"...Mollohan's personal fortunes soared. From 2000 to 2004, his assets grew from no more than $565,000 to at least $6.3 million."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/14/AR2006051401032.html
Anyone catch todays giant headline on the front page in the TulsaWorld about the dow reaching 12,000.
Woweee....2 years late. But it is election time. Doonesbury is more tuthful and honest than the world editors.....
Oh yeah. I forgot that Bush controls the stock market too.
More Homeowners Going Into Default
http://www.latimes.com/classified/realestate/la-fi-foreclose19oct19,0,4110776.story?coll=la-home-headlines
"But in another disquieting sign, DataQuick reported that 19% of the owners who went into default earlier in the year actually lost their homes to foreclosure in the third quarter, more than triple the 6% in 2005."
"In the vast majority of cases, the default notices are falling disproportionately on the entry-level market," said John Hokkanen, a San Diego agent. "These are people who don't have any reserves in a time of crisis."
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
Oh yeah. I forgot that Bush controls the stock market too.
Nope. It depends on confidence. Not too many people feel confident about our current economy. It's hard to trust what info comes out of liars mouths or for that matter what they hide from the populace.
The economy is good thanks to GWB's tax cuts. Anyone who disagrees is ignoring the facts.
quote:
Not too many people feel confident about our current economy.
Horse sh!t. The Dow only moves when economic factors are consonant with a healthy and vibrant economy. You should just walk away now before you stick your foot any farther in your mouth and stop breathing.
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
quote:
Not too many people feel confident about our current economy.
Horse sh!t. The Dow only moves when economic factors are consonant with a healthy and vibrant economy. You should just walk away now before you stick your foot any farther in your mouth and stop breathing.
I saw him hopping down Brookside...It was sticking out his a$$........
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
quote:
Not too many people feel confident about our current economy.
Horse sh!t. The Dow only moves when economic factors are consonant with a healthy and vibrant economy. You should just walk away now before you stick your foot any farther in your mouth and stop breathing.
Geez, I quit breathing from laughing so hard.[}:)]
quote:
Originally posted by aoxamaxoa
More Homeowners Going Into Default
http://www.latimes.com/classified/realestate/la-fi-foreclose19oct19,0,4110776.story?coll=la-home-headlines
"But in another disquieting sign, DataQuick reported that 19% of the owners who went into default earlier in the year actually lost their homes to foreclosure in the third quarter, more than triple the 6% in 2005."
"In the vast majority of cases, the default notices are falling disproportionately on the entry-level market," said John Hokkanen, a San Diego agent. "These are people who don't have any reserves in a time of crisis."
That is a sign of liberal lending policies (not to be confused with liberal politics, simpleton), moronically high real estate costs, and young home buyers who don't have the common sense to buy something in their price range. Nothing more, nothing less.
I think it will be the next President who must deal with the unbalanced allocation of funds towards a war with very little return on the investment.
Now, the setup: Somewhere in the next 8 years, the blame for this current abuse will go to the next President as interest rates continue to rise no matter what our Fed has to say about it. It will be that administration's (his or her, democrat or republican) fault. Or so it will be perceived and exploited.
He or She will have to be courageous and hire the best and the brightest to fix the mess of health care, social security, trade etc. Issues that have seen wasted by the current regime.
If you see cronyism in the next President's economic circle, short the market.
BTW, the 6th year for a President is historically a good one for the market. I bet we see an interesting year. Hopefully, a bit better than the previous periods.
Posties. I will stick to my guns on the confidence thing. I do not fore see a disruption. However, I do believe "It's hard to trust what info comes out of liars mouths or for that matter what they hide from the populace." Why do you take my comment, hatch it up, and put it out of context?
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
Oh yeah. I forgot that Bush controls the stock market too.
I heard that he did when it was down. :)
You may as well stop talking after making this comment:
quote:
Not too many people feel confident about our current economy.
Anything you say past this comment should be flushed once for the bulk and again for the remainder.
quote:
Originally posted by aoxamaxoa
I think it will be the next President who must deal with the unbalanced allocation of funds towards a war with very little return on the investment.
All the war is doing is creating consumption of materials and services that in turn sends profits over to some big American businesses. This isn't neccesarily bad for the business world. From a moral standpoint, you might wonder if things are being dragged along in Iraq because some companies are making money. But from any kind of "economic index" this looks great for our economy. The stock market isn't so much of a telltale of how the economy is doing, or how well the average person is off, but in how well corporate profits are looking to the investment crowd.
It's funny, look at a 5 year chart of the Dow Jones. The lowest point appears to be very close to March 19th, 2003....
quote:
Originally posted by YoungTulsan
quote:
Originally posted by aoxamaxoa
I think it will be the next President who must deal with the unbalanced allocation of funds towards a war with very little return on the investment.
All the war is doing is creating consumption of materials and services that in turn sends profits over to some big American businesses. This isn't neccesarily bad for the business world. From a moral standpoint, you might wonder if things are being dragged along in Iraq because some companies are making money. But from any kind of "economic index" this looks great for our economy. The stock market isn't so much of a telltale of how the economy is doing, or how well the average person is off, but in how well corporate profits are looking to the investment crowd.
It's funny, look at a 5 year chart of the Dow Jones. The lowest point appears to be very close to March 19th, 2003....
No one loves war quite like defense contractors.[;)]
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
You may as well stop talking after making this comment:
quote:
Not too many people feel confident about our current economy.
Anything you say past this comment should be flushed once for the bulk and again for the remainder.
I'm doin' it for the young people!(http://www.fotothing.com/photos/f92/f9220f28805c51c09e933563d7698255.jpg?ts=1161379617)
"The stock market isn't so much of a telltale of how the economy is doing, or how well the average person is off, but in how well corporate profits are looking to the investment crowd."
So true.
"IN TWO WEEKS, Election Day will render George W. Bush a lame-duck president, and he can begin thinking about his presidential library."
"http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/10/21/bush_on_display/
"Imagine what an honest rendition of that library might look like."Such libraries typically begin with the early career -- in this case The Foggy Years, the heroic service in the Air National Guard, and the falling upward economically. A gallery could commemorate all the Texas businessmen who helped young George turn business blunders into windfalls."
"Falling upward economy"....like that phrase.
"IN TWO WEEKS, Election Day will render George W. Bush a lame-duck president, and he can begin thinking about his presidential library."
From the George W. Bush Presidential Library:
(http://www.myoklahomalife.net/images/tulsa_now/bushlibrary.jpg)
And lest the Bush Apologists be miffed at not having equal time, this one is from the William J. Clinton Presidential Library:
(http://www.myoklahomalife.net/images/tulsa_now/clintonlibrary.jpg)
I know which volume I'd rather read. [:P]
quote:
Originally posted by rwarn17588
I know which volume I'd rather read. [:P]
True. Very true. [}:)]
The Roman Empire even by mixing lead with its gold did not accomplish an economy equal to ours. We are importing for the retail market from foreign suppliers, on credit to where we retail at a profit. We are the world greatest debtor. We buy today and don’t have to pay for it in the months and years ahead. The foreign countries are buying our lands through the stock market and in the future they will merger these corporations to foreign ownerships. The inflation is eroding the children’s future. Increasing interest rates will be debt passed on to the children. We are in a war time economy trying to remove the mid-east like Rome did Carthage. Our economy is tied with a chain to the plastic card. It is liken a hot air balloon as long as the bottle has propane.
quote:
Originally posted by shadows
The Roman Empire even by mixing lead with its gold did not accomplish an economy equal to ours. We are importing for the retail market from foreign suppliers, on credit to where we retail at a profit. We are the world greatest debtor. We buy today and don’t have to pay for it in the months and years ahead. The foreign countries are buying our lands through the stock market and in the future they will merger these corporations to foreign ownerships. The inflation is eroding the children’s future. Increasing interest rates will be debt passed on to the children. We are in a war time economy trying to remove the mid-east like Rome did Carthage. Our economy is tied with a chain to the plastic card. It is liken a hot air balloon as long as the bottle has propane.
Another way I look at it is that our economy feeds on growth. There is seemingly always exponential future growth in this country that we capitalize on, borrow from, etc. because for as long as this country has been a superpower it has always been growing at a fast pace. I'm worried about what kind of collapse might happen if we hit some sort of "critical mass" where there becomes a need to become self-sustaining. Right now, switching to a self-sustaining economy instead of one feeding off of growth would be the end of us. Maybe that is why Republicans keep telling environmentalists "Hey, shut up!"
quote:
Originally posted by shadows
The Roman Empire even by mixing lead with its gold did not accomplish an economy equal to ours. We are importing for the retail market from foreign suppliers, on credit to where we retail at a profit. We are the world greatest debtor. We buy today and don’t have to pay for it in the months and years ahead. The foreign countries are buying our lands through the stock market and in the future they will merger these corporations to foreign ownerships. The inflation is eroding the children’s future. Increasing interest rates will be debt passed on to the children. We are in a war time economy trying to remove the mid-east like Rome did Carthage. Our economy is tied with a chain to the plastic card. It is liken a hot air balloon as long as the bottle has propane.
I'd be curious as to how you are comparing the two; such distinct systems. The biggest problem with you analysis is that you are conflating personal finance with federalized financal policy. I agree with you that personal debt is not good for either the individual or the society, but that cannot be superimposed onto the other system.
We may be the world's biggest debtor, but we create a supermajority of the world's food, medicine and aid. Most of the major institutions of the world are funded by the US: the UN, IMF, NATO. Without the US none of these entities would exist or have operating budgets. If the US simply quit funding these worldwide needs it would be a moot point.
As for the comment about the mid-east. Comparing the war on terror to the punic wars...please. The Roman empire was trying to expand it's territory, plain and simple. You cannot equate the two. Carthage was the center of a world dominant power and Rome's aim was to BE that world power.
Bottom line: We are already the world's only superpower, there is no struggle for land, just ideologies. There are better analogies.
"Bottom line: We are already the world's only superpower, there is no struggle for land, just ideologies. There are better analogies."
This is momentarily true....
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
We may be the world's biggest debtor, but we create a supermajority of the world's food, medicine and aid. Most of the major institutions of the world are funded by the US: the UN, IMF, NATO. Without the US none of these entities would exist or have operating budgets. If the US simply quit funding these worldwide needs it would be a moot point.
Let's see...how many years in a row did the U.S. refuse to pay it's UN dues? And yet it survived and continued working.
Define "working."
As a matter of fact, more than 50% of member states are delinquent on their dues. The UN can't even collect it's dues..damn that's "working" for ya.
quote:
Originally posted by papaspot
"IN TWO WEEKS, Election Day will render George W. Bush a lame-duck president, and he can begin thinking about his presidential library."
From the George W. Bush Presidential Library:
(http://www.myoklahomalife.net/images/tulsa_now/bushlibrary.jpg)
And lest the Bush Apologists be miffed at not having equal time, this one is from the William J. Clinton Presidential Library:
(http://www.myoklahomalife.net/images/tulsa_now/clintonlibrary.jpg)
That settles it, I'm goin' to Little Rock! I wonder if they sell Lewinski's in the gift shop?
Would a Lewinski be a slightly "pre owned" cigar?
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
Define "working."
As a matter of fact, more than 50% of member states are delinquent on their dues. The UN can't even collect it's dues..damn that's "working" for ya.
Unless I'm mistaken, your CLAIM was that if the U.S. pulled its funding, the UN would collapse. So is this what you'd call a diversionary tactic?
There's a world of difference between pulling dues permanently and being late, yet catching up. A permanent retraction of funds would be fatal to the UN.
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
Would a Lewinski be a slightly "pre owned" cigar?
Here. Since you enjoy silly political humor....
http://youtube.com/watch?v=XSVYkQoFADs&mode=related&search
Has anyone considered what the economy might be doing if Bush was not presidunt?
The Dow would probably be substantially higher... just a guess so don't go whack IPlawless....
Don't forget to jiggle the handle.
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
There's a world of difference between pulling dues permanently and being late, yet catching up. A permanent retraction of funds would be fatal to the UN.
That's your claim. Can you support it? If the U.S. pulled its dues for several years and the U.N. didn't collapse, there's not much weight to your claim that the U.N. couldn't get along without U.S. money. I know it gives some people a nice warm feeling to think that the world couldn't get by without the U.S. but I suspect that there were probably people in the former Soviet Union that believed the same thing about the U.S.S.R.
Think about it. The UN is like any other business that can tolerate late payment as long as it knows it's going to get money in the end, which is the case with the UN. Most companies can run in the red for extended periods and still stay afloat. Does that mean that they can survive FOREVER with with a 25% loss of income? No. It just mean they can make it short term.
Anyways. As much as I would love to see us leave that international circus, we never will. Any system that allows coutries like China and Lybia to hold seats in their council for human rights needs to be disbanded.
Back on topic, I see that Mollohan has Robert Byrd campaigning for him. Nothing like having a kleagle to recruit support for you, I guess.
http://www.timeswv.com/local/local_story_297002310.html
(http://www.lonestartimes.com/images/Bramanti/byrd_kkk.jpg)
Byrd looks stunning in white doesn't he?
http://www.thespeciousreport.com/2006/06061025limbaugh.html
Rush Lumbaugh Goes off Meds to Citicize Michael J. Fox!
Drug Addict Attacks Actor:
http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/10/cnn-on-michael-j-fox-being-attacked-by.html
Aox,
Nice try at satire, wrong topic. What are you doing cruising web sites that have links to "Porn Bloopers.com" anyhow?
<Conan wrote:
Aox,
Nice try at satire, wrong topic. What are you doing cruising web sites that have links to "Porn Bloopers.com" anyhow?
<end clip>
Research. Like Pete Townsend did. [}:)]
quote:
Originally posted by rwarn17588
<Conan wrote:
Aox,
Nice try at satire, wrong topic. What are you doing cruising web sites that have links to "Porn Bloopers.com" anyhow?
<end clip>
Research. Like Pete Townsend did. [}:)]
Pete, Jeff Jones, Paul Reubens [xx(]
Last I've heard, Pee Wee's been sticking it out in Florida[;)]
Disproportionate profits as Exxon reports over 10 billion in income.....
You pricks tell me what Robert Byrd has to do with this thread.....
You all resemble twinkies.....
Bush sucks.....
In case you hadn't noticed, Mr. Rocket Scientist, the thread is about Alan Mollohan. It was my childish effort at matching one of Bledsoe's childish posts on Repubs.
The Baby Bush Economy According to Hometown
Background: Late Clinton. Surging investments in technology. Rising wages for middle and working class. Full employment. Budget surpluses. Paying down of national debt.
Then Republican Greenspan set about raising interest rates when there were no sign of inflation. Many economists of the time questioned Greenspan's moves. Greenspan succeeded in killing the New Economy and bringing down the stock market.
When Baby Bush took office he set about "talking us into a recession." I recall one economic pundit of the time saying he had seen presidents try and talk us out of recession but this was the first time he saw a president talk us into one.
Then Bush set about throwing money at rich people while the livelihoods of the middle and lower classes took a beating.
The Old Economy bites back.
The stock market sinks and commodities take off. The same energy players that participated in a fraud on the state of California turn their attention to a broader audience with gas and oil fun and games.
After six years stock market returns to where it was in Clinton's second term. A record high isn't all it's cracked up to be. You need to take us back to the late Clinton level then add eight percent a year for six years and compound that to get us back to where we need to be.
Oh and balance the budget without destroying the safety net and make some payments on the national debt.
I guess you could say that when you've been held down like we have, even small improvements are cause for celebration.
Bush has been good to the rich and not so nice to the rest of us.
I have to agree that a record high isn't all it's cracked up to be. Just because the stock market is doing well doesn't mean the money is getting into the hands of the working class. In my opinion, it's merely alot of money going through the hands of the well-to-do. I'm not a rich basher, but I definitely see the decline of the middle class in this country over the last several years.
quote]Originally posted by snopes
I have to agree that a record high isn't all it's cracked up to be. Just because the stock market is doing well doesn't mean the money is getting into the hands of the working class. In my opinion, it's merely alot of money going through the hands of the well-to-do. I'm not a rich basher, but I definitely see the decline of the middle class in this country over the last several years.
[/quote]
AMEN!!!![
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
Think about it. The UN is like any other business that can tolerate late payment as long as it knows it's going to get money in the end, which is the case with the UN. Most companies can run in the red for extended periods and still stay afloat. Does that mean that they can survive FOREVER with with a 25% loss of income? No. It just mean they can make it short term.
Anyways. As much as I would love to see us leave that international circus, we never will. Any system that allows coutries like China and Lybia to hold seats in their council for human rights needs to be disbanded.
Your analogy to business would be valid except for one thing. Businesses CAN get by waiting for payment in the SHORT TERM...several weeks or even several months. But we're talking about YEARS that the U.S. withheld its dues. I'm not saying that it didn't hurt them and they didn't have to cut to cut back on some programs (like the United Nations Children's Fund) but if they were gonna fold, they would have folded.
As far as dropping out of the UN, I think we've gotta decide if we're gonna be a world player or maintain a strict isolationist policy. If the former, then we need to start abiding by the rules that we expect everyone else to abide by. If the later, then we need to stop invading other countries.
Look what Clinton did for the middle class.
Clinton gave us the $250,000 tax exclusion on the sale of your primary residence.
When you sell your primary residence, you can make up to $250,000 in profit if you're a single owner, twice that if you're married, and not owe any capital gains taxes. That provision was signed into law by Clinton in 1997.
If you couple Clinton's tax exclusion with the increase in real estate prices, you are talking about the most significant boost to the middle class economic well being in my life time.
I'm not about to jump on Hometown's bandwagon of bashing Alan Greenspan. Greenspan was one of the best Fed chairmen in history.
Sure, Greenspan was a GOP appointee. But Clinton had him for eight years and made no move to replace him, nor should he have. That's because Greenspan was very, very good at his job.
Bush II also should have heeded Greenspan's warnings about deficit spending. The deficits run up on Bush's watch are truly a black eye on the conservative movement.
quote:
Originally posted by rwarn17588
Bush II also should have heeded Greenspan's warnings about deficit spending. The deficits run up on Bush's watch are truly a black eye on the conservative movement.
Bush is very far from being a conservative. Bush is a business man. Pretty much every decision made is by "how does this affect business?"
The new GOP has found that it is ok to spend federal dollars as long as you give the contracts to businesses. Those tax dollars and borrowed dollars just flow right into business profits, so the old idea of a balanced budget is no longer a worry. Privatizing social security is the last boon they have left to feed into corporate profits.
I think it's pretty simplistic to attack or attribute the economy to one person.
The media has done a pretty good job of ignoring the positive signposts of our present economy, and I'm not just talking about the stock market, though that is an indicator of people's confidence in the major players in our economy.
If you get most of your information from left-leaning news outlets, either the economic news is ignored and buried under sex scandal stories or 4.8% unemployment is spun into bad news, because it's not the 4.4% late in the Clinton years. Those news outlets don't talk about the increased tax revenues of our robust economy and present tax policies, they just compare that there was a surplus late in the Clinton years and now there is a deficit. Nevermind there have been unforseeable massive natural disasters, an over-haul of national security, and an expensive war on terror.
If you get all your news from right-leaning news outlets, it's all rosy and good.
The truth lies somewhere in the middle.
Without getting into a whole esoteric discussion on economics, there's a *lot* more at work than the actions of one or two people. You also have to take into account individual management of publicly and privately-held corporations that determine the well-being of the American worker. Unless you want the Amerikansk government to administer all jobs, and we see how much prosperity that that has brought the workers in other countries.
I'll give the economy of the Clinton era it's props, but I'm not going to give sole credit to Clinton, Greenspan, or the Republican controlled Congress. Nor do I attribute the present growth soley to Bush, Barnake, or the present Congress. There's so much more that makes an economy good or bad, but it sure looks good in political advertising around elections for whomever was in power during a growth period.
I'm not saying that economic policies handled by the Fed, nor the "feel" of the economic climate as attributed to legislators and presidents is irrelevant, but it's not the "be-all/end-all".
People want to bash "corporate monoliths" like Microsoft, but think how much money MS has put back into our economy and how many well-paying middle class jobs they have brought about not only in their corporation, but the demand they have brought about in other companies for IT specialists who work with their products.
People want to bash Wal-Mart, but look at how many well-paying jobs have come from their management structure, and all the jobs it has created in their supply chain, and in construction to put up their new stores. Before anyone pipes up about the wages of their store employees- it's free enterprise. The employer sets the wage and workers agree to work for a certain wage. If they don't like the pay, then get out of retail, re-train and do something they can make more money at. No one, especially the government puts handcuffs on these people.
People go off on Enron because some of the executives were cozy with Bush II. The reality is, their greatest period of prosperity and most of their accounting fiascos occured during the Clinton years. Neither Bush nor Clinton are to blame- it was the actions of a few. Enron, while it was around created great paying jobs in their own corporate infrastructure and down their supply and marketing chain.
Investment in high-tech? How much was lost in pension funds and other investment dollars during the "dot bomb" period late in the Clinton years? It wasn't Clinton's fault any more than it would have been Bush's fault if it had happened while he was in office, yet I'm sure the left media could have put the entire blame in Bush's lap. It was greedy intrepreneurs and even greedier investors who created that whole debacle.
Bottom line is, if you beleive the government is going improve your personal financial situation, you are going to stay on the dock while others who are self-reliant will sail off with better jobs.
Unless you have a physical or mental deficiency which would preclude you from improving your station in life, or you have created a domestic situation that will keep you from it, you can participate at any level of the economy as you wish in America.
Presidents aren't gods but they appoint key economic figures and they provide leadership.
People forget the leadership that Clinton displayed in getting Congress to balance the budget. That required a lot of difficult decisions and there were Democrats voted out of office because of their votes to balance the budget.
The market really took off after Clinton balanced the budget.
The Rose Garden colored glasses
By Molly Ivins
Creators Syndicate
http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/news/opinion/15852915.htm
"But the Dow is not a good indicator of how thing are really going for the majority of Americans."
"Meanwhile, what we see in the economy as a whole is an immense shift of wealth from the poor and middle class to the very rich. It seems a little painful to have to point this out yet again after six solid years of it, but these are lies, damn lies and statistics."
quote:
Originally posted by aoxamaxoa
The Rose Garden colored glasses
By Molly Ivins
Creators Syndicate
http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/news/opinion/15852915.htm
"But the Dow is not a good indicator of how thing are really going for the majority of Americans."
"Meanwhile, what we see in the economy as a whole is an immense shift of wealth from the poor and middle class to the very rich. It seems a little painful to have to point this out yet again after six solid years of it, but these are lies, damn lies and statistics."
Who is Molly Ivins pandering to?
Molly Ivins isn't in touch with the average Amercian either, she's hardly earning middle class wages. Henry Waxman, cited in her article, represents one of the wealthiest congressional districts in the U.S. as well.
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
quote:
Originally posted by aoxamaxoa
The Rose Garden colored glasses
By Molly Ivins
Creators Syndicate
http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/news/opinion/15852915.htm
"But the Dow is not a good indicator of how thing are really going for the majority of Americans."
"Meanwhile, what we see in the economy as a whole is an immense shift of wealth from the poor and middle class to the very rich. It seems a little painful to have to point this out yet again after six solid years of it, but these are lies, damn lies and statistics."
Who is Molly Ivins pandering to?
Molly Ivins isn't in touch with the average Amercian either, she's hardly earning middle class wages. Henry Waxman, cited in her article, represents one of the wealthiest congressional districts in the U.S. as well.
Woof woof.....
quote:
Originally posted by aoxamaxoa
Woof woof.....
Ya know, Aox, I agree with some of the points you make. But, I swear, you sound more like TulsaJames & inteller every day. You've probably noticed that most people just ignore those two any more. Is that what you're working towards?
Hey, I consider you an ally. Don't rock the boat for two weeks. OK?
"woof woof"=attack dog...and I was trying to be nice.
If you invested $1000 in the 30 companies in the Dow six years ago you would have $1000.34 today.
Invest the same amount in the SandP 500 index you'd have $910.56 and if you'd invested the same amount in the Nasdaq, you'd have $552.04.
I bet you still feel good about what the current regime has done with our economy.....
Vote the jerks out in a week!
I told you not to trust the financial info comming out of the FED.....
Productivity growth unexpectedly flat in Q3
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061102/bs_nm/economy_productivity_dc_1
Lying bastards.....I wonder what unfolds after the election.....
aox, the Fed did not release this info. They are merely in a position to possibly need to respond to it... "lying bastards"? I think not...
Looking at it another way, this adds data to the argument that wages are not shrinking and in fact the working man is in a position to demand higher pay. Not true of every industry but evidently it is of some....
quote:
Originally posted by bokworker
aox, the Fed did not release this info. They are merely in a position to possibly need to respond to it... "lying bastards"? I think not...
Looking at it another way, this adds data to the argument that wages are not shrinking and in fact the working man is in a position to demand higher pay. Not true of every industry but evidently it is of some....
you are correct...however, dissemination of materials and information can be manipulated by the Federal government. I mean, if they can allow a President to wage a war based on lies, anything becomes possible.
quote:
Originally posted by aoxamaxoa
quote:
Originally posted by bokworker
aox, the Fed did not release this info. They are merely in a position to possibly need to respond to it... "lying bastards"? I think not...
Looking at it another way, this adds data to the argument that wages are not shrinking and in fact the working man is in a position to demand higher pay. Not true of every industry but evidently it is of some....
you are correct...however, dissemination of materials and information can be manipulated by the Federal government. I mean, if they can allow a President to wage a war based on lies, anything becomes possible.
Yeah, just like they can be manipulated by forum posties. [}:)]
No, the government can't be manipulated by you posties. Unless you are lobbyists too.
The manipulations come from chickenhawks like Cheney and Rove.....
see what I mean....Scientists Say White House Muzzled Climate Research
by John Heilprin
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/1102-03.htm
"Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., said he was informed that the inspectors general for the Commerce Department and NASA had begun "coordinated, sweeping investigations of the Bush administration's censorship and suppression" of federal research into global warming."
quote:
Originally posted by aoxamaxoa
"woof woof"=attack dog...and I was trying to be nice.
Okay, sorry. I misunderstood.