US Economy turns in weakest growth to date.

[kiwiman127]

As predicted, Rabbi came back and called a poster a name.

You need to post a graph so I can make fun of you again.
The spin here is dizzying. My point is simple if you have more than 2 functioning brain cells. This is the worst quarter post recession on record. It shouldnt be. But growth has averaged under 3%. That is a record of dismal failure, especially considering the amount of gov't intervention.

Oh boy, the ole' you make fun of me when I post graphs. The truth is, that you attempt to make fun of me, but end up looking like an ignorant fool, always.
99% of the posters on this board know how to read graphs. It's plain to see you just don't have the cognitive ability to read graphs.
I'll never forget when you posted a graph to make a point. Your graph had a wavy line running horizontally and that was it. Your graph had absolutely no qualifiers, data ranges, X and Y axes and no labels! You posted a graph that absolutely said nothing. You completely showed exactly how ignorant you really are.
Being it's clear that you are one of the 47% by being on USMB all day, you have plenty of time to learn how to read a graph. I tried to help you once, I posted a link that was instructional on how to read graphs. Obviously, educating yourself interfered with your obsession of posting multitudes of mundane one-sided, non-objective posts, so you blew it off.
I can't help you, you have to help yourself.

Thanks for proving my point. I posted that graph to mock you because you have proven yourself incapable and you run away every single time I challenge you.
But now NYCarb has managed to demonstrate that on the issue of "weakest quarter" I was wrong. Maybe it's one of the three worst. My bad. In the course of that he showed that this is the worst recovery after a recession ever. Obama's policies are total failures.

"Thanks for proving my point. I posted that graph to mock you because you have proven yourself incapable and you run away every single time I challenge you." Rabbi

Well, that was a load of shit.
The thread where you posted your great graph was a thread, I had not participated in until I saw your bogus graph. You used your bogus graph to make a point with another poster, it was your "proof". How would you know if I'd even visit that thread considering I don't spend hardly anytime on USMB and only post an average of four times daily. So, in fact you just lied your ass off.
Secondly, I don't run from a fight, that's your M.O. and everybody knows it. You may come back after you have again been proven wrong, just to call other posters names, but that's it. That's your version of winning an argument, insult the person who just thumped your ass and getting the last word in. You done it with me and several other posters. You've been called on it dozens and dozens of times.
I've posted this before and I'll post it again, there are quite a few really good conservative posters on this board. You aren't one of them. I'll never forget the time you posted that you were the smartest poster on USMB and you were serious!!!! That was an insult to hundreds of conservative, liberal and those in-between people who post regularly on USMB.
Now, go away.

Every time I challenge you to explain a graph you run. Every time. You are a joke.

Well, If I'm a joke, what does that make you?
You average a paltry 17.8 rating points per 100 posts.
I average 38.4 per 100 posts. That's more than double than you receive.
This is a conservative dominated board. The difference is that I have conservatives, moderates and liberals agree with my posts. You just get the goose-stepper crowd. This illustrates just how narrow your thinking is and the lack of quality of your posts. That's pretty sad for the self-proclaimed "smartest poster" on USMB.

 

[gipper]

It is not the job of Congress to create jobs. There job is to pass legislation that enables the private sector to create jobs. The House passed approximately 40 so-called jobs bills, the vast majority of which that were ratholed in the Senate by Harry Reid. It is called a 'pocket veto' since they were not voted on and Obama didn't have to veto them.
The Keystone pipeline would not have cost the taxpayers any money and would create a lot of private sector jobs, but Obama killed that.

You need to catch up with the times. It is now called climate change, and the climate has undergone change every few decades since there was such a thing as climate.

No sir. The Keystone pipeline was never in the best interests of the country. The environmental consequences were too severe, not to mention the fact that it would NOT have created many jobs at all. You don't need a lot of people to build a pipeline, and you need even fewer to maintain one.

Could you please outline the severe environmental consequences?

The pipeline was planned to be built right through America's breadbasket, and so any major spills there could have consequences for our food supply. But the most important environmental issue is the potential impacts on our waterways and ground water resources, which are critical in that part of the country. And finally, the tar sands oils are the dirtiest oils on the planet, so any spill would have long-term consequences far above what normal crude would have.

Your concern about spills related to pipelines is not based in reality. Oil pipelines crisscross America today. Spills seldom occur.

What about rail roads? Oil is often shipped by rail, which is more risky than pipelines, yet seldom do spills occur.

One must do a risk benefit analysis, if one wishes to use oil. If you would rather we not use oil, then we can go back to living in caves.

I have worked on pipeline spills. You don't know what you are talking about.

Your response fails to address my argument.

Please identify the pipeline spills which have occurred in the US...say the last 10 years. Then we can analyze the level of damage that occurred at each spill site and what conditions are like there today.

It would seem likely, if you are correct, that since pipelines crisscross much of the nation's 'bread basket' that environmental harm would be clearly evident and terribly damaging.

 

[orogenicman]

No sir. The Keystone pipeline was never in the best interests of the country. The environmental consequences were too severe, not to mention the fact that it would NOT have created many jobs at all. You don't need a lot of people to build a pipeline, and you need even fewer to maintain one.

Could you please outline the severe environmental consequences?

The pipeline was planned to be built right through America's breadbasket, and so any major spills there could have consequences for our food supply. But the most important environmental issue is the potential impacts on our waterways and ground water resources, which are critical in that part of the country. And finally, the tar sands oils are the dirtiest oils on the planet, so any spill would have long-term consequences far above what normal crude would have.

Your concern about spills related to pipelines is not based in reality. Oil pipelines crisscross America today. Spills seldom occur.

What about rail roads? Oil is often shipped by rail, which is more risky than pipelines, yet seldom do spills occur.

One must do a risk benefit analysis, if one wishes to use oil. If you would rather we not use oil, then we can go back to living in caves.

I have worked on pipeline spills. You don't know what you are talking about.

Your response fails to address my argument.

Please identify the pipeline spills which have occurred in the US...say the last 10 years. Then we can analyze the level of damage that occurred at each spill site and what conditions are like there today.

It would seem likely, if you are correct, that since pipelines crisscross much of the nation's 'bread basket' that environmental harm would be clearly evident and terribly damaging.

To what end? Look, the pipeline project is dead. End of story.

 

[gipper]

Could you please outline the severe environmental consequences?

The pipeline was planned to be built right through America's breadbasket, and so any major spills there could have consequences for our food supply. But the most important environmental issue is the potential impacts on our waterways and ground water resources, which are critical in that part of the country. And finally, the tar sands oils are the dirtiest oils on the planet, so any spill would have long-term consequences far above what normal crude would have.

Your concern about spills related to pipelines is not based in reality. Oil pipelines crisscross America today. Spills seldom occur.

What about rail roads? Oil is often shipped by rail, which is more risky than pipelines, yet seldom do spills occur.

One must do a risk benefit analysis, if one wishes to use oil. If you would rather we not use oil, then we can go back to living in caves.

I have worked on pipeline spills. You don't know what you are talking about.

Your response fails to address my argument.

Please identify the pipeline spills which have occurred in the US...say the last 10 years. Then we can analyze the level of damage that occurred at each spill site and what conditions are like there today.

It would seem likely, if you are correct, that since pipelines crisscross much of the nation's 'bread basket' that environmental harm would be clearly evident and terribly damaging.

To what end? Look, the pipeline project is dead. End of story.

I will take your post (re-posted below) to be misguided or maybe just propaganda.

The pipeline was planned to be built right through America's breadbasket, and so any major spills there could have consequences for our food supply. But the most important environmental issue is the potential impacts on our waterways and ground water resources, which are critical in that part of the country. And finally, the tar sands oils are the dirtiest oils on the planet, so any spill would have long-term consequences far above what normal crude would have.

 

[nat4900]

Please identify the pipeline spills which have occurred in the US...say the last 10 years. Then we can analyze the level of damage that occurred at each spill site and what conditions are like there today.

You know, you could do your own research...its easy....nonetheless:

List of pipeline accidents in the United States in the 21st century - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

North Dakota recorded 300 oil spills in two years without notifying the public Environment The Guardian

Worst Oil Spill in History

 

[The Rabbi]

You need to post a graph so I can make fun of you again.
The spin here is dizzying. My point is simple if you have more than 2 functioning brain cells. This is the worst quarter post recession on record. It shouldnt be. But growth has averaged under 3%. That is a record of dismal failure, especially considering the amount of gov't intervention.

Oh boy, the ole' you make fun of me when I post graphs. The truth is, that you attempt to make fun of me, but end up looking like an ignorant fool, always.
99% of the posters on this board know how to read graphs. It's plain to see you just don't have the cognitive ability to read graphs.
I'll never forget when you posted a graph to make a point. Your graph had a wavy line running horizontally and that was it. Your graph had absolutely no qualifiers, data ranges, X and Y axes and no labels! You posted a graph that absolutely said nothing. You completely showed exactly how ignorant you really are.
Being it's clear that you are one of the 47% by being on USMB all day, you have plenty of time to learn how to read a graph. I tried to help you once, I posted a link that was instructional on how to read graphs. Obviously, educating yourself interfered with your obsession of posting multitudes of mundane one-sided, non-objective posts, so you blew it off.
I can't help you, you have to help yourself.

Thanks for proving my point. I posted that graph to mock you because you have proven yourself incapable and you run away every single time I challenge you.
But now NYCarb has managed to demonstrate that on the issue of "weakest quarter" I was wrong. Maybe it's one of the three worst. My bad. In the course of that he showed that this is the worst recovery after a recession ever. Obama's policies are total failures.

"Thanks for proving my point. I posted that graph to mock you because you have proven yourself incapable and you run away every single time I challenge you." Rabbi

Well, that was a load of shit.
The thread where you posted your great graph was a thread, I had not participated in until I saw your bogus graph. You used your bogus graph to make a point with another poster, it was your "proof". How would you know if I'd even visit that thread considering I don't spend hardly anytime on USMB and only post an average of four times daily. So, in fact you just lied your ass off.
Secondly, I don't run from a fight, that's your M.O. and everybody knows it. You may come back after you have again been proven wrong, just to call other posters names, but that's it. That's your version of winning an argument, insult the person who just thumped your ass and getting the last word in. You done it with me and several other posters. You've been called on it dozens and dozens of times.
I've posted this before and I'll post it again, there are quite a few really good conservative posters on this board. You aren't one of them. I'll never forget the time you posted that you were the smartest poster on USMB and you were serious!!!! That was an insult to hundreds of conservative, liberal and those in-between people who post regularly on USMB.
Now, go away.

Every time I challenge you to explain a graph you run. Every time. You are a joke.

Well, If I'm a joke, what does that make you?
You average a paltry 17.8 rating points per 100 posts.
I average 38.4 per 100 posts. That's more than double than you receive.
This is a conservative dominated board. The difference is that I have conservatives, moderates and liberals agree with my posts. You just get the goose-stepper crowd. This illustrates just how narrow your thinking is and the lack of quality of your posts. That's pretty sad for the self-proclaimed "smartest poster" on USMB.

Post a graph or STFU, asshole.

 

[TooTall]

Oh well, its the usual Rabbi poop-flinging without basis...as usual

Two questions:

How many JOB-BILLS have been passed by the republican led-congress that Obama has vetoed?

Do the idiotic right wingers who deny global warming, EVER realize how our bad weather affects the economic growth?

It is not the job of Congress to create jobs. There job is to pass legislation that enables the private sector to create jobs. The House passed approximately 40 so-called jobs bills, the vast majority of which that were ratholed in the Senate by Harry Reid. It is called a 'pocket veto' since they were not voted on and Obama didn't have to veto them.
The Keystone pipeline would not have cost the taxpayers any money and would create a lot of private sector jobs, but Obama killed that.

You need to catch up with the times. It is now called climate change, and the climate has undergone change every few decades since there was such a thing as climate.

No sir. The Keystone pipeline was never in the best interests of the country. The environmental consequences were too severe, not to mention the fact that it would NOT have created many jobs at all. You don't need a lot of people to build a pipeline, and you need even fewer to maintain one.

The environmental consequences were shown to be less severe than transporting by rail and the argument that an increase in supply would create more emissions is bullshit. The oil will go on the market with or without the Keystone pipeline. One estimate I read was about 2,000 jobs to build the pipeline for 2 years and 50 permanent jobs to maintain it. The jobs that would be created to feed clothe and house these construction workers was not in the estimate.

 

[kiwiman127]

Oh boy, the ole' you make fun of me when I post graphs. The truth is, that you attempt to make fun of me, but end up looking like an ignorant fool, always.
99% of the posters on this board know how to read graphs. It's plain to see you just don't have the cognitive ability to read graphs.
I'll never forget when you posted a graph to make a point. Your graph had a wavy line running horizontally and that was it. Your graph had absolutely no qualifiers, data ranges, X and Y axes and no labels! You posted a graph that absolutely said nothing. You completely showed exactly how ignorant you really are.
Being it's clear that you are one of the 47% by being on USMB all day, you have plenty of time to learn how to read a graph. I tried to help you once, I posted a link that was instructional on how to read graphs. Obviously, educating yourself interfered with your obsession of posting multitudes of mundane one-sided, non-objective posts, so you blew it off.
I can't help you, you have to help yourself.

Thanks for proving my point. I posted that graph to mock you because you have proven yourself incapable and you run away every single time I challenge you.
But now NYCarb has managed to demonstrate that on the issue of "weakest quarter" I was wrong. Maybe it's one of the three worst. My bad. In the course of that he showed that this is the worst recovery after a recession ever. Obama's policies are total failures.

"Thanks for proving my point. I posted that graph to mock you because you have proven yourself incapable and you run away every single time I challenge you." Rabbi

Well, that was a load of shit.
The thread where you posted your great graph was a thread, I had not participated in until I saw your bogus graph. You used your bogus graph to make a point with another poster, it was your "proof". How would you know if I'd even visit that thread considering I don't spend hardly anytime on USMB and only post an average of four times daily. So, in fact you just lied your ass off.
Secondly, I don't run from a fight, that's your M.O. and everybody knows it. You may come back after you have again been proven wrong, just to call other posters names, but that's it. That's your version of winning an argument, insult the person who just thumped your ass and getting the last word in. You done it with me and several other posters. You've been called on it dozens and dozens of times.
I've posted this before and I'll post it again, there are quite a few really good conservative posters on this board. You aren't one of them. I'll never forget the time you posted that you were the smartest poster on USMB and you were serious!!!! That was an insult to hundreds of conservative, liberal and those in-between people who post regularly on USMB.
Now, go away.

Every time I challenge you to explain a graph you run. Every time. You are a joke.

Well, If I'm a joke, what does that make you?
You average a paltry 17.8 rating points per 100 posts.
I average 38.4 per 100 posts. That's more than double than you receive.
This is a conservative dominated board. The difference is that I have conservatives, moderates and liberals agree with my posts. You just get the goose-stepper crowd. This illustrates just how narrow your thinking is and the lack of quality of your posts. That's pretty sad for the self-proclaimed "smartest poster" on USMB.

Post a graph or STFU, asshole.

 

[Kosh]

You need to post a graph so I can make fun of you again.
The spin here is dizzying. My point is simple if you have more than 2 functioning brain cells. This is the worst quarter post recession on record. It shouldnt be. But growth has averaged under 3%. That is a record of dismal failure, especially considering the amount of gov't intervention.

Oh boy, the ole' you make fun of me when I post graphs. The truth is, that you attempt to make fun of me, but end up looking like an ignorant fool, always.
99% of the posters on this board know how to read graphs. It's plain to see you just don't have the cognitive ability to read graphs.
I'll never forget when you posted a graph to make a point. Your graph had a wavy line running horizontally and that was it. Your graph had absolutely no qualifiers, data ranges, X and Y axes and no labels! You posted a graph that absolutely said nothing. You completely showed exactly how ignorant you really are.
Being it's clear that you are one of the 47% by being on USMB all day, you have plenty of time to learn how to read a graph. I tried to help you once, I posted a link that was instructional on how to read graphs. Obviously, educating yourself interfered with your obsession of posting multitudes of mundane one-sided, non-objective posts, so you blew it off.
I can't help you, you have to help yourself.

Thanks for proving my point. I posted that graph to mock you because you have proven yourself incapable and you run away every single time I challenge you.
But now NYCarb has managed to demonstrate that on the issue of "weakest quarter" I was wrong. Maybe it's one of the three worst. My bad. In the course of that he showed that this is the worst recovery after a recession ever. Obama's policies are total failures.

"Thanks for proving my point. I posted that graph to mock you because you have proven yourself incapable and you run away every single time I challenge you." Rabbi

Well, that was a load of shit.
The thread where you posted your great graph was a thread, I had not participated in until I saw your bogus graph. You used your bogus graph to make a point with another poster, it was your "proof". How would you know if I'd even visit that thread considering I don't spend hardly anytime on USMB and only post an average of four times daily. So, in fact you just lied your ass off.
Secondly, I don't run from a fight, that's your M.O. and everybody knows it. You may come back after you have again been proven wrong, just to call other posters names, but that's it. That's your version of winning an argument, insult the person who just thumped your ass and getting the last word in. You done it with me and several other posters. You've been called on it dozens and dozens of times.
I've posted this before and I'll post it again, there are quite a few really good conservative posters on this board. You aren't one of them. I'll never forget the time you posted that you were the smartest poster on USMB and you were serious!!!! That was an insult to hundreds of conservative, liberal and those in-between people who post regularly on USMB.
Now, go away.

Every time I challenge you to explain a graph you run. Every time. You are a joke.

Well, If I'm a joke, what does that make you?
You average a paltry 17.8 rating points per 100 posts.
I average 38.4 per 100 posts. That's more than double than you receive.
This is a conservative dominated board. The difference is that I have conservatives, moderates and liberals agree with my posts. You just get the goose-stepper crowd. This illustrates just how narrow your thinking is and the lack of quality of your posts. That's pretty sad for the self-proclaimed "smartest poster" on USMB.

Yes the far left often support each other here and definitely anyone trying to associate that with being the smartest poster here truly shows how stupid they are..

 

[TooTall]

Oh well, its the usual Rabbi poop-flinging without basis...as usual

Two questions:

How many JOB-BILLS have been passed by the republican led-congress that Obama has vetoed?

Do the idiotic right wingers who deny global warming, EVER realize how our bad weather affects the economic growth?

It is not the job of Congress to create jobs. There job is to pass legislation that enables the private sector to create jobs. The House passed approximately 40 so-called jobs bills, the vast majority of which that were ratholed in the Senate by Harry Reid. It is called a 'pocket veto' since they were not voted on and Obama didn't have to veto them.
The Keystone pipeline would not have cost the taxpayers any money and would create a lot of private sector jobs, but Obama killed that.

You need to catch up with the times. It is now called climate change, and the climate has undergone change every few decades since there was such a thing as climate.

No sir. The Keystone pipeline was never in the best interests of the country. The environmental consequences were too severe, not to mention the fact that it would NOT have created many jobs at all. You don't need a lot of people to build a pipeline, and you need even fewer to maintain one.

Could you please outline the severe environmental consequences?

The pipeline was planned to be built right through America's breadbasket, and so any major spills there could have consequences for our food supply. But the most important environmental issue is the potential impacts on our waterways and ground water resources, which are critical in that part of the country. And finally, the tar sands oils are the dirtiest oils on the planet, so any spill would have long-term consequences far above what normal crude would have.

How many pipelines already exist in America's breadbasket? Just make a guess.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Oh well, its the usual Rabbi poop-flinging without basis...as usual

Two questions:

How many JOB-BILLS have been passed by the republican led-congress that Obama has vetoed?

Do the idiotic right wingers who deny global warming, EVER realize how our bad weather affects the economic growth?

It is not the job of Congress to create jobs. There job is to pass legislation that enables the private sector to create jobs. The House passed approximately 40 so-called jobs bills, the vast majority of which that were ratholed in the Senate by Harry Reid. It is called a 'pocket veto' since they were not voted on and Obama didn't have to veto them.
The Keystone pipeline would not have cost the taxpayers any money and would create a lot of private sector jobs, but Obama killed that.

You need to catch up with the times. It is now called climate change, and the climate has undergone change every few decades since there was such a thing as climate.

No sir. The Keystone pipeline was never in the best interests of the country. The environmental consequences were too severe, not to mention the fact that it would NOT have created many jobs at all. You don't need a lot of people to build a pipeline, and you need even fewer to maintain one.

Could you please outline the severe environmental consequences?

The pipeline was planned to be built right through America's breadbasket, and so any major spills there could have consequences for our food supply. But the most important environmental issue is the potential impacts on our waterways and ground water resources, which are critical in that part of the country. And finally, the tar sands oils are the dirtiest oils on the planet, so any spill would have long-term consequences far above what normal crude would have.

How many pipelines already exist in America's breadbasket? Just make a guess.

One billion?

 

[TooTall]

No sir. The Keystone pipeline was never in the best interests of the country. The environmental consequences were too severe, not to mention the fact that it would NOT have created many jobs at all. You don't need a lot of people to build a pipeline, and you need even fewer to maintain one.

Could you please outline the severe environmental consequences?

The pipeline was planned to be built right through America's breadbasket, and so any major spills there could have consequences for our food supply. But the most important environmental issue is the potential impacts on our waterways and ground water resources, which are critical in that part of the country. And finally, the tar sands oils are the dirtiest oils on the planet, so any spill would have long-term consequences far above what normal crude would have.

Your concern about spills related to pipelines is not based in reality. Oil pipelines crisscross America today. Spills seldom occur.

What about rail roads? Oil is often shipped by rail, which is more risky than pipelines, yet seldom do spills occur.

One must do a risk benefit analysis, if one wishes to use oil. If you would rather we not use oil, then we can go back to living in caves.

I have worked on pipeline spills. You don't know what you are talking about.

Your response fails to address my argument.

Please identify the pipeline spills which have occurred in the US...say the last 10 years. Then we can analyze the level of damage that occurred at each spill site and what conditions are like there today.

It would seem likely, if you are correct, that since pipelines crisscross much of the nation's 'bread basket' that environmental harm would be clearly evident and terribly damaging.

From your link:

"Records obtained by the AP show that so far this year, North Dakota has recorded 139 pipeline leaks that spilled a total of 735 barrels of oil. In 2012, there were 153 pipeline leaks that spilled 495 barrels of oil, data show. A little more than half of the spills companies reported to North Dakota occurred "on-site," where a well is connected to a pipeline, and most were fewer than 10 barrels. The remainder of the spills occurred along the state's labyrinth of pipelines."


WASHINGTON — More crude oil was spilled in U.S. rail incidents last year than was spilled in the nearly four decades since the federal government began collecting data on such spills, an analysis of the data shows.

Including major derailments in Alabama and North Dakota, more than 1.15 million gallons of crude oil was spilled from rail cars in 2013, according to data from the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration.

By comparison, from 1975 to 2012, U.S. railroads spilled a combined 800,000 gallons of crude oil. The spike underscores new concerns about the safety of such shipments as rail has become the preferred mode for oil producers amid a North American energy boom.

The federal data does not include incidents in Canada where oil spilled from trains. Canadian authorities estimate that more than 1.5 million gallons of crude oil spilled in Lac-Megantic, Quebec, on July 6, when a runaway train derailed and exploded, killing 47 people. The cargo originated in North Dakota.

Nearly 750,000 gallons of crude oil spilled from a train on Nov. 8 near Aliceville, Ala. The train also originated in North Dakota and caught fire after it derailed in a swampy area. No one was injured or killed.

The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration doesn’t yet have spill data from a Dec. 30 derailment near Casselton, N.D. But the National Transportation Safety Board, which is the lead investigator in that incident, estimates that more than 400,000 gallons of crude oil were spilled there. Though no one was injured or killed, the intense fire forced most of Casselton’s 2,400 residents to evacuate in subzero temperatures.


Read more here: WASHINGTON More oil spilled from trains in 2013 than in previous 4 decades federal data show Economy McClatchy DC

 

[orogenicman]

Oh well, its the usual Rabbi poop-flinging without basis...as usual

Two questions:

How many JOB-BILLS have been passed by the republican led-congress that Obama has vetoed?

Do the idiotic right wingers who deny global warming, EVER realize how our bad weather affects the economic growth?

It is not the job of Congress to create jobs. There job is to pass legislation that enables the private sector to create jobs. The House passed approximately 40 so-called jobs bills, the vast majority of which that were ratholed in the Senate by Harry Reid. It is called a 'pocket veto' since they were not voted on and Obama didn't have to veto them.
The Keystone pipeline would not have cost the taxpayers any money and would create a lot of private sector jobs, but Obama killed that.

You need to catch up with the times. It is now called climate change, and the climate has undergone change every few decades since there was such a thing as climate.

No sir. The Keystone pipeline was never in the best interests of the country. The environmental consequences were too severe, not to mention the fact that it would NOT have created many jobs at all. You don't need a lot of people to build a pipeline, and you need even fewer to maintain one.

The environmental consequences were shown to be less severe than transporting by rail and the argument that an increase in supply would create more emissions is bullshit. The oil will go on the market with or without the Keystone pipeline. One estimate I read was about 2,000 jobs to build the pipeline for 2 years and 50 permanent jobs to maintain it. The jobs that would be created to feed clothe and house these construction workers was not in the estimate.

But then, we don't need tar sand oil, so they don't have to transport it by any means into or through the U.S. The only reason why they wanted to transport it here is because their own people don't want it transported through their own lands.

 

[nat4900]

The jobs that would be created to feed clothe and house these construction workers was not in the estimate.

Well, if the Keystone folks would promise us that they were going to hire 50 starving, naked, and homeless people, I may change my mind about the project.

 

[nat4900]

I would tell those Canadian "investors" that they could build the pipeline to Vancouver to ship that oil to China....AND, hire some US refiners to build their plants all over southwestern Canada..........Problem thusly solved, don't you think?

 

[TooTall]

I would tell those Canadian "investors" that they could build the pipeline to Vancouver to ship that oil to China....AND, hire some US refiners to build their plants all over southwestern Canada..........Problem thusly solved, don't you think?

That would make a lot of money for the oil companies and Canadian workers and nothing for US workers. If that is your goal, problem solved for the Canadians. Some of the tar sands oil is on North Dakota. Do you want that sent to Canada as well?

 

[TooTall]

The jobs that would be created to feed clothe and house these construction workers was not in the estimate.

Well, if the Keystone folks would promise us that they were going to hire 50 starving, naked, and homeless people, I may change my mind about the project.

Very few starving, naked, homeless people have the skills to build a pipeline. If they did, they wouldn't be starving, naked and homeless.

 

[TooTall]

Oh well, its the usual Rabbi poop-flinging without basis...as usual

Two questions:

How many JOB-BILLS have been passed by the republican led-congress that Obama has vetoed?

Do the idiotic right wingers who deny global warming, EVER realize how our bad weather affects the economic growth?

It is not the job of Congress to create jobs. There job is to pass legislation that enables the private sector to create jobs. The House passed approximately 40 so-called jobs bills, the vast majority of which that were ratholed in the Senate by Harry Reid. It is called a 'pocket veto' since they were not voted on and Obama didn't have to veto them.
The Keystone pipeline would not have cost the taxpayers any money and would create a lot of private sector jobs, but Obama killed that.

You need to catch up with the times. It is now called climate change, and the climate has undergone change every few decades since there was such a thing as climate.

No sir. The Keystone pipeline was never in the best interests of the country. The environmental consequences were too severe, not to mention the fact that it would NOT have created many jobs at all. You don't need a lot of people to build a pipeline, and you need even fewer to maintain one.

The environmental consequences were shown to be less severe than transporting by rail and the argument that an increase in supply would create more emissions is bullshit. The oil will go on the market with or without the Keystone pipeline. One estimate I read was about 2,000 jobs to build the pipeline for 2 years and 50 permanent jobs to maintain it. The jobs that would be created to feed clothe and house these construction workers was not in the estimate.

But then, we don't need tar sand oil, so they don't have to transport it by any means into or through the U.S. The only reason why they wanted to transport it here is because their own people don't want it transported through their own lands.

It has to be transported on their own land to get to the US.

 

[kiwiman127]

Oh boy, the ole' you make fun of me when I post graphs. The truth is, that you attempt to make fun of me, but end up looking like an ignorant fool, always.
99% of the posters on this board know how to read graphs. It's plain to see you just don't have the cognitive ability to read graphs.
I'll never forget when you posted a graph to make a point. Your graph had a wavy line running horizontally and that was it. Your graph had absolutely no qualifiers, data ranges, X and Y axes and no labels! You posted a graph that absolutely said nothing. You completely showed exactly how ignorant you really are.
Being it's clear that you are one of the 47% by being on USMB all day, you have plenty of time to learn how to read a graph. I tried to help you once, I posted a link that was instructional on how to read graphs. Obviously, educating yourself interfered with your obsession of posting multitudes of mundane one-sided, non-objective posts, so you blew it off.
I can't help you, you have to help yourself.

Thanks for proving my point. I posted that graph to mock you because you have proven yourself incapable and you run away every single time I challenge you.
But now NYCarb has managed to demonstrate that on the issue of "weakest quarter" I was wrong. Maybe it's one of the three worst. My bad. In the course of that he showed that this is the worst recovery after a recession ever. Obama's policies are total failures.

"Thanks for proving my point. I posted that graph to mock you because you have proven yourself incapable and you run away every single time I challenge you." Rabbi

Well, that was a load of shit.
The thread where you posted your great graph was a thread, I had not participated in until I saw your bogus graph. You used your bogus graph to make a point with another poster, it was your "proof". How would you know if I'd even visit that thread considering I don't spend hardly anytime on USMB and only post an average of four times daily. So, in fact you just lied your ass off.
Secondly, I don't run from a fight, that's your M.O. and everybody knows it. You may come back after you have again been proven wrong, just to call other posters names, but that's it. That's your version of winning an argument, insult the person who just thumped your ass and getting the last word in. You done it with me and several other posters. You've been called on it dozens and dozens of times.
I've posted this before and I'll post it again, there are quite a few really good conservative posters on this board. You aren't one of them. I'll never forget the time you posted that you were the smartest poster on USMB and you were serious!!!! That was an insult to hundreds of conservative, liberal and those in-between people who post regularly on USMB.
Now, go away.

Every time I challenge you to explain a graph you run. Every time. You are a joke.

Well, If I'm a joke, what does that make you?
You average a paltry 17.8 rating points per 100 posts.
I average 38.4 per 100 posts. That's more than double than you receive.
This is a conservative dominated board. The difference is that I have conservatives, moderates and liberals agree with my posts. You just get the goose-stepper crowd. This illustrates just how narrow your thinking is and the lack of quality of your posts. That's pretty sad for the self-proclaimed "smartest poster" on USMB.

Yes the far left often support each other here and definitely anyone trying to associate that with being the smartest poster here truly shows how stupid they are..

You know Kosh, I get along pretty well with the adult conservatives, it's the infantile conservatives I have issues with.
And yes, that was really stupid of Rabbi to claim to be the smartest poster on USMB. We finally agree on something.

 

[NYcarbineer]

As predicted, Rabbi came back and called a poster a name.

You need to post a graph so I can make fun of you again.
The spin here is dizzying. My point is simple if you have more than 2 functioning brain cells. This is the worst quarter post recession on record. It shouldnt be. But growth has averaged under 3%. That is a record of dismal failure, especially considering the amount of gov't intervention.

Oh boy, the ole' you make fun of me when I post graphs. The truth is, that you attempt to make fun of me, but end up looking like an ignorant fool, always.
99% of the posters on this board know how to read graphs. It's plain to see you just don't have the cognitive ability to read graphs.
I'll never forget when you posted a graph to make a point. Your graph had a wavy line running horizontally and that was it. Your graph had absolutely no qualifiers, data ranges, X and Y axes and no labels! You posted a graph that absolutely said nothing. You completely showed exactly how ignorant you really are.
Being it's clear that you are one of the 47% by being on USMB all day, you have plenty of time to learn how to read a graph. I tried to help you once, I posted a link that was instructional on how to read graphs. Obviously, educating yourself interfered with your obsession of posting multitudes of mundane one-sided, non-objective posts, so you blew it off.
I can't help you, you have to help yourself.

Thanks for proving my point. I posted that graph to mock you because you have proven yourself incapable and you run away every single time I challenge you.
But now NYCarb has managed to demonstrate that on the issue of "weakest quarter" I was wrong. Maybe it's one of the three worst. My bad. In the course of that he showed that this is the worst recovery after a recession ever. Obama's policies are total failures.

Since you didn't link your claim and then you were proven wrong makes it even funnier that you constantly make claims and then tell people to look it up themselves if they don't believe it.

You need to post a graph so I can make fun of you again.
The spin here is dizzying. My point is simple if you have more than 2 functioning brain cells. This is the worst quarter post recession on record. It shouldnt be. But growth has averaged under 3%. That is a record of dismal failure, especially considering the amount of gov't intervention.

Oh boy, the ole' you make fun of me when I post graphs. The truth is, that you attempt to make fun of me, but end up looking like an ignorant fool, always.
99% of the posters on this board know how to read graphs. It's plain to see you just don't have the cognitive ability to read graphs.
I'll never forget when you posted a graph to make a point. Your graph had a wavy line running horizontally and that was it. Your graph had absolutely no qualifiers, data ranges, X and Y axes and no labels! You posted a graph that absolutely said nothing. You completely showed exactly how ignorant you really are.
Being it's clear that you are one of the 47% by being on USMB all day, you have plenty of time to learn how to read a graph. I tried to help you once, I posted a link that was instructional on how to read graphs. Obviously, educating yourself interfered with your obsession of posting multitudes of mundane one-sided, non-objective posts, so you blew it off.
I can't help you, you have to help yourself.

I proved his original premise wrong with a graph.

Yes, I was wrong. You would think 0.2% growth would be the worst quarter results in the midst of a recovery. But no. There was negative growth during this "recovery." Making it in total the worst recovery on record. Thanks, Maobama!

The worst recovery in history was in the beginning of Reagan's presidency when the recovery that began in July of 1980 only lasted a year and then fell back into the deep Reagan recession.

LOL. You clearly dont know what you're talking about. Like that's news.

Tell me ANYTHING about what I said that you dispute.

1. Was the economy in recovery when Reagan was inaugurated? Yes.
2. Was that recovery only 6 months old? Yes.
3. Did that recovery falter and collapse in July 1981? Yes.
4. Was it followed by the long Reagan recession? Yes
5. Was it a very short weak recovery, weaker and shorter than the current one? Yes.