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.
Keep grasping at straws, it's what you hacks do best.I never said I didn't believe the numbers were down, you said I did (inference, interpretation), making my point........ Thank you.No, you interpreted only skepticism, I simply asked some valid questions, offered examples and made comments referring to both sides using numbers for political purposes.Gas is down and thats bad
Unemployment is down and thats not good
Actually no, you provided only skepticism
Yeah I interpreted skepticism because it was skepticism. I didnt mention anything about one side or the other. I simply stated that your skepticism doesnt allow you to believe anything therefore you question everything. Both sides use number for their purpose is a true statement. Whats not clear is what you do believe...so it allows you to have "valid questions" based on that skepticism
Your partisanship is showing, you think I'm attacking Obama and the Dems, you're locked in the us vs them paradigm and can't see how anyone else is not........
Instead of comparing you (appropriately) to your far right demagogic opponents out of hand I'll give you a hint; If the economy had fully recovered under Obama and the Dems I'd be ecstatic because I don't care who's in power at the time. I don't believe either side has or can do much to affect the recovery, it's primarily economic cycles.
Well this is about the employment numbers being down. You dont believe it. So that means you have to be talking about (in this instance) the Dems, correct? You'll probably say no to remain flexible
You dont have to say it directly you implied it...Theres no other reason to say both parties play with the numbers for their political purposes.
If you weren't reading into you'd realize the context, it was a simple statement, not specifically applied to this current jobs report but applied in general. If you had actually read what I said you'd realize I applauded the fact jobs were created and that my thought direction was based on the fact that partisan pundits use these numbers to make political points without looking at the situation in the whole.Keep grasping at straws, it's what you hacks do best.I never said I didn't believe the numbers were down, you said I did (inference, interpretation), making my point........ Thank you.No, you interpreted only skepticism, I simply asked some valid questions, offered examples and made comments referring to both sides using numbers for political purposes.
Yeah I interpreted skepticism because it was skepticism. I didnt mention anything about one side or the other. I simply stated that your skepticism doesnt allow you to believe anything therefore you question everything. Both sides use number for their purpose is a true statement. Whats not clear is what you do believe...so it allows you to have "valid questions" based on that skepticism
Your partisanship is showing, you think I'm attacking Obama and the Dems, you're locked in the us vs them paradigm and can't see how anyone else is not........
Instead of comparing you (appropriately) to your far right demagogic opponents out of hand I'll give you a hint; If the economy had fully recovered under Obama and the Dems I'd be ecstatic because I don't care who's in power at the time. I don't believe either side has or can do much to affect the recovery, it's primarily economic cycles.
Well this is about the employment numbers being down. You dont believe it. So that means you have to be talking about (in this instance) the Dems, correct? You'll probably say no to remain flexible
You dont have to say it directly you implied it...Theres no other reason to say both parties play with the numbers for their political purposes.
Your language aint that slick, slick
The Employment-Population Ration went from 59% to 59.2%. The Population went up by 211,000, but Employed went up by 683,000Job creation is not even keeping up with population growth.
That was incredibly lazy of you to just make a claim without bothering to check to see if you were right.
Boedicca never cares about facts
Employed Sept: 146,600,000Don't Be Fooled by the Unemployent Rate - Obama's Slight of Hand As has been explained dozens of times....and as everyone knows..... the reason the Unemployment Rate has been dropping is for the WRONG REASON. It's not dropping because Obama's policies have generated so many jobs....it has dropped because so many people have dropped out of the pool of people COUNTED
If you weren't reading into you'd realize the context, it was a simple statement, not specifically applied to this current jobs report but applied in general.Keep grasping at straws, it's what you hacks do best.I never said I didn't believe the numbers were down, you said I did (inference, interpretation), making my point........ Thank you.Yeah I interpreted skepticism because it was skepticism. I didnt mention anything about one side or the other. I simply stated that your skepticism doesnt allow you to believe anything therefore you question everything. Both sides use number for their purpose is a true statement. Whats not clear is what you do believe...so it allows you to have "valid questions" based on that skepticism
Well this is about the employment numbers being down. You dont believe it. So that means you have to be talking about (in this instance) the Dems, correct? You'll probably say no to remain flexible
You dont have to say it directly you implied it...Theres no other reason to say both parties play with the numbers for their political purposes.
Your language aint that slick, slick
If you had actually read what I said you'd realize I applauded the fact jobs were created and that my thought direction was based on the fact that partisan pundits use these numbers to make political points without looking at the situation in the whole.
Granted I probably didn't put it in a way the someone like you would understand but you appear to be the only one who took it wrong and ran with it. Go figure........
I just showed how you got it wrong, again you ignored it. I'm beginning to think you're simply trying to start a fight.If you weren't reading into you'd realize the context, it was a simple statement, not specifically applied to this current jobs report but applied in general.Keep grasping at straws, it's what you hacks do best.I never said I didn't believe the numbers were down, you said I did (inference, interpretation), making my point........ Thank you.
You dont have to say it directly you implied it...Theres no other reason to say both parties play with the numbers for their political purposes.
Your language aint that slick, slick
You talk a lot...I know and I'm sure your skepticism applies to many different areas
If you had actually read what I said you'd realize I applauded the fact jobs were created and that my thought direction was based on the fact that partisan pundits use these numbers to make political points without looking at the situation in the whole.
You talk a lot and you repeat yourself a lot too. No one is confused by what you just said.
Granted I probably didn't put it in a way the someone like you would understand but you appear to be the only one who took it wrong and ran with it. Go figure........
I didnt take it wrong. See, if I had it wrong you would've said how I was wrong but you didnt. See?
Actually job creation is about double what is needed to keep up with population growth.Job creation is not even keeping up with population growth. And if Obama uses an EO to grant Amnesty, population growth will increase and make this anemic job growth even more inadequate.
MopenFail!
Bush economic crash = great job W.the SLOWEST "recovery" in history- great job O!
How can they? According to Obama those boot straps don't belong to them. They didn't create them, someone else did.Sounds like the people in those areas need to pick themselves up by their bootstraps.Here's my point, some people are claiming the economy is improving overall, it isn't, overall.We won't know that for a couple of weeks. This is just the National Level, and it will take some more time for the State, Local, and Metropolitan level numbers to come out (21 November for Regional and State level, 9 December for Metropolitan level)That's all fine and good but where were those jobs created?
Here's the breakdown by industry: Table B-1. Employees on nonfarm payrolls by industry sector and selected industry detailWhat type of jobs were they? Most of the big metropolitan cities have fared quite well were as the vast majority of smaller cities and towns are still reeling from the economic bust of 2008.
Case in point; I live out west in Southern Colorado, Denver is thriving, Colorado Springs has stopped imploding for now but I just noted another large listing of pre-foreclosures. Walsenburg and Trinidad have almost completely imploded losing half of their jobs and populations. Head into New Mexico, same thing to include Albuquerque (a major metropolitan city) which has yet to stop imploding and we need not even mention Arizona and Nevada which are both far from economic recovery.
Bush economic crash = great job W.the SLOWEST "recovery" in history- great job O!
Obama economic recovery = bad job O.
that's right, I keep forgetting Bush was never president and is therefore not responsible for anything that happened while he was president.Bush economic crash = great job W.the SLOWEST "recovery" in history- great job O!
Obama economic recovery = bad job O.
lmao- the crash wasn't bush's fault you idiot. 9/11, fannie freddie, etc...
I live in Canon City and I know you're exaggerating. If the Springs and Denver are doing fine then that says a lot about the economy of the state. Trinidad and Walsenburg are too small to make a determination about the economy anyway.Here's my point, some people are claiming the economy is improving overall, it isn't, overall.We won't know that for a couple of weeks. This is just the National Level, and it will take some more time for the State, Local, and Metropolitan level numbers to come out (21 November for Regional and State level, 9 December for Metropolitan level)That's all fine and good but where were those jobs created?
Here's the breakdown by industry: Table B-1. Employees on nonfarm payrolls by industry sector and selected industry detailWhat type of jobs were they? Most of the big metropolitan cities have fared quite well were as the vast majority of smaller cities and towns are still reeling from the economic bust of 2008.
Case in point; I live out west in Southern Colorado, Denver is thriving, Colorado Springs has stopped imploding for now but I just noted another large listing of pre-foreclosures. Walsenburg and Trinidad have almost completely imploded losing half of their jobs and populations. Head into New Mexico, same thing to include Albuquerque (a major metropolitan city) which has yet to stop imploding and we need not even mention Arizona and Nevada which are both far from economic recovery.
They are part time jobs. And all those folks are pulling lint out of their pockets.That's all fine and good but where were those jobs created? What type of jobs were they? Most of the big metropolitan cities have fared quite well were as the vast majority of smaller cities and towns are still reeling from the economic bust of 2008.
How can they? According to Obama those boot straps don't belong to them. They didn't create them, someone else did.Sounds like the people in those areas need to pick themselves up by their bootstraps.Here's my point, some people are claiming the economy is improving overall, it isn't, overall.We won't know that for a couple of weeks. This is just the National Level, and it will take some more time for the State, Local, and Metropolitan level numbers to come out (21 November for Regional and State level, 9 December for Metropolitan level)That's all fine and good but where were those jobs created?
Here's the breakdown by industry: Table B-1. Employees on nonfarm payrolls by industry sector and selected industry detailWhat type of jobs were they? Most of the big metropolitan cities have fared quite well were as the vast majority of smaller cities and towns are still reeling from the economic bust of 2008.
Case in point; I live out west in Southern Colorado, Denver is thriving, Colorado Springs has stopped imploding for now but I just noted another large listing of pre-foreclosures. Walsenburg and Trinidad have almost completely imploded losing half of their jobs and populations. Head into New Mexico, same thing to include Albuquerque (a major metropolitan city) which has yet to stop imploding and we need not even mention Arizona and Nevada which are both far from economic recovery.
Well, you see, that's called theThat's all fine and good but where were those jobs created? What type of jobs were they? Most of the big metropolitan cities have fared quite well were as the vast majority of smaller cities and towns are still reeling from the economic bust of 2008.
The RWnuts will continue for awhile to try to talk down the good numbers, but not long from now, if the good news continues,
they'll start trying to give the newly elected GOP majority credit for them.
I guarantee.
