http://www.cnbc.com/id/48092010

Let's all just jackoff another Summer and campaign.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/16/2012 08:34AM by WingNut.
Attachments:

Time to elect Romney and get it back to 10% where it belongs.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

http://www.fairfaxunderground.com/forum/read/40/915193/915209.html#msg-915209

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Time to elect Romney and get it back to 10% where
> it belongs.

Exactly.. Romney couldn't possibly know more about economics than the brilliant Barack H. Obama.
Attachments:

Obama sucks. Romney no doubt will suck. How did the federal government and the president become responsible for the unemployment in this country? What the hell happened to us that we now define America through our government and not our enterprise or our society? The US is quickly becoming a second rate country with a first rate military. Woo Hoo, USSR here we come.

WingNut Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Time to elect Romney and get it back to 10%
> where
> > it belongs.
>
> Exactly.. Romney couldn't possibly know more about
> economics than the brilliant Barack H. Obama.


What does Romney know about job creation? Has he ever created a job that didn't require a name tag?



That'll get America ahead. Millions of jobs that pay poverty wages with little or no benefits.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

Do you mean all the jobs that Romney lost? Republicans agree, Romney sucks as job creator.

If Romney had been President in 2008, he would have let GM and Chrysler go into bankruptcy. Because we were in the middle of a banking crisis at the time, and there would be no private capital, that bankruptcy would have consisted of Chapter 7 liquidation. As a result, our unemployment rate probably would have been closer to 13 or 14% at the height of the recession.

Yes, Romney knows a lot about job creation.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

Over the last year, there are over a million more jobs added in the Household Survey than in the Business Establishment Survey. The former is often taken as a leading indicator due to the lag in business' reporting of hiring and firing.

Probably see much stronger numbers just before the election if the economy holds up. On the other hand, if the economy is getting weaker, the headline employment numbers may not reflect it either as the discrepancy corrects.

If Romney was president in 2008 there wouldn't be a US any more.

China would be running the US and Bin Laden would still running Al Qaeda.
Attachments:

There's not much either can do. Interest rates are practically zero. The deficit is 1.5 trillion. There's not much support for more deficit spending and tax cutting. If you support one or the other, you have to find the money for it by cutting spending or raising taxes, It's basically a zero-sum game.

There is only one thing to do: Pass my jobs bill which calls for higher taxes, longer unemployment benefits, let one million illegals in the country and keep blaming Bush.

Barry O Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> There is only one thing to do: Pass my jobs bill
> which calls for higher taxes, longer unemployment
> benefits, let one million illegals in the country
> and keep blaming Bush.

Or do what the republicans do, start a war and hire contractors to cover up failed economic policies like "trickle down." Even with two wars Bush still fucked over the US economy and almost drove the US economy in a depression worse than 1929.

Not to mention all the fuck ups with Blackwater and Halliburton.

O gets blame for the next recession.
Bush gets blame for this one.
Clinton should get blame for the last one.

Clinton, Greenspan, Rubin, and the rest of his crew should get the bulk of the blame for getting the ball rolling on manipulated interest rates, manipulated markets, and pushing offshoring. Manipulation begets more manipulation and artificial markets. Offshoring begets more government intervention in the jobs market.

I voted for Obama, and I regret it. He's been a monumental disappointment. I'll leave the country and go back to London if he's reelected.

You Obama Girls are so sad, still clinging to the idea that Dingle Barry was some kind of smart choice for the country.

Owebama is a hype, a bluff, a big ball of shit and nothing- his record as a leader proves it.

Over the past year, all Dingle Barry has been doing is talking about how raising taxes is what is needed. What a dumbshit- as if the only thing between us and lower unemployment is a tax increase.

Face it, you voted for a "community organizer"..

And regardless of who you blame for the Recession, it's Owebama's now- and the dipshit is utterly fucking clueless and has chosen division and blame over leadership.
Attachments:

Axe Dems and Pubs Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> O gets blame for the next recession.
> Bush gets blame for this one.
> Clinton should get blame for the last one.
>
> Clinton, Greenspan, Rubin, and the rest of his
> crew should get the bulk of the blame for getting
> the ball rolling on manipulated interest rates,
> manipulated markets, and pushing offshoring.
> Manipulation begets more manipulation and
> artificial markets. Offshoring begets more
> government intervention in the jobs market.

And now for the real facts...

O has a recovery going.
Bush caused a recession.
Clinton had a recovery and even gave Bush a surplus.

WingNut Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You Obama Girls are so sad, still clinging to the
> idea that Dingle Barry was some kind of smart
> choice for the country.
>
> Owebama is a hype, a bluff, a big ball of shit and
> nothing- his record as a leader proves it.
>
> Over the past year, all Dingle Barry has been
> doing is talking about how raising taxes is what
> is needed. What a dumbshit- as if the only thing
> between us and lower unemployment is a tax
> increase.
>
> Face it, you voted for a "community organizer"..
>
> And regardless of who you blame for the Recession,
> it's Owebama's now- and the dipshit is utterly
> fucking clueless and has chosen division and blame
> over leadership.

Wingnut used the word "dingle berry" hehehehehehehehehehehehehehehe

Little Kid Talk Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Wingnut used the word "dingle berry"
> hehehehehehehehehehehehehehehe

And some of you use the word "Mr.President".
Attachments:

The Factor Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> And now for the real facts...
>
> O has a recovery going.
> Bush caused a recession.
> Clinton had a recovery and even gave Bush a
> surplus.

What were you about 15 when Clinton left? lol

Clinton left Bush a mess after the crash and a recession that lasted until 2003-2004 on top of 9/11 effects. The only reason that he had an *annual* surplus for a short time was because of capital gains from the bogus .com bubble which all went poof.

"O" doesn't have shit going. He has no clue. He and entire staff have no experience other than in working as social activists and academics who rely entirely on BS Krugman writes to fill column space in the Times for their entire economic view. His economic plans like the hokey "American Jobs Act" are no more than thinly veiled political moves intended to placate the unions and have no substance otherwise.

He has no leadership ability and no ability to manage a government and get something done. As much of a knucklehead as he was, at least Bush and past Presidents with divided governments knew how to work the system in order to make things happen. He's is the most partisan, party-controlled president ever. All of his pants have Velcro on the ass to make it easier for Jarrett to shove her hand up his butt to work his mouth. lol

The Factor's short on facts Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Factor Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> >
> > And now for the real facts...
> >
> > O has a recovery going.
> > Bush caused a recession.
> > Clinton had a recovery and even gave Bush a
> > surplus.
>
> What were you about 15 when Clinton left? lol
>
> Clinton left Bush a mess after the crash and a
> recession that lasted until 2003-2004 on top of
> 9/11 effects. The only reason that he had an
> *annual* surplus for a short time was because of
> capital gains from the bogus .com bubble which all
> went poof.
>
> "O" doesn't have shit going. He has no clue. He
> and entire staff have no experience other than in
> working as social activists and academics who rely
> entirely on BS Krugman writes to fill column space
> in the Times for their entire economic view. His
> economic plans like the hokey "American Jobs Act"
> are no more than thinly veiled political moves
> intended to placate the unions and have no
> substance otherwise.
>
> He has no leadership ability and no ability to
> manage a government and get something done. As
> much of a knucklehead as he was, at least Bush and
> past Presidents with divided governments knew how
> to work the system in order to make things happen.
> He's is the most partisan, party-controlled
> president ever. All of his pants have Velcro on
> the ass to make it easier for Jarrett to shove her
> hand up his butt to work his mouth. lol


x2. All the democrat dickheads who have somehow forgot that Clinton left Bush a recession (plus the crash of the telcom and Internet bubbles) and 5 teams of terrorists already living in this country and practicing how to fly a plane but not take off and land while Bin Laden was fat and happy in Afghanistan after being offered to up by Yeman and Clinton declined.

It takes two or more to make a mess as big as the telecom bubble or the housing bubble. The regulators have a responsibility to make sure that bad credit isn't extended to such a degree that it endangers the banking system and the economy. Instead, they encouraged it in order to stimulate the economy. Congress has various committees that are supposed to provide oversight for the regulators and the financial markets. And the Presidents are to blame as well.

Looks like Obama is going down in defeat unless something happens quickly.

oh noes!

More people went on disability in June 2012 than got jobs.

80K Jobs vs. 85K went on disability.

How on Earth is this good?


http://news.investors.com/article/617233/201207060945/disability-climbs-faster-than-jobs-under-obama.htm

Dear America,

Please stop being such faggots.

Thanks!
WingNut
Attachments:

WingNut Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> More people went on disability in June 2012 than
> got jobs.
>
> 80K Jobs vs. 85K went on disability.
>
> How on Earth is this good?
>
>
> http://news.investors.com/article/617233/201207060
> 945/disability-climbs-faster-than-jobs-under-obama
> .htm
>
> Dear America,
>
> Please stop being such faggots.
>
> Thanks!
> WingNut
Attachments:

IBD is junk economics. They only report headline numbers and don't disset the data to get the real story.

June has the largest negative seasonal adjustments every year to account for the college graduates entering the labor force.



Over 1.1 million found full-time work last month.

Hedge youself Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Over 1.1 million found full-time work last month.


LOL. Despite that being nonsense, it still would put us about 9 million short of getting back to a relatively normal unemployment rate. That's a LOT of jobs needed every month just to get back to even.

Oh yeah, and the net +80K number would have been a -44K without the +124K from the sketchy birth-death model plug that they use (an artificial guess at the numbers too new to be included, so they basically just make something up lol)

Hedge youself Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> IBD is junk economics. They only report headline
> numbers and don't disset the data to get the real
> story.
>
> June has the largest negative seasonal adjustments
> every year to account for the college graduates
> entering the labor force.
>
> http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/image
> s/user5/imageroot/2012/03/Seasonal%20Factor%202.jp
> g
>
> Over 1.1 million found full-time work last month.


Perhaps if you got you lips off Obama's ass long enough, you'd realize that your own chart shows that November has the largest negative seasonal adjustments. Idiot.

Hedge youself Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> IBD is junk economics. They only report headline
> numbers and don't disset the data to get the real
> story.
>
> June has the largest negative seasonal adjustments
> every year to account for the college graduates
> entering the labor force.
>
> http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/image
> s/user5/imageroot/2012/03/Seasonal%20Factor%202.jp
> g
>
> Over 1.1 million found full-time work last month.

IBD is a pro-Romney rag. It's not surprising.

Those employment numbers look pretty bad for Romney.

The Fed may use the 'weakness' of the headline numbers as the excuse to start up QE3. All the other governments have restarted their printers.

At the same time, the headline numbers may improve sharply into the election. The Establishment Survey's employment count for the trailing 12 months lags the Household Survey by 1.3 million. Eventually, they'll converge.

New all-time highs in stocks and strong headline numbers.

Romney's best hope then is the that Pubs ratchet up the Fiscal Cliff threats before the election.

Lester Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hedge youself Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > IBD is junk economics. They only report
> headline
> > numbers and don't disset the data to get the
> real
> > story.
> >
> > June has the largest negative seasonal
> adjustments
> > every year to account for the college graduates
> > entering the labor force.
> >
> >
> http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/image
>
> >
> s/user5/imageroot/2012/03/Seasonal%20Factor%202.jp
>
> > g
> >
> > Over 1.1 million found full-time work last
> month.
>
> IBD is a pro-Romney rag. It's not surprising.
>
> Those employment numbers look pretty bad for
> Romney.
>
> The Fed may use the 'weakness' of the headline
> numbers as the excuse to start up QE3. All the
> other governments have restarted their printers.
>
> At the same time, the headline numbers may improve
> sharply into the election. The Establishment
> Survey's employment count for the trailing 12
> months lags the Household Survey by 1.3 million.
> Eventually, they'll converge.
>
> New all-time highs in stocks and strong headline
> numbers.
>
> Romney's best hope then is the that Pubs ratchet
> up the Fiscal Cliff threats before the election.

You mean Obama.

Lester Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Fed may use the 'weakness' of the headline
> numbers as the excuse to start up QE3. All the
> other governments have restarted their printers.
>
> At the same time, the headline numbers may improve
> sharply into the election. The Establishment
> Survey's employment count for the trailing 12
> months lags the Household Survey by 1.3 million.
> Eventually, they'll converge.
>
> New all-time highs in stocks and strong headline
> numbers.
>
> Romney's best hope then is the that Pubs ratchet
> up the Fiscal Cliff threats before the election.


Too late. It's July already. Unemployment number is going nowhere but up. Business investment is stalled. Asia and Europe are slowing. Lots more down-side risk than up-side potential. Even for stocks, while they might get an artificial bump at some point, it's going to be risk-off and wait and see headed into the Fall.

Lester Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hedge youself Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > IBD is junk economics. They only report
> headline
> > numbers and don't disset the data to get the
> real
> > story.
> >
> > June has the largest negative seasonal
> adjustments
> > every year to account for the college graduates
> > entering the labor force.
> >
> >
> http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/image
>
> >
> s/user5/imageroot/2012/03/Seasonal%20Factor%202.jp
>
> > g
> >
> > Over 1.1 million found full-time work last
> month.
>
> IBD is a pro-Romney rag. It's not surprising.
>
> Those employment numbers look pretty bad for
> Romney.
>
> The Fed may use the 'weakness' of the headline
> numbers as the excuse to start up QE3. All the
> other governments have restarted their printers.
>
> At the same time, the headline numbers may improve
> sharply into the election. The Establishment
> Survey's employment count for the trailing 12
> months lags the Household Survey by 1.3 million.
> Eventually, they'll converge.
>
> New all-time highs in stocks and strong headline
> numbers.
>
> Romney's best hope then is the that Pubs ratchet
> up the Fiscal Cliff threats before the election.

I think Team Owebama's plan will likely be to blame the repub house for any budget problemsa and/or downgrades. It will be a hard sell o the American people though, because Owebama had carte blanche with majorities for two years and it can be argued that his stimulus was a failure and moved employment in the opposite direction it was supposed to.

Obama cannot really base his argument of improving the economy on raising taxes on the so-called "millioniares" (who make over $200K) because even the more left leaning independents understand that raising these taxes will not create jobs.

Obama probably assumed that this recession was typical of others and would be a year or 18 month lull followed by a natural recovery.He exploited the situation with a worthless stimulus.

"I think Team Owebama's plan will likely be to blame the repub house for any budget problemsa and/or downgrades"

Why not he blames others for anything that goes wrong. This guy hasnt taken responsibility for anything other than Obamacare. Also killing Bin Laden which to hear him tell it he did all by himself with no help from the Seals.

bye bye barry Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "I think Team Owebama's plan will likely be to
> blame the repub house for any budget problemsa
> and/or downgrades"
>
> Why not he blames others for anything that goes
> wrong. This guy hasnt taken responsibility for
> anything other than Obamacare. Also killing Bin
> Laden which to hear him tell it he did all by
> himself with no help from the Seals.

If the Skins ever god forbid win a Super Bowl, praise isn't going to Dan Snyder- but to the coaches who called the strategy and the players who risked their bodies in the game.

Owebama is now pushing for extending middle class tax cuts- the same "Bush" tax cuts he seemed to be grandstanding against just a few months ago.

Did Barry get the memo that his divisive attacks blaming the "rich" aren't working?

BushWhacked2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Barry O Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > There is only one thing to do: Pass my jobs
> bill
> > which calls for higher taxes, longer
> unemployment
> > benefits, let one million illegals in the
> country
> > and keep blaming Bush.
>
> Or do what the republicans do, start a war and
> hire contractors to cover up failed economic
> policies like "trickle down." Even with two wars
> Bush still fucked over the US economy and almost
> drove the US economy in a depression worse than
> 1929.
>
> Not to mention all the fuck ups with Blackwater
> and Halliburton.




You can add all the fucking green initiatives on your Obama "trickle down" also. Pissing away tax payers money that is. Go suck Obama's dick faggot.

In other employment news, another "green emergy" failure for Team Barry and the taxpayers expense.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jul/4/lights-go-dim-on-another-energy-project/?page=all%23pagebreak

The Green Jobs and Shovel Ready Projects are just booming, huh?
Attachments:

Wasteful spending.

Higher deficits.

Broken promises.

More unemployment.


Great read from San Diego.


The most common excuse President Barack Obama offers for the nation’s continuing economic woes is that those blasted Republicans in Congress are obstructing him from passing new “stimulus” bills that they know would instantly revive job growth. On MSNBC and in the comments section of media websites, this argument is repeated, with GOP lawmakers called saboteurs, traitors, racists and worst.

This is garbage, and on several fronts.

When it comes to economic growth, Republicans are being consistent with the policies they have espoused for decades. They believe the private sector is what creates jobs and wealth, not government spending.

The president, however, used the $787 billion 2009 stimulus bill not to push private-sector growth but in large part to keep money flowing in the economy by backfilling the coffers of state and local governments so they could avoid laying off public employees. On June 9, when Obama infamously said “the private sector is doing fine,” the context of the rest of his remarks showed no evidence that he wasn’t saying exactly what he believes. The president went on to say the bigger problem was job losses in state and local governments – a point that builds on his comment about the private sector.

As for Republicans rejecting Obama’s calls to saddle future generations with ever more debt by borrowing and spending money now to invigorate the economy, it is true that the GOP’s record on deficit spending is nothing to celebrate. But as Obama observed, “Elections have consequences.” In 2010, a tidal wave drove Democrats from power in the House of Representatives, a wave fueled by public anger over Obamacare and heavy deficit spending.

So the claim that Republicans are sandbagging legislation solely to hurt Obama is based on some truly bizarre premises. That only recently have GOP lawmakers emphasized the primacy of the private sector over government in creating good jobs. That GOP lawmakers should turn their backs on the people who got them elected.

But the most bizarre premise of all is that everyone just knows what Obama wants to do would in fact revive the economy.

What is that based on? None of the confident predictions that accompanied the $787 billion stimulus bill have come true. Obama said U.S. unemployment would be under 6 percent. Instead, we continue to see the worst sustained unemployment since the Great Depression. The June rate was 8.2 percent and would be much higher if it factored in the 6 million adults who have stopped looking for work. A Gallup tracking poll finds that 17 percent of the adult workforce that is looking for full-time employment can only find part-time work. Add it all up, and well more than one-quarter of adults who want to work can’t find a full-time job.

So, once again, where does Democrats’ confidence that Obama knows how to create jobs come from? Why should fresh promises be taken seriously when 2009’s promises didn’t remotely come true?

The president has proved he knows how to preserve government jobs with borrowed money and how to borrow and spend money to goose the economy in the short term. That’s all.

It’s not obstructionism, sabotage, treason or racism to believe that more of the same is not what America needs



http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2012/jul/14/history-destroys-claims-for-obama-jobs-plan/

idontlikebeingrightaboutshitlikethisbutiam



Edited 21 time(s). Last edit at 5/31/1967 05:57AM by WingNut.

Last edit at 11/30/2015 01:37PM Last edit at 5/14/2015 03:52PM Last edit at 1/28/2014 05:57AM Last edit at 11/29/2015 01:10PM Last edit at 3/14/2011 11:52PM Last edit at 7/20/2012 04:07AM
Last edit at 6/29/2013 11:18PM Last edit at 3/19/2011 01:02PM Last edit at 3/26/2012 09:07PM

WingNut Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> I think Team Owebama's plan will likely be to
> blame the repub house for any budget problemsa
> and/or downgrades. It will be a hard sell o the
> American people though, because Owebama had carte
> blanche with majorities for two years and it can
> be argued that his stimulus was a failure and
> moved employment in the opposite direction it was
> supposed to.
>
> Obama cannot really base his argument of improving
> the economy on raising taxes on the so-called
> "millioniares" (who make over $200K) because even
> the more left leaning independents understand that
> raising these taxes will not create jobs.
>
> Obama probably assumed that this recession was
> typical of others and would be a year or 18 month
> lull followed by a natural recovery.He exploited
> the situation with a worthless stimulus.

Since the Bush tax cuts didn't come up for extension till after the 2010 election, it was moot that the Democrats held the majority. In any event, as I've mentioned before, the Democrats are just as responsible for those tax cuts. In addition to the changes to the tax rates, they contain the tax credits for low incomes. In all, reversing the tax changes for just the top earners (>$250K) only reduces the deficits enough to offset the $1.2 trillion budget sequester. In order to avoid the debt downgrade in 2013, they need to achieve $3.4 trillion in tax increases and spending cuts.

Lester Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Since the Bush tax cuts didn't come up for
> extension till after the 2010 election, it was
> moot that the Democrats held the majority. In any
> event, as I've mentioned before, the Democrats are
> just as responsible for those tax cuts. In
> addition to the changes to the tax rates, they
> contain the tax credits for low incomes. In all,
> reversing the tax changes for just the top earners
> (>$250K) only reduces the deficits enough to
> offset the $1.2 trillion budget sequester. In
> order to avoid the debt downgrade in 2013, they
> need to achieve $3.4 trillion in tax increases and
> spending cuts.

As far as the Dems having the majority, they could have addressed any number of issues besides the Bush tax cuts. When given the opportunity to specifically address those tax cuts, Obama argued that "during a recession it is not good to raise taxes", I'm not sure what has changed now as we arre hardly in a period of growth.

I don't think ANY tax increases should be considered until there are moves made to cut spending and reform entitlements drastically. Stagger the age for Social Security benefits, eliminate some departments...The government is ALWAYS asking something of taxpayers, but NEVER offering to make sacrifices itself or jeopardize funding programs they can exploit politically.


If the government is asking of more of a "contribution" from earners, they should first display a little bit of fiscal responsibilty of their own instead of asking taxpayers to keep feeding a corrupt and ineffecient machine.

being jobless aint bad. Just more friends to party with. and gives me time to post. so glad to find these forum. some real smatrt people hear and I can pratice my typin. thank yu forum

Southern aristacrat Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> being jobless aint bad. Just more friends to party
> with. and gives me time to post. so glad to find
> these forum. some real smatrt people hear and I
> can pratice my typin. thank yu forum

http://www.politico.com/politico44/2012/07/obama-meets-with-jerry-springer-129069.html

Obama met with Jerry Springer today.

Plenty of time to watch the Springer show and payday loan commercials with Dingle Barry at the helm of this ship.

Jerry! Jerry!

WingNut Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Lester Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Since the Bush tax cuts didn't come up for
> > extension till after the 2010 election, it was
> > moot that the Democrats held the majority. In
> any
> > event, as I've mentioned before, the Democrats
> are
> > just as responsible for those tax cuts. In
> > addition to the changes to the tax rates, they
> > contain the tax credits for low incomes. In
> all,
> > reversing the tax changes for just the top
> earners
> > (>$250K) only reduces the deficits enough to
> > offset the $1.2 trillion budget sequester. In
> > order to avoid the debt downgrade in 2013, they
> > need to achieve $3.4 trillion in tax increases
> and
> > spending cuts.
>
> As far as the Dems having the majority, they could
> have addressed any number of issues besides the
> Bush tax cuts. When given the opportunity to
> specifically address those tax cuts, Obama argued
> that "during a recession it is not good to raise
> taxes", I'm not sure what has changed now as we
> arre hardly in a period of growth.
>
> I don't think ANY tax increases should be
> considered until there are moves made to cut
> spending and reform entitlements drastically.
> Stagger the age for Social Security benefits,
> eliminate some departments...The government is
> ALWAYS asking something of taxpayers, but NEVER
> offering to make sacrifices itself or jeopardize
> funding programs they can exploit politically.
>
>
> If the government is asking of more of a
> "contribution" from earners, they should first
> display a little bit of fiscal responsibilty of
> their own instead of asking taxpayers to keep
> feeding a corrupt and ineffecient machine.

The negotiating game so far has been we'll keep ours, you cut yours.

Nothing will happen.

Hopefully, the fiscal cliff happens and the tax system gets revamped along with spending cuts.

Hey Dont blame the 112th Congress or anyting for passing jobs bills. THey are busy NOT REPEALING THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT 33 TIMES! YAAAAAAY REPUBLICANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Lester Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WingNut Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Lester Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Since the Bush tax cuts didn't come up for
> > > extension till after the 2010 election, it
> was
> > > moot that the Democrats held the majority.
> In
> > any
> > > event, as I've mentioned before, the
> Democrats
> > are
> > > just as responsible for those tax cuts. In
> > > addition to the changes to the tax rates,
> they
> > > contain the tax credits for low incomes. In
> > all,
> > > reversing the tax changes for just the top
> > earners
> > > (>$250K) only reduces the deficits enough to
> > > offset the $1.2 trillion budget sequester.
> In
> > > order to avoid the debt downgrade in 2013,
> they
> > > need to achieve $3.4 trillion in tax
> increases
> > and
> > > spending cuts.
> >
> > As far as the Dems having the majority, they
> could
> > have addressed any number of issues besides the
> > Bush tax cuts. When given the opportunity to
> > specifically address those tax cuts, Obama
> argued
> > that "during a recession it is not good to
> raise
> > taxes", I'm not sure what has changed now as we
> > arre hardly in a period of growth.
> >
> > I don't think ANY tax increases should be
> > considered until there are moves made to cut
> > spending and reform entitlements drastically.
> > Stagger the age for Social Security benefits,
> > eliminate some departments...The government is
> > ALWAYS asking something of taxpayers, but NEVER
> > offering to make sacrifices itself or
> jeopardize
> > funding programs they can exploit politically.
> >
> >
> > If the government is asking of more of a
> > "contribution" from earners, they should first
> > display a little bit of fiscal responsibilty of
> > their own instead of asking taxpayers to keep
> > feeding a corrupt and ineffecient machine.
>
> The negotiating game so far has been we'll keep
> ours, you cut yours.
>
> Nothing will happen.
>
> Hopefully, the fiscal cliff happens and the tax
> system gets revamped along with spending cuts.

If Owebama has anything resembling a nutsack or cared about the future of the country he would realize how desperately needed entitlement reform is..

Just my guess, but I think that staggering the retirement age or introducing means tests could do wonders for the deficit.

If Obama backed some proposals thatinvolved reform, I think he could easily shame the House repubs into backing tax increases for those in the half million + income range that would start in 2 or 3 years.

However, Owebama's present strategy is to somehow make the odd case that lower taxes is leading to a bad job market.

Class warfare of this kind does not make sense.

Poor Wingnut. He was completely wrong.

I miss that Nutty SOB.

He must be taking ol' Willard's crushing defeat even harder than poor Anne has.

That, or he's hella embarrassed.
Attachments:

Yeah, look how far we've come.

.5% change since this was posted and only because several million more people have dropped off the radar.

Winning!

lmao

Charlie Sheen Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yeah, look how far we've come.
>
> .5% change since this was posted and only because
> several million more people have dropped off the
> radar.

Not really...

According to the BLS, the US Labor Force Participation rate was 63.7% in June and 63.6% in November. FYI, one-tenth of one percent (0.1%) of the labor force is +/- 135,000.

http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000

Consided learning the facts before making an ass of yourself.

Nutty's Sack Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Charlie Sheen Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Yeah, look how far we've come.
> >
> > .5% change since this was posted and only
> because
> > several million more people have dropped off
> the
> > radar.
>
> Not really...
>
> According to the BLS, the US Labor Force
> Participation rate was 63.7% in June and 63.6% in
> November. FYI, one-tenth of one percent (0.1%) of
> the labor force is +/- 135,000.
>
> http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000
>
> Consided learning the facts before making an ass
> of yourself.



Maybe you should take your own advice.

Sorry, it's not that simple. The participation rate is a rolling calculation. You can't do it simply by difference in the % and back into it as you have since that doesn't take into account prior changes or population effects.

You'd need to look to the running total for those not in the workforce as reflected in the data used for BLS' Table A-16:

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t16.htm

Nov 2012 89,221,000 - Nov 2011 86,757,000 = 2.46 million/yr or an average of a reduction of about 200,000/month leaving the workforce which is weighted heavier in more recent months. e.g, It was about 350,000 for November 2012. "Several million" was an exaggeration but not by a lot.

Wild Thing Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sorry, it's not that simple. The participation
> rate is a rolling calculation. You can't do it
> simply by difference in the % and back into it as
> you have since that doesn't take into account
> prior changes or population effects.

Okay, then look @ the numbers.

According to the BLS, the US Civilian Labor Force - Employed was 142,220,000 in July and 143,262,00 in November. That's an increase in employment of 1,042,000.

http://bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t01.htm

> You'd need to look to the running total for those
> not in the workforce as reflected in the data used
> for BLS' Table A-16:
>
> http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t16.htm
>
> Nov 2012 89,221,000 - Nov 2011 86,757,000 = 2.46
> million/yr or an average of a reduction of about
> 200,000/month leaving the workforce which is
> weighted heavier in more recent months. e.g, It
> was about 350,000 for November 2012. "Several
> million" was an exaggeration but not by a lot.

The category "Not in the Labor Force" includes people who voluntarily left the work force and don't want a job (e.g.; retirees, stay-at-home moms, independently wealth, etc.), making it a poor metric for gauging participation. That's why there's a whole other category called Civilian Labor Force - Employed.

The point is, the assertion that the unemployment rate has fallen over the past five - six months only because "several million more people have dropped off the radar" is patently false.

Nutty's Sack Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Okay, then look @ the numbers.
>
> According to the BLS, the US Civilian Labor Force
> - Employed was 142,220,000 in July and 143,262,00
> in November. That's an increase in employment of
> 1,042,000.
>
> http://bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t01.htm
>


Again, you're ignoring prior changes to the number that affects the basis for the % calculation and population effects which make the unemployment and participation % appear smaller than they would be otherwise in a growing economy.

We need somewhere between 100,000 and 200,000 added each month just to keep up with population growth. So, at a little over 1 million jobs added we're basically just treading water and the main difference in the rate results from the size of the pie just getting smaller. If you had a more typical situation where fewer people were leaving the workforce on top of population adds, the unemployment number would be quite a point or more higher as is expected when the economy better turns around and more reenter.



> The category "Not in the Labor Force" includes
> people who voluntarily left the work force and
> don't want a job (e.g.; retirees, stay-at-home
> moms, independently wealth, etc.), making it a
> poor metric for gauging participation. That's why
> there's a whole other category called Civilian
> Labor Force - Employed.
>
> The point is, the assertion that the unemployment
> rate has fallen over the past five - six months
> only because "several million more people have
> dropped off the radar" is patently false.


Doesn't matter why they left, it still serves as the basis for the calculation. You have people leave/not in the labor force on a continual basis and they are no longer counted in the base number. The only difference now is that there are relatively more of them (for whatever reasons). The fewer of them counted, the lower the unemployment rate given the smaller basis.

It's not false. But you don't have to believe me. If you look to most any objective economic analysis group virtually all agree that the primary cause for lower unemployment numbers at this point is the reduction to the relative size of the workforce. e.g., Even by left-leaning groups like Brookings:

"For the last couple of months we have a situation where the unemployment rate is still declining, but that's because people are leaving the workforce," says Gary Burtless, a labor economist at the Brookings Institution.

That quote was from April but the same applies as the underlying circumstances represented with respect to the unemployment calculation remain the same.

Wild Thing Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Nutty's Sack Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Okay, then look @ the numbers.
> >
> > According to the BLS, the US Civilian Labor
> Force
> > - Employed was 142,220,000 in July and
> 143,262,00
> > in November. That's an increase in employment
> of
> > 1,042,000.
> >
> > http://bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t01.htm
> >
> Again, you're ignoring prior changes to the number
> that affects the basis for the % calculation and
> population effects which make the unemployment and
> participation % appear smaller than they would be
> otherwise in a growing economy.

There aren't any trends in these BLS numbers. The Civilian noninstitutional population, Civilian labor force, and Unemployed numbers are snapshots in time.

Not in labor force = Civilian noninstitutional population - Civilian labor force

Unemployed = Civilian labor force – Employed

Prior changes have nothing to do with these numbers.

There were 1,042,000 more people employed in this country in November than there were in July. During this same period, the Civilian noninstitutional population grew by 820,000, while the Civilian labor force grew by 278,000, which accounts for the 543,000 person rise in the Not in labor force number.

There were also 765,000 fewer unemployed, which is the difference between the increase in employment over the period (1,042,000) and the increase in the Civilian labor force (278,000). The economy created more jobs than there were people entering the work force, hence unemployment decreased.

> We need somewhere between 100,000 and 200,000
> added each month just to keep up with population
> growth. So, at a little over 1 million jobs added
> we're basically just treading water and the main
> difference in the rate results from the size of
> the pie just getting smaller.

The economy added nearly two jobs for each person who left the labor force over the period. That is what drove the unemployment rate down by six-tenths of a percent.

> It's not false. But you don't have to believe me.
> If you look to most any objective economic
> analysis group virtually all agree that the
> primary cause for lower unemployment numbers at
> this point is the reduction to the relative size
> of the workforce. e.g., Even by left-leaning
> groups like Brookings:
>
> "For the last couple of months we have a situation
> where the unemployment rate is still declining,
> but that's because people are leaving the
> workforce," says Gary Burtless, a labor economist
> at the Brookings Institution.
>
> That quote was from April but the same applies as
> the underlying circumstances represented with
> respect to the unemployment calculation remain the
> same.

I don’t think Mr. Burtless would agree with you:

http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/jobs/posts/2012/11/02-jobs-burtless

I assume after Obama won that unemployment and jobs fell apart right?

you missed google summer - THEY recovered

with YOUR money !

I dont know who is bumping these Wingnut threads but it is funny as hell to see how absurdly wrong Wing was in his dire predictions. Things have improved a hell of a lot under Obama after Bush scuttled our economy and led us into expensive wars killing our finest by 'accident.'

funny as hell Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I dont know who is bumping these Wingnut threads
> but it is funny as hell to see how absurdly wrong
> Wing was in his dire predictions. Things have
> improved a hell of a lot under Obama after Bush
> scuttled our economy and led us into expensive
> wars killing our finest by 'accident.'


how can someone be so stupid and yet use a keyboard?
you are comparing today which still shows no recovery to three years ago when we were promised year after year that it was going to happen any second because Hussain said so

funny as hell Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I dont know who is bumping these Wingnut threads
> but it is funny as hell to see how absurdly wrong
> Wing was in his dire predictions. Things have
> improved a hell of a lot under Obama after Bush
> scuttled our economy and led us into expensive
> wars killing our finest by 'accident.'


you are so right, funny as hell. I can't stop laughing. Oh wait. No, it's not funny, just boring. You're still a fucktard though, so you got going for you.


Conserva-tards!

Lolz!

Idiot-tards! Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> you are so right, funny as hell. I can't stop
> laughing. Oh wait. No, it's not funny, just
> boring. You're still a fucktard though, so you
> got going for you.

Conserva-tards!

Lolz!

Attachments:

funny as hell Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I dont know who is bumping these Wingnut threads
> but it is funny as hell to see how absurdly wrong
> Wing was in his dire predictions. Things have
> improved a hell of a lot under Obama after Bush
> scuttled our economy and led us into expensive
> wars killing our finest by 'accident.'

Wingnut was wrong and about every other conservative.

Let's face the facts. Republicans are just greedy little bastards who piss all over each other.

Shitty-tards! Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Idiot-tards! Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > you are so right, funny as hell. I can't stop
> > laughing. Oh wait. No, it's not funny, just
> > boring. You're still a fucktard though, so you
> > got going for you.
>
> Conserva-tards!
>
> Lolz!
>


Conserva-tards!

Lolz!


 
Attachments:

funny as hell Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I dont know who is bumping these Wingnut threads
> but it is funny as hell to see how absurdly wrong
> Wing was in his dire predictions. Things have
> improved a hell of a lot under Obama after Bush
> scuttled our economy and led us into expensive
> wars killing our finest by 'accident.'


True. We now have:

a debt larger than our entire economy

racial animus is the highest in living memory

underemployment is rampant

wage growth is stagnant

record numbers on SSI disability

record numbers on welfare

record numbers pouring through our southern border

traditional allies abandoning us in favor of China

total collapse of Iraq after abandoning it

California suffering its worst drought in recorded history

political gridlock

a near total collapse of what had been pretty much the only economic sector showing growth and paying decent wages to the unskilled

elected officials prosecuting "lawfare" against those who stand up to government

and the list goes on...


But if you say things have improved, well who's to say the facts say differently, right?

LIB-TARDZ LOLZ! Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> True. We now have:
>
> a debt larger than our entire economy

So what?

> racial animus is the highest in living memory

Hardly.

> underemployment is rampant

Not really.

> wage growth is stagnant

As it has been for decades. Thanks conserva-tards.

> record numbers on SSI disability

That's bcause there are record numbers of older Americans.

> record numbers on welfare

Not really.

> record numbers pouring through our southern
> border

Not really.

> traditional allies abandoning us in favor of
> China

Not really.

> total collapse of Iraq after abandoning it

Fuckin' Bush's blunder. No more US lives lost in that shithole. Fuck 'em.

> California suffering its worst drought in recorded
> history

POTUS controls the weather now? lol.

> political gridlock

Thanks conserva-tards.

> a near total collapse of what had been pretty much
> the only economic sector showing growth and paying
> decent wages to the unskilled

Which economic sector is this?

> elected officials prosecuting "lawfare" against
> those who stand up to government

not really.

> But if you say things have improved, well who's to
> say the facts say differently, right?

Conserva-tards!

LoLz!

Conserva-tards! Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> LIB-TARDZ LOLZ! Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > True. We now have:
> >
> > a debt larger than our entire economy
>
> So what?
>
> > racial animus is the highest in living memory
>
> Hardly.
>
> > underemployment is rampant
>
> Not really.
>
> > wage growth is stagnant
>
> As it has been for decades. Thanks
> conserva-tards.
>
> > record numbers on SSI disability
>
> That's bcause there are record numbers of older
> Americans.
>
> > record numbers on welfare
>
> Not really.
>
> > record numbers pouring through our southern
> > border
>
> Not really.
>
> > traditional allies abandoning us in favor of
> > China
>
> Not really.
>
> > total collapse of Iraq after abandoning it
>
> Fuckin' Bush's blunder. No more US lives lost in
> that shithole. Fuck 'em.
>
> > California suffering its worst drought in
> recorded
> > history
>
> POTUS controls the weather now? lol.
>
> > political gridlock
>
> Thanks conserva-tards.
>
> > a near total collapse of what had been pretty
> much
> > the only economic sector showing growth and
> paying
> > decent wages to the unskilled
>
> Which economic sector is this?
>
> > elected officials prosecuting "lawfare" against
> > those who stand up to government
>
> not really.
>
> > But if you say things have improved, well who's
> to
> > say the facts say differently, right?
>
> Conserva-tards!
>
> LoLz!


Oh you're so right. What compelling arguments. You've changed my mind. Go Hillary!

LIB-TARDZ LOLZ! Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> funny as hell Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I dont know who is bumping these Wingnut
> threads
> > but it is funny as hell to see how absurdly
> wrong
> > Wing was in his dire predictions. Things have
> > improved a hell of a lot under Obama after Bush
> > scuttled our economy and led us into expensive
> > wars killing our finest by 'accident.'
>
>
> True. We now have:
>
> a debt larger than our entire economy
>
> racial animus is the highest in living memory
>
> underemployment is rampant
>
> wage growth is stagnant
>
> record numbers on SSI disability
>
> record numbers on welfare
>
> record numbers pouring through our southern
> border
>
> traditional allies abandoning us in favor of
> China
>
> total collapse of Iraq after abandoning it
>
> California suffering its worst drought in recorded
> history
>
> political gridlock
>
> a near total collapse of what had been pretty much
> the only economic sector showing growth and paying
> decent wages to the unskilled
>
> elected officials prosecuting "lawfare" against
> those who stand up to government
>
> and the list goes on...
>
> But if you say things have improved, well who's to
> say the facts say differently, right?

Gee, what compelling arguments. SO well research & supported by facts, too. You must be so proud.

Conserva-tards!

LoLz!

bitches!

LIB-TARDZ LOLZ! Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> funny as hell Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I dont know who is bumping these Wingnut
> threads
> > but it is funny as hell to see how absurdly
> wrong
> > Wing was in his dire predictions. Things have
> > improved a hell of a lot under Obama after Bush
> > scuttled our economy and led us into expensive
> > wars killing our finest by 'accident.'
>
>
> True. We now have:
>
> a debt larger than our entire economy
>
> racial animus is the highest in living memory
>
> underemployment is rampant
>
> wage growth is stagnant
>
> record numbers on SSI disability
>
> record numbers on welfare
>
> record numbers pouring through our southern
> border
>
> traditional allies abandoning us in favor of
> China
>
> total collapse of Iraq after abandoning it
>
> California suffering its worst drought in recorded
> history
>
> political gridlock
>
> a near total collapse of what had been pretty much
> the only economic sector showing growth and paying
> decent wages to the unskilled
>
> elected officials prosecuting "lawfare" against
> those who stand up to government
>
> and the list goes on...
>
>
> But if you say things have improved, well who's to
> say the facts say differently, right?


Lol the shit Rushtards say. Just to pick one of the many false statements you just made, the reality is during the Bush administration there were tens of thousands of more illegal immigrants crossing the border, you dumb ignorant cunt. You should research some old stories from 2005 and 2006 specifically to see ABCNews, CNN, and even Fox News covering the crisis. By those standards, the kids that showed up last year are a tiny sliver of past history under republican presidents. You are cute though, faggot.

faggoty GOP gets faggoty Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> LIB-TARDZ LOLZ! Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > funny as hell Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > I dont know who is bumping these Wingnut
> > threads
> > > but it is funny as hell to see how absurdly
> > wrong
> > > Wing was in his dire predictions. Things
> have
> > > improved a hell of a lot under Obama after
> Bush
> > > scuttled our economy and led us into
> expensive
> > > wars killing our finest by 'accident.'
> >
> >
> > True. We now have:
> >
> > a debt larger than our entire economy
> >
> > racial animus is the highest in living memory
> >
> > underemployment is rampant
> >
> > wage growth is stagnant
> >
> > record numbers on SSI disability
> >
> > record numbers on welfare
> >
> > record numbers pouring through our southern
> > border
> >
> > traditional allies abandoning us in favor of
> > China
> >
> > total collapse of Iraq after abandoning it
> >
> > California suffering its worst drought in
> recorded
> > history
> >
> > political gridlock
> >
> > a near total collapse of what had been pretty
> much
> > the only economic sector showing growth and
> paying
> > decent wages to the unskilled
> >
> > elected officials prosecuting "lawfare" against
> > those who stand up to government
> >
> > and the list goes on...
> >
> >
> > But if you say things have improved, well who's
> to
> > say the facts say differently, right?
>
>
> Lol the shit Rushtards say. Just to pick one of
> the many false statements you just made, the
> reality is during the Bush administration there
> were tens of thousands of more illegal immigrants
> crossing the border, you dumb ignorant cunt. You
> should research some old stories from 2005 and
> 2006 specifically to see ABCNews, CNN, and even
> Fox News covering the crisis. By those standards,
> the kids that showed up last year are a tiny
> sliver of past history under republican
> presidents. You are cute though, faggot.

Believing evidence-based facts does not make you right - it just makes you a liberal...

Believing Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> faggoty GOP gets faggoty Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > LIB-TARDZ LOLZ! Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > funny as hell Wrote:
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > > -----
> > > > I dont know who is bumping these Wingnut
> > > threads
> > > > but it is funny as hell to see how absurdly
> > > wrong
> > > > Wing was in his dire predictions. Things
> > have
> > > > improved a hell of a lot under Obama after
> > Bush
> > > > scuttled our economy and led us into
> > expensive
> > > > wars killing our finest by 'accident.'
> > >
> > >
> > > True. We now have:
> > >
> > > a debt larger than our entire economy
> > >
> > > racial animus is the highest in living memory
> > >
> > > underemployment is rampant
> > >
> > > wage growth is stagnant
> > >
> > > record numbers on SSI disability
> > >
> > > record numbers on welfare
> > >
> > > record numbers pouring through our southern
> > > border
> > >
> > > traditional allies abandoning us in favor of
> > > China
> > >
> > > total collapse of Iraq after abandoning it
> > >
> > > California suffering its worst drought in
> > recorded
> > > history
> > >
> > > political gridlock
> > >
> > > a near total collapse of what had been pretty
> > much
> > > the only economic sector showing growth and
> > paying
> > > decent wages to the unskilled
> > >
> > > elected officials prosecuting "lawfare"
> against
> > > those who stand up to government
> > >
> > > and the list goes on...
> > >
> > >
> > > But if you say things have improved, well
> who's
> > to
> > > say the facts say differently, right?
> >
> >
> > Lol the shit Rushtards say. Just to pick one of
> > the many false statements you just made, the
> > reality is during the Bush administration there
> > were tens of thousands of more illegal
> immigrants
> > crossing the border, you dumb ignorant cunt.
> You
> > should research some old stories from 2005 and
> > 2006 specifically to see ABCNews, CNN, and even
> > Fox News covering the crisis. By those
> standards,
> > the kids that showed up last year are a tiny
> > sliver of past history under republican
> > presidents. You are cute though, faggot.
>
> Believing evidence-based facts does not make you
> right - it just makes you a liberal...


I love when fagnut is wrong

WingNut Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> More people went on disability in June 2012 than
> got jobs.
>
> 80K Jobs vs. 85K went on disability.
>
> How on Earth is this good?
>
>
> http://news.investors.com/article/617233/201207060
> 945/disability-climbs-faster-than-jobs-under-obama
> .htm
>
> Dear America,
>
> Please stop being such faggots.
>
> Thanks!
> WingNut

The economy got better and you still complain you still lie and say they are only low pay jobs, you keep bringing up participation rate without admitting that the labor force average has dropped 2 years since the recession, ie boomers are retiring faster than millenials are replacing them. You refuse to acknowledge any of it because you have been hoping for a second recession for 7 years now. You dont care about america, you care only about your partys backwards ass ideology being right. Wevetried trickle down tax cuts twice now and it never worked so fuck off and die already. Lets try raising the minimum wage asshole

Let's see now.

320 million people in the USA.

93 million dropped out/NOT in the workforce.

But SOMEHOW, we have 4.9% unemployment. Gotta love that math !!!!!!!!!!

Libtardz are good little government bots. They lap up everything their masters tell them, even when it's clearly wrong.

Libtardz!

LoLz!

Admit it Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WingNut Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > More people went on disability in June 2012
> than
> > got jobs.
> >
> > 80K Jobs vs. 85K went on disability.
> >
> > How on Earth is this good?
> >
> >
> >
> http://news.investors.com/article/617233/201207060
>
> >
> 945/disability-climbs-faster-than-jobs-under-obama
>
> > .htm
> >
> > Dear America,
> >
> > Please stop being such faggots.
> >
> > Thanks!
> > WingNut
>
> The economy got better and you still complain you
> still lie and say they are only low pay jobs, you
> keep bringing up participation rate without
> admitting that the labor force average has dropped
> 2 years since the recession, ie boomers are
> retiring faster than millenials are replacing
> them. You refuse to acknowledge any of it because
> you have been hoping for a second recession for 7
> years now. You dont care about america, you care
> only about your partys backwards ass ideology
> being right. Wevetried trickle down tax cuts twice
> now and it never worked so fuck off and die
> already. Lets try raising the minimum wage asshole

Either a troll post or opposite day.

America cannot continue in this depression the Dems keep us in.

Republicans are a scourge.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Republicans are a scourge.


I will accept that considering the alternative is being a felon or a socialist.