Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CBS DC)   White House: "It is important not to read too much into one monthly jobs report." Probably not the past 41 monthly reports either   (washington.cbslocal.com) divider line 384
    More: Obvious, White House, Alan Krueger, CBS Radio  
•       •       •

1422 clicks; posted to Business » on 07 Sep 2012 at 3:16 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



384 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-09-07 03:58:12 PM  

impaler: Are you better off than you were 4 years ago? This guy isn't:
[extras.mnginteractive.com image 601x411]


turns out that he was right. Heaven wasn't too far away after all
 
2012-09-07 03:58:13 PM  

coeyagi: Are you better off than you were 4 Years Ago?


Ya, I don't get why they keep asking this question? I think the majority of people and the economy as a whole is better off than the economic free fall we were in when Bush handed over the economy. I guess the Republicans are betting on the old adage that if you keep telling people they are worse off they will eventually begin to believe it.
 
2012-09-07 03:58:23 PM  

King Something: coeyagi: praymantis: CPennypacker: TIKIMAN87: AdolfOliverPanties: Obama's plans work. Steady job growth, even though the GOP has fought and blocked everything that would help.

The stock market is at record highs and corporations have never made more profits.

The stock market is high becuase his buddy Ben Bernanke has printed trillions of dollars into the system. The market is inflated and will crash even harder in the end.

Obama has all 3 branches in his first 2 years and yet he passed no jobs bills. Only cramming health care through.

FALSE

Hey I can do that too TRUE

Ok, facts.

Al Franken wasn't confirmed until May, June 2009? Something like that. Then Kennedy dies in September 2009? I may be off by a month or two for each. And then Scott Brown gets in Jan 2010. So.... you're looking at about 4-6 months of filibuster-proof majority in the Senate.

Again, FALSE.

And even then, not really, since their filibuster-proof majority included the Blue Dog Democrats from flyover country and Joe "I'm an 'independent' and totally not in the GOP's corner despite me running for their party's presidential nomination in 2008, oh and I want you to hamstring the health care reform bill or else I'm gonna side with the GOP and vote against cloture" Lieberman


Yeah, I didn't have the strength to point out all the other ones. I figured giving them a 75% reduction on their 2 year statement was enough... for them to conveniently ignore. Plus, you tell them it was down to like 2 weeks, and then they just start yelling "bullshiat" because it is the complete opposite of what Fox News tells them.
 
2012-09-07 03:58:36 PM  

King Something: coeyagi: praymantis: CPennypacker: TIKIMAN87: AdolfOliverPanties: Obama's plans work. Steady job growth, even though the GOP has fought and blocked everything that would help.

The stock market is at record highs and corporations have never made more profits.

The stock market is high becuase his buddy Ben Bernanke has printed trillions of dollars into the system. The market is inflated and will crash even harder in the end.

Obama has all 3 branches in his first 2 years and yet he passed no jobs bills. Only cramming health care through.

FALSE

Hey I can do that too TRUE

Ok, facts.

Al Franken wasn't confirmed until May, June 2009? Something like that. Then Kennedy dies in September 2009? I may be off by a month or two for each. And then Scott Brown gets in Jan 2010. So.... you're looking at about 4-6 months of filibuster-proof majority in the Senate.

Again, FALSE.

And even then, not really, since their filibuster-proof majority included the Blue Dog Democrats from flyover country and Joe "I'm an 'independent' and totally not in the GOP's corner despite me running for their party's presidential nomination in 2008, oh and I want you to hamstring the health care reform bill or else I'm gonna side with the GOP and vote against cloture" Lieberman


But those liberal facts don't fit the GOP narrative, so they are not announced. If so, it would seem like Republicans have done nothing but obstruct the president, and still he has been able to make great accomplishments. If anything, it only solidifies my vote for him, and that the Republicans haven't had a chance in this election since 2008.
 
2012-09-07 03:58:40 PM  

skullkrusher: so your plan is to blame the private sector for not doing stuff that will reduce their profitability?


How do you think we got into this mess? Reducing wages and decreasing the number of employees doing the same amount of work leads to higher corporate profits but also higher unemployment.

Corporate profits are higher than ever right now but wages and hiring have not bounced back. How isn't that the fault of the private sector?
 
2012-09-07 03:59:08 PM  

WhyteRaven74: BigJake: this is a joke, right

Nope. By having people fewer people do more work you're wearing out your employees faster also making growth in productivity harder to achieve. And then there's the fact there are fewer people with money to buy what you make. This used to be standard for every CEO, they understood that what might seem good on paper today could actually be bad tomorrow.


Yeah, but these days, you gotta hit your quarterly earnings targets so you get your bonuses. There's absolutely no incentive to think long-term.
 
2012-09-07 03:59:24 PM  
Republican plan:

1. Do everything humanly possible to keep the economy from recovering.
2. Wait for 2012.
3. Run a campaign based on the fact that the economy is not as recovered as we'd like.

I don't hate America enough to vote republican.
 
2012-09-07 03:59:28 PM  

Citrate1007: A vast majority of long term unemployed are simply unemployable.


I wonder why... We should cut education spending some more!
 
2012-09-07 03:59:56 PM  

skullkrusher: what do you think has changed? Suddenly what happened in the past 4 or 5 years to make things different?


The people running things are different than they used to be. The people who ran things in the past thought of the larger economic consequences of their decisions and operated on the assumption that if it's good for the economy it's good for business, likewise what's good for business is only that which is good for the economy.
 
2012-09-07 03:59:58 PM  

qorkfiend: Gyrfalcon: Now is as good a time as any to ask a question that bugs me about this metric: What the hell does it mean "given up looking for a job"??

What does that mean? What CAN it mean? Does it mean that people have accepted living homeless and broke is now their lot in life and that they no longer even seek employment? Does it mean they've just stopped collecting unemployment? That they've merely stopped using regular (i.e. government tracked) employment agencies? Or that when asked, they flippantly replied, "Nah, I've stopped even looking for work"? Or were previously the unemployed job-seekers being classed as "employed" as in "employed in seeking employment"?

It seems to me there are only two states of being: Either you are employed or you are not. And regardless of whether you are "looking" for a job or have "given up looking" and resigned yourself to eating scraps from the dumpster behind McDonalds, in both cases you are NOT EMPLOYED.

Is there some other, third state of being regarding jobs I'm unaware of? Or is this like how the budget was artificially lowered by not counting war costs, only in reverse: "We've decided that the unemployed job-seekers are now officially unemployed and no longer officially...unemployed"?

I guess there's the people who aren't legally eligible to work.


Yeah, but that doesn't really answer the question "who or what are the people no longer looking for work"? Who are these people, and what the f*ck do they do? What does it mean "380,000 people are no longer looking for work"? How is that even determined?

I mean, I'm "looking for work", but not every minute of every day; I have other things I do some days that preclude me from actually "looking for work" on those days. So am I "unemployed" or just "not looking for work" on those days? And if I stop for a week and then start back up again, does that change my status? If someone is collecting unemployment AND looking for work, where do they fall on this graph?

It just seems to me to be a weird thing to say and a weird group to somehow "add" to the numbers of unemployed, since it seems to imply that job-seekers are neither employed nor unemployed; and that's impossible unless they work for Schrodinger.
 
2012-09-07 04:00:00 PM  

skullkrusher: If the demand is not there,


It's almost as if slashing a metric assload of public sector jobs changed the "able" part of "willing and able" for those folks.
 
2012-09-07 04:00:21 PM  
I love how most of the serious libs on here are so easily trolled...I mean if Obama personally told you to jump off a bridge tomorrow most of you guys on here wouldn't hesitate. I would just like to personally thank all of you for providing me with free entertainment throughout my day...The cutest thing is how you guys confuse your opinions with facts as well...
 
2012-09-07 04:00:23 PM  

shastacola: soy_bomb: 368,000 people dropped out the job market, 96,000 found jobs. That's a recovery?

So the private sector won't hire despite paying the lowest taxes in history and the republicans will not pass a jobs bill.


Yea, they have been slacking....

H. Res. 72 - Passed by the House (391-28) on February 11, 2011
H.R. 872 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 910 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.J. Res. 37 - Senate has blocked a companion measure by a vote of 46-52
H.R. 2018 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 1315 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 2587 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 2401 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 2681 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 2250 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 2273 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 3094 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 3010 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 527 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 10 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 1633 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 1837 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 2087 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 4078 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 9 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 4 - Signed into law by the President on April 14, 2011
H.R. 436 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 674 - Signed into law by the President on November 21, 2011
H.R. 3630 - Signed into law by the President on February 22, 2012
H.R. 8 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 6169 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 3078 - Signed by the President on October 21, 2011
H.R. 3079 - Signed by the President on October 21, 2011
H.R. 3080 - Signed by the President on October 21, 2011
H.R. 1904 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 658 - Signed by the President on February 14, 2012
H.R. 4105 - Signed into law by the President on March 13, 2012
H.R. 4402 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 1249 - Signed into law by the President on September 16, 2011
H.R. 2433 - Signed into law by the President on November 21, 2011
H.R. 3606 - Signed into law by the President on March 3, 2012
H.R. 3012 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 1230 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 1229 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 1231 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 2021 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 1938 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 3408 - Passed by the House (237-187) on February 16, 2012
H.R. 2842 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 2578 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 4480 - Senate has taken no action to date 

/lame democrat(ic) talking point is lame
 
2012-09-07 04:00:31 PM  
Are you better off than you were 4 years ago?

4.bp.blogspot.com

Fartbummer is killing our nation's children, one pack of Marlboro Reds at a time.
 
2012-09-07 04:00:36 PM  

ignatius_crumbcake: skullkrusher: so your plan is to blame the private sector for not doing stuff that will reduce their profitability?

How do you think we got into this mess? Reducing wages and decreasing the number of employees doing the same amount of work leads to higher corporate profits but also higher unemployment.

Corporate profits are higher than ever right now but wages and hiring have not bounced back. How isn't that the fault of the private sector?


SOCIALISM and SHUT UP
 
2012-09-07 04:01:26 PM  

soy_bomb: shastacola: soy_bomb: 368,000 people dropped out the job market, 96,000 found jobs. That's a recovery?

So the private sector won't hire despite paying the lowest taxes in history and the republicans will not pass a jobs bill.

Yea, they have been slacking....

H. Res. 72 - Passed by the House (391-28) on February 11, 2011
H.R. 872 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 910 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.J. Res. 37 - Senate has blocked a companion measure by a vote of 46-52
H.R. 2018 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 1315 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 2587 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 2401 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 2681 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 2250 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 2273 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 3094 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 3010 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 527 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 10 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 1633 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 1837 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 2087 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 4078 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 9 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 4 - Signed into law by the President on April 14, 2011
H.R. 436 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 674 - Signed into law by the President on November 21, 2011
H.R. 3630 - Signed into law by the President on February 22, 2012
H.R. 8 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 6169 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 3078 - Signed by the President on October 21, 2011
H.R. 3079 - Signed by the President on October 21, 2011
H.R. 3080 - Signed by the President on October 21, 2011
H.R. 1904 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 658 - Signed by the President on February 14, 2012
H.R. 4105 - Signed into law by the President on March 13, 2012
H.R. 4402 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 1249 - Signed into law by the President on Septemb ...


Congrats, those bills mostly legitimately rape the environment. Next?
 
2012-09-07 04:01:33 PM  

ignatius_crumbcake: skullkrusher: so your plan is to blame the private sector for not doing stuff that will reduce their profitability?

How do you think we got into this mess? Reducing wages and decreasing the number of employees doing the same amount of work leads to higher corporate profits but also higher unemployment.

Corporate profits are higher than ever right now but wages and hiring have not bounced back. How isn't that the fault of the private sector?


It's not necessarily the fault of the private sector, it's the fault of the trickle-down economic theory that has been put into place over the past decades. The private sector is doing what is best for themselves, which is how it should be.
 
2012-09-07 04:01:54 PM  
It's funny the Democrats always tried to turned this into class warfare. Blame greedy Wall Street and then take credit for the rise in S&P and other market. Is Wall Street against Obama or not Libs, if Obama is so good for Wall Street. You can't have it both ways.

If Wall Street is so awesome then lets privatize Social Security and let everyone get in. How about it Libs? Want to take credit for the S&P now?

Let's not forget the smoke and mirrors BS that is QE. Government buying up stocks and record low volume in the markets
 
2012-09-07 04:02:12 PM  

thurstonxhowell: leviosaurus: Would you play Russian Roulette with a four barrel gun?

[cdn3.hark.com image 320x240]

GUNS DO NOT WORK THAT WAY!


Some do...
 
2012-09-07 04:02:14 PM  

WhyteRaven74: And then there's the fact there are fewer people with money to buy what you make.


This is the crucial part that nobody on the right seems to grasp.
 
2012-09-07 04:02:40 PM  

soy_bomb: shastacola: soy_bomb: 368,000 people dropped out the job market, 96,000 found jobs. That's a recovery?

So the private sector won't hire despite paying the lowest taxes in history and the republicans will not pass a jobs bill.

Yea, they have been slacking....


Oooh, research time.
 
2012-09-07 04:02:48 PM  
Are you better off than you were a few years ago?

www.nndb.com

Trick question....

Yes: 72 virgins, biatches!
 
2012-09-07 04:02:58 PM  

soy_bomb: H.J. Res. 37 - Senate has blocked a companion measure by a vote of 46-52


You hate Net Neutrality?

How would that bill do anything in terms of jobs?
 
2012-09-07 04:03:11 PM  
It's wrong to jump up and down on a fragile economy like Dems did preceding the last election.

Go shopping or the Republicans win.

Oh wait...
 
2012-09-07 04:03:17 PM  

leviosaurus: MisterLoki: [i568.photobucket.com image 380x446]

People keep posting that as if it means Obama is a lock for re-election. If that's what you think it means, then you don't understand what it says. Those aren't poll numbers, they're odds. It's saying Romney has a little worse than a 1 in 4 chance of winning the election. Sure, Obama is in a better position, but that is a long, long way from certain victory. Would you play Russian Roulette with a four barrel gun? If you're an Obama supporter and that sounds like lousy odds to you, then you shouldn't be happy with these numbers.


Wow. Thanks.
 
2012-09-07 04:03:21 PM  

WhyteRaven74: Yes it is.


No, it categorically is not. People of retirement age are considered "not in the labor force" and are not counted at all in that number. See this table

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

and this definition of what it means to be in the labor force from here

http://www.bls.gov/cps/lfcharacteristics.htm#nlf

Persons who are neither employed nor unemployed are not in the labor force. This category includes retired persons, students, those taking care of children or other family members, and others who are neither working nor seeking work.

You'll notice in the BLS' chart above that that category is accounted for separately and is not part of the number we're discussing. You're wrong.
 
2012-09-07 04:03:31 PM  
i48.tinypic.com

soy_bomb: shastacola: soy_bomb: 368,000 people dropped out the job market, 96,000 found jobs. That's a recovery?

So the private sector won't hire despite paying the lowest taxes in history and the republicans will not pass a jobs bill.

Yea, they have been slacking....

DERP RESOLUTIONS ...


Show us all the jobs bills from the GOP-controlled House that weren't laced with (1) supply-side horseshiat and/or (2) conservative social policy farkery.
 
2012-09-07 04:03:50 PM  

ignatius_crumbcake: How do you think we got into this mess? Reducing wages and decreasing the number of employees doing the same amount of work leads to higher corporate profits but also higher unemployment.


that wasn't what got us into this mess but ok.

ignatius_crumbcake: Corporate profits are higher than ever right now but wages and hiring have not bounced back. How isn't that the fault of the private sector?


ok, you blame the monolithic "private sector". We'll ignore legitimate concerns about the future weighing on expansion for argument's sake. Now what?
 
2012-09-07 04:04:02 PM  

coeyagi: Congrats, those bills mostly legitimately rape the environment. Next?


2.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-09-07 04:04:13 PM  

qorkfiend: There's absolutely no incentive to think long-term.


Well yeah, but that gets into the fact the people running things now aren't like the people who used to run things. And that's not a good thing.
 
2012-09-07 04:04:26 PM  

WhyteRaven74: This used to be standard for every CEO


EVERY CEO? Prove it.
 
2012-09-07 04:04:39 PM  

coeyagi: soy_bomb: shastacola: soy_bomb: 368,000 people dropped out the job market, 96,000 found jobs. That's a recovery?

So the private sector won't hire despite paying the lowest taxes in history and the republicans will not pass a jobs bill.

Yea, they have been slacking....

H. Res. 72 - Passed by the House (391-28) on February 11, 2011
H.R. 872 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 910 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.J. Res. 37 - Senate has blocked a companion measure by a vote of 46-52
H.R. 2018 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 1315 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 2587 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 2401 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 2681 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 2250 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 2273 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 3094 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 3010 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 527 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 10 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 1633 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 1837 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 2087 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 4078 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 9 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 4 - Signed into law by the President on April 14, 2011
H.R. 436 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 674 - Signed into law by the President on November 21, 2011
H.R. 3630 - Signed into law by the President on February 22, 2012
H.R. 8 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 6169 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 3078 - Signed by the President on October 21, 2011
H.R. 3079 - Signed by the President on October 21, 2011
H.R. 3080 - Signed by the President on October 21, 2011
H.R. 1904 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 658 - Signed by the President on February 14, 2012
H.R. 4105 - Signed into law by the President on March 13, 2012
H.R. 4402 - Senate has taken no action to date
H.R. 1249 - Signed into law by the President ...


The fact he's too chickenshiat to put the title of those bills in front of it's designated number shows that even he knows those bills would do jackshiat to spur job growth.
 
2012-09-07 04:04:44 PM  

Pincy: ignatius_crumbcake: skullkrusher: so your plan is to blame the private sector for not doing stuff that will reduce their profitability?

How do you think we got into this mess? Reducing wages and decreasing the number of employees doing the same amount of work leads to higher corporate profits but also higher unemployment.

Corporate profits are higher than ever right now but wages and hiring have not bounced back. How isn't that the fault of the private sector?

It's not necessarily the fault of the private sector, it's the fault of the trickle-down economic theory that has been put into place over the past decades. The private sector is doing what is best for themselves, which is how it should be.


well lookie here
 
2012-09-07 04:05:04 PM  

BigJake: EVERY CEO? Prove it.


Hell, I'll take any 30 or 40 that have said something like that
 
2012-09-07 04:05:36 PM  
Are you better off than you were 4 years ago?

media.salon.com

"Obama... made me smoke crack....

But Grover Norquist called me Big Gubermint and drowned me in the bathtub."
 
2012-09-07 04:05:53 PM  

leviosaurus: thurstonxhowell: leviosaurus: Would you play Russian Roulette with a four barrel gun?

[cdn3.hark.com image 320x240]

GUNS DO NOT WORK THAT WAY!

erm... a four chamber revolver. That's what I actually said. The filter must've messed it up. Yeah, that's the ticket.


gunwebsites.net
 
2012-09-07 04:06:04 PM  

phreezen: It's funny the Democrats always tried to turned this into class warfare.


i45.tinypic.com

TIL that "fighting back" means "you started a nonexistent war".

*litany of graphs/charts, not posting them all over again as dolts pretend they're not real*
 
2012-09-07 04:06:33 PM  

soy_bomb: coeyagi: Congrats, those bills mostly legitimately rape the environment. Next?

[2.bp.blogspot.com image 512x325]


Yes, they do.
 
2012-09-07 04:06:33 PM  

Pincy: . The private sector is doing what is best for themselves


Except it's not.

skullkrusher: We'll ignore legitimate concerns about the future


Such as?
 
2012-09-07 04:07:20 PM  

ignatius_crumbcake: WhyteRaven74: And then there's the fact there are fewer people with money to buy what you make.

This is the crucial part that nobody on the right seems to grasp.


I just got through reading the new Krugman book and the one point he makes over and over again is "your spending is my income". Economies grow when more people have more money to spend.
 
2012-09-07 04:07:50 PM  

gameshowhost: skullkrusher: If the demand is not there,

It's almost as if slashing a metric assload of public sector jobs changed the "able" part of "willing and able" for those folks.


Don't worry. Businesses which fire people for no reason don't tend to last long
 
2012-09-07 04:08:16 PM  

SlothB77: There are 243,566,000 Americans at least 16 years old; and not in the military, prison, mental hospital or a nursing home.

Of those, 88,921,000 are not working nor have looked for a job in the past four weeks. In other words, 37% of people capable of working don't even attempt to get a job. Another 12,544,000 are looking for work, but remain unemployed, which is 5% of the pool of people capable of working.

Of the pool of people capable of working, only 58% of them are actually working - 142,101,000 people.

Assuming a US population of 315,000,000 people, that is only 45% of the total population of the USA that works.

Obama's America


So, you excluded the under 16 year olds when you wanted the % number to be high and then re-included them wen you wanted the % number to be low? That is farking AWESOME!!!

/let's not even talk about old people
 
2012-09-07 04:08:29 PM  

WhyteRaven74: skullkrusher: We'll ignore legitimate concerns about the future

Such as?


The black guy winning again.
 
2012-09-07 04:08:33 PM  

coeyagi: soy_bomb: coeyagi: Congrats, those bills mostly legitimately rape the environment. Next?

[2.bp.blogspot.com image 512x325]

Yes, they do.


One of those bills was a bill to stop Net Neutrality.

I couldn't take the rest seriously after that.
 
2012-09-07 04:08:56 PM  

WhyteRaven74: Pincy: . The private sector is doing what is best for themselves

Except it's not.

skullkrusher: We'll ignore legitimate concerns about the future

Such as?


such as consumer sentiment, aggregate demand, central bank actions, sovereign debt defaults, oil shocks, bank failures... are you for real?
 
2012-09-07 04:09:13 PM  

Nadie_AZ: make me some tea: impaler: Do we really need this thread again?
Link

Every 4 hours until everyone is in agreement.

Fine. I agree that cherry pie is the best pie. Anyone want to carry the motion?


www.motifake.com

Raspberry pie is best pie.
 
2012-09-07 04:09:18 PM  

skullkrusher: Pincy: ignatius_crumbcake: skullkrusher: so your plan is to blame the private sector for not doing stuff that will reduce their profitability?

How do you think we got into this mess? Reducing wages and decreasing the number of employees doing the same amount of work leads to higher corporate profits but also higher unemployment.

Corporate profits are higher than ever right now but wages and hiring have not bounced back. How isn't that the fault of the private sector?

It's not necessarily the fault of the private sector, it's the fault of the trickle-down economic theory that has been put into place over the past decades. The private sector is doing what is best for themselves, which is how it should be.

well lookie here


I'm sorry, did I say something earth-shattering?
 
2012-09-07 04:09:24 PM  

gameshowhost: phreezen: It's funny the Democrats always tried to turned this into class warfare.

[i45.tinypic.com image 480x408]

TIL that "fighting back" means "you started a nonexistent war".

*litany of graphs/charts, not posting them all over again as dolts pretend they're not real*


Fight back from what, why not privatize social security and join the market. Is Wall Street for or against Obama? You can't have it both ways.
 
2012-09-07 04:09:30 PM  
The only economics that work are those in which exploitation is fought the most; both exploitation by big business and exploitation by government against individuals or institutions
 
2012-09-07 04:09:43 PM  
For those of you asserting that Obama is a failure, please answer two questions:

1. How would President McCain have done better; and
2. How would President Romney do better.

Thank you.
 
Displayed 50 of 384 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report