Remember, it is the Republican Party who cares about the people.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Tell that to the US Treasury - it's from their data. I guess you'll do it right after you tell the IRS how to do its job.

As I explained, their jobs have political motivations. You're hiding behind the effects.

Of course, any statistics can be misused this way, and you do it a lot.

[billvon 3,118]

> I don't know of many college grads that aren't drowning them selves
>in beer or whatever right now.

Agreed. But that's true no matter what the economy is doing. I recall a lot of beer during that last summer in college.

[Bolas 5]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

I don't really care how it's funded.

Good to know that you are for fiscal responsibility.

I think the attachment mnealtx posted fits your attitude to a tee.

Funny how right wingers suddenly discover fiscal responsibility now that their profligate borrow-and-spenders are out of office.

Couldn't possibly be in this economic meltdown that they are seeing the error of their ways...

No, I think it's more likely to be pure hypocrisy.

Regardless of if you doubt their motives, do you think fiscal responsibility is what it's going to take to reverse this mess or do you think we can "spend our way out of debt."

Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Regardless of if you doubt their motives, do you think fiscal responsibility is what it's going to take to reverse this mess or do you think we can "spend our way out of debt."

50/50 chance of guessing the right answer.....

I like those odds

(you do realize that some people truly think "fiscal responsibility" = "spend our way out of debt"? )

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[Bolas 5]

Quote

(you do realize that some people truly think "fiscal responsibility" = "spend our way out of debt"? )

That's a scary thought. While it is an option, I'd call it more of a gamble instead of a responsible choice.

Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

[kallend 2,148]

Quote

Regardless of if you doubt their motives, do you think fiscal responsibility is what it's going to take to reverse this mess or do you think we can "spend our way out of debt."

Wrong question..

I'm a Keynesian. Govt should pay down debt in the good times, and spend in the bad times.

Trouble is, we kept borrowing in the good times and putting the money in the pockets of the already wealthy.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 2,148]

Quote

Quote

Tell that to the US Treasury - it's from their data. I guess you'll do it right after you tell the IRS how to do its job.

As I explained, their jobs have political motivations. You're hiding behind the effects.

Of course, any statistics can be misused this way, and you do it a lot.

So now you claim the US Treasury is lying about the national debt. So give us YOUR numbers.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Still searching for a valid point.

Yes, we know you are.

Quote

Esp after taking a positive economy and surplus and hammering into a 5T debt.

And Obama has taken a 450B deficit and tripled it, as well as racking up half the debt increase of the ENTIRE Bush presidency in a year and a half. (53.5% of the total increase in 18.66% of the time)

Heck of a job, Barry!

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Funny how right wingers suddenly discover fiscal responsibility now that their profligate borrow-and-spenders are out of office.

Funny how left wingers suddenly forget about fiscal responsibility now that their profligate borrow-and-spenders are in office.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Bolas 5]

Quote

Quote

Regardless of if you doubt their motives, do you think fiscal responsibility is what it's going to take to reverse this mess or do you think we can "spend our way out of debt."

Wrong question..

I'm a Keynesian. Govt should pay down debt in the good times, and spend in the bad times.

Trouble is, we kept borrowing in the good times and putting the money in the pockets of the already wealthy.

So what do you think we should do in this case?

Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Regardless of if you doubt their motives, do you think fiscal responsibility is what it's going to take to reverse this mess or do you think we can "spend our way out of debt."

Wrong question..

I'm a Keynesian. Govt should pay down debt in the good times, and spend in the bad times.

Trouble is, we kept borrowing in the good times and putting the money in the pockets of the already wealthy.

Same old 'classist' argument.

Of course, we all see what happened to the deficit when the party of fiscal responsibility took over the purse-strings.

Deficit FY2007 (last Rep Congress budget) - 161B
Deficit FY2008 (first budget year for current Dem Congress, under Bush) - 458B
Deficit FY2009 (first Obama budget) - 1412B

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

They are, tax cuts, which are virtually only for the very rich, turn into stagnate bank accounts. Unemp checks hit the economy in minutes; not real hard to understand.

Banks circulate money. I take it that you forget that the Depression was made worse because people pulled their money out of banks so it wasn't available for investment.

Unemployment checks hit the economy in minutes. Yeah. Take money out of the economy and putting it back in does not seem to be good for the economy.


[Reply]Or raise taxes to nab some of those elitist, hard-stolen dollars.

This statement says it all. The taxes aren't about helping anybody but are about punishing one or more groups of people that you want to see suffer. Of course, the true "elitists" are the ones with the self-anointed authority to determine who should and should not be punished.

You don't care about people. You hate some people. You'll get further if you admit that because it will display some intellectual honesty.

As Luck would have it,...don't exspect intellectual honesty coming from him anytime soon.

Ewwwww, so shrewd . Thx for contributing your usual nothing.

I find your Rants somewhat confusing...but I'm sure its just me.

I find your so-called contributions empty.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

I don't really care how it's funded.

Good to know that you are for fiscal responsibility.

I think the attachment mnealtx posted fits your attitude to a tee.

I see, cartoons are your best asset and ability to understand. I am for fiscal responsibility which is why I liek presidents like Eisenhower, Clinton and others.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

I don't really care how it's funded.

Good to know that you are for fiscal responsibility.

I think the attachment mnealtx posted fits your attitude to a tee.

Funny how right wingers suddenly discover fiscal responsibility now that their profligate borrow-and-spenders are out of office.

Isn't it ironic yet predictable? Just as GHWB cut troops and bases and it was ok, then Clinton cut about the same numebr and the wheels fell off. These jokes are predictable.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

For how long of a period do you feel the government should provide unemployment benefits? A year? 18 months? 36 months? Indefinitely?

As long as there is a lot of unemp, 9.5% then it's warranted. Let's say 7% is a good time to let up as a start.

What part of "for how long" don't you understand?
Edit to add: In case the concept slipped by you.....for how long do you think any one person should be able to collect unemployment benefits from the government?

I can be socratic too; at what point do you throw a person to thestreet for an economic condition they couldn't control?

[airdvr 210]

Quote

at what point do you throw a person to thestreet for an economic condition they couldn't control?

That pretty much sums up the difference. You say there is no control, I say I have total control over what happens to me and how I handle the situation. Do you advocate forgetting your EP's and just waiting for the AAD?

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

For how long of a period do you feel the government should provide unemployment benefits? A year? 18 months? 36 months? Indefinitely?

As long as there is a lot of unemp, 9.5% then it's warranted. Let's say 7% is a good time to let up as a start.

What part of "for how long" don't you understand?
Edit to add: In case the concept slipped by you.....for how long do you think any one person should be able to collect unemployment benefits from the government?

I can be socratic too; at what point do you throw a person to thestreet for an economic condition they couldn't control?

So you think unemployment benefits should continue indefinitely.
It is good that you are not the one to make that decision.

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[scruffy 0]

Quote

It is good that you are not the one to make that decision.

Yeah, unfortunately we have a legislature that feels the same way right now...well at least till after the elections. I'm curious if the dems will fight so hard to keep benefits flowing once they got their seats locked up for another 2 years at least.

Peace, love and hoppiness

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

at what point do you throw a person to thestreet for an economic condition they couldn't control?

That pretty much sums up the difference. You say there is no control, I say I have total control over what happens to me and how I handle the situation. Do you advocate forgetting your EP's and just waiting for the AAD?

No, I don't have an AAD, so I take personal responsibility. But with a corporate-controlled econoly, I can't just pull red then silver to get a job; lousy analogy.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

For how long of a period do you feel the government should provide unemployment benefits? A year? 18 months? 36 months? Indefinitely?

As long as there is a lot of unemp, 9.5% then it's warranted. Let's say 7% is a good time to let up as a start.

What part of "for how long" don't you understand?
Edit to add: In case the concept slipped by you.....for how long do you think any one person should be able to collect unemployment benefits from the government?

I can be socratic too; at what point do you throw a person to thestreet for an economic condition they couldn't control?

So you think unemployment benefits should continue indefinitely.
It is good that you are not the one to make that decision.

And you think they should be minimal to non-existent; good thing you and yours just lost in congress, now maybe in Nov more people will see that the R's don't care if people go homeless all the name of personal responsibility.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

It is good that you are not the one to make that decision.

Yeah, unfortunately we have a legislature that feels the same way right now...well at least till after the elections. I'm curious if the dems will fight so hard to keep benefits flowing once they got their seats locked up for another 2 years at least.

I know, I'm with ya bro, I say kick those worthless, no-good pieces of shit to the street who were gainfully employed, but morons elected GWB and he just shrugged his shoulders as the country went down the tubes, now they can't find work. It's their fault, fuck em. But keep matching the world dollar for dollar in military spending, after all, it's not about the spending, right?

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100721/ap_on_bi_ge/us_unemployment_benefits

Yea, I know, all those unemployed people are just whiners.

___________________________________________
All Democrats want to do is borrow money from China to buy votes.They pass paygo and exempt every bill they propose...

On May 10, The Detroit News found job applicants turning down landscaping companies’ offers of employment. Tom Corbett, a Republican candidate for Pennsylvania governor, told a Harrisburg, Pa., radio station that some construction companies in his state are dealing with the same problem.

Corbett said the companies told him some laid-off workers have refused work until they run out of unemployment checks, according to an AP story. In fact, Pennsylvania has reported more than $4 million in unemployment fraud, according to WGAL.com

Lancaster Nissan dealers expressed “frustration after several applicants were offered jobs but turned them down.” One was a former car salesman who didn’t want to lose his benefits by working.

OK, so an enginner gets laid off, he can't find an engineering job so he collects unemp comp until he can find an engineering job. You say he should take a sleezy car salesman job? It would fuck up his resume making it harder to find an engineering job and reestablish his wage scale. I understand you simply just don't give a shit about people, but this is a bad idea for him to take this job. Furthermore, who knows how accurate this testimonial is. Maybe some maggotted conservative car dealship offerring strict commission and using it as fodder to denouce unemp benefits.

As for not losing benefits by working, if you are earning X, get laid off, take a job offerring 1/2 X then that is your new wage scale. As well, if I were a car salesman laid iff, getting unemp comp, I'm probably not wanting to take a car salesman job now anyway, I'm probably wanting to cross-train as cars aren't selling well anyway.

So it's fun to actually have all the facts of a situation, none of which either of us have. But I hear ya, shovel it all to corps, fuck the people.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

OK, so an enginner gets laid off, he can't find an engineering job so he collects unemp comp until he can find an engineering job. You say he should take a sleezy car salesman job? It would fuck up his resume making it harder to find an engineering job and reestablish his wage scale.

bullshit. You aren't obligated to list anything on your resume. You can say you weren't working at the time.

I can think of reasons why an engineer might better use his time then sell cars (if that's really the only option), but it's not going to hurt his job chances.

[DaVinci 0]

Yep, they care about not running the deficit so high that it will be almost impossible to recover. You don't seem to worry about spending money we don't have or spending someone else's money.

Also, it has been shown that people go back to work when they are close to losing their benefit.

"Mr. MIRON: Oh no - there are analyses done by economists, going back, you know, a couple decades, in which they document that the rate of job-leaving is very, very high when people are in their last week or two of eligibility for their unemployment. For people who are eligible for 26 weeks, you see high exit rates out of unemployment in weeks 24, 25, 26. For people who are eligible 52, high exit rates then.

So there's more than just anecdotes. There's certainly some systematic stuff published in journals.

CONAN: So at some point people, well, if they've got the benefits available, take advantage of it.

Mr. MIRON: They do, and I don't think we should refer to that as gaming the system or be casting aspersions on the people who are doing that. They're doing the intelligent thing. They're responding to incentives that are created.

But it's appropriate for policymakers, for society, to say do we want to create that incentive, and to what degree do we want to create that incentive?

Obviously, doing a little bit to provide the safety net is reasonable, but doing it extensively, at some point, generates a large number of people who stay unemployed for a long time, and that's not in anybody's interest. "

From NPR http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=128696646

But hey, Jeffrey Miron is only the director of undergraduate studies at Harvard University at the Department of Economics.... What would he know?

So given that the Republicans were concerned about how to pay for the benefits AND how some studies have shown that some people just stay on Unemployment instead of taking a job.....

Yeah, they do care about people.

[airdvr 210]

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=128696646

I thought it deserved a clicky.

This is a very interesting call...

Quote

TRACY (Caller): Hi, thank you. This is you know, I was just listening to your panelists, and I'm just letting you know, not only am I unemployed since November, 2008, I have a 19-year-old daughter who's been trying to get into the workforce for the past two years in addition to going to college full time.

And to say that we're not willing to take certain positions: you're right, I'm not willing to take certain positions, but the suggestion that I take a position from a salary of, like, half of what I was making previously, is only going to add to the deflation pressures that we have in our economy right now.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne