Census data shows Obamacare and welfare kept millions out of poverty

[Dad2three]

Reagan tripled the national debt, obama was handed one of the worst disasters in decades. Jobs are being added rapidly.

Reagan is dead

Obiwan's link destroyed your OP

and

Job numbers are still a negative net

Job numbers negative net? lol

Can't have it both ways. BTW 60% of all US Workers are employed by small business. That is employers of less than 100 people. One other thing. IN spite of your sycophantic feelings toward Obama, there is one certainty, the economy is cyclical. I just is. What goes up MUST come down. And of course the opposite is true.
Deal with it.

WTF? You dumbass, YOU claimed a net job loss, nice dodge dumfuk!


Cyclical? lol

Ahh yes....The insult stage has been reached.
I win. You LOSE

Sorry Bubba, in right wing world having more than 8+ million PRIVATE sector more jobs than the day he was sworn in as Prez, is a "net job loss" lol


Moron

 

[thereisnospoon]

So how is it that those EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEVIL corporations are screwing the American worker?
The left's problem is they demand to have it both ways...

Looks like the job creators are doing a fine job of killing the middle class all by themselves.

Tell us some more about the job killing unions?.

I'm a corporate president, and that graph looks right to me.

When was the last time you managed anything other than a hot-dog cart?

Money in any business is a fleeting thing. And debt in any business is a mounting thing.

Hot dog carts huh? They have a corp title like that Bubs?


RECORD FUKKN CORP PROFITS IN THE US FOR OVER A DECADE, LOWEST SUSTAINED TAX BURDEN ON THE "JOB CREATORS" FOR 14 YEARS, LOWEST EFFECTIVE TAX BURDEN ON CORPS ANYWHERE IN THE DEVELOPED WORLD EXCEPT CHILE AND MEXICO, LOWEST SHARE OF COSTS COSTS EVER FOR CORPS

60% OF MIN WAGE JOBS ARE BY CORPS WITH 500+ EMPLOYEES

OVER HALF OF ALL US CAPITAL GAINS AND DIVIDENDS GO TO THE TOP 1/10TH OF 1% OF US

None of which is true.

Sorry, I was wrong:
The central finding of this report is that the majority of America’s lowest-paid workers are employed by large corporations, not small businesses


Specifically:

* The majority (66 percent) of low-wage workers are not employed by small businesses, but rather by large corporations with over 100 employees;


Corporate Profits of Low-Wage Employers




HALF OF CAP GAINS AND DIVIDENDS GO THE THE TOP 1/10TH OF 1% OF US



The Top 0.1% Of The Nation Earn Half Of All Capital Gains



Corporate Profits Are At An All-Time Record Peak And Expected To Grow in 2014

Corporate Profits Are At An All-Time Record Peak And Expected To Grow in 2014


According to data from the General Accountability Office cited by Kleinbard, corporations on average paid 12.6 percent as of 2010.


Expert debunks claim U.S. corporate taxes are too high

Very slick. Some of the nation's largest employers are retailers. Retail is for the most part low skill work and therefor low wage.
Also. Banks employ large numbers of people many of which hold low skill teller and customer service jobs.
Capital gains go to those who invest their money. It makes complete sense that those with larger amounts of wealth do the most investing.
So in sheer quantity, the numbers are correct. However, your premise ignores all the millions of people who on a yeqarly basis realize capital gains through their investments in for example, 401k plans. Pension plans. Mutual funds. Stock funds. IRA's. sales of real properties.
I'm not seeing a problem here.
You are reliable at one thing. Finding these left wing blogs that spew the shit with which you agree.
Look here......There is no nobility in poverty.
If you hate your station so much, DO SOMETHING about it. Stop the jealousy and stop trying to bring down those who have found a better way to do things than you.
I'm sick of people like you who look at people like me that have scratched and clawed to advance themselves so that they can live a decent lifestyle, then accuse us of being selfish because we want to keep as much of what we earn as possible.
I am also pissed off at people like you who think by knocking down those who have succeeded at something would some how benefit YOU....
It is NONE of your business what anyone else earns or has.....

 

[thereisnospoon]

Reagan is dead

Obiwan's link destroyed your OP

and

Job numbers are still a negative net

Job numbers negative net? lol

Can't have it both ways. BTW 60% of all US Workers are employed by small business. That is employers of less than 100 people. One other thing. IN spite of your sycophantic feelings toward Obama, there is one certainty, the economy is cyclical. I just is. What goes up MUST come down. And of course the opposite is true.
Deal with it.

WTF? You dumbass, YOU claimed a net job loss, nice dodge dumfuk!


Cyclical? lol

Ahh yes....The insult stage has been reached.
I win. You LOSE

Sorry Bubba, in right wing world having more than 8+ million PRIVATE sector more jobs than the day he was sworn in as Prez, is a "net job loss" lol


Moron

No one is addressing this issue.
BTW, with well over 25 million people LEAVING the job market since 2009, that 8 million number pales in comparison.
These are not "new" jobs either. Most are jobs which were vacant and now are being filled as a matter of economic course. In spite of this administration's disastrous domestic economic policy, the economy while sputtering along at a less than 2% annualized GDP growth rate, companies are adding back jobs which for years went unfilled.
For example. There is a company near here that makes and installs glass and metal shower enclosures and other bathroom fixtures. in the lat 2000's, the company went from three shifts per day to one. Two thirds of the workforce was laid off.
Now that same Co, is back to two shifts. Many of the laid off employees were called back to their jobs. Now, the laughable part of this is the White House spin doctors would label these as "new jobs created under this President"......Horseshit. The one third of the workers never called back is an example of a NET JOB LOSS....
Now, if you want to believe the spin coming from the federal government, go right ahead.
That is YOUR problem.
And now you will refute my post and call me names. Go ahead. You are a liberal. You cannot help yourself.
OUT.
LOSER.

 

[hortysir]

Middle Class Lost In Obama's 'Middle Class Economics'
Economy: After six-plus years of President Obama's big-spending, tax-raising policies, middle-class families have seen their incomes decline and more families have fallen into poverty, Census data show.

The Census Bureau's latest annual report on income and poverty in America shows that there was little to cheer about in 2014.

View attachment 50460


Read More At Investor's Business Daily: Middle Class Lost In Obama's 'Middle Class Economics'
Follow us: @IBDinvestors on Twitter | InvestorsBusinessDaily on Facebook

Reagan tripled the national debt, obama was handed one of the worst disasters in decades. Jobs are being added rapidly.

Reagan is dead

Obiwan's link destroyed your OP

and

Job numbers are still a negative net

Job numbers negative net? lol

Can't have it both ways. BTW 60% of all US Workers are employed by small business. That is employers of less than 100 people. One other thing. IN spite of your sycophantic feelings toward Obama, there is one certainty, the economy is cyclical. I just is. What goes up MUST come down. And of course the opposite is true.
Deal with it.

WTF? You dumbass, YOU claimed a net job loss, nice dodge dumfuk!


Cyclical? lol

That was my claim.

Can you spell Labor Participation Rate?

Where Are All the Workers?

 

[Dad2three]

Reagan tripled the national debt, obama was handed one of the worst disasters in decades. Jobs are being added rapidly.

Reagan is dead

Obiwan's link destroyed your OP

and

Job numbers are still a negative net

Job numbers negative net? lol

Can't have it both ways. BTW 60% of all US Workers are employed by small business. That is employers of less than 100 people. One other thing. IN spite of your sycophantic feelings toward Obama, there is one certainty, the economy is cyclical. I just is. What goes up MUST come down. And of course the opposite is true.
Deal with it.

WTF? You dumbass, YOU claimed a net job loss, nice dodge dumfuk!


Cyclical? lol

That was my claim.

Can you spell Labor Participation Rate?

Where Are All the Workers?

WOOHOO, THE WORDS THAT NEVER ONCE CAME OUT OF GOPer/CONServatives MOUTH UNTIL 2010, LFP



LOL



Retirement Among Baby Boomers Contributing To Shrinking Labor Force. According to The Washington Post, many economists agree the shrinking labor force participation rate is largely explained by a demographic shift, wherein "baby boomers are starting to retire en masse":


Demographics have always played a big role in the rise and fall of the labor force. Between 1960 and 2000, the labor force in the United States surged from 59 percent to a peak of 67.3 percent. That was largely due to the fact that more women were entering the labor force while improvements in health and information technology allowed Americans to work more years.


But since 2000, the labor force rate has been steadily declining as the baby-boom generation has been retiring. Because of this, the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago expects the labor force participation rate to be lower in 2020 than it is today, regardless of how well the economy does.

In a March report titled "Dispelling an Urban Legend," Dean Maki, an economist at Barclays Capital, found that demographics accounted for a majority of the drop in the participation rate since 2002


The incredible shrinking labor force

 

[Dad2three]

Looks like the job creators are doing a fine job of killing the middle class all by themselves.

Tell us some more about the job killing unions?.

I'm a corporate president, and that graph looks right to me.

When was the last time you managed anything other than a hot-dog cart?

Money in any business is a fleeting thing. And debt in any business is a mounting thing.

Hot dog carts huh? They have a corp title like that Bubs?


RECORD FUKKN CORP PROFITS IN THE US FOR OVER A DECADE, LOWEST SUSTAINED TAX BURDEN ON THE "JOB CREATORS" FOR 14 YEARS, LOWEST EFFECTIVE TAX BURDEN ON CORPS ANYWHERE IN THE DEVELOPED WORLD EXCEPT CHILE AND MEXICO, LOWEST SHARE OF COSTS COSTS EVER FOR CORPS

60% OF MIN WAGE JOBS ARE BY CORPS WITH 500+ EMPLOYEES

OVER HALF OF ALL US CAPITAL GAINS AND DIVIDENDS GO TO THE TOP 1/10TH OF 1% OF US

None of which is true.

Sorry, I was wrong:
The central finding of this report is that the majority of America’s lowest-paid workers are employed by large corporations, not small businesses


Specifically:

* The majority (66 percent) of low-wage workers are not employed by small businesses, but rather by large corporations with over 100 employees;


Corporate Profits of Low-Wage Employers




HALF OF CAP GAINS AND DIVIDENDS GO THE THE TOP 1/10TH OF 1% OF US



The Top 0.1% Of The Nation Earn Half Of All Capital Gains



Corporate Profits Are At An All-Time Record Peak And Expected To Grow in 2014

Corporate Profits Are At An All-Time Record Peak And Expected To Grow in 2014


According to data from the General Accountability Office cited by Kleinbard, corporations on average paid 12.6 percent as of 2010.


Expert debunks claim U.S. corporate taxes are too high

Very slick. Some of the nation's largest employers are retailers. Retail is for the most part low skill work and therefor low wage.
Also. Banks employ large numbers of people many of which hold low skill teller and customer service jobs.
Capital gains go to those who invest their money. It makes complete sense that those with larger amounts of wealth do the most investing.
So in sheer quantity, the numbers are correct. However, your premise ignores all the millions of people who on a yeqarly basis realize capital gains through their investments in for example, 401k plans. Pension plans. Mutual funds. Stock funds. IRA's. sales of real properties.
I'm not seeing a problem here.
You are reliable at one thing. Finding these left wing blogs that spew the shit with which you agree.
Look here......There is no nobility in poverty.
If you hate your station so much, DO SOMETHING about it. Stop the


adnjealousy and stop trying to bring down those who have found a better way to do things than you.
I'm sick of people like you who look at people like me that have scratched and clawed to advance themselves so that they can live a decent lifestyle, then accuse us of being selfish because we want to keep as much of what we earn as possible.
I am also pissed off at people like you who think by knocking down those who have succeeded at something would some how benefit YOU....
It is NONE of your business what anyone else earns or has.....

Good you admit you lied, and accept the links to counter your lies. Enough said dumbass!

 

[Obiwan]

Reagan is dead

Obiwan's link destroyed your OP

and

Job numbers are still a negative net

Job numbers negative net? lol

Can't have it both ways. BTW 60% of all US Workers are employed by small business. That is employers of less than 100 people. One other thing. IN spite of your sycophantic feelings toward Obama, there is one certainty, the economy is cyclical. I just is. What goes up MUST come down. And of course the opposite is true.
Deal with it.

WTF? You dumbass, YOU claimed a net job loss, nice dodge dumfuk!


Cyclical? lol

That was my claim.

Can you spell Labor Participation Rate?

Where Are All the Workers?

WOOHOO, THE WORDS THAT NEVER ONCE CAME OUT OF GOPer/CONServatives MOUTH UNTIL 2010, LFP



LOL



Retirement Among Baby Boomers Contributing To Shrinking Labor Force. According to The Washington Post, many economists agree the shrinking labor force participation rate is largely explained by a demographic shift, wherein "baby boomers are starting to retire en masse":


Demographics have always played a big role in the rise and fall of the labor force. Between 1960 and 2000, the labor force in the United States surged from 59 percent to a peak of 67.3 percent. That was largely due to the fact that more women were entering the labor force while improvements in health and information technology allowed Americans to work more years.


But since 2000, the labor force rate has been steadily declining as the baby-boom generation has been retiring. Because of this, the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago expects the labor force participation rate to be lower in 2020 than it is today, regardless of how well the economy does.

In a March report titled "Dispelling an Urban Legend," Dean Maki, an economist at Barclays Capital, found that demographics accounted for a majority of the drop in the participation rate since 2002


The incredible shrinking labor force

Ever think of a simple philosophy???

Quit murdering the next generation....

 

[hortysir]

Reagan is dead

Obiwan's link destroyed your OP

and

Job numbers are still a negative net

Job numbers negative net? lol

Can't have it both ways. BTW 60% of all US Workers are employed by small business. That is employers of less than 100 people. One other thing. IN spite of your sycophantic feelings toward Obama, there is one certainty, the economy is cyclical. I just is. What goes up MUST come down. And of course the opposite is true.
Deal with it.

WTF? You dumbass, YOU claimed a net job loss, nice dodge dumfuk!


Cyclical? lol

That was my claim.

Can you spell Labor Participation Rate?

Where Are All the Workers?

WOOHOO, THE WORDS THAT NEVER ONCE CAME OUT OF GOPer/CONServatives MOUTH UNTIL 2010, LFP



LOL



Retirement Among Baby Boomers Contributing To Shrinking Labor Force. According to The Washington Post, many economists agree the shrinking labor force participation rate is largely explained by a demographic shift, wherein "baby boomers are starting to retire en masse":


Demographics have always played a big role in the rise and fall of the labor force. Between 1960 and 2000, the labor force in the United States surged from 59 percent to a peak of 67.3 percent. That was largely due to the fact that more women were entering the labor force while improvements in health and information technology allowed Americans to work more years.


But since 2000, the labor force rate has been steadily declining as the baby-boom generation has been retiring. Because of this, the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago expects the labor force participation rate to be lower in 2020 than it is today, regardless of how well the economy does.

In a March report titled "Dispelling an Urban Legend," Dean Maki, an economist at Barclays Capital, found that demographics accounted for a majority of the drop in the participation rate since 2002


The incredible shrinking labor force

So your previous claim is false.

Thanks for helping to disprove your own bullshit

 

[Dad2three]

Job numbers negative net? lol

Can't have it both ways. BTW 60% of all US Workers are employed by small business. That is employers of less than 100 people. One other thing. IN spite of your sycophantic feelings toward Obama, there is one certainty, the economy is cyclical. I just is. What goes up MUST come down. And of course the opposite is true.
Deal with it.

WTF? You dumbass, YOU claimed a net job loss, nice dodge dumfuk!


Cyclical? lol

Ahh yes....The insult stage has been reached.
I win. You LOSE

Sorry Bubba, in right wing world having more than 8+ million PRIVATE sector more jobs than the day he was sworn in as Prez, is a "net job loss" lol


Moron

No one is addressing this issue.
BTW, with well over 25 million people LEAVING the job market since 2009, that 8 million number pales in comparison.
These are not "new" jobs either. Most are jobs which were vacant and now are being filled as a matter of economic course. In spite of this administration's disastrous domestic economic policy, the economy while sputtering along at a less than 2% annualized GDP growth rate, companies are adding back jobs which for years went unfilled.
For example. There is a company near here that makes and installs glass and metal shower enclosures and other bathroom fixtures. in the lat 2000's, the company went from three shifts per day to one. Two thirds of the workforce was laid off.
Now that same Co, is back to two shifts. Many of the laid off employees were called back to their jobs. Now, the laughable part of this is the White House spin doctors would label these as "new jobs created under this President"......Horseshit. The one third of the workers never called back is an example of a NET JOB LOSS....
Now, if you want to believe the spin coming from the federal government, go right ahead.
That is YOUR problem.
And now you will refute my post and call me names. Go ahead. You are a liberal. You cannot help yourself.
OUT.
LOSER.

Oh I get it dummy, IF the labor force has more workers August 2015 than they did Jan 2009, OR EVEN ANY YEAR UNDER DUBYA, that's a net job loss? YOU FUKKN KOOK


PRIVATE SECTOR TOTAL JOBS USA


2001 JAN 111,861,000 total

2007 July 115,813,000 (DUBYA'S HIGH POINT DUMMY)

2015 Aug 120,293,000 TOTAL PRIVATE SECTOR JOBS


Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

Crazy, stupid right wingers!!!

 

[Dad2three]

Job numbers negative net? lol

Can't have it both ways. BTW 60% of all US Workers are employed by small business. That is employers of less than 100 people. One other thing. IN spite of your sycophantic feelings toward Obama, there is one certainty, the economy is cyclical. I just is. What goes up MUST come down. And of course the opposite is true.
Deal with it.

WTF? You dumbass, YOU claimed a net job loss, nice dodge dumfuk!


Cyclical? lol

That was my claim.

Can you spell Labor Participation Rate?

Where Are All the Workers?

WOOHOO, THE WORDS THAT NEVER ONCE CAME OUT OF GOPer/CONServatives MOUTH UNTIL 2010, LFP



LOL



Retirement Among Baby Boomers Contributing To Shrinking Labor Force. According to The Washington Post, many economists agree the shrinking labor force participation rate is largely explained by a demographic shift, wherein "baby boomers are starting to retire en masse":


Demographics have always played a big role in the rise and fall of the labor force. Between 1960 and 2000, the labor force in the United States surged from 59 percent to a peak of 67.3 percent. That was largely due to the fact that more women were entering the labor force while improvements in health and information technology allowed Americans to work more years.


But since 2000, the labor force rate has been steadily declining as the baby-boom generation has been retiring. Because of this, the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago expects the labor force participation rate to be lower in 2020 than it is today, regardless of how well the economy does.

In a March report titled "Dispelling an Urban Legend," Dean Maki, an economist at Barclays Capital, found that demographics accounted for a majority of the drop in the participation rate since 2002


The incredible shrinking labor force

Ever think of a simple philosophy???

Quit murdering the next generation....

I'm 100% for abortion on demand, I wish we could have as many abortion clinics in the South as there are McD's, maybe the gene pool would clean up a bit?

If ONLY the right wing cared about babies as much as they do about fetuses!

 

[Dad2three]

Job numbers negative net? lol

Can't have it both ways. BTW 60% of all US Workers are employed by small business. That is employers of less than 100 people. One other thing. IN spite of your sycophantic feelings toward Obama, there is one certainty, the economy is cyclical. I just is. What goes up MUST come down. And of course the opposite is true.
Deal with it.

WTF? You dumbass, YOU claimed a net job loss, nice dodge dumfuk!


Cyclical? lol

That was my claim.

Can you spell Labor Participation Rate?

Where Are All the Workers?

WOOHOO, THE WORDS THAT NEVER ONCE CAME OUT OF GOPer/CONServatives MOUTH UNTIL 2010, LFP



LOL



Retirement Among Baby Boomers Contributing To Shrinking Labor Force. According to The Washington Post, many economists agree the shrinking labor force participation rate is largely explained by a demographic shift, wherein "baby boomers are starting to retire en masse":


Demographics have always played a big role in the rise and fall of the labor force. Between 1960 and 2000, the labor force in the United States surged from 59 percent to a peak of 67.3 percent. That was largely due to the fact that more women were entering the labor force while improvements in health and information technology allowed Americans to work more years.


But since 2000, the labor force rate has been steadily declining as the baby-boom generation has been retiring. Because of this, the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago expects the labor force participation rate to be lower in 2020 than it is today, regardless of how well the economy does.

In a March report titled "Dispelling an Urban Legend," Dean Maki, an economist at Barclays Capital, found that demographics accounted for a majority of the drop in the participation rate since 2002


The incredible shrinking labor force

So your previous claim is false.

Thanks for helping to disprove your own bullshit

Gawd you wing nutters MUST stop the inbreeding if you CONservatives EVER hope to live as good as blue states Bubba

 

[Dad2three]

LISTEN YOU CRAZY, INBRED WINGNUTTERS, THERE HAS NEVER BEEN AS MANY AMERICAN'S WORKING AS THERE IS TODAY. EVER

PUT IN ANY DATE YOU WANT YOU TOOLS

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

 

[Dad2three]

Reagan tripled the national debt, obama was handed one of the worst disasters in decades. Jobs are being added rapidly.

Reagan is dead

Obiwan's link destroyed your OP

and

Job numbers are still a negative net

Job numbers negative net? lol

Can't have it both ways. BTW 60% of all US Workers are employed by small business. That is employers of less than 100 people. One other thing. IN spite of your sycophantic feelings toward Obama, there is one certainty, the economy is cyclical. I just is. What goes up MUST come down. And of course the opposite is true.
Deal with it.

WTF? You dumbass, YOU claimed a net job loss, nice dodge dumfuk!


Cyclical? lol

That was my claim.

Can you spell Labor Participation Rate?

Where Are All the Workers?

Yet there has NEVER been more private sector workers working, almost 5 million more than Dubya's peak (built on his ponzi scheme bubble)

Weird


Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

 

[hortysir]

LISTEN YOU CRAZY, INBRED WINGNUTTERS, THERE HAS NEVER BEEN AS MANY AMERICAN'S WORKING AS THERE IS TODAY. EVER

PUT IN ANY DATE YOU WANT YOU TOOLS

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

You may want to look up the definition of RATE

We can't even keep up with the birth rate, minus death and retirement

 

[ScienceRocks]

How will granting the super rich a super tax cut = more jobs?
How will allowing a few hundred super large businesses to control the market place = more jobs?
How will sacking millions of government public sector jobs = more jobs? A lot of these are r&d, science and infrastructure jobs.

The far right is bat shit insane.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Middle Class Lost In Obama's 'Middle Class Economics'
Economy: After six-plus years of President Obama's big-spending, tax-raising policies, middle-class families have seen their incomes decline and more families have fallen into poverty, Census data show.

The Census Bureau's latest annual report on income and poverty in America shows that there was little to cheer about in 2014.

View attachment 50460


Read More At Investor's Business Daily: Middle Class Lost In Obama's 'Middle Class Economics'
Follow us: @IBDinvestors on Twitter | InvestorsBusinessDaily on Facebook

How would you raise wages?

Remember before bush high school grads could go find a ggod paying union job and raise a family. Those jobs are all but gone.

So how you gonna help high school grads get better pay?

By continuing their education or job training skills.
Oh, BTW, those wonderful union jobs you so lovingly like to mention? Only is a few areas of the country did those jobs ever exist.
At its peak, unions represented just one third of all US workers.
Unions did themselves in. Unions refused to adjust to the times. Unions made labor costs non competitive in many markets. So business did what it needed to do for self preservation.
The days of unions are over. Move on. Others have.

So now the masses who don't like school are just SOL? That's what I thought.

Perhaps you never worked in a factory before. Those aren't the school types. So now you want the masses to go to college just to get a degree to do what? We're talking about the masses. I don't think Republicans get that.

The honest answer is you don't think the masses should do as well as they have.

This should be a warning to Honda and Toyota employees down south. They only pay you well so you don't unionize. Take away that threat and why should a Toyota worker who didn't go to college make more than minimum wage?

Hey, if one does not like school, that is a choice THEY are free to make. They also don't then have the right to turn around and demand higher wages if they make the conscious choice to not further their education or training.
Factory work is no longer for the general studies high school graduate. Jobs in manufacturing now require more advanced skills and training.
Define "the masses"....Companies do not hire "the masses"....They hire individuals
"The honest answer is you don't think the masses should do as well as they have.".....You don't get to assume anything such as this. Admit you are speculating.
I am not concerned with "the masses" because there is no such thing as "the masses"....
"They only pay you well so you don't unionize."....So what? The workers are well compensated. Other than your pro union stance, what is your point? Seems by your story telling about how wonderful unions are and the bubble in which you lived. Fine.
No one claimed any one must possess a college degree in order to gain employment in a manufacturing environment. Prospective employees are also recruited for their exceptional skill levels. Experience in the manufacturing fields is also a plus. The bottom line is the days of an untrained high school drop out or graduate walking into a factory filling out an application and 35 years later walks out with a pension and a Timex.
Based on your making of excuses for these people ( don't like school, not the school types) I see you are the one who not only doesn't get it. You refuse to "get it"....
BTW, those auto manufacturers have factories all over the country.....Not just "down south"...
In fact just ONE of Honda;s US plants are "down south"....
The list......
Marysville, OH
East Liberty, OH
Greensburg, IN
Lincoln, AL
The other North American plant is in Ontario, CAN
Toyota has plants in MS, TX, KY, IN(2), WV,
The fact that really pisses off you people is that the union thugs can't get their grubby paws on them.

I don't care if the unions get their paws on those non union plants. I'm telling you that when unions are gone, those factory workers will never see another raise for as long as they live. In fact the ones who are making close to union wages will be asked to leave and being a non union plant, they will have no right to their job.

I'm just telling you what created the big huge strong fat middle class we had until Reagan started dismantling it.

So don't cry that "wages are down" in America. Because you see the middle class was doing well for decades because those union "thugs" were making such good wages that it created the great economy and middle class we got use to having around.

So don't cry and say wages are down in America and try to blame it on Obama. Unless you want Obama to pay for all those uneducated workers to get more schooling and unless you expect him to help them study because they are not meant for school. Yes, the masses are not meant for school. Do you get that? So we will NEVER see the middle class or economy that liberals and unions produced because "the masses" will not just automatically get smarter. Instead of going to work for Ford or GM they will go work for Walmart. Congrats. This is the new America. A much smaller middle class than we had before the GOP got their hands on our economy.

I'm ok with it. I have an education and I am not in a union. **** the uneducated low class Americans. I used to care but they don't even care enough to show up and vote. AND, a lot of them vote GOP. So **** them!

You wait and see. Honda's wages will only go up when GM and Chrysler's wages go up. So those Honda employees may not realize it but they too benefit from unions and collective bargaining.

There is no other reason those Honda factory rats make what they make. NO other reason.

I don't care if the unions get their paws on those non union plants

Oh yes you do....Otherwise you would have not mentioned them.
Cookie, essentially, unions are gone. Union representation in the private sector is down to just under 7%.
"I'm telling you that when unions are gone, those factory workers will never see another raise for as long as they live. In fact the ones who are making close to union wages will be asked to leave and being a non union plant, they will have no right to their job."...
First, before you get to "tell anyone anything, you must first have some knowledge in said area. I cannot describe the level of vapid in your quote above. You just got through posting that in effect non union workers( 93% of us) never see wage increases. I'd ask you to think about that, but apparently thinking is not one of your stronger suits.
I have to ask..Other than what your fellow liberal brethren have told you to think, what evidence do you have that proves Reagan dismantled the middle class?....Surely you are not referring to that PATCO thing? The ATC's have a clause in their contract with the FAA that barred them from any job action. In other words their strike was ILLEGAL. The heads of the PATCO union were told by the White House, your members will be terminated if they strike. The union thugs called Reagan, thinking he was bluffing. Wrong play.
Many of you pro union libs look back to this event as the beginning of the downfall of organized labor in the US. When actually the decline in union membership had been in decline since membership was at its peak in the mid 60's
Obama, by virtue of his terrible domestic policies IS responsible. Don't kid yourself. This Admin is not in the least bit interested in economic growth. Not one iota.
You people keep whining about "jobs bills"....For what? Government spending on silly programs don't create jobs. Those stimulus spending measures were used to delay the loss of a bunch of public sector jobs....and ONLY in those states where public employees were unionized. Yes stimulus mopney went to every state. Most sate governments used the money to pay outstanding bills. One trillion dollars thrown down a rat hole. Great.
Here we go with "the masses"...Cut the shit.. There is no such thing as "the masses"....
"Unless you want Obama to pay for all those uneducated workers".....Obama pay?....Sure let him write a check. What do you mean by "pay for all those uneducated workers"?...Do you mean school? Hey look genius. We are all responsible for ourselves. Government does not exist to suck your ass just because you feel incapable.
ANYONE who is willing to put forth the effort can learn. ANYONE. This notion you project that if one does not like training or schooling they should be showered with the largess of taxpayers is absurd. This is the same as saying. " I hate school and I refuse to improve my skillset so you OWE ME"....Yeah, that and 50 cents will get you a senior coffee.
Unionization of part of the workforce may have started the growth of the middle class but it never maintained it. Unions haven't been part of the mainstream for 5 decades.
Working for Ford or GM? What the hell are you talking about? Do you think any no skill person could just walk into an auto plant and they got hired?
You have a very clouded view of the world.
And you are a very bitter individual.
Educated? In what? Some obscure nonsense such as Women's Studies?.....For a person who refers to themselves as educated, you aren't very articulate. Your choice of colorful metaphors indicates a middling level of education.
Quite frankly. I am unconcerned regarding your self proclaimed level of education. All I see is what you post. It's not impressive.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Reagan tripled the national debt, obama was handed one of the worst disasters in decades. Jobs are being added rapidly.

Reagan is dead

Obiwan's link destroyed your OP

and

Job numbers are still a negative net

Job numbers negative net? lol

Can't have it both ways. BTW 60% of all US Workers are employed by small business. That is employers of less than 100 people. One other thing. IN spite of your sycophantic feelings toward Obama, there is one certainty, the economy is cyclical. I just is. What goes up MUST come down. And of course the opposite is true.
Deal with it.

WTF? You dumbass, YOU claimed a net job loss, nice dodge dumfuk!


Cyclical? lol

That was my claim.

Can you spell Labor Participation Rate?

Where Are All the Workers?

Sitting home on the couch....

 

[Obiwan]

How will granting the super rich a super tax cut = more jobs?
How will allowing a few hundred super large businesses to control the market place = more jobs?
How will sacking millions of government public sector jobs = more jobs? A lot of these are r&d, science and infrastructure jobs.

The far right is bat shit insane.

Infrastructure!!!

Toot!!! Toot!!!

 

[thereisnospoon]

Can't have it both ways. BTW 60% of all US Workers are employed by small business. That is employers of less than 100 people. One other thing. IN spite of your sycophantic feelings toward Obama, there is one certainty, the economy is cyclical. I just is. What goes up MUST come down. And of course the opposite is true.
Deal with it.

WTF? You dumbass, YOU claimed a net job loss, nice dodge dumfuk!


Cyclical? lol

Ahh yes....The insult stage has been reached.
I win. You LOSE

Sorry Bubba, in right wing world having more than 8+ million PRIVATE sector more jobs than the day he was sworn in as Prez, is a "net job loss" lol


Moron

No one is addressing this issue.
BTW, with well over 25 million people LEAVING the job market since 2009, that 8 million number pales in comparison.
These are not "new" jobs either. Most are jobs which were vacant and now are being filled as a matter of economic course. In spite of this administration's disastrous domestic economic policy, the economy while sputtering along at a less than 2% annualized GDP growth rate, companies are adding back jobs which for years went unfilled.
For example. There is a company near here that makes and installs glass and metal shower enclosures and other bathroom fixtures. in the lat 2000's, the company went from three shifts per day to one. Two thirds of the workforce was laid off.
Now that same Co, is back to two shifts. Many of the laid off employees were called back to their jobs. Now, the laughable part of this is the White House spin doctors would label these as "new jobs created under this President"......Horseshit. The one third of the workers never called back is an example of a NET JOB LOSS....
Now, if you want to believe the spin coming from the federal government, go right ahead.
That is YOUR problem.
And now you will refute my post and call me names. Go ahead. You are a liberal. You cannot help yourself.
OUT.
LOSER.

Oh I get it dummy, IF the labor force has more workers August 2015 than they did Jan 2009, OR EVEN ANY YEAR UNDER DUBYA, that's a net job loss? YOU FUKKN KOOK


PRIVATE SECTOR TOTAL JOBS USA


2001 JAN 111,861,000 total

2007 July 115,813,000 (DUBYA'S HIGH POINT DUMMY)

2015 Aug 120,293,000 TOTAL PRIVATE SECTOR JOBS


Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

Crazy, stupid right wingers!!!

You still refuse to acknowledge the lowest labor participation rate in 50 years.
That's fine. ignore the facts.

 

[thereisnospoon]

I'm a corporate president, and that graph looks right to me.

When was the last time you managed anything other than a hot-dog cart?

Money in any business is a fleeting thing. And debt in any business is a mounting thing.

Hot dog carts huh? They have a corp title like that Bubs?


RECORD FUKKN CORP PROFITS IN THE US FOR OVER A DECADE, LOWEST SUSTAINED TAX BURDEN ON THE "JOB CREATORS" FOR 14 YEARS, LOWEST EFFECTIVE TAX BURDEN ON CORPS ANYWHERE IN THE DEVELOPED WORLD EXCEPT CHILE AND MEXICO, LOWEST SHARE OF COSTS COSTS EVER FOR CORPS

60% OF MIN WAGE JOBS ARE BY CORPS WITH 500+ EMPLOYEES

OVER HALF OF ALL US CAPITAL GAINS AND DIVIDENDS GO TO THE TOP 1/10TH OF 1% OF US

None of which is true.

Sorry, I was wrong:
The central finding of this report is that the majority of America’s lowest-paid workers are employed by large corporations, not small businesses


Specifically:

* The majority (66 percent) of low-wage workers are not employed by small businesses, but rather by large corporations with over 100 employees;


Corporate Profits of Low-Wage Employers




HALF OF CAP GAINS AND DIVIDENDS GO THE THE TOP 1/10TH OF 1% OF US



The Top 0.1% Of The Nation Earn Half Of All Capital Gains



Corporate Profits Are At An All-Time Record Peak And Expected To Grow in 2014

Corporate Profits Are At An All-Time Record Peak And Expected To Grow in 2014


According to data from the General Accountability Office cited by Kleinbard, corporations on average paid 12.6 percent as of 2010.


Expert debunks claim U.S. corporate taxes are too high

Very slick. Some of the nation's largest employers are retailers. Retail is for the most part low skill work and therefor low wage.
Also. Banks employ large numbers of people many of which hold low skill teller and customer service jobs.
Capital gains go to those who invest their money. It makes complete sense that those with larger amounts of wealth do the most investing.
So in sheer quantity, the numbers are correct. However, your premise ignores all the millions of people who on a yeqarly basis realize capital gains through their investments in for example, 401k plans. Pension plans. Mutual funds. Stock funds. IRA's. sales of real properties.
I'm not seeing a problem here.
You are reliable at one thing. Finding these left wing blogs that spew the shit with which you agree.
Look here......There is no nobility in poverty.
If you hate your station so much, DO SOMETHING about it. Stop the


adnjealousy and stop trying to bring down those who have found a better way to do things than you.
I'm sick of people like you who look at people like me that have scratched and clawed to advance themselves so that they can live a decent lifestyle, then accuse us of being selfish because we want to keep as much of what we earn as possible.
I am also pissed off at people like you who think by knocking down those who have succeeded at something would some how benefit YOU....
It is NONE of your business what anyone else earns or has.....

Good you admit you lied, and accept the links to counter your lies. Enough said dumbass!

And here we have the last retort liberals use. "You're a liar"....
95 million.....That's all you need to know.
That is the number of work eligible people in the US who CAN work, but cannot find work, but have given up.....