58 straight months of jobs growth, ACA working great where allowed to, where is this bad economy?

[pinqy]

ONCE MORE.......

RECORD 93,770,000 AMERICANS NOT IN LABOR FORCE

And why? 93% do not want or need a job.

yea they have welfare

Do the math unsustainable....

In the 1950s it was like 12 workers supported a person on welfare

Today it is like 4 workers support some one on welfare

Do the math you retarded libs....

Ok, how many of the 93 million are dependent on welfare?

Why you telling me now we have 93 million folks who are millionaires now?

Out of some 300 million people?

Do the math.it's unsustainable

Yiou do the math. Why was a far lower participation rate sustainable until 1978? Our current rate is higher than anytime in the 50's or 60's.

 

[Wyatt earp]

ONCE MORE.......

RECORD 93,770,000 AMERICANS NOT IN LABOR FORCE

And why? 93% do not want or need a job.

yea they have welfare

Do the math unsustainable....

In the 1950s it was like 12 workers supported a person on welfare

Today it is like 4 workers support some one on welfare

Do the math you retarded libs....

Ok, how many of the 93 million are dependent on welfare?

Why you telling me now we have 93 million folks who are millionaires now?

Out of some 300 million people?

Do the math.it's unsustainable

Yiou do the math. Why was a far lower participation rate sustainable until 1978? Our current rate is higher than anytime in the 50's or 60's.

have a link?

I know the numbers and plenty of government links to support my post *****.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Do the math jackass, the ponzi schemes is unsustainable.

 

[bedowin62]

the Left will do anything, say anything, to hide, deflect from or obfuscate their failed ideology

 

[Wyatt earp]

We don't have more workers supporting the folks on welfare we have 50% less.then the 1950s

 

[Wyatt earp]

Google it ***** I am not your teacher it's common knowledge on the political boards.

Ya dumb ass

 

[pinqy]

And why? 93% do not want or need a job.

yea they have welfare

Do the math unsustainable....

In the 1950s it was like 12 workers supported a person on welfare

Today it is like 4 workers support some one on welfare

Do the math you retarded libs....

Ok, how many of the 93 million are dependent on welfare?

Why you telling me now we have 93 million folks who are millionaires now?

Out of some 300 million people?

Do the math.it's unsustainable

Yiou do the math. Why was a far lower participation rate sustainable until 1978? Our current rate is higher than anytime in the 50's or 60's.

have a link?

I know the numbers and plenty of government links to support my post *****.

And for the straight data: Labor Force Participation Rate

 

[Wyatt earp]

the Left will do anything, say anything, to hide, deflect from or obfuscate their failed ideology

they just spout opinions opinions from there ass

I know, every one knows who has a God Damn brain, less and less workers support the welfare queens in America

It Will crash, still waiting for the bubble to burst on student loans, that's the next one

 

[Faun]

Now the point I'm making with the above was simple!
With all these events going on major earth shaking events... where would there have been time to concentrate on the
housing bubble? After all when Bush wanted to do something he was rebuffed!
By ERIC DASH Published: August 11, 2007
"Even President Bush weighed in. On Thursday, he said that both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac needed to complete a “robust reform package” before they expanded their mortgage portfolios.
The statement drew fire from many Democratic lawmakers on Capitol Hill.
Christopher J. Dodd, the chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, called upon President Bush to “immediately reconsider his ill-advised” position as problems in the housing market worsen.
In an interview yesterday, Barney Frank, the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, said that the president’s comments were “inane.”“Tell the Republicans to stop blocking the bill,” Mr. Frank said. If the president “is saying that ‘I don’t want to support any increase until we pass the reforms,’ then you pass the bill and the bill takes care of that.”

Mr. Frank, like many Democrats, argued that increasing Fannie Mae’s mortgage portfolio was important because the government-sponsored enterprises could provide both liquidity to the market and were more willing to work out problem loans.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/11/business/11fannie.html?_r=0

You are so ******* retarded.

What do you mean, there wasn't enough time to work on the housing bubble? Congress had enough time to draft no less than 5 bills on GSE reform ... had enough time to debate them in committee ... some even passed in committee and at least one passed in the House ........

But your idiotic defense is they didn't have enough time to vote in the Senate on any one of the 3 bills sitting on Bill Frist's desk or the other two sitting in committee??

 

[Wyatt earp]

yea they have welfare

Do the math unsustainable....

In the 1950s it was like 12 workers supported a person on welfare

Today it is like 4 workers support some one on welfare

Do the math you retarded libs....

Ok, how many of the 93 million are dependent on welfare?

Why you telling me now we have 93 million folks who are millionaires now?

Out of some 300 million people?

Do the math.it's unsustainable

Yiou do the math. Why was a far lower participation rate sustainable until 1978? Our current rate is higher than anytime in the 50's or 60's.

have a link?

I know the numbers and plenty of government links to support my post *****.

And for the straight data: Labor Force Participation Rate

**** your graph needle dick


Just Google how many workers supported welfare till today?

You are lucky I have to go sleep, and be up at 10 pm tonight to go to work because when I come back I will smoke your ass

 

[bedowin62]

Now the point I'm making with the above was simple!
With all these events going on major earth shaking events... where would there have been time to concentrate on the
housing bubble? After all when Bush wanted to do something he was rebuffed!
By ERIC DASH Published: August 11, 2007
"Even President Bush weighed in. On Thursday, he said that both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac needed to complete a “robust reform package” before they expanded their mortgage portfolios.
The statement drew fire from many Democratic lawmakers on Capitol Hill.
Christopher J. Dodd, the chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, called upon President Bush to “immediately reconsider his ill-advised” position as problems in the housing market worsen.
In an interview yesterday, Barney Frank, the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, said that the president’s comments were “inane.”“Tell the Republicans to stop blocking the bill,” Mr. Frank said. If the president “is saying that ‘I don’t want to support any increase until we pass the reforms,’ then you pass the bill and the bill takes care of that.”

Mr. Frank, like many Democrats, argued that increasing Fannie Mae’s mortgage portfolio was important because the government-sponsored enterprises could provide both liquidity to the market and were more willing to work out problem loans.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/11/business/11fannie.html?_r=0

You are so ******* retarded.

What do you mean, there wasn't enough time to work on the housing bubble? Congress had enough time to draft no less than 5 bills on GSE reform ... had enough time to debate them in committee ... some even passed in committee and at least one passed in the House ........

But your idiotic defense is they didn't have enough time to vote in the Senate on any one of the 3 bills sitting on Bill Frist's desk or the other two sitting in committee??

as has been repeatedly pointed out to you the top Democrat on the comittee said there was no need for ANY ACTION

 

[bedowin62]

Some have said that the drop in the labor force participation rate is largely about demographics and nothing to worry about. Aging baby boomers are retiring. Middle-aged women, who came roaring into the workforce in the 1970s and 1980s, are now opting out. More kids are staying in school. (Thanks Mr. T!) Indeed, a group of economists basically predicted the current drop in the labor force participation rate all the way back in 2006, well before the recession hit.


Last week, though, a study by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis took on the notion that the drop is all about demographics and not a sign that the labor market is sicker than we think. The study looked at the labor force participation rate not just in the U.S. but in eight major developed countries, including Sweden, Japan, Canada, Germany, France, Spain, and the United Kingdom. Nearly all of those countries are facing the same demographic trends as the U.S. And Japan is currently dealing with an even more severe case of aging population. And yet, out of the eight nations, the U.S. is the only one where the participation in the labor force is declining.


LIBS lie to themselves

 

[pinqy]

Ok, how many of the 93 million are dependent on welfare?

Why you telling me now we have 93 million folks who are millionaires now?

Out of some 300 million people?

Do the math.it's unsustainable

Yiou do the math. Why was a far lower participation rate sustainable until 1978? Our current rate is higher than anytime in the 50's or 60's.

have a link?

I know the numbers and plenty of government links to support my post *****.

And for the straight data: Labor Force Participation Rate

**** your graph needle dick

You asked for the evidence that teh participation rate is higher now. You don't like it when you realize you were mistaken?

Just Google how many workers supported welfare till today?

That's a different matter. Not eveyone not in the labor force is on welfare and many who are on welfate are in the labor force. Working people use a lot of food stamps.

Perhaps if you actually tried to learn the topic instead of making shit up and insulting people when proven wrong, you would have higher self-esteem.

 

[bedowin62]

in the 1950s it was common for only the man to be the "breadwinner"; both from a practical and cultural point of view. to compare today to the 50's; by the "forward-looking" crowd no less, is just idiotic

 

[bedowin62]

The US labor force participation rate has fallen by about three percentage points since the Great Recession. Of that decline, Barclays thinks two points are due to population aging. The rest it blames on less participation within various age groups. Now overall, the US still has participation rates higher than Germany, Japan, and UK — the other large, advanced economies Barclays examines in a new report. But US participation dropped a lot more than those nations between 2005 and 2014. And it has particularly dropped a lot for working-age Americans versus that age group in other nations.
The difference is more notable among women:
The most jarring nugget was that only the US saw a decline in the prime working-age female participation over the two last decades. …
US female participation peaked in the mid-90′s and has since been trending downwards, while in Germany, Japan, and the UK the rate continued to inch higher.

 

[bedowin62]

none of the Left's excuses for PROGRESSIVE FAILURE hold up to scrutiny

 

[Mac1958]

10-year Treasury yield down to 2.12% today. Incredible.

Blame whomever your ideology requires, but anyone who says the economy is in good shape is either lying or willfully ignorant.

,

 

[bedowin62]

Barlcays find this all “counterproductive” since the US has a higher overall participation rate. But, as the bank explains, “this turns out to be entirely due to the more favourable US demographic structure. For example, the US rate of labor force participation is lower than Japan’s for every demographic group that we consider, except the young (15-24) population some of whom might be more productively occupied in school for advanced training than in paid employment. … After adjustment for demographic composition, the US has the lowest, not the highest rate of participation.”


libs lie to themselves

 

[francoHFW]

Back in 2008 with the corrupt Boooshies and their bubble bust as usual...GOP voters are totally misinformed by megarich greedy lying Pubs and their bs media. Will they never learn?
The GOP s Job Killer Problem With Obamacare - ABC News

The Obamacare is a disaster:
(1) It is skyrocketing premiums, deductibles and copays for all health plans. In large corp plans. My increase was sick.
(2) The majority of people are signing up for the bronze program to avoid the penalty. The bronze (and silver plans) have ginormous deductibles and copays. It is like getting insurance without having insurance.
(3) in group plans we are seeing the rise of the high deductible PPOs. They are less expensive plans, but when you get sick you are stuck with thousands of dollars in medical bills.
(4) We still have 10s of millions uninsured people.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

BS, unless you had a scam Pubplan before.
Of course, it's the plan for the working class.

All plans cover most tests and doctor visits. When you get sick or injured there are annual caps not much higher than your deductible. No more bankruptcies, dupe.

Thanks to Red states refusing Medicaid and brainwashed dupes like you. About to end.

And ACA will only get better...Transparent competition and more and more regulation.

 

[bedowin62]

[PDF]The Fluctuating Labor Force Participation Rate in the U.S. ...
lmi.mt.gov/media/9245/art-1013.pdf

• Cached

participation rate was fairly stable in the 1950s and 60s, hovering around 58%. ... lowest participation rate since the early 1980s, and the majority of this decline occurred after 2007. ... The labor force participation rate is influenced by a number