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.
Stop projecting, JesterChart shows nothing. The only thing is shows is you can't read a chart.As the chart, which the forum jester can't understand, shows.Nope, Reagan set the record after Carter.dumb assBoth Bushes did Reagan did, Clinton did, Carter did, Ford did, Nixon did. The next president will no matter who it is!Bush didn't Clinton didn't So fuck off.
OK Carter held the record until obama took it from him.
It's already been demonstrated that you're the only one who can't read it. 
No one else had a problem. Go figure. 
I think they're gay lovers. Or socks. Or something.It's hard to decide who the biggest board fool is you or John Q?The forumIt actually doesn't demonstrate that. Nor is the assertion true.It demonstrates what was said here, which is clearly too complex for your limited d, d! !? t te ?comprehension ... that every president had more people who were not in the labor force than any previous president going as far back as the data allows.
Here's a graph of the workforce participation rate. Note that it goes up from 1970 to about 1990, then starts to decline. After 2008 it declines more severely.
People entered the labor force because they perceived job opportunities. They left for pretty much the opposite reason. Under Obama there is hardly any incentive to work at all.
Your graph show the percentages of people participating in the workforce in a given year. It does not show how many actually had jobs. Faun's graph shows the number of people who were in the workforce but were unemployed in a given year. The LPR and UE are two different things.
OH what the hell it's a great day you both can hold the title.
That has been demonstrated about as much as what the chart is about.Stop projecting, JesterChart shows nothing. The only thing is shows is you can't read a chart.As the chart, which the forum jester can't understand, shows.Nope, Reagan set the record after Carter.dumb assBoth Bushes did Reagan did, Clinton did, Carter did, Ford did, Nixon did. The next president will no matter who it is!
OK Carter held the record until obama took it from him.
That has been demonstrated about as much as what the chart is about.Stop projecting, JesterChart shows nothing. The only thing is shows is you can't read a chart.As the chart, which the forum jester can't understand, shows.Nope, Reagan set the record after Carter.dumb ass
OK Carter held the record until obama took it from him.
Which is to say nothing at all.
I think you don't understand what the word "demonstrate" means.
I dont need to pretend. I just need to point out your chart is worthless and you can't explain it.That has been demonstrated about as much as what the chart is about.Stop projecting, JesterChart shows nothing. The only thing is shows is you can't read a chart.As the chart, which the forum jester can't understand, shows.Nope, Reagan set the record after Carter.
Which is to say nothing at all.
I think you don't understand what the word "demonstrate" means.
Pretending you didn't make a fool of yourself, Jester, doesn't help you.
Ok, so you weren't pretending.I dont need to pretend. I just need to point out your chart is worthless and you can't explain it.That has been demonstrated about as much as what the chart is about.Stop projecting, JesterChart shows nothing. The only thing is shows is you can't read a chart.As the chart, which the forum jester can't understand, shows.
Which is to say nothing at all.
I think you don't understand what the word "demonstrate" means.
Pretending you didn't make a fool of yourself, Jester, doesn't help you.
Nope, still no understanding of what "demonstrate" means.Ok, so you weren't pretending.I dont need to pretend. I just need to point out your chart is worthless and you can't explain it.That has been demonstrated about as much as what the chart is about.Stop projecting, JesterChart shows nothing. The only thing is shows is you can't read a chart.
Which is to say nothing at all.
I think you don't understand what the word "demonstrate" means.
Pretending you didn't make a fool of yourself, Jester, doesn't help you.
Meanwhile, you remain the only one here who doesn't understand it. Even after 2 explanations, you still don't get it. Clearly, you don't possess even the minimum mental faculties required to understand it. That's ok, Jester, I doubt anyone here (except you, of course) thought you did.
cries the forum jester who admits he doesn't understand the chart.Nope, still no understanding of what "demonstrate" means.Ok, so you weren't pretending.I dont need to pretend. I just need to point out your chart is worthless and you can't explain it.That has been demonstrated about as much as what the chart is about.Stop projecting, Jester
Which is to say nothing at all.
I think you don't understand what the word "demonstrate" means.
Pretending you didn't make a fool of yourself, Jester, doesn't help you.
Meanwhile, you remain the only one here who doesn't understand it. Even after 2 explanations, you still don't get it. Clearly, you don't possess even the minimum mental faculties required to understand it. That's ok, Jester, I doubt anyone here (except you, of course) thought you did.
You might want to try a dictionary or something. Meanwhile your chart remains floating like a turd in the toiletbowl.
Says thea ssclown who can't explain it.cries the forum jester who admits he doesn't understand the chart.Nope, still no understanding of what "demonstrate" means.Ok, so you weren't pretending.I dont need to pretend. I just need to point out your chart is worthless and you can't explain it.That has been demonstrated about as much as what the chart is about.
Which is to say nothing at all.
I think you don't understand what the word "demonstrate" means.
Pretending you didn't make a fool of yourself, Jester, doesn't help you.
Meanwhile, you remain the only one here who doesn't understand it. Even after 2 explanations, you still don't get it. Clearly, you don't possess even the minimum mental faculties required to understand it. That's ok, Jester, I doubt anyone here (except you, of course) thought you did.
You might want to try a dictionary or something. Meanwhile your chart remains floating like a turd in the toiletbowl.
I dont know what his graph shows. It doesnt appear to show anything as there is no context whatsoever.Are you not understanding the difference between level and rate? Faun's graph shows a steady increase in the number of people not in the labor force...a "new record" for every President.It actually doesn't demonstrate that. Nor is the assertion true.It demonstrates what was said here, which is clearly too complex for your limited comprehension ... that every president had more people who were not in the labor force than any previous president going as far back as the data allows.LOL! Wow that graph just demonstrates it all. Chiefly it demonstrates you are a dimbuilb.Of course Bush & Clinton both had record numbers of people not in the labor force during their respective presidencies. Every president has...
Here's a graph of the workforce participation rate. Note that it goes up from 1970 to about 1990, then starts to decline. After 2008 it declines more severely.
People entered the labor force because they perceived job opportunities. They left for pretty much the opposite reason. Under Obama there is hardly any incentive to work at all.
Your graph shows the Labor Force Participation RATE: the percent of the population in the labor force. It has been going down since 2000.
In short: As the population grew from 1948 to 2000, both those in the labor force and those not in the labor force increased, but in the labor force increased faster, causing the participation rate to increase.
Since 2000, the number Not in the Labor Force has increased faster than those in the Labor Force (especially considering the drop in the labor force level due to the recession) and so the participation rate has dropped.
Assuming you are correct, so what? The key fact is more people are opting out of working. That is likely due to a bad economy failing to attract people into the job force. It is likely because following every other recession the UE rate blipped up as people previously not looking for work suddenly entered the workforce. Tht didnt happen this time and the reason is poor prospecs. Because this is the worst administration in history for the economy and its policies are complete failures.
Imbecile ... I already explained it. Others got it even though you're not capable. Clearly, the problem is your limited mental capabilities and not my ability to explain it.Says thea ssclown who can't explain it.cries the forum jester who admits he doesn't understand the chart.Nope, still no understanding of what "demonstrate" means.Ok, so you weren't pretending.I dont need to pretend. I just need to point out your chart is worthless and you can't explain it.
Pretending you didn't make a fool of yourself, Jester, doesn't help you.
Meanwhile, you remain the only one here who doesn't understand it. Even after 2 explanations, you still don't get it. Clearly, you don't possess even the minimum mental faculties required to understand it. That's ok, Jester, I doubt anyone here (except you, of course) thought you did.
You might want to try a dictionary or something. Meanwhile your chart remains floating like a turd in the toiletbowl.
You can't explain it because the chart doesnt make sense.
Says thea ssclown who can't explain it.cries the forum jester who admits he doesn't understand the chart.Nope, still no understanding of what "demonstrate" means.Ok, so you weren't pretending.I dont need to pretend. I just need to point out your chart is worthless and you can't explain it.
Pretending you didn't make a fool of yourself, Jester, doesn't help you.
Meanwhile, you remain the only one here who doesn't understand it. Even after 2 explanations, you still don't get it. Clearly, you don't possess even the minimum mental faculties required to understand it. That's ok, Jester, I doubt anyone here (except you, of course) thought you did.
You might want to try a dictionary or something. Meanwhile your chart remains floating like a turd in the toiletbowl.
You can't explain it because the chart doesnt make sense.
I dont need to pretend. I just need to point out your chart is worthless and you can't explain it.That has been demonstrated about as much as what the chart is about.Stop projecting, JesterChart shows nothing. The only thing is shows is you can't read a chart.As the chart, which the forum jester can't understand, shows.
Which is to say nothing at all.
I think you don't understand what the word "demonstrate" means.
Pretending you didn't make a fool of yourself, Jester, doesn't help you.
The world can only hope he hasn't bred. Can you imagine the dumb fucking retards that would spawn from a brain-dead miserable curmudgeon likeI dont need to pretend. I just need to point out your chart is worthless and you can't explain it.That has been demonstrated about as much as what the chart is about.Stop projecting, JesterChart shows nothing. The only thing is shows is you can't read a chart.
Which is to say nothing at all.
I think you don't understand what the word "demonstrate" means.
Pretending you didn't make a fool of yourself, Jester, doesn't help you.
Do you have kids? If so, ask one of them to explain it to you...
Jester? I'd have to pity such blobs. Then why don't you go ahead and explain his chart. We'll wait.Says thea ssclown who can't explain it.cries the forum jester who admits he doesn't understand the chart.Nope, still no understanding of what "demonstrate" means.Ok, so you weren't pretending.I dont need to pretend. I just need to point out your chart is worthless and you can't explain it.
Meanwhile, you remain the only one here who doesn't understand it. Even after 2 explanations, you still don't get it. Clearly, you don't possess even the minimum mental faculties required to understand it. That's ok, Jester, I doubt anyone here (except you, of course) thought you did.
You might want to try a dictionary or something. Meanwhile your chart remains floating like a turd in the toiletbowl.
You can't explain it because the chart doesnt make sense.
Both Faun and pingy's charts are crystal clear to us heterosexuals lurking about. Your mind is clouded by homosexual fantasies and your peculiar predilection.
Then why don't you go ahead and explain his chart. We'll wait.Says thea ssclown who can't explain it.cries the forum jester who admits he doesn't understand the chart.Nope, still no understanding of what "demonstrate" means.Ok, so you weren't pretending.
Meanwhile, you remain the only one here who doesn't understand it. Even after 2 explanations, you still don't get it. Clearly, you don't possess even the minimum mental faculties required to understand it. That's ok, Jester, I doubt anyone here (except you, of course) thought you did.
You might want to try a dictionary or something. Meanwhile your chart remains floating like a turd in the toiletbowl.
You can't explain it because the chart doesnt make sense.
Both Faun and pingy's charts are crystal clear to us heterosexuals lurking about. Your mind is clouded by homosexual fantasies and your peculiar predilection.
Translation: I can't explain it either so I'll call names.Then why don't you go ahead and explain his chart. We'll wait.Says thea ssclown who can't explain it.cries the forum jester who admits he doesn't understand the chart.Nope, still no understanding of what "demonstrate" means.
You might want to try a dictionary or something. Meanwhile your chart remains floating like a turd in the toiletbowl.
You can't explain it because the chart doesnt make sense.
Both Faun and pingy's charts are crystal clear to us heterosexuals lurking about. Your mind is clouded by homosexual fantasies and your peculiar predilection.
explain ?
ok, you're a dumbass.
You didn't read post #412? I explained it there. Get Limbaugh's balls out of your eyes and take a peek!Then why don't you go ahead and explain his chart. We'll wait.Says thea ssclown who can't explain it.cries the forum jester who admits he doesn't understand the chart.Nope, still no understanding of what "demonstrate" means.Ok, so you weren't pretending.
Meanwhile, you remain the only one here who doesn't understand it. Even after 2 explanations, you still don't get it. Clearly, you don't possess even the minimum mental faculties required to understand it. That's ok, Jester, I doubt anyone here (except you, of course) thought you did.
You might want to try a dictionary or something. Meanwhile your chart remains floating like a turd in the toiletbowl.
You can't explain it because the chart doesnt make sense.
Both Faun and pingy's charts are crystal clear to us heterosexuals lurking about. Your mind is clouded by homosexual fantasies and your peculiar predilection.
I've explained it twice. What part did you not understand?Translation: I can't explain it either so I'll call names.Then why don't you go ahead and explain his chart. We'll wait.Says thea ssclown who can't explain it.cries the forum jester who admits he doesn't understand the chart.
You can't explain it because the chart doesnt make sense.
Both Faun and pingy's charts are crystal clear to us heterosexuals lurking about. Your mind is clouded by homosexual fantasies and your peculiar predilection.
explain ?
ok, you're a dumbass.
