I'd ask you put down your Democrat pom-poms for a moment and think about this:
Congress doesn't create lasting jobs, people and businesses do.
Party composition does not matter in the above.
***Yes, I know you're going to say - that's not true - they can create lasting jobs. I'd say - umm rarely. But, fine - let's add a caveat -government can create lasting positions here or there, if they have the money. But, ummm... the US gov't does not have money right now. Moreover, even if they did, they can't nearly at the pace or magnitude the private sector can. Anyway, right now the gov't can't. The argument that the "Congress" or the "President" or the "Fed" can create lasting jobs right now is the equivalent to arguing a person who's foreclosing on his home can. All they can do is alter the incentive structure for us or business to create jobs. Right now - people and businesses are scared to invest in human capital (and other forms of capital) and they have good reason to be. Hence - weak job gains.
*****Now, feel free to pick up your pom-poms and go back to the cheer game.
Yeah this poop and why not you are here using pom-poms about your GOP GO AHEAD VOTE FOR ROMNEY ...
First, I'd recommend you learn how to type a coherent sentence. Second, I'd ask why you think I have GOP pom-poms regarding anything whatsoever? I have opinions on markets, and life in general but... The GOP, in recent times, have been a failure. Yet, anyone who defends the buffoon in office, or his party, clearly has issues admitting that the Democrats have been a dismal failure as well. They have pom-poms in hand. Particularly, those here. Party rhetoric is party rhetoric.
The whole thing - you seem to support - is a political football game. Saying one side is better than the other. That's what I was attempting to point out to your fellow "D" lover. I am not trying to be insulting whatsoever, but trying to point out it's a game - and you don't know it. There's people on both sides here... R and D pom-poms... then there's some who have their own opinions - and may seem to side with one side based on their own opinions. I could give you examples of each - but, I think it's unnecessary.
Anyway, you and gimme both may have pom-poms and a nice sweater with the letter "D" written on it - but, this is a message board. You seemingly don't have ideas that either party may or may not support idea A or B - it's all about party support. It seems your guided by their opinions, not your own. To me - that's what's wrong with society. It seems you both just want to support your team - not ideas. Go ahead... if you feel that supporting a party is winning approach - awesome. Good for you.
Me? Well, I think the last two administrations were terrible. Bush was awful - he increased spending, led us into wars - he was terrible. Obama was even worse. My measure - US Debt, unemployment - general economic statistics. The guy thought spending would help us out - it made our debt worse... it's a fact. If I was omnipotent - Would I re-elect Bush right now? Fuck no. Would I re-elect Obama in Nov? Fuck no. Do I think Romney will be a good President? No, I don't.
Who would I elect? Ron Paul. That's that. End of story.
Was it Sunday morning when my President came on and said to me
everything is fine in the private sector,
this while enjoying my first cup of coffee?
JB across from me...
our eyes met, really I almost cried ...
:wtf: was that?
Just so he knows I am not doing fine, neither are all the unemployed,
those still upside down in their houses or now having to rent,
those coming home from war with no job prospects,
small businesses in a hole of taxes afraid to take on a new employee.
That was really the most helpless feeling to hear him say those words.
I thought this year things would be so much better,
high hopes I had for him and me.
And yes we permanently laid off someone this spring ...
we added to the rise.
Job growth remained stuck in June, depriving President Barack Obama of progress on voters’ overriding concern with just four months to go before the election.
U.S. employers added 80,000 jobs last month, below economists’ forecasts and up only slightly from a 77,000 increase in May. The jobless rate stalled at 8.2 percent, the same as it was in March.
So, in 2009 there were 77 million students (at all levels) and 7.1 million teachers. 10-1 seems not so shabby. Oh, and about 1/2 of those teachers taught elementary and middle school.
National average pay $52,800. Apply that over 12 months of work it would be over $60,000 per year, not bad.
Question: Are the people who are complaining about today's 8.2% unemployment rate the SAME people who thought GM and Chrysler should have been allowed to fail back in 2009?
...
Just wonderin'.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
Question: Are the people who are complaining about today's 8.2% unemployment rate the SAME people who thought GM and Chrysler should have been allowed to fail back in 2009?
...
Just wonderin'.
:corn:
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
Question: Are the people who are complaining about today's 8.2% unemployment rate the SAME people who thought GM and Chrysler should have been allowed to fail back in 2009?
...
Just wonderin'.
:corn:
...
Is there one of those smiley faces for: **crickets**... **crickets**...?
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
The unemployment rate was still high during FDR's first two terms, much higher than it is now, but the American people didn't blame him for it then. They'll understand this time that Mitt Romney's policies would be the same as Bush's, if not worse.
The vote to advance the bill was 50 to 50. Democrats needed 60 votes to overcome a Republican filibuster.
This time, the bill was narrowed to provide $35 billion to state and local governments to prevent layoffs of teachers, police officers and firefighters. To offset the cost, the bill would impose a surtax of 0.5 percent, starting in 2013, on income in excess of $1 million.
'Republicans in the Senate Thursday dealt President Barack Obama the third in a string of defeats on his stimulus-style jobs agenda, blocking a $60 billion measure for building and repairing infrastructure like roads and rail lines.
Supporters of the failed measure said it would have created tens of thousands of construction jobs and lifted the still-struggling economy. But Republicans unanimously opposed it for its tax surcharge on the wealthy..'
The vote to advance the bill was 50 to 50. Democrats needed 60 votes to overcome a Republican filibuster.
This time, the bill was narrowed to provide $35 billion to state and local governments to prevent layoffs of teachers, police officers and firefighters. To offset the cost, the bill would impose a surtax of 0.5 percent, starting in 2013, on income in excess of $1 million.
'Republicans in the Senate Thursday dealt President Barack Obama the third in a string of defeats on his stimulus-style jobs agenda, blocking a $60 billion measure for building and repairing infrastructure like roads and rail lines.
Supporters of the failed measure said it would have created tens of thousands of construction jobs and lifted the still-struggling economy. But Republicans unanimously opposed it for its tax surcharge on the wealthy..'
Obama is like an angry wife.....She knows you're swimming in debt, but she's going to prove what a jerk you are for not going out and getting a 5th job to pay down the debt by spending money on a couch to replace the broken couch that could be fixed less expensively with a little attention. :roll:
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
The vote to advance the bill was 50 to 50. Democrats needed 60 votes to overcome a Republican filibuster.
This time, the bill was narrowed to provide $35 billion to state and local governments to prevent layoffs of teachers, police officers and firefighters. To offset the cost, the bill would impose a surtax of 0.5 percent, starting in 2013, on income in excess of $1 million.
'Republicans in the Senate Thursday dealt President Barack Obama the third in a string of defeats on his stimulus-style jobs agenda, blocking a $60 billion measure for building and repairing infrastructure like roads and rail lines.
Supporters of the failed measure said it would have created tens of thousands of construction jobs and lifted the still-struggling economy. But Republicans unanimously opposed it for its tax surcharge on the wealthy..'
Obama is like an angry wife.....She knows you're swimming in debt, but she's going to prove what a jerk you are for not going out and getting a 5th job to pay down the debt by spending money on a couch to replace the broken couch that could be fixed less expensively with a little attention. :roll:
The vote to advance the bill was 50 to 50. Democrats needed 60 votes to overcome a Republican filibuster.
This time, the bill was narrowed to provide $35 billion to state and local governments to prevent layoffs of teachers, police officers and firefighters. To offset the cost, the bill would impose a surtax of 0.5 percent, starting in 2013, on income in excess of $1 million.
'Republicans in the Senate Thursday dealt President Barack Obama the third in a string of defeats on his stimulus-style jobs agenda, blocking a $60 billion measure for building and repairing infrastructure like roads and rail lines.
Supporters of the failed measure said it would have created tens of thousands of construction jobs and lifted the still-struggling economy. But Republicans unanimously opposed it for its tax surcharge on the wealthy..'
Obama is like an angry wife.....She knows you're swimming in debt, but she's going to prove what a jerk you are for not going out and getting a 5th job to pay down the debt by spending money on a couch to replace the broken couch that could be fixed less expensively with a little attention. :roll:
that was random and nonsensical response....
Was it? Maybe, that's the problem. You don't understand.
Hint: Gov't jobs are not sustainable without RECURRING revenue. That's not creating jobs. It's creating DEBT.
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
Keep laughing. Who's paying for those jobs and how?
Whoa....mind blown....
Yeah. Screw the firefighters, teachers, and police officers. Who need 'em anyway??
Yeah. I love how that debate gets twisted that way. Nobody is saying we don't need or value firefighters, teachers, et. al. Of course.
But Odumba standing up and saying - look!!! I'm creating jobs with your credit card which has been shredded is diverting from the real problem.
If you have more people to tax (i.e. more people working), you have more revenue to create these jobs. Simply raising taxes is not the answer.
But, don't worry - it's easier to make one side look stupid than understand what is clearly meant.
Not trying to do that. But frankly, saying that creating those kinds of jobs is stupid makes zero sense, especially in a country where there is a big need for firefighters, teachers, and police officers.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
That about sums it up. Though reading the comments by a lot of Republicans here, you'd think none of that ever happened. They must think we have the same memory spans as fish.
Keep laughing. Who's paying for those jobs and how?
Whoa....mind blown....
Yeah. Screw the firefighters, teachers, and police officers. Who need 'em anyway??
So, the FEDERAL gov't is going to step in and take money out of everyone's pockets to create jobs the LOCAL gov't has deemed it can't afford based on the desires of the LOCAL people?
How does that make sense? So, now instead of being an angry wife, he's the enabling mother in law that won't allow her daughter to learn fiscal responsibility?
Again - nobody is saying these aren't important jobs. It's just that the last time I checked, all those things were LOCAL items. If Joe Public in East Podunk, IA thinks his town can't afford that teacher, why should someone in East Hampton, Long Island pay for it?
How does that make any sense (other than to the satirical political cartoon folks)?
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
How does that make any sense (other than to the satirical political cartoon folks)?
i know this was a dig at me. yes or no, would you argue against the assertion that the gop would rather just sink the ship to eliminate the captain??
Oh, there's no doubt the GOP wants the GOP to win the next election. But, isn't that the same for the Donkeys? Aren't they doing things to keep their Ass in office?
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
Comments
First, I'd recommend you learn how to type a coherent sentence. Second, I'd ask why you think I have GOP pom-poms regarding anything whatsoever? I have opinions on markets, and life in general but... The GOP, in recent times, have been a failure. Yet, anyone who defends the buffoon in office, or his party, clearly has issues admitting that the Democrats have been a dismal failure as well. They have pom-poms in hand. Particularly, those here. Party rhetoric is party rhetoric.
The whole thing - you seem to support - is a political football game. Saying one side is better than the other. That's what I was attempting to point out to your fellow "D" lover. I am not trying to be insulting whatsoever, but trying to point out it's a game - and you don't know it. There's people on both sides here... R and D pom-poms... then there's some who have their own opinions - and may seem to side with one side based on their own opinions. I could give you examples of each - but, I think it's unnecessary.
Anyway, you and gimme both may have pom-poms and a nice sweater with the letter "D" written on it - but, this is a message board. You seemingly don't have ideas that either party may or may not support idea A or B - it's all about party support. It seems your guided by their opinions, not your own. To me - that's what's wrong with society. It seems you both just want to support your team - not ideas. Go ahead... if you feel that supporting a party is winning approach - awesome. Good for you.
Me? Well, I think the last two administrations were terrible. Bush was awful - he increased spending, led us into wars - he was terrible. Obama was even worse. My measure - US Debt, unemployment - general economic statistics. The guy thought spending would help us out - it made our debt worse... it's a fact. If I was omnipotent - Would I re-elect Bush right now? Fuck no. Would I re-elect Obama in Nov? Fuck no. Do I think Romney will be a good President? No, I don't.
Who would I elect? Ron Paul. That's that. End of story.
<object height="81" width="100%"> <param name="movie" value="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869"></param> <param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param> <embed allowscriptaccess="always" height="81" src="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="100%"></embed> </object> <span><a href=" - In the Fire (demo)</a> by <a href="
everything is fine in the private sector,
this while enjoying my first cup of coffee?
JB across from me...
our eyes met, really I almost cried ...
:wtf: was that?
Just so he knows I am not doing fine, neither are all the unemployed,
those still upside down in their houses or now having to rent,
those coming home from war with no job prospects,
small businesses in a hole of taxes afraid to take on a new employee.
That was really the most helpless feeling to hear him say those words.
I thought this year things would be so much better,
high hopes I had for him and me.
And yes we permanently laid off someone this spring ...
we added to the rise.
I want congress to do things that ENCOURAGE or SUPPORT those entities who might be interested in job creation.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
I wouldn't mind having more teachers and jobs related to building infrastructure.
U.S. employers added 80,000 jobs last month, below economists’ forecasts and up only slightly from a 77,000 increase in May. The jobless rate stalled at 8.2 percent, the same as it was in March.
http://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases ... -ff15.html
So, in 2009 there were 77 million students (at all levels) and 7.1 million teachers. 10-1 seems not so shabby. Oh, and about 1/2 of those teachers taught elementary and middle school.
National average pay $52,800. Apply that over 12 months of work it would be over $60,000 per year, not bad.
...
Just wonderin'.
Hail, Hail!!!
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Is there one of those smiley faces for: **crickets**... **crickets**...?
Hail, Hail!!!
Yeah! We could build a huge drone air fleet. Although we'd probably outsource those jobs to India too... :think:
It is quite stunning how unemployment dropped as soon as the U.S. entered the war...
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/21/us/po ... emeal.html
For the second time in 10 days, the Senate on Thursday rejected Democratic efforts to take up a jobs bill championed by President Obama.
The vote to advance the bill was 50 to 50. Democrats needed 60 votes to overcome a Republican filibuster.
This time, the bill was narrowed to provide $35 billion to state and local governments to prevent layoffs of teachers, police officers and firefighters. To offset the cost, the bill would impose a surtax of 0.5 percent, starting in 2013, on income in excess of $1 million.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/0 ... 74539.html
'Republicans in the Senate Thursday dealt President Barack Obama the third in a string of defeats on his stimulus-style jobs agenda, blocking a $60 billion measure for building and repairing infrastructure like roads and rail lines.
Supporters of the failed measure said it would have created tens of thousands of construction jobs and lifted the still-struggling economy. But Republicans unanimously opposed it for its tax surcharge on the wealthy..'
Obama is like an angry wife.....She knows you're swimming in debt, but she's going to prove what a jerk you are for not going out and getting a 5th job to pay down the debt by spending money on a couch to replace the broken couch that could be fixed less expensively with a little attention. :roll:
that was random and nonsensical response....
Was it? Maybe, that's the problem. You don't understand.
Hint: Gov't jobs are not sustainable without RECURRING revenue. That's not creating jobs. It's creating DEBT.
Yes...
and you don't understand...
a job is job...
whoa...mind blown....
Whoa....mind blown....
Yeah. I love how that debate gets twisted that way. Nobody is saying we don't need or value firefighters, teachers, et. al. Of course.
But Odumba standing up and saying - look!!! I'm creating jobs with your credit card which has been shredded is diverting from the real problem.
If you have more people to tax (i.e. more people working), you have more revenue to create these jobs. Simply raising taxes is not the answer.
But, don't worry - it's easier to make one side look stupid than understand what is clearly meant.
the taxpayer is paying gov't employees to perform a service...i.e., Job...
boom...
you feel stupid because you're wrong...that's what you meant, right...? don't beat yourself up, buddy...you'll be fine...
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
That about sums it up. Though reading the comments by a lot of Republicans here, you'd think none of that ever happened. They must think we have the same memory spans as fish.
So, the FEDERAL gov't is going to step in and take money out of everyone's pockets to create jobs the LOCAL gov't has deemed it can't afford based on the desires of the LOCAL people?
How does that make sense? So, now instead of being an angry wife, he's the enabling mother in law that won't allow her daughter to learn fiscal responsibility?
Again - nobody is saying these aren't important jobs. It's just that the last time I checked, all those things were LOCAL items. If Joe Public in East Podunk, IA thinks his town can't afford that teacher, why should someone in East Hampton, Long Island pay for it?
How does that make any sense (other than to the satirical political cartoon folks)?
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Oh, there's no doubt the GOP wants the GOP to win the next election. But, isn't that the same for the Donkeys? Aren't they doing things to keep their Ass in office?