dreamdancer 0 #1 September 17, 2010 is the empire crumbling... QuoteOne in seven Americans now live on or below the poverty line, according to figures published by the US Census Bureau. It is the sharpest annual rise for three decades, and analysts predicted next year's figures will be even worse. According to the bureau, 43.6 million people or 14.3% of the population were in poverty in 2009, up from 39.8 million in 2008. This is the third consecutive annual rise. The hardest-hit are African-Americans and Hispanics. The numbers are comparable to poverty levels of the early 1960s that led President Lyndon Johnson to launch his "war on poverty" as part of the "Great Society", a series of programmes aimed at creating jobs and providing welfare – his equivalent of Franklin D Roosevelt's New Deal. The jump coincided with the first year of Barack Obama's presidency and reflected the impact of the recession on jobs. William Frey, a demographer at the Brookings Institution, said: "The one-year gain in poverty is the highest in almost three decades, when unemployment shot up in the early 1980s. It's only the beginning, since I would expect an even higher level next year. "What's important this time, is that [it] has especially affected previously growing parts of the country in the south and west, and the nation's fastest growing minorities, Hispanics. They are certainly not as horrific as before the Great Society but they reflect a huge shock to large parts of America." http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/sep/16/four-million-americans-poverty-one-yearstay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #2 September 17, 2010 That can be corrected at the stroke of a pen ..... Change the trigger point. (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 0 #3 September 17, 2010 We need to make this a standard SC poll: [ ] It's Bush's fault for military spending and sucking up to the banks. [ ] It's Obama's fault cuz it shoulda been fixed by now. Where's the "change"? [ ] Clinton did it first. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #4 September 17, 2010 You left out an important option (the correct one) [ ] Politicians from both parties have been going this way for decadeswitty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #5 September 17, 2010 Quoteis the empire crumbling... QuoteOne in seven Americans now live on or below the poverty line, according to figures published by the US Census Bureau. It is the sharpest annual rise for three decades, and analysts predicted next year's figures will be even worse. According to the bureau, 43.6 million people or 14.3% of the population were in poverty in 2009, up from 39.8 million in 2008. This is the third consecutive annual rise. The hardest-hit are African-Americans and Hispanics. The numbers are comparable to poverty levels of the early 1960s that led President Lyndon Johnson to launch his "war on poverty" as part of the "Great Society", a series of programmes aimed at creating jobs and providing welfare – his equivalent of Franklin D Roosevelt's New Deal. The jump coincided with the first year of Barack Obama's presidency and reflected the impact of the recession on jobs. William Frey, a demographer at the Brookings Institution, said: "The one-year gain in poverty is the highest in almost three decades, when unemployment shot up in the early 1980s. It's only the beginning, since I would expect an even higher level next year. "What's important this time, is that [it] has especially affected previously growing parts of the country in the south and west, and the nation's fastest growing minorities, Hispanics. They are certainly not as horrific as before the Great Society but they reflect a huge shock to large parts of America." http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/sep/16/four-million-americans-poverty-one-year I guess many out here don't really understand what poverty is and are gulible enough to be mislead. There is a difference between a lower income and poverty. Poverty is what I have seen in third world countries. Low income is what I see here. The reb's blame the dem's and the dem's blame the reb's. What we really have is government steeling the income from people (by the way of taxes) to support their agendas. More people would have higher incomes if the government would ruduce spending and lower taxes on those that produce jobs. Also government needs to protect american jobs and manufacturing by giving concessions to companies that keep jobs here in the US and hire legal citizens. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 200 #6 September 17, 2010 I'm gonna need some help with the math here. US population 308,000,000 Porkulas Bill $700,000,000,000 How is it that 1 in 7 lives in poverty?Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #7 September 17, 2010 QuoteI'm gonna need some help with the math here. US population 308,000,000 Porkulas Bill $700,000,000,000 How is it that 1 in 7 lives in poverty? Yes you do Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
funjumper101 15 #8 September 17, 2010 Quote I guess many out here don't really understand what poverty is and are gulible enough to be mislead. There is a difference between a lower income and poverty. Poverty is what I have seen in third world countries. Low income is what I see here. The reb's blame the dem's and the dem's blame the reb's. What we really have is government steeling the income from people (by the way of taxes) to support their agendas. More people would have higher incomes if the government would ruduce spending and lower taxes on those that produce jobs. Also government needs to protect american jobs and manufacturing by giving concessions to companies that keep jobs here in the US and hire legal citizens. I guess that there are many out there that don't understand the US Census Bureau and what they do. They don't understand statistics, especially when the statistics show things that they don't like. They don't bother to educate thenselves as to what the real meaning of the statistics are, how the conclusions were reached, and what the causes for the drastic changes were. Instead, they post ignorant bullshit on Internet forums. Bullshit that has nothing to do with the subject at hand. Bullshit that attempts to compare apples to ju-ju fruit candy. The USA slips ever faster towards second world economic status, cheered on by these very same people. Very depressing... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
loumeinhart 0 #9 September 17, 2010 QuoteI guess many out here don't really understand what poverty is and are gulible enough to be mislead I would like to know the stats on how many 'impoverished' have mobile telephones, xbox, air conditioning, transportation, cable tv, jewelry, and ipods.. Funny that at one time the above luxuries were only for the super rich. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #10 September 18, 2010 QuoteYou left out an important option (the correct one) [ ] Politicians from both parties have been going this way for decades Really? The Great Depression occurred under Harding, Coolidge and Hoover, was fixed under 20 years of FDR and Truman. The debt crisis of the 80's occurred under mostly Reagan, but the rate of damage was highe runder GWHB in spite of the fact that he made small changes to try to reverse it. The debt mess was stopped under Clinton. The mortgage meltdown oiccurred under GWB, now Obama has to fix it. So I don't see your, "they both do it" secenario. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #11 September 18, 2010 QuoteQuoteis the empire crumbling... QuoteOne in seven Americans now live on or below the poverty line, according to figures published by the US Census Bureau. It is the sharpest annual rise for three decades, and analysts predicted next year's figures will be even worse. According to the bureau, 43.6 million people or 14.3% of the population were in poverty in 2009, up from 39.8 million in 2008. This is the third consecutive annual rise. The hardest-hit are African-Americans and Hispanics. The numbers are comparable to poverty levels of the early 1960s that led President Lyndon Johnson to launch his "war on poverty" as part of the "Great Society", a series of programmes aimed at creating jobs and providing welfare – his equivalent of Franklin D Roosevelt's New Deal. The jump coincided with the first year of Barack Obama's presidency and reflected the impact of the recession on jobs. William Frey, a demographer at the Brookings Institution, said: "The one-year gain in poverty is the highest in almost three decades, when unemployment shot up in the early 1980s. It's only the beginning, since I would expect an even higher level next year. "What's important this time, is that [it] has especially affected previously growing parts of the country in the south and west, and the nation's fastest growing minorities, Hispanics. They are certainly not as horrific as before the Great Society but they reflect a huge shock to large parts of America." http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/sep/16/four-million-americans-poverty-one-year QuoteI guess many out here don't really understand what poverty is and are gulible enough to be mislead. There is a difference between a lower income and poverty. Poverty is what I have seen in third world countries. Low income is what I see here. Yea, people living in tents here are just winers, as McCain's aise said; I see where they support their electorate and vice versa. QuoteThe reb's blame the dem's and the dem's blame the reb's. What we really have is government steeling the income from people (by the way of taxes) to support their agendas. Really? Explain how teh country does better under periods of higher stealing, worse under lower stealing? QuoteMore people would have higher incomes if the government would ruduce spending and lower taxes on those that produce jobs. Other than your wild-ass opinion/ideology, what supports that? And is it ok if we cut military spending? QuoteAlso government needs to protect american jobs and manufacturing by giving concessions to companies that keep jobs here in the US and hire legal citizens. Agreed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #12 September 18, 2010 QuoteI'm gonna need some help with the math here. US population 308,000,000 Porkulas Bill $700,000,000,000 How is it that 1 in 7 lives in poverty? Only part of the stimulus was spent, it flipped the GDP in record time and curbed skyrocketing unemployment; AKA no big deal in your terms. Not only that but the stimulus wasn't for people in poverty, it went to home buyers, auto buyers and other programs for already productive people, it wasn't garden variety welfare as you think it is. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites marks2065 0 #13 September 18, 2010 I have not seen any tents in my comunity lately. in the low income section of the town I work in, most have cell phones and thousand dollar rims. go to dominican republic and mexico if you want to see poverty. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites marks2065 0 #14 September 18, 2010 QuoteQuoteYou left out an important option (the correct one) [ ] Politicians from both parties have been going this way for decades Really? The Great Depression occurred under Harding, Coolidge and Hoover, was fixed under 20 years of FDR and Truman. The debt crisis of the 80's occurred under mostly Reagan, but the rate of damage was highe runder GWHB in spite of the fact that he made small changes to try to reverse it. The debt mess was stopped under Clinton. The mortgage meltdown oiccurred under GWB, now Obama has to fix it. So I don't see your, "they both do it" secenario. you need to see who wrote the bills and stopped the bills before placing blame. all you can seem to see is whats on the surface. Take the blinders off and open your eyes. Just under 20 million jobs were created under reagan and 10 million under bush, how many has Obama created? and you can't blame the recession because reagan had one to. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites airdvr 200 #15 September 18, 2010 Quote I have not seen any tents in my comunity lately. in the low income section of the town I work in, most have cell phones and thousand dollar rims. go to dominican republic and mexico if you want to see poverty. Nah..not like you see it in Jamaica mon Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites marks2065 0 #16 September 18, 2010 Quote Quote I have not seen any tents in my comunity lately. in the low income section of the town I work in, most have cell phones and thousand dollar rims. go to dominican republic and mexico if you want to see poverty. Nah..not like you see it in Jamaica mon I have seen 1 room houses with out houses and kitchens outside the house with no roofs. some houses had walls made of different materials and some had only 3 walls. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dreamdancer 0 #17 September 18, 2010 QuoteWhile 43.6 million Americans live in poverty, the richest men of finance sure are getting pissy. First Steve Schwartzman, head of the Blackrock private equity company, compares the Obama administration's effort to close billionaires' tax loopholes to "the Nazi invasion of Poland." Then hedge fund mogul David Loeb announces that he's abandoning the Democrats because they're violating "this country's core founding principles" -- including "non-punitive taxation, Constitutionally-guaranteed protections against persecution of the minority, and an inexorable right of self-determination." Instead of showing their outrage about the spread of poverty in the richest nation on Earth, the super-rich want us to pity them? Why are Wall Street's billionaires so whiny? Is it really possible to make $900,000 an hour (not a typo -- that's what the top ten hedge fund managers take in), and still feel aggrieved about the way government is treating you? After you've been bailed out by the federal government to the tune of $10 trillion (also not a typo) in loans, asset swaps, liquidity and other guarantees, can you really still feel like an oppressed minority? http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/09/17-5stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kelpdiver 2 #18 September 19, 2010 Larry Fink is the head of Blackrock. This guy is the head of Blackstone. hopefully the article (reported widely) didn't get other simple details incorrect. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #19 September 19, 2010 Quote I have not seen any tents in my comunity lately. in the low income section of the town I work in, most have cell phones and thousand dollar rims. go to dominican republic and mexico if you want to see poverty. I know, we should just cut taxes and nix this silly HC thing, only certain people need it after all. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #20 September 19, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteYou left out an important option (the correct one) [ ] Politicians from both parties have been going this way for decades Really? The Great Depression occurred under Harding, Coolidge and Hoover, was fixed under 20 years of FDR and Truman. The debt crisis of the 80's occurred under mostly Reagan, but the rate of damage was highe runder GWHB in spite of the fact that he made small changes to try to reverse it. The debt mess was stopped under Clinton. The mortgage meltdown oiccurred under GWB, now Obama has to fix it. So I don't see your, "they both do it" secenario. Quote you need to see who wrote the bills and stopped the bills before placing blame. all you can seem to see is whats on the surface. I know, 100 years of the same usual sociopaths doing the same things. And then we can talk NIXON: The media is our enemy ( repeat several times), college professors are our enemy (repeat several times). Other tna Eisenhower and GHWB, your party has been shit since Teddy, 100 years ago. You can play these vague game and throw your hands in the air as I bring hard data and evets that, to an objective person, yields that these events happened during and as a cause of that sociopathic party. QuoteTake the blinders off and open your eyes. See, this is why I do silly things like posts data and you do brilliant thinsg like tell me to take the blinders off. QuoteJust under 20 million jobs were created under reagan and 10 million under bush, ... See, if you outright lie, then your guy looks brilliant and you appear to be on top of the data. Kinda like lawrocket telling us the 1997 capital gains tax cut of 8% was a major tax cut. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jobs_created_during_U.S._presidential_terms Job growth under: Reagan: 16.1M GHWB: 2.6M Clinton: 22.7 GWB: 1.1 16M is a far cry from 20M and both Bush's didn't create 4M, let alone the 10M you assigned to the sociopathic one. Oh and Clinton produced 22.7M jobs and I bet the wages were higher too, let me check.....Ah yes, as I suspected; wages blew up big time under Clinton, were modest under Reagan and dismal under your other hero. http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/W209RC1?cid=110 So let's recap: Clinton produced more jobs and the wages were extremely higher versus your ill data that was incorrect anyway. You guys are so fun to beat up on and then watch you say, "so, that doesn't matter." Easy... Quotehow many has Obama created? -3.1M and he's still ranked above Reagan and of course GWB (I'm ranked higher than GWB). I guess if you look past the fact that the unemp rate increased 3.4% from fed 08 to Feb 09 then it really all is Obama's fault. I mean he saved the auto industry, he and GWB saved the banks, Obama made them pay it back or act responbsibly so many have paid it back under Obama and he and his stimulus has flipped teh dead GDP, cut the skyrocketing unemp rate and is now creating jobs, even in light of teh census workers jobs ending. Again, if you want to downplay the 2nd worst economy, not to mention 2 BS wars that Obama inherited, then you can also do whatever else you want. If you want to be honest and realize that Obama has an abortion to deal with, then you have started to look at obvious, moot issues. Quote and you can't blame the recession because reagan had one to. Reagan inherited a lame economy and high intrates, he made his own recession by allowing Volkers to contract the money supply versus other means that wouldn't just starve out the littl guy like that fucking corpo-fascist pig did. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_recessions_in_the_United_States 1980 recession 1980Jan–July 1980 066 months (July 1980) 02.2−2.2% The NBER considers a short recession to have occurred in 1980, followed by a short period of growth and then a deep recession. Unemployment remained relatively elevated in between recessions. The recession began as the Federal Reserve, under Paul Volcker raised interest rates dramatically to fight the inflation of the 1970s. The early '80s are sometimes referred to as a "double-dip" or "W-shaped" recession.[29][40 Early 1980s recession 1981July 1981 – Nov 1982 161 year 4 months 0121 year 10.8 10.8% (Nov 1982) 02.7−2.7% The Iranian Revolution sharply increased the price of oil around the world in 1979, causing the 1979 energy crisis. This was caused by the new regime in power in Iran, which exported oil at inconsistent intervals and at a lower volume, forcing prices up. Tight monetary policy in the United States to control inflation led to another recession. The changes were made largely because of inflation carried over from the previous decade because of the 1973 oil crisis and the 1979 energy crisis.[41][42] So the senile one created his own recession by allowing Volker to do what he wanted, but he inherited the economy sluggish but not in recession. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites futuredivot 0 #21 September 19, 2010 Quote I know, we should just cut taxes and nix this silly HC thing, only certain people need it after all. Finally you make sense.You are only as strong as the prey you devour Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #22 September 19, 2010 QuoteQuote I know, we should just cut taxes and nix this silly HC thing, only certain people need it after all. Finally you make sense. Finally, a 1-liner. Thx for contributing, we're all the better for it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rushmc 18 #23 September 19, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuote I know, we should just cut taxes and nix this silly HC thing, only certain people need it after all. Finally you make sense. Finally, a 1-liner. Thx for contributing, we're all the better for it. It was far better than your rambling rant"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Coreece 190 #24 September 19, 2010 QuoteAccording to the bureau, 43.6 million people or 14.3% of the population were in poverty in 2009, up from 39.8 million in 2008. This is the third consecutive annual rise. The hardest-hit are African-Americans and Hispanics. I wonder how many of them are illegals?Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites turtlespeed 212 #25 September 19, 2010 QuoteQuoteAccording to the bureau, 43.6 million people or 14.3% of the population were in poverty in 2009, up from 39.8 million in 2008. This is the third consecutive annual rise. The hardest-hit are African-Americans and Hispanics. I wonder how many of them are illegals? The feds only have reported income to go off of. Not income received "under the table" or "off the books". Just like the guy that has a 4 bedroom house and 3 SUVs and makes his living begging for change on the corner. Wow - that sounds familiar, somone making a living with change, coincidence?I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 Next Page 1 of 3 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
Lucky... 0 #12 September 18, 2010 QuoteI'm gonna need some help with the math here. US population 308,000,000 Porkulas Bill $700,000,000,000 How is it that 1 in 7 lives in poverty? Only part of the stimulus was spent, it flipped the GDP in record time and curbed skyrocketing unemployment; AKA no big deal in your terms. Not only that but the stimulus wasn't for people in poverty, it went to home buyers, auto buyers and other programs for already productive people, it wasn't garden variety welfare as you think it is. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #13 September 18, 2010 I have not seen any tents in my comunity lately. in the low income section of the town I work in, most have cell phones and thousand dollar rims. go to dominican republic and mexico if you want to see poverty. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #14 September 18, 2010 QuoteQuoteYou left out an important option (the correct one) [ ] Politicians from both parties have been going this way for decades Really? The Great Depression occurred under Harding, Coolidge and Hoover, was fixed under 20 years of FDR and Truman. The debt crisis of the 80's occurred under mostly Reagan, but the rate of damage was highe runder GWHB in spite of the fact that he made small changes to try to reverse it. The debt mess was stopped under Clinton. The mortgage meltdown oiccurred under GWB, now Obama has to fix it. So I don't see your, "they both do it" secenario. you need to see who wrote the bills and stopped the bills before placing blame. all you can seem to see is whats on the surface. Take the blinders off and open your eyes. Just under 20 million jobs were created under reagan and 10 million under bush, how many has Obama created? and you can't blame the recession because reagan had one to. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 200 #15 September 18, 2010 Quote I have not seen any tents in my comunity lately. in the low income section of the town I work in, most have cell phones and thousand dollar rims. go to dominican republic and mexico if you want to see poverty. Nah..not like you see it in Jamaica mon Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #16 September 18, 2010 Quote Quote I have not seen any tents in my comunity lately. in the low income section of the town I work in, most have cell phones and thousand dollar rims. go to dominican republic and mexico if you want to see poverty. Nah..not like you see it in Jamaica mon I have seen 1 room houses with out houses and kitchens outside the house with no roofs. some houses had walls made of different materials and some had only 3 walls. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #17 September 18, 2010 QuoteWhile 43.6 million Americans live in poverty, the richest men of finance sure are getting pissy. First Steve Schwartzman, head of the Blackrock private equity company, compares the Obama administration's effort to close billionaires' tax loopholes to "the Nazi invasion of Poland." Then hedge fund mogul David Loeb announces that he's abandoning the Democrats because they're violating "this country's core founding principles" -- including "non-punitive taxation, Constitutionally-guaranteed protections against persecution of the minority, and an inexorable right of self-determination." Instead of showing their outrage about the spread of poverty in the richest nation on Earth, the super-rich want us to pity them? Why are Wall Street's billionaires so whiny? Is it really possible to make $900,000 an hour (not a typo -- that's what the top ten hedge fund managers take in), and still feel aggrieved about the way government is treating you? After you've been bailed out by the federal government to the tune of $10 trillion (also not a typo) in loans, asset swaps, liquidity and other guarantees, can you really still feel like an oppressed minority? http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/09/17-5stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #18 September 19, 2010 Larry Fink is the head of Blackrock. This guy is the head of Blackstone. hopefully the article (reported widely) didn't get other simple details incorrect. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #19 September 19, 2010 Quote I have not seen any tents in my comunity lately. in the low income section of the town I work in, most have cell phones and thousand dollar rims. go to dominican republic and mexico if you want to see poverty. I know, we should just cut taxes and nix this silly HC thing, only certain people need it after all. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #20 September 19, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteYou left out an important option (the correct one) [ ] Politicians from both parties have been going this way for decades Really? The Great Depression occurred under Harding, Coolidge and Hoover, was fixed under 20 years of FDR and Truman. The debt crisis of the 80's occurred under mostly Reagan, but the rate of damage was highe runder GWHB in spite of the fact that he made small changes to try to reverse it. The debt mess was stopped under Clinton. The mortgage meltdown oiccurred under GWB, now Obama has to fix it. So I don't see your, "they both do it" secenario. Quote you need to see who wrote the bills and stopped the bills before placing blame. all you can seem to see is whats on the surface. I know, 100 years of the same usual sociopaths doing the same things. And then we can talk NIXON: The media is our enemy ( repeat several times), college professors are our enemy (repeat several times). Other tna Eisenhower and GHWB, your party has been shit since Teddy, 100 years ago. You can play these vague game and throw your hands in the air as I bring hard data and evets that, to an objective person, yields that these events happened during and as a cause of that sociopathic party. QuoteTake the blinders off and open your eyes. See, this is why I do silly things like posts data and you do brilliant thinsg like tell me to take the blinders off. QuoteJust under 20 million jobs were created under reagan and 10 million under bush, ... See, if you outright lie, then your guy looks brilliant and you appear to be on top of the data. Kinda like lawrocket telling us the 1997 capital gains tax cut of 8% was a major tax cut. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jobs_created_during_U.S._presidential_terms Job growth under: Reagan: 16.1M GHWB: 2.6M Clinton: 22.7 GWB: 1.1 16M is a far cry from 20M and both Bush's didn't create 4M, let alone the 10M you assigned to the sociopathic one. Oh and Clinton produced 22.7M jobs and I bet the wages were higher too, let me check.....Ah yes, as I suspected; wages blew up big time under Clinton, were modest under Reagan and dismal under your other hero. http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/W209RC1?cid=110 So let's recap: Clinton produced more jobs and the wages were extremely higher versus your ill data that was incorrect anyway. You guys are so fun to beat up on and then watch you say, "so, that doesn't matter." Easy... Quotehow many has Obama created? -3.1M and he's still ranked above Reagan and of course GWB (I'm ranked higher than GWB). I guess if you look past the fact that the unemp rate increased 3.4% from fed 08 to Feb 09 then it really all is Obama's fault. I mean he saved the auto industry, he and GWB saved the banks, Obama made them pay it back or act responbsibly so many have paid it back under Obama and he and his stimulus has flipped teh dead GDP, cut the skyrocketing unemp rate and is now creating jobs, even in light of teh census workers jobs ending. Again, if you want to downplay the 2nd worst economy, not to mention 2 BS wars that Obama inherited, then you can also do whatever else you want. If you want to be honest and realize that Obama has an abortion to deal with, then you have started to look at obvious, moot issues. Quote and you can't blame the recession because reagan had one to. Reagan inherited a lame economy and high intrates, he made his own recession by allowing Volkers to contract the money supply versus other means that wouldn't just starve out the littl guy like that fucking corpo-fascist pig did. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_recessions_in_the_United_States 1980 recession 1980Jan–July 1980 066 months (July 1980) 02.2−2.2% The NBER considers a short recession to have occurred in 1980, followed by a short period of growth and then a deep recession. Unemployment remained relatively elevated in between recessions. The recession began as the Federal Reserve, under Paul Volcker raised interest rates dramatically to fight the inflation of the 1970s. The early '80s are sometimes referred to as a "double-dip" or "W-shaped" recession.[29][40 Early 1980s recession 1981July 1981 – Nov 1982 161 year 4 months 0121 year 10.8 10.8% (Nov 1982) 02.7−2.7% The Iranian Revolution sharply increased the price of oil around the world in 1979, causing the 1979 energy crisis. This was caused by the new regime in power in Iran, which exported oil at inconsistent intervals and at a lower volume, forcing prices up. Tight monetary policy in the United States to control inflation led to another recession. The changes were made largely because of inflation carried over from the previous decade because of the 1973 oil crisis and the 1979 energy crisis.[41][42] So the senile one created his own recession by allowing Volker to do what he wanted, but he inherited the economy sluggish but not in recession. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites futuredivot 0 #21 September 19, 2010 Quote I know, we should just cut taxes and nix this silly HC thing, only certain people need it after all. Finally you make sense.You are only as strong as the prey you devour Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #22 September 19, 2010 QuoteQuote I know, we should just cut taxes and nix this silly HC thing, only certain people need it after all. Finally you make sense. Finally, a 1-liner. Thx for contributing, we're all the better for it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rushmc 18 #23 September 19, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuote I know, we should just cut taxes and nix this silly HC thing, only certain people need it after all. Finally you make sense. Finally, a 1-liner. Thx for contributing, we're all the better for it. It was far better than your rambling rant"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Coreece 190 #24 September 19, 2010 QuoteAccording to the bureau, 43.6 million people or 14.3% of the population were in poverty in 2009, up from 39.8 million in 2008. This is the third consecutive annual rise. The hardest-hit are African-Americans and Hispanics. I wonder how many of them are illegals?Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites turtlespeed 212 #25 September 19, 2010 QuoteQuoteAccording to the bureau, 43.6 million people or 14.3% of the population were in poverty in 2009, up from 39.8 million in 2008. This is the third consecutive annual rise. The hardest-hit are African-Americans and Hispanics. I wonder how many of them are illegals? The feds only have reported income to go off of. Not income received "under the table" or "off the books". Just like the guy that has a 4 bedroom house and 3 SUVs and makes his living begging for change on the corner. Wow - that sounds familiar, somone making a living with change, coincidence?I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 Next Page 1 of 3 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
futuredivot 0 #21 September 19, 2010 Quote I know, we should just cut taxes and nix this silly HC thing, only certain people need it after all. Finally you make sense.You are only as strong as the prey you devour Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #22 September 19, 2010 QuoteQuote I know, we should just cut taxes and nix this silly HC thing, only certain people need it after all. Finally you make sense. Finally, a 1-liner. Thx for contributing, we're all the better for it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #23 September 19, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuote I know, we should just cut taxes and nix this silly HC thing, only certain people need it after all. Finally you make sense. Finally, a 1-liner. Thx for contributing, we're all the better for it. It was far better than your rambling rant"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Coreece 190 #24 September 19, 2010 QuoteAccording to the bureau, 43.6 million people or 14.3% of the population were in poverty in 2009, up from 39.8 million in 2008. This is the third consecutive annual rise. The hardest-hit are African-Americans and Hispanics. I wonder how many of them are illegals?Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 212 #25 September 19, 2010 QuoteQuoteAccording to the bureau, 43.6 million people or 14.3% of the population were in poverty in 2009, up from 39.8 million in 2008. This is the third consecutive annual rise. The hardest-hit are African-Americans and Hispanics. I wonder how many of them are illegals? The feds only have reported income to go off of. Not income received "under the table" or "off the books". Just like the guy that has a 4 bedroom house and 3 SUVs and makes his living begging for change on the corner. Wow - that sounds familiar, somone making a living with change, coincidence?I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
