I know this is cliche but..

TNHarley

Diamond Member
Sep 27, 2012
91,225
52,317
2,605
I know this is cliche but around here every obama sign is in a poverty stricken yard. Boy, how backwards is that? They must like being poor. R & R 2012 baby!
 
I know this is cliche but around here every obama sign is in a poverty stricken yard. Boy, how backwards is that? They must like being poor. R & R 2012 baby!


You need to read a few more threads on here. Obama is promising the poor people
perpetual welfare and food stamps and free health care and free housing and free everything without having to do anything. According to some on here anyways.

Of course the poor people are putting Obamas sign in their yards. You think they would put Mitts sign out? Why?
 
I know this is cliche but around here every obama sign is in a poverty stricken yard. Boy, how backwards is that? They must like being poor. R & R 2012 baby!


You need to read a few more threads on here. Obama is promising the poor people
perpetual welfare and food stamps and free health care and free housing and free everything without having to do anything. According to some on here anyways.

Of course the poor people are putting Obamas sign in their yards. You think they would put Mitts sign out? Why?

No way would they put Mitt signs in their yards. He'll probably create lots of jobs, concentrate on the Federal Jobs training programs and expect them to work. Obama would prefer to keep the free stuff going to them so they remain "organized".
 
I know this is cliche but around here every obama sign is in a poverty stricken yard. Boy, how backwards is that? They must like being poor. R & R 2012 baby!


You need to read a few more threads on here. Obama is promising the poor people
perpetual welfare and food stamps and free health care and free housing and free everything without having to do anything. According to some on here anyways.

Of course the poor people are putting Obamas sign in their yards. You think they would put Mitts sign out? Why?

No way would they put Mitt signs in their yards. He'll probably create lots of jobs, concentrate on the Federal Jobs training programs and expect them to work. Obama would prefer to keep the free stuff going to them so they remain "organized".



Isn't that what I said? I am curious now that you brought it up. Short of going on a massive federal hiring binge, what will Mitt do to create all these jobs.

And I know you will say; eliminate regulations. Which ones? And how does a "regulation" keep consumers from buying a product? How does a "regulation" reduce demand for consumer goods and services?

You do know that as much as 70% of our economy is based on consumers.

SO; hows Mitt create jobs and what regs gotta go? Just curious.
 
You need to read a few more threads on here. Obama is promising the poor people
perpetual welfare and food stamps and free health care and free housing and free everything without having to do anything. According to some on here anyways.

Of course the poor people are putting Obamas sign in their yards. You think they would put Mitts sign out? Why?

No way would they put Mitt signs in their yards. He'll probably create lots of jobs, concentrate on the Federal Jobs training programs and expect them to work. Obama would prefer to keep the free stuff going to them so they remain "organized".



Isn't that what I said? I am curious now that you brought it up. Short of going on a massive federal hiring binge, what will Mitt do to create all these jobs.

And I know you will say; eliminate regulations. Which ones? And how does a "regulation" keep consumers from buying a product? How does a "regulation" reduce demand for consumer goods and services?

You do know that as much as 70% of our economy is based on consumers.

SO; hows Mitt create jobs and what regs gotta go? Just curious.

As a business owner who's forte' is reorganizing failing companies and growing others, I believe he'll start by eliminating a lot of redundancy in several "departments". I'm thinking that alone will save the (Feds) taxpayers a ton of $$$$$$$$$.

The guy we have now has no idea how to minimize losses. :eusa_hand:
 
No way would they put Mitt signs in their yards. He'll probably create lots of jobs, concentrate on the Federal Jobs training programs and expect them to work. Obama would prefer to keep the free stuff going to them so they remain "organized".



Isn't that what I said? I am curious now that you brought it up. Short of going on a massive federal hiring binge, what will Mitt do to create all these jobs.

And I know you will say; eliminate regulations. Which ones? And how does a "regulation" keep consumers from buying a product? How does a "regulation" reduce demand for consumer goods and services?

You do know that as much as 70% of our economy is based on consumers.

SO; hows Mitt create jobs and what regs gotta go? Just curious.

As a business owner who's forte' is reorganizing failing companies and growing others, I believe he'll start by eliminating a lot of redundancy in several "departments". I'm thinking that alone will save the (Feds) taxpayers a ton of $$$$$$$$$.

The guy we have now has no idea how to minimize losses. :eusa_hand:


You call the above an answer to my most respectful question? LMAO..

Why didn't you just come out and say what is appantely the truth; you have no idea if Mitt can create jobs, other than going on a massive fed hiring binge.

btw, eliminating all the "redundancy" may be great. But it will cost people jobs. Not create jobs.

Please try again if you feel like it. And can do a better job. If not, thanks anyway.
 
Isn't that what I said? I am curious now that you brought it up. Short of going on a massive federal hiring binge, what will Mitt do to create all these jobs.

And I know you will say; eliminate regulations. Which ones? And how does a "regulation" keep consumers from buying a product? How does a "regulation" reduce demand for consumer goods and services?

You do know that as much as 70% of our economy is based on consumers.

SO; hows Mitt create jobs and what regs gotta go? Just curious.

As a business owner who's forte' is reorganizing failing companies and growing others, I believe he'll start by eliminating a lot of redundancy in several "departments". I'm thinking that alone will save the (Feds) taxpayers a ton of $$$$$$$$$.

The guy we have now has no idea how to minimize losses. :eusa_hand:


You call the above an answer to my most respectful question? LMAO..

Why didn't you just come out and say what is appantely the truth; you have no idea if Mitt can create jobs, other than going on a massive fed hiring binge.

btw, eliminating all the "redundancy" may be great. But it will cost people jobs. Not create jobs.

Please try again if you feel like it. And can do a better job. If not, thanks anyway.
To the bolded: Yes, let's keep jobs in non-producing and redundant areas. Great idea for the GNP. And, why not have the government employ everyone and we can produce nothing and crash even faster?

Awesome.
 
Isn't that what I said? I am curious now that you brought it up. Short of going on a massive federal hiring binge, what will Mitt do to create all these jobs.

And I know you will say; eliminate regulations. Which ones? And how does a "regulation" keep consumers from buying a product? How does a "regulation" reduce demand for consumer goods and services?

You do know that as much as 70% of our economy is based on consumers.

SO; hows Mitt create jobs and what regs gotta go? Just curious.

As a business owner who's forte' is reorganizing failing companies and growing others, I believe he'll start by eliminating a lot of redundancy in several "departments". I'm thinking that alone will save the (Feds) taxpayers a ton of $$$$$$$$$.

The guy we have now has no idea how to minimize losses. :eusa_hand:


You call the above an answer to my most respectful question? LMAO..

Why didn't you just come out and say what is appantely the truth; you have no idea if Mitt can create jobs, other than going on a massive fed hiring binge.

btw, eliminating all the "redundancy" may be great. But it will cost people jobs. Not create jobs.

Please try again if you feel like it. And can do a better job. If not, thanks anyway.

Looks like we're trying to discuss something you truly don't understand.

Government does not create jobs.............minimizing losses creates additional opportunity in the private sector. Returning many programs to the States will create additional opportunities at state and local levels. Have you looked at the average income of the folks that live in the DC area??
 
As a business owner who's forte' is reorganizing failing companies and growing others, I believe he'll start by eliminating a lot of redundancy in several "departments". I'm thinking that alone will save the (Feds) taxpayers a ton of $$$$$$$$$.

The guy we have now has no idea how to minimize losses. :eusa_hand:


You call the above an answer to my most respectful question? LMAO..

Why didn't you just come out and say what is appantely the truth; you have no idea if Mitt can create jobs, other than going on a massive fed hiring binge.

btw, eliminating all the "redundancy" may be great. But it will cost people jobs. Not create jobs.

Please try again if you feel like it. And can do a better job. If not, thanks anyway.

Looks like we're trying to discuss something you truly don't understand.

Government does not create jobs.............minimizing losses creates additional opportunity in the private sector. Returning many programs to the States will create additional opportunities at state and local levels. Have you looked at the average income of the folks that live in the DC area??



You are just making shit up now. btw, how is it the Federal government does not create jobs but the state government does. LMAO again.

You stupid.

So with you channeling mitt, you can't figure out how mitt will create jobs, except for the elimanation of some federal jobs which will then go to the state to create those jobs.

That about sum it up?

But back to the original question that you can't answer. What will Mitt do to create private sector jobs?
 
Mitt's going to create the jobs? I thought that was the job of the 1%, as long as we didn't raise their taxes. Well, we're waiting. :eusa_snooty:
 
Also naturegirl.

If the federal guvmint doesn't "create" jobs, why are all those rethugs and dems complaining about all the job loss in the defense industry that MIGHT happen?

How could that be. The guvmint does not create defense industry jobs by ordering all that stuff the milirary needs. Does it? Or is that aok.

Its ok with me but then I am not so stupid to say the government does not create jobs. But you are that stupid. To bad.
 
Mitt's going to create the jobs? I thought that was the job of the 1%, as long as we didn't raise their taxes. Well, we're waiting. :eusa_snooty:


Well, the reason Mitt can do this is because he is of the 1% and will get together with all the other 1%ers and go on a hiring binge. As long as they get a big tax cut first.

But we have to wait for 4 years.
 
Mitt Romney:

"Government doesn't create jobs, Mr. President"

"I'm going to create 12 million jobs as president"

:lol:

I guess he didn't check with his puppet masters, Sununu and Rove before he said anything.
 
You all just stay right here. Nature girly is coming back to explain how Mitt will create all those jobs.

Me, I gotta go to work at the job I created.
 
Not sure about the placement of political signs but it is no big secret that hacks from all economic levels are bleeding the government/us dry.

The government, both Feds and State offer far too many jobs, some of them hack jobs and therein lies the problem. Also, how many millions of Americans are employed by companies that rely on government contracts?

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, approximately 2 million civilians work for the federal government. That is not even counting the military or the postal service.

Home : Occupational Outlook Handbook : U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics

Federal Resume | Government is Largest Employer
 

Forum List

Back
Top