Obama knee-pads have been surgically implanted.
There's a perfect example.
You just come into a thread where others are having a conversation and crap. You are a stop, squat, and crapper on the Forum.
We might as well change your nickname to crapper.
Being an anus to anyone you don't agree with is no way to go through life Julie.
Quote from: guido911 on July 08, 2011, 01:25:27 PM
NO! Oh wait, YES. I was channeling my inner RM earlier.
I would take a bath if I were you.
Quote from: RecycleMichael on July 08, 2011, 03:42:59 PM
I would take a bath if I were you.
Careful what he gets on you.
Quote from: Townsend on July 08, 2011, 03:36:29 PM
There's a perfect example.
You just come into a thread where others are having a conversation and crap. You are a stop, squat, and crapper on the Forum.
We might as well change your nickname to crapper.
Being an anus to anyone you don't agree with is no way to go through life Julie.
No, you run down those who have a different view of political issues by calling them "unwashed masses". You get called on it, and then start the flame war. Try not being such a damned smart@ss all the time and perhaps meaningful conversations can continue. Here was my damnable question I posed that resulted in your PDS:
QuoteWho precisely are the unwashed masses T that you are referring to?
Now, was that inflammatory or crapping on this thread? No. Here was your response:
QuoteI was wondering when your pain killer fog would lift a little.
I expect nothing of consequence from you.
Now get off your freakin high horse. You started this.
Quote from: RecycleMichael on July 08, 2011, 03:42:59 PM
I would take a bath if I were you.
Naw, a gentle ribbing is a good thing. I can take it too.
You were looking for a fight.
You crap on threads.
Now you're crying about it.
Pitiful.
You take away from the experience everyone could have on here.
If one of us decides we don't want to put up with you you accuse us of running away.
Then we point out how bad you are for this forum and you back up.
All you do is go after people on here. It harms the forum and we lose contributors because of you.
Quote from: guido911 on July 08, 2011, 03:35:47 PM
O/T a bit. Does anyone know whatever happened to that Julio guy in the first video and Henrietta Hughes, two struggling people that spoke to Obama? I know Hughes, who was apparently homeless, had gotten housing. And what about the non-worrying about paying her mortgage woman? These were people symbolic of Obama's message and I'm just curious.
She was never homeless. Turns out she signed over the deed to her primary home to her son Cory in 2006 so that she could maintain her SSDI welfare benefits at the same level because ownership of the property would reduce her government check.
(http://www.televisioninternet.com/news/pictures/henrietta-hughes-obama-video.jpg)
After her appearance a local Democrat politician supposedly gave her a house, but I'm not sure if she kept it, it's not on the books.
According to local records, it turns out that she was a bit of a scam artiest. She lives on SSDI, yet she is quite the property investor.
6/18/01 – Henrietta and Corey Hughes purchases Lot 18 and 19, Block 35 of Lehigh Acres
8/17/01 – Henrietta and Corey Hughes purchases Lot 22, Block 35 of Lehigh Acres
10/29/01 – Henrietta and Corey Hughes receives building permit for Lot 19, Block 35 of Lehigh Acres. The builder is Holiday Builders of Cape Coral, Florida
10/29/01 – Henrietta and Corey Hughes secures mortgage financing from Riverside Bank of The Gulf Coast, Cape Coral, Florida in the amount of $124,400.00
7/15/03 – Forclosure filed by Riverside Bank of the Gulf Coast on Lot 19, Block 35 Lehigh Acres in an amount of slightly over $123,600.00 but she satisfies the lean in October and is granted ownership of her home again.
6/30/05 – Lot 22, Block 35 of Lehigh Acres sold to Homeland, LLC.
8/9/06 – Quit claim deed signed by Henrietta Hughes to Corey Hughes for Lot 18, Block 35 of Lehigh Acres.
She originally owned 3 lots, #18, #19 and #22.
Number #22 was sold in 2005 to Homeland, LLC in June, 2005 and #18 was transferred to her son, Corey Lamont, on 8/9/06. She remained in this property with her name no longer on any deed, and was eligible for SSDI benifits at the highest rate.
She is like a freekin welfare Yoda.
And that's the shame of it all, Gasman. I never knew Hughes was basically a fraud. As for the unemployment rate, are there any 99ers in here or does anyone know someone that has been unemployment for any extended period of time? I want to know how they get by and what the job market is looking for.
QuoteThe only way for Obama to stimulate the enormous private sector job growth needed to ensure Obama's reelection is for Obama to announce he is not running for reelection, which would unleash a wave of investment and economic activity not seen since the Great Depression.
http://legalinsurrection.com/2011/07/obamas-catch-2012/w
tee hee ;)
Hmm, I haven't heard many people refer to Social Security as welfare before. Normally, I wouldn't bother to point this out, but I know Gaspar likes to use the word as an epithet.
Quote from: Townsend on July 08, 2011, 04:00:33 PM
You take away from the experience everyone could have on here.
If one of us decides we don't want to put up with you you accuse us of running away.
Then we point out how bad you are for this forum and you back up.
All you do is go after people on here. It harms the forum and we lose contributors because of you.
Let me grab you a beach towel......
Quote from: nathanm on July 09, 2011, 01:21:00 AM
Hmm, I haven't heard many people refer to Social Security as welfare before. Normally, I wouldn't bother to point this out, but I know Gaspar likes to use the word as an epithet.
SSDI=Disability insurance benefits.
She is disabled and unable to work. This leaves her free to do real estate speculation and travel the country to democratic rallies.
The guy down the hall from me is a double amputee (diabetes). He gets here at about the same time I do in the morning (7:00am), puts in a full day of work and goes home after 5pm. Part of his salary goes to pay for this welfare hag.
It is what it is!
You don't understand how SSDI works, do you?
Quote from: nathanm on July 11, 2011, 07:51:47 AM
You don't understand how SSDI works, do you?
Here's a FYI.
QuoteSocial Security Disability Insurance pays benefits to you and certain members of your family if you are "insured," meaning that you worked long enough and paid Social Security taxes.
http://www.ssa.gov/disability/
Nate, please address Gaspar's point now that I have educated him (which of course I didn't since his understanding is fairly close to the quoted passage).
Yeah, you proved my point. You have to earn the benefit, so calling it welfare is completely stupid.
Quote from: nathanm on July 11, 2011, 06:29:34 PM
Yeah, you proved my point. You have to earn the benefit, so calling it welfare is completely stupid.
I don't think its stupid at all. It's his opinion. And in that woman's case, according to Gaspar and some stories I have read, she made an end run of the SSDI qualification rules by transferring a significant asset by quit claim so she could paint herself as poor in order to game the system. That to me is the welfare mentality and why I have no problem with Gaspar's characterization.
Here's a source supportive of Gaspar's point.
http://elmoq.blogspot.com/2009/02/henrietta-hughes-is-just-another-obama.html
My only problem is the nexus between SSDI and the value of the property she quit claimed. As I understand SSDI, it doesn't matter if you are wealthy or not to qualify (income/wealth could impact the amount of the benefit--too lazy to look it up). Now if she was on SSI, which some internet sources indicate, that program is need based:
QuoteSupplemental Security Income pays benefits based on financial need.
My source above. So is medicaid.
Quote from: guido911 on July 11, 2011, 07:34:31 PM
That to me is the welfare mentality and why I have no problem with Gaspar's characterization.
Sigh.
So, if she gamed the system - she gets $1,000 per month or $12,000 per year on average (average SDDI from Social Security website). What a crime - yeah, it IS a very small shame.
Especially when compared to the CEO of Abercrombie and Fitch gaming the system to the tune of over $35 million per year - a mere $3 million per month. As is done millions of other times in this country by many of the 1%'ers. Hence the fact that those richest 1%ers pay on average under 18% taxes while the rest of us get to pay 20% and more. This is the very large shame.
What mentality does that represent?? Welfare, definitely. Corporate Welfare of the most egregious type. Just what the Republicontin's ordered from their paid lackeys in Congress.
*Sigh* is right. There is not hope wevsus. They just can't see the hypocrisy and the injustice due to the blinding by The Right. (And that most definitely is NOT the correct - it IS The Right.)
Quote from: we vs us on July 11, 2011, 09:40:55 PM
Sigh.
Where's the sin in pointing out that people are ripping off our government? Sigh? You understand/excuse that sort of behavior at the taxpayers expense?
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on July 11, 2011, 09:44:11 PM
So, if she gamed the system - she gets $1,000 per month or $12,000 per year on average (average SDDI from Social Security website). What a crime - yeah, it IS a very small shame.
Especially when compared to the CEO of Abercrombie and Fitch gaming the system to the tune of over $35 million per year - a mere $3 million per month. As is done millions of other times in this country by many of the 1%'ers. Hence the fact that those richest 1%ers pay on average under 18% taxes while the rest of us get to pay 20% and more. This is the very large shame.
What mentality does that represent?? Welfare, definitely. Corporate Welfare of the most egregious type. Just what the Republicontin's ordered from their paid lackeys in Congress.
And here we go.
(http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSYqOIpIlr6Nzu6GZalhtRE7fee-LVCwcUUxsl3mg6_2rEmz0Y8TA)
Are you PWI?
Quote from: guido911 on July 11, 2011, 10:47:48 PM
Where's the sin in pointing out that people are ripping off our government? Sigh? You understand/excuse that sort of behavior at the taxpayers expense?
Perhaps we should focus our rage on the investment bankers who ripped us off to the tune of a few hundred billion dollars. It's more fun to focus on the petty stuff, though.
I'll only say one thing and be gone. Go to the building downtown where food stamps, LIHEAP, unemployment, etc. are processed. Wait in line to talk to a SS employee out east. First make note of the parking lot and its auto salvage appearance. Be witness to the level of humanity displayed. Your remarks may then be received with some credibility. Be prepared for people to stare at you because you cannot hide your station in life no matter how hard you try. They will treat you with more dignity than you have referred to them.
Quote from: AquaMan on July 12, 2011, 07:19:18 AM
I'll only say one thing and be gone. Go to the building downtown where food stamps, LIHEAP, unemployment, etc. are processed. Wait in line to talk to a SS employee out east. First make note of the parking lot and its auto salvage appearance. Be witness to the level of humanity displayed. Your remarks may then be received with some credibility. Be prepared for people to stare at you because you cannot hide your station in life no matter how hard you try. They will treat you with more dignity than you have referred to them.
Post of the year
Quote from: AquaMan on July 12, 2011, 07:19:18 AM
I'll only say one thing and be gone. Go to the building downtown where food stamps, LIHEAP, unemployment, etc. are processed. Wait in line to talk to a SS employee out east. First make note of the parking lot and its auto salvage appearance. Be witness to the level of humanity displayed. Your remarks may then be received with some credibility. Be prepared for people to stare at you because you cannot hide your station in life no matter how hard you try. They will treat you with more dignity than you have referred to them.
+1
We should expect a picture or video in order to change the subject any time now.
Well put AquaMan.
Quote from: AquaMan on July 12, 2011, 07:19:18 AM
I'll only say one thing and be gone. Go to the building downtown where food stamps, LIHEAP, unemployment, etc. are processed. Wait in line to talk to a SS employee out east. First make note of the parking lot and its auto salvage appearance. Be witness to the level of humanity displayed. Your remarks may then be received with some credibility. Be prepared for people to stare at you because you cannot hide your station in life no matter how hard you try. They will treat you with more dignity than you have referred to them.
This is about people who are documented thieves of the U.S. Treasury. Sheesh, get off your high horse. As for downtown, don't need to go to see anything. Go to a third world country like I have multiple times and roll up your sleeves if you care to help the truly needy. In this country, I am not at all interested in helping ANYONE rip off the taxpayers. Apparently, you are.
Quote from: guido911 on July 12, 2011, 01:03:18 PM
This is about people who are documented thieves of the U.S. Treasury. Sheesh, get off your high horse. As for downtown, don't need to go to see anything. Go to a third world country like I have multiple times and roll up your sleeves if you care to help the truly needy. In this country, I am not at all interested in helping ANYONE rip off the taxpayers. Apparently, you are.
It's time for you to be tasered....not once but twice! 8)
Quote from: nathanm on July 12, 2011, 12:09:15 AM
Perhaps we should focus our rage on the investment bankers who ripped us off to the tune of a few hundred billion dollars. It's more fun to focus on the petty stuff, though.
More strawmen. If you want to talk about investment bankers, let's have that discussion over in another thread (maybe like this discussion). But for now, tell you what Nate, please list for all of us crimes you think are too "petty" to either point out that are occurring or that we should not enforce. There is little doubt that welfare fraud is widespread and costs millions of dollars. Here's one story I found googling "welfare fraud cost."
QuoteWelfare recipients and their friends and relatives could be defrauding taxpayers of $500 million a year through the county's child-care programs, a grand jury report concludes.
According to the report, released Thursday, some county employees estimate that half of the $1.1 billion in funding for the CalWORKs program is lost to fraud because the Department of Public Social Services doesn't verify that welfare-to-work recipients meet the requirements for child-care payments.
http://articles.latimes.com/2006/jul/01/local/me-welfare1
I wonder how many of those types are in those downtown "pity the poor" lines Aquaman was crying over. It really chaps me when people that know absolutely nothing about me and my family's work with the truly poor try to paint me with such a brush of stupidity. Instead of looking at the poor standing in line and fretting, get your damned hands dirty and do something about it.
Quote from: guido911 on July 12, 2011, 01:03:18 PM
This is about people who are documented thieves of the U.S. Treasury. Sheesh, get off your high horse. As for downtown, don't need to go to see anything. Go to a third world country like I have multiple times and roll up your sleeves if you care to help the truly needy. In this country, I am not at all interested in helping ANYONE rip off the taxpayers. Apparently, you are.
So just how high is your horse?
Quote from: Hoss on July 12, 2011, 01:30:42 PM
So just how high is your horse?
Now he didn't say he helped. Just that he was in a third world country.
No horse.
I don't know what to say. I had hoped to make an observation and leave, but I feel personally assaulted by someone who has a keen interest in high horses. Perhaps he owns a low horse and has some sort of high horse envy. :)
I'm glad to see that there are posters who know what I was trying to say. Interesting Guido that you thought I was referring to you alone. Take much psych in college?
Anyway, I've said this before and I believe it to be true. America is a country of liars, cheats, chiselers and thieves. We pride ourselves on that, we celebrate these traits. We like winning, period. People hire lawyers to successfully use these traits and I'm pretty sure they ain't morally pristine lawyers. BACHMAN ALERT: The folks who threw crates of East India tea into Boston Harbor were businessmen dressed up as INDIANS! They were using the contemporary racist feelings of the time to hide their true motivations.
So, it is no surprise to me that these traits run the gamut demographically from the top of our society to the bottom. To be so incensed that some indigent folks follow the lead of their contemporaries outside their class without understanding this is, well, disingenuous to say the least. Hypocritical even.
One of my professors seemed amused when it was brought up in a class discussion of "welfare queens" way, way back. It was pointed out that so many poor people seemed to spend their money on color tv's and Cadillacs while their homes were small and poorly maintained. "Wouldn't you?", he asked. "They want the same things you do, see the same world you do on tv, and are motivated by the same advertisements. When they get money they consume like the rest of us."
How about cutting funds to the "welfare states" (those that receive more federal dollars than they pay in taxes, that are typically Red states) down to the amount they pay into the federal government? Enough with enabling these true welfare queens whose socialism makes way for paving their roads, for subsidizing their water and their power and communication grids, for funding their school systems, for paying them not to grow food .... the list goes on.
Quote from: guido911 on July 12, 2011, 01:03:18 PM
This is about people who are documented thieves of the U.S. Treasury. Sheesh, get off your high horse. As for downtown, don't need to go to see anything. Go to a third world country like I have multiple times and roll up your sleeves if you care to help the truly needy. In this country, I am not at all interested in helping ANYONE rip off the taxpayers. Apparently, you are.
Oh, I don't want anyone ripping off the treasury, but I'd rather go after the ones who ripped us off for billions first.
Quote from: AquaMan on July 12, 2011, 02:57:57 PM
Anyway, I've said this before and I believe it to be true. America is a country of liars, cheats, chiselers and thieves. We pride ourselves on that, we celebrate these traits. We like winning, period. People hire lawyers to successfully use these traits and I'm pretty sure they ain't morally pristine lawyers. BACHMAN ALERT: The folks who threw crates of East India tea into Boston Harbor were businessmen dressed up as INDIANS! They were using the contemporary racist feelings of the time to hide their true motivations.
That's a sad vision of America you have and one I do not share.
We are the brightest, most creative people in the world. The quality of life for even our poorest is far better than most countries. We respect and believe in our fellow man. We honor liberty and freedom above all other concepts and are willing to share that philosophy with the world through our example.
In our very short existence we gave the world so many gifts. We demonstrated that the free enterprise of men is far more powerful motivator than the force of governments on subjects. We advanced science, technology and medicine further than it had come over the past 5,000 years.
Celebrate the liberty that we enjoy, and recognize that we are a country of innovators, romantics, philanthropists and geniuses. But be aware that it can only last for a limited time. We will eventually vote ourselves back into the dark. Tyrants will rise again by convincing you that without them you will starve. They will have the audacity to buy your vote with the hope that they alone can ensure your welfare. You will beg for their chains.
The ideal tyranny is that which is ignorantly self-administered by its victims. The most perfect slaves are, therefore, those which blissfully and unawaredly enslave themselves. – Dresden James
Quote from: Gaspar on July 12, 2011, 03:36:19 PM
That's a sad vision of America you have and one I do not share.
Only because you are deliberately blind to the theft that those in high finance are perpetrating from you every single day. You have this strange belief that only the government can steal from you.
Quote from: nathanm on July 12, 2011, 03:41:41 PM
Only because you are deliberately blind to the theft that those in high finance are perpetrating from you every single day. You have this strange belief that only the government can steal from you.
No, they are just the best at it.
Quote from: Gaspar on July 12, 2011, 03:48:41 PM
No, they are just the best at it.
Funny, I thought putting a gun to Bush's head and saying "we need a couple of trillion dollars" was a bigger theft than just about any in history. Goldman literally did this with AIG, which cost us what, $200 billion in one whack?
Read some books, friend.
Quote from: Gaspar on July 12, 2011, 03:36:19 PM
That's a sad vision of America you have and one I do not share.
We are the brightest, most creative people in the world. The quality of life for even our poorest is far better than most countries. We respect and believe in our fellow man. We honor liberty and freedom above all other concepts and are willing to share that philosophy with the world through our example.
In our very short existence we gave the world so many gifts. We demonstrated that the free enterprise of men is far more powerful motivator than the force of governments on subjects. We advanced science, technology and medicine further than it had come over the past 5,000 years.
Celebrate the liberty that we enjoy, and recognize that we are a country of innovators, romantics, philanthropists and geniuses. But be aware that it can only last for a limited time. We will eventually vote ourselves back into the dark. Tyrants will rise again by convincing you that without them you will starve. They will have the audacity to buy your vote with the hope that they alone can ensure your welfare. You will beg for their chains.
The ideal tyranny is that which is ignorantly self-administered by its victims. The most perfect slaves are, therefore, those which blissfully and unawaredly enslave themselves. – Dresden James
Everything you say is quite true AND so is what I said. They are not mutually exclusive.
Disregarding the pompous, chauvinist nature of your post, what is left is that you buy into the fictional creations that are driving our politics right now. The fiction that we are a capitalist country. The fiction that the poor deserve there misery and should just pull themselves up. The damaging fiction that the wealthy are job creators that must have their taxes reduced and never raised again. The fiction that everyone else fits my adjectives, but not the reader. Fictions that are being created every day by politicians simply for electability with no regard for their consequences.
We are a great country, but not the only one and our greatness has been borne on the backs of many different classes and races. It is not a sad vision, it is a vision based on reality.
Quote from: nathanm on July 12, 2011, 03:55:57 PM
Funny, I thought putting a gun to Bush's head and saying "we need a couple of trillion dollars" was a bigger theft than just about any in history. Goldman literally did this with AIG, which cost us what, $200 billion in one whack?
Read some books, friend.
I am always in the market for a good book my friend. I read far less than I should. Do you have any you would suggest?
The harm done by ordinary criminals, murderers, gangsters, and thieves is negligible in comparison with the agony inflicted upon human beings by the professional do-gooders, who attempt to set themselves up as gods on earth and who would ruthlessly force their views on all others – with the abiding assurance that the end justifies the means. – Henry Grady Weaver, The Mainspring of Human Progress
Quote from: AquaMan on July 12, 2011, 04:04:09 PM
Everything you say is quite true AND so is what I said. They are not mutually exclusive.
Disregarding the pompous, chauvinist nature of your post, what is left is that you buy into the fictional creations that are driving our politics right now. The fiction that we are a capitalist country. The fiction that the poor deserve there misery and should just pull themselves up. The damaging fiction that the wealthy are job creators that must have their taxes reduced and never raised again. The fiction that everyone else fits my adjectives, but not the reader. Fictions that are being created every day by politicians simply for electability with no regard for their consequences.
We are a great country, but not the only one and our greatness has been borne on the backs of many different classes and races. It is not a sad vision, it is a vision based on reality.
I had no idea I was a pompous chauvinist. You have humbled me. I just feel sad for your view of my fellow countrymen. What would it take to improve your impression of the American people?
Quote from: Gaspar on July 12, 2011, 04:08:53 PM
I am always in the market for a good book my friend. I read far less than I should. Do you have any you would suggest?
All the Devils are Here is a pretty good one. I haven't finished it, but 13 Bankers also appears to be pretty good. Matt Taibbi's most recent book, Griftopia has a wealth of facts if you can get past the perspective it's selling very hard in the first couple of chapters. It gets better in the middle. Taibbi managed to get interviews with a few people whose perspectives aren't detailed anywhere else I've seen, otherwise I'd throw it on the trash pile.
All of these are available in both electronic and paper form from the library.
Quote from: nathanm on July 12, 2011, 04:30:01 PM
All the Devils are Here is a pretty good one. I haven't finished it, but 13 Bankers also appears to be pretty good. Matt Taibbi's most recent book, Griftopia has a wealth of facts if you can get past the perspective it's selling very hard in the first couple of chapters. It gets better in the middle. Taibbi managed to get interviews with a few people whose perspectives aren't detailed anywhere else I've seen, otherwise I'd throw it on the trash pile.
All of these are available in both electronic and paper form from the library.
13 bankers looks interesting. The others seem to be journalist works. I will investigate. Thanks.
Quote from: Gaspar on July 12, 2011, 04:16:32 PM
I had no idea I was a pompous chauvinist. You have humbled me. I just feel sad for your view of my fellow countrymen. What would it take to improve your impression of the American people?
Won't do you any good to read books if you cannot understand simple posts!
I feel fine about my fellow countrymen and my impression of the American people, of whom I am one, is generally favorable though declining at this moment in time. Not recognizing the great fictional conventions of our time is a deficit when conversing. Imagine having to talk to a Russian who doesn't believe that Soviet style Communism was a disastrous lie. A fiction that nearly destroyed them. Or trying to explain to a Nazi that Hitler was hiding Jewish ancestry all the while persecuting them. Fictions are damaging. You know the failures caused in marketing by not recognizing truths and holding on to fictions.
Perhaps your sadness would be ameliorated somewhat if I included most of humanity in my description? Now wait a minute....where did I also read about liars, cheats, chiselers and thieves...oh yeah, the Bible. So there you go, Americans are biblical in nature.
Quote from: AquaMan on July 12, 2011, 04:42:18 PM
Won't do you any good to read books if you cannot understand simple posts!
I feel fine about my fellow countrymen and my impression of the American people, of whom I am one, is generally favorable though declining at this moment in time. Not recognizing the great fictional conventions of our time is a deficit when conversing. Imagine having to talk to a Russian who doesn't believe that Soviet style Communism was a disastrous lie. A fiction that nearly destroyed them. Or trying to explain to a Nazi that Hitler was hiding Jewish ancestry all the while persecuting them. Fictions are damaging. You know the failures caused in marketing by not recognizing truths and holding on to fictions.
Perhaps your sadness would be ameliorated somewhat if I included most of humanity in my description? Now wait a minute....where did I also read about liars, cheats, chiselers and thieves...oh yeah, the Bible. So there you go, Americans are biblical in nature.
At least you recognize your pathology.
Quote from: Gaspar on July 12, 2011, 04:45:29 PM
At least you recognize your pathology.
That infers that I am suffering from some sort of disease. If so, you are wrong again. I am quite healthy in mind, body and spirit. Probably economically unhealthy but 4 more years will help that. ;)
Quote from: Gaspar on July 12, 2011, 04:37:41 PM
13 bankers looks interesting. The others seem to be journalist works. I will investigate. Thanks.
Journalists are often able to provide perspectives from people whose experience would otherwise be unknown. You do have to be careful to be aware of what the journalist is saying and what the interviewees are saying, however. Griftopia includes an interesting story I hadn't seen elsewhere about how Goldman was largely responsible for bringing down AIG by squeezing not only FP, which was the division that wrote all the credit default swaps, but also the securities lending division.
I hadn't seen it reported quite how close AIG's insurance subsidiaries were to being seized by state insurance regulators as a result of the squeeze Goldman was putting on them. As long as you're aware of Taibbi's particular bias his stuff is good to read, as he gets people to talk who you'll otherwise never have heard from. And as someone with an extreme dislike for Obama, you'd probably find something to like in his frequent tirades of personal opinion.
I think it's interesting how we all are in strong agreement that there's something wrong with the goings-on in our country, but can't really agree on what exactly the problem is, much less agree on the causes or solutions.
Quote from: Townsend on July 12, 2011, 02:57:24 PM
Now he didn't say he helped. Just that he was in a third world country.
Oh no, I helped. In Honduras and Mexico. I can only give money (I would say significant) to help in countries I feel really need it, Haiti and Jamaica. As I've written before, I saw the actual result of my charitable giving in the latter place. Question here is, we can TALK about the poor in this country, but what are each of us DOING about it. I mean, besides watching them stand in a line with a look of pity. Something about talking the talk and walking the walk comes to mind.
Quote from: guido911 on July 12, 2011, 06:01:57 PM
Oh no, I helped. In Honduras and Mexico. I can only give money (I would say significant) to help in countries I feel really need it, Haiti and Jamaica. As I've written before, I saw the actual result of my charitable giving in the latter place. Question here is, we can TALK about the poor in this country, but what are each of us DOING about it. I mean, besides watching them stand in a line with a look of pity. Something about talking the talk and walking the walk comes to mind.
Gentlemen, there is the horse.
Ahhh, guido, donatining significant amounts of money to relief efforts to get a significant tax deduction!
I will defend guido on this one. I believe that he does give significant amounts to many charities. He may be confused and wrong on many things, but he does have a good heart. With a little proper therapy, he could be a liberal.
Quote from: RecycleMichael on July 12, 2011, 09:00:37 PM
I will defend guido on this one. I believe that he does give significant amounts to many charities. He may be confused and wrong on many things, but he does have a good heart. With a little proper therapy, he could be a liberal.
I detect a 'Scanners' moment from him soon now.
Quote from: guido911 on July 12, 2011, 01:03:18 PM
This is about people who are documented thieves of the U.S. Treasury. Sheesh, get off your high horse. As for downtown, don't need to go to see anything. Go to a third world country like I have multiple times and roll up your sleeves if you care to help the truly needy. In this country, I am not at all interested in helping ANYONE rip off the taxpayers. Apparently, you are.
And guido once again gets it all wrong. The documented thieves of the US Treasury are sitting at the top 1% of the pyramid. With the help of their bought and paid for Congress.
If truly NOT interested in helping anyone rip off the biggest number of taxpayers, there would be support for the Baby Bush cuts repeal.
RM,
I don't think there is enough therapy in the world to help him with that.
Quote from: RecycleMichael on July 12, 2011, 09:00:37 PM
I will defend guido on this one. I believe that he does give significant amounts to many charities. He may be confused and wrong on many things, but he does have a good heart. With a little proper waterboarding therapy, he could be a liberal.
fixed it
Edit: added color
Quote from: RecycleMichael on July 12, 2011, 09:00:37 PM
I will defend guido on this one. I believe that he does give significant amounts to many charities. He may be confused and wrong on many things, but he does have a good heart. With a little proper therapy, he could be a liberal.
Thanks for the back-up. Food Bank of Eastern Oklahoma will get a little more help (I really appreciate their hard work). And I agree with RA and warterboarding, and perhaps also this:
(http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQK-rvqdVAzwiVasZkwLzjRi4qK4Mc05Sg_Nm2Gd8r4iBaIk_D4)
Or make me watch a marathon of The Backyardigans (I have to watch that b/o my son). Maybe that explains my conduct sometimes? :P
O/T This thread has been going for a while. Below is a link giving state by state unemployment rates. Oklahoma is doing fairly well.
http://www.bls.gov/lau/
Quote from: Townsend on July 08, 2011, 02:10:22 PM
Sounds like it'd help if everyone would rally 'round the president then.
If it worked before it could work again.
It's unfortunate, but I believe that ended with the Iran/Contra scandal and White Water which was little more than retribution for I/C. It gets worse with every change in leadership with either legislative house or the big white one on Pennsylvania Ave.
Which was retribution for Watergate (Iran/Contra).
Notice the pattern there? The Republicontins actually committing crimes. The Dummycrats getting blamed for committing crimes, but not really doing them.
If everyone would just listen to The Asteroids Galaxy Tour band, everything would be all right!! And drink a Heineken while we're at it!
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on July 14, 2011, 11:14:55 PM
Which was retribution for Watergate (Iran/Contra).
Notice the pattern there? The Republicontins actually committing crimes. The Dummycrats getting blamed for committing crimes, but not really doing them.
If everyone would just listen to The Asteroids Galaxy Tour band, everything would be all right!! And drink a Heineken while we're at it!
On the job malfeasance is something the citizens should be concerned with. If we did a poor job vetting a real estate crook and sexual predator prior to him becoming president, I don't see where that's worth a multi year multi million dollar investigation, but I think Gingrich envisioned himself as president some day if he could bring down Clinton. Turns out, personal pecadillos and moronic aides aside, Clinton was actually a very successful president.
I have no doubt some very loyal people took a fall on behalf of Clinton. It's their fault for getting so caught up in his ambition that they failed to blow the whistle properly
before he could even secure the nomination. I think it's probably impossible to rise to that level of power without some sort of power issues or being completely corrupt on the way up.
The whole process of Whitewater was nothing but vendetta. It was paybacks for Watergate. It was fraud on a massive scale, but NOT by Clinton.
And the whole idea of an impeachment for getting a BJ in the Oval office? Well, that was brought to us by the guy who was in the middle of a decade long affair, followed by dumping the wife he was cheating on, then marrying the whore he had been hooking with. See the hypocrisy??
And now, Newt wants to be President. And he has plenty of support from the "moral majority". Yeah, right!
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on July 14, 2011, 11:50:35 PM
The whole process of Whitewater was nothing but vendetta. It was paybacks for Watergate. It was fraud on a massive scale, but NOT by Clinton.
And the whole idea of an impeachment for getting a BJ in the Oval office? Well, that was brought to us by the guy who was in the middle of a decade long affair, followed by dumping the wife he was cheating on, then marrying the whore he had been hooking with. See the hypocrisy??
And now, Newt wants to be President. And he has plenty of support from the "moral majority". Yeah, right!
There's little doubt the Clintons were dirty on the White Water deal, they had the power though to pardon co-conspirators so they bargained their way out and got others to obfuscate as much as possible. As far as the BJ, that wasn't the issue. Instead of being honest, Clinton perjured himself, plain and simple. Was that a waste of time and money? You bet it was.
Oh, puleezzzeeee...Whitewater was a cheesy little attempt to "sell" the Arkansas equivalent of desert "ranchettes". If someone is stupid enough to buy 20 acres of desert with no infrastructure for 100 miles, then so be it. They should investigate the situation first. Like selling swamp land in Florida, it is not a crime, it is just a cheesy little scam on people who don't want to do any due diligence.
Here is some info about it; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whitewater_controversy
And here we come to the selective morality portion of the play. Is lying about having a little boom-boom action in the Oval office worse than the lie of more than a decade, not just to his wife, but also to the American people, about Newt's whoring. Which one is worse?? The answer to that is the selective part.
Not to even mention the hypocrisy of starting an impeachment in the middle of his big lie!
Well,...maybe to mention it...
I'm not cutting Billy Bob any slack, I'm just not cutting Newt any either. So since action was taken against Billy Bob, where is the corresponding consequences for Newt. Goes to personal accountability - one of the Republicontins favorite catch phrases.
One other thing about Billy Bob and Hillary - their lifestyle would appear to be somewhat in keeping with swingers and swappers. Hillary never had any intention of dumping Billy Bob for this stuff. She very well could be an active participant in the lifestyle and enjoy it as much as he. She had to show some indignation for the press...but probably not really.
Newt's wife WAS NOT! As shown by divorce! There is a huge difference.
Unemployment Claims Rise Unexpectedly. ;)
I expected it. Gotta send more jobs to China! For the obvious and well documented reasons.
(http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2011/07/~/media/Images/Reports/2011/07/wm3316_chart1.ashx?w=500&h=718&as=1)
Quote from: Gaspar on July 21, 2011, 02:39:11 PM
(http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2011/07/~/media/Images/Reports/2011/07/wm3316_chart1.ashx?w=500&h=718&as=1)
Random coincidence. There's no way Obamacare is a job killer.
Quote from: Conan71 on July 21, 2011, 02:41:22 PM
Random coincidence. There's no way Obamacare is a job killer.
Hmm, I get this graph...
(http://www.nwacg.net/gallery3/var/resizes/random-stuff/fredgraph-80728180.png?m=1311277911)
That is a neat trick, though! Adding jobs in a recession. Oh Heritage.
You might be interested to know that we're adding private sector jobs at about the same rate we did in the Bush Administration. You wouldn't know that from the headlines, though, since government layoffs are bringing the overall numbers down.
Quote from: Conan71 on July 21, 2011, 02:41:22 PM
Random coincidence. There's no way Obamacare is a job killer.
It is a coincidence. After all, what did Pelosi tell us?
Jeebus she looks like a pillowcase full of crazy.
http://www.americanpatriotsprevail.com/PatriotBlast.html
website for faux patriots....guido the schmoe, thanks. Added it to my favorites so I can check in to all the hate and dogma. You rock! ::)
btw, you don't think an 18 second clip might be missing other context do you?
Quote from: nathanm on July 21, 2011, 02:58:26 PM
Hmm, I get this graph...
(http://www.nwacg.net/gallery3/var/resizes/random-stuff/fredgraph-80728180.png?m=1311277911)
That is a neat trick, though! Adding jobs in a recession. Oh Heritage.
You might be interested to know that we're adding private sector jobs at about the same rate we did in the Bush Administration. You wouldn't know that from the headlines, though, since government layoffs are bringing the overall numbers down.
Wheww! Than everything is OK. Thank god!. . . I mean thank President Obama!
(http://www.istockphoto.com/file_thumbview_approve/6016248/2/istockphoto_6016248-whew.jpg)
Quote from: Gaspar on July 21, 2011, 03:41:25 PM
Wheww! Than everything is OK. Thank god!. . . I mean thank President Obama!
(http://26.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lcufrmWnYz1qbipv3o1_400.gif)
Wow! Texas equals half of the payroll gains from 2009 to 2011. We should do what they are doing.
http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/2011-07-25-texas-a-magnet-for-jobs_n.htm
Quote from: Gaspar on July 27, 2011, 04:43:22 PM
Wow! Texas equals half of the payroll gains from 2009 to 2011. We should do what they are doing.
http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/2011-07-25-texas-a-magnet-for-jobs_n.htm
Do we really have to go through this again? Or do you just not believe in arithmetic because I say it exists.