Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Good, there's plenty of coal that is not on Federal Land, and none of it is important for the economy.there are more people employed in alternate energy than in gas and coal combined now and we are competing with China and the EU, which we were not before Obama.Here is a single example, snowflake. And it is a perfect example.all you jackass doops go on and on about horrible regulations and can't give a single example. Idiot.
The result of this highly unconstitutional action?The Obama administration on Friday ordered a moratorium on new leases for coal mined from federal lands as part of a sweeping review of the government’s management of vast amounts of taxpayer-owned coal throughout the West.
I. Created unaffordable energy prices
II. Negative impact on jobs
III. Which in turn has a negative impact on tax revenues
It’s bad all the way around and it’s why we’ve seen an exponentially better economy under President Trump and the Republicans than we did under MaObama and the Dumbocrats. And this is just one example of hundreds. So much for your ignorant claim that MaObama “had no policies”. He did. They were all just really bad.
Obama announces moratorium on new federal coal leases
Too bad Hillary wasn't elected, she would have helped West Virginians Etc get trained for new technology jobs so, now we still have 6 million going unfilled...Good, there's plenty of coal that is not on Federal Land, and none of it is important for the economy.there are more people employed in alternate energy than in gas and coal combined now and we are competing with China and the EU, which we were not before Obama.Here is a single example, snowflake. And it is a perfect example.all you jackass doops go on and on about horrible regulations and can't give a single example. Idiot.
The result of this highly unconstitutional action?The Obama administration on Friday ordered a moratorium on new leases for coal mined from federal lands as part of a sweeping review of the government’s management of vast amounts of taxpayer-owned coal throughout the West.
I. Created unaffordable energy prices
II. Negative impact on jobs
III. Which in turn has a negative impact on tax revenues
It’s bad all the way around and it’s why we’ve seen an exponentially better economy under President Trump and the Republicans than we did under MaObama and the Dumbocrats. And this is just one example of hundreds. So much for your ignorant claim that MaObama “had no policies”. He did. They were all just really bad.
Obama announces moratorium on new federal coal leases
I rest my case. You responded exactly as I predicted you would. You denied everything. Once I proved it and you could no longer deny it, then you simply declare that anything Obama did was “good”.Good
Uh...why does the federal government even own “federal land”? The U.S. Constitution never authorized them to steal lands from the state and make it federal.there's plenty of coal that is not on Federal Land
All of it is vital to the economy, stupid. It’s basic Supply & Demand.and none of it is important for the economy.
Because of unconstitutional government intervention. The federal government isn’t empowered to pick winners and losers. That is supposed to be done by the consumers of the free market.there are more people employed in alternate energy than in gas and coal combined now
Exactly. Before, we had no competition. We were the elite of the elite. In typical Dumbocrat fahsion, MaObama lowered the bar (and thus lowered our standard of living) and now we have to compete with shit-hole communists states like China. Thankfully though, President Trump is fixin that. God Bless President Trump.and we are competing with China and the EU, which we were not before Obama.
I think I'll go with our justice system and judges over bought off High School grad right-wing pundits, thanks oh, as to what is unconstitutional and illegal. How is lockherup coming, super duper. Or any other Democrat you people have convicted in your brain such as it is...If you left-wing lunatics would stop engaging in unconstitutional actions, we wouldn’t have to “repeal”. It really is that simple.you guys still have nothing but repeal to go with your tax cut economics.
So you’re admitting she would have acted unconstitutionally and you’re disappointed that she didn’t get the opportunity to do so? Wow, man. Wow. The U.S. Constitution does not empower the federal government to “train” citizens. Idiot.Too bad Hillary wasn't elected, she would have helped West Virginians Etc get trained for new technology jobs so
We have many job openings thanks to President Trump and the Republicans! And the free market will flawlessly handle all of them.now we still have 6 million going unfilled...
Well you have to. You’re not informed/educated enough to determine it yourself. But the rest of us who have actually read the U.S. Constitution don’t need someone else to affirm it for us.I think I'll go with our justice system and judges over bought off High School grad right-wing pundits, thanks oh, as to what is unconstitutional and illegal
Why would that make him stupid when the unemployment rate was 6% when he said that? Was he supposed to know it would sky rocket to 8% by the time it was passed by Congress and put into effect?Well then MaObama was extra stupid for “promising” that unemployment would never hit 8% if we passed his absurd “stimulus package”.The unemployment rate was already about 8% when ARRA went into effect.
look into it yourself, or stop saying you know anything about economics.That is why we have a have a Natural rate of Unemployment, for Capitalists' bottom line.
Okay, time to step up. You keep saying, "natural rate of unemployment".
1. What is that rate? The actual number, not another meaningless phrase.
2. What is your source for that number? An actual link.
Or stop saying it.
So you just made it up and really don't mean anything when you say it. You say it, define it.
I am not the one claiming I have a valid argument with nothing but an appeal to ignorance.Ahahahahahaha! Daniel makes shit up and then panics when someone calls him out on it. Well done hadit!look into it yourself, or stop saying you know anything about economics.That is why we have a have a Natural rate of Unemployment, for Capitalists' bottom line.
Okay, time to step up. You keep saying, "natural rate of unemployment".
1. What is that rate? The actual number, not another meaningless phrase.
2. What is your source for that number? An actual link.
Or stop saying it.
Daniel...you’re the one who keeps making the claim. If you know, you should give the answer. You just got bent over son.
It Must be the "gospel Truth" if you don't have a valid rebuttal.look into it yourself, or stop saying you know anything about economics.That is why we have a have a Natural rate of Unemployment, for Capitalists' bottom line.
Okay, time to step up. You keep saying, "natural rate of unemployment".
1. What is that rate? The actual number, not another meaningless phrase.
2. What is your source for that number? An actual link.
Or stop saying it.
So you just made it up and really don't mean anything when you say it. You say it, define it.
Nobody takes the right wing seriously about the Law, Constitutional or otherwise.If you left-wing lunatics would stop engaging in unconstitutional actions, we wouldn’t have to “repeal”. It really is that simple.you guys still have nothing but repeal to go with your tax cut economics.
I am not the one claiming I have a valid argument with nothing but an appeal to ignorance.Ahahahahahaha! Daniel makes shit up and then panics when someone calls him out on it. Well done hadit!look into it yourself, or stop saying you know anything about economics.That is why we have a have a Natural rate of Unemployment, for Capitalists' bottom line.
Okay, time to step up. You keep saying, "natural rate of unemployment".
1. What is that rate? The actual number, not another meaningless phrase.
2. What is your source for that number? An actual link.
Or stop saying it.
Daniel...you’re the one who keeps making the claim. If you know, you should give the answer. You just got bent over son.
It Must be the "gospel Truth" if you don't have a valid rebuttal.look into it yourself, or stop saying you know anything about economics.That is why we have a have a Natural rate of Unemployment, for Capitalists' bottom line.
Okay, time to step up. You keep saying, "natural rate of unemployment".
1. What is that rate? The actual number, not another meaningless phrase.
2. What is your source for that number? An actual link.
Or stop saying it.
So you just made it up and really don't mean anything when you say it. You say it, define it.
Nobody takes the right wing seriously about the Law, Constitutional or otherwise.If you left-wing lunatics would stop engaging in unconstitutional actions, we wouldn’t have to “repeal”. It really is that simple.you guys still have nothing but repeal to go with your tax cut economics.
Who cares about right wing morals.I am not the one claiming I have a valid argument with nothing but an appeal to ignorance.Ahahahahahaha! Daniel makes shit up and then panics when someone calls him out on it. Well done hadit!look into it yourself, or stop saying you know anything about economics.That is why we have a have a Natural rate of Unemployment, for Capitalists' bottom line.
Okay, time to step up. You keep saying, "natural rate of unemployment".
1. What is that rate? The actual number, not another meaningless phrase.
2. What is your source for that number? An actual link.
Or stop saying it.
Daniel...you’re the one who keeps making the claim. If you know, you should give the answer. You just got bent over son.
But you ARE the one who keeps using that same phrase over and over again to justify the fact that you want to be paid for not working. So, here's your chance to define what you're saying. What is the number and what is your source for that number?
Then we can debate whether it's applicable or if you're just spouting off nonsense.
Anyone who wants to have any understanding of economics whatsoever, should look into the concepts involved.It Must be the "gospel Truth" if you don't have a valid rebuttal.look into it yourself, or stop saying you know anything about economics.That is why we have a have a Natural rate of Unemployment, for Capitalists' bottom line.
Okay, time to step up. You keep saying, "natural rate of unemployment".
1. What is that rate? The actual number, not another meaningless phrase.
2. What is your source for that number? An actual link.
Or stop saying it.
So you just made it up and really don't mean anything when you say it. You say it, define it.
I made a simple request. What is this number you keep talking about and where did you get it?
Why "rebut" something that may not even have any meaning?
A book on Economics. I don't need to Gossip, like right wingers.Nobody takes the right wing seriously about the Law, Constitutional or otherwise.If you left-wing lunatics would stop engaging in unconstitutional actions, we wouldn’t have to “repeal”. It really is that simple.you guys still have nothing but repeal to go with your tax cut economics.
What's the number and where did you get it?
What is the number and what is the name of the book?A book on Economics. I don't need to Gossip, like right wingers.Nobody takes the right wing seriously about the Law, Constitutional or otherwise.If you left-wing lunatics would stop engaging in unconstitutional actions, we wouldn’t have to “repeal”. It really is that simple.you guys still have nothing but repeal to go with your tax cut economics.
What's the number and where did you get it?
You talk about a number, what is it?Anyone who wants to have any understanding of economics whatsoever, should look into the concepts involved.It Must be the "gospel Truth" if you don't have a valid rebuttal.look into it yourself, or stop saying you know anything about economics.Okay, time to step up. You keep saying, "natural rate of unemployment".
1. What is that rate? The actual number, not another meaningless phrase.
2. What is your source for that number? An actual link.
Or stop saying it.
So you just made it up and really don't mean anything when you say it. You say it, define it.
I made a simple request. What is this number you keep talking about and where did you get it?
Why "rebut" something that may not even have any meaning?
You're talking about a 'natural rate of unemployment'. What is the number and what is your source?Who cares about right wing morals.I am not the one claiming I have a valid argument with nothing but an appeal to ignorance.Ahahahahahaha! Daniel makes shit up and then panics when someone calls him out on it. Well done hadit!look into it yourself, or stop saying you know anything about economics.Okay, time to step up. You keep saying, "natural rate of unemployment".
1. What is that rate? The actual number, not another meaningless phrase.
2. What is your source for that number? An actual link.
Or stop saying it.
Daniel...you’re the one who keeps making the claim. If you know, you should give the answer. You just got bent over son.
But you ARE the one who keeps using that same phrase over and over again to justify the fact that you want to be paid for not working. So, here's your chance to define what you're saying. What is the number and what is your source for that number?
Then we can debate whether it's applicable or if you're just spouting off nonsense.
We are discussing economics and promoting the general welfare by solving simple poverty in a market friendly manner.
