crowfarm
|
posted on September 1, 2004 11:45:59 AM new
So much talk about 9/11....so little mention of Osama Bin Forgotten.
Well, actually they never even mentioned the guy who was REALLY behind 9/11.....more dupicity from the Righties.
|
kiara
|
posted on September 1, 2004 11:52:32 AM new
Linda_K, you have taken it upon yourself to read much more into my comment than I ever said. But that's nothing new here. 
|
Linda_K
|
posted on September 1, 2004 12:00:20 PM new
fenix - Thank you for giving me that one.
Now give me this one too please.
http://data.bls.gov/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet
This chart shows the unemployment rate at the end of July 1996 was 5.5...which is the same as where it was July 2004.
August figures will be coming out within a couple of days....but unless the unemployment rate *rises* to 6.1, Bush, at the same point in time [in their administrations] and with all our economy has had to deal with....will be BETTER than it was during the clinton administration.
On the other statement ....it wasn't directed at you fenix, alone. It's been a standard, most often repeated statement constantly made here by the left....as IF to say....only the dems think of others.
|
fenix03
|
posted on September 1, 2004 12:08:35 PM new
::But then I don't have that right. ::
And the poor poor put upon me act rolls on....
::Evidently you must have grown up in a different world than I did. I do believe marriage is more for love than "health Care" Now that was a statement. I can hear it now. Male: Will you Marry Me? Female: Well I will if you have health care. ::
Yes Libra, the combination of increased health care costs and the increase in number of employers discontinuing or simply not offering health care has resulted in people marrying to provide an ailing friend or friend with ailing children with dependent coverage. It is a sad fact but it is indeed a fact and it has been covered by various news outlets. Just because you are unaware of something does not mean it does not exist.
BTW - I don't think Maria gave up anything so that he could become govenor. There is a big difference between sacrificing for and sacrificing because of.
Of the 3o some members of the past 3 generations of Kennedy's I counted less than half a dozen divorces listed. Now, Iwill admit I could have missed a few but that rate falls far below the national average and kind of fails to support your.."as many of the Kennedy wives did" statement.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
|
Linda_K
|
posted on September 1, 2004 12:11:07 PM new
LOL kiara - We'll let everyone decide for them selves if there's a different implication between using the two terms:
yours: so many jobs.
the truth: accounts for just a small fraction of....
guess it's all relative....but to ME there is a definiate difference in what's implied. 
[ edited by Linda_K on Sep 1, 2004 12:50 PM ]
|
fenix03
|
posted on September 1, 2004 12:14:33 PM new
::Now give me this one too please.
http://data.bls.gov/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet::
I would - but this is what I get...
Notice
Wednesday, September 1, 2004 3:09 PM
Sorry, survey does not exist. If you need to contact someone about the program or its data, please send a message to the data questions e-mail address below or call the phone number below.
Here is the chart I used
This is a prime example of information vs information in context. Once you put the two end numbers into the context of the full terms they finished out they tell very different stories.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
[ edited by fenix03 on Sep 1, 2004 12:20 PM ]
|
Linda_K
|
posted on September 1, 2004 12:48:07 PM new
That's not fair, fenix ....using the last THREE generations. Only use the last generation and see how the numbers are different then.
On that site....if you got that message they're updating it then. Try again later. Until then you'll have to trust me.
And also anyone who wants to see the differences/sameness [lol] between our economy in mid-1996 compared to now...can pull up Greenspans reports on the state of our economy - then and now.
Also...I want to mention that if one looks to our current GDP numbers....they will find that even though our deficit is high....put into perspective...we're not doing anywhere near as bad as the left keeps saying we are. "4.2% of the nations GDP it would represent a smaller share of the economy than the deficits of the mid-1980's and early 1990's."
http://www.cbo.gov/showdoc.cfm?index=4988&sequence=0
Our economy is strong....and a lot stronger than other countries. Our unemployment rate is low compared to theirs too. Not saying it's robust...but strong and growing in a positive mode.
[ edited by Linda_K on Sep 1, 2004 01:00 PM ]
|
crowfarm
|
posted on September 1, 2004 12:49:13 PM new
Linda, isn't it hard to walk with Neroters nose up your butt?
|
Linda_K
|
posted on September 1, 2004 12:54:18 PM new
fenix - This is a prime example of information vs information in context. Once you put the two end numbers into the context of the full terms they finished out they tell very different stories
The reason it's telling different stories is that you used one that only gives the 'Sacramento' figures....the one's from the link I have are for the whole U.S. - an overall picture....not just one cities/counties picture. 
|
Reamond
|
posted on September 1, 2004 12:55:57 PM new
This chart shows the unemployment rate at the end of July 1996 was 5.5...which is the same as where it was July 2004.
The unemployment rate only shows percentage of workers who have applied for or are receiving unemployment benefits.
It does not show how many workers have exhausted their benefits. Clinton's two terms produced record job growth. It would naturally follow that the unemployment rate in 1996 at 5.5% is a far different metric than the present 5.5%.
Bush has a net loss of jobs. The first president to do so since Hoover in 1929.
|
crowfarm
|
posted on September 1, 2004 12:56:29 PM new
I love how Arnold insulted and degraded women again by implying that women are weak when he called some people "girlie men"..
Some women are SO stupid that they'll keep voting for a party that thinks women are weak and need to be controlled....what air heads. Oh, maybe the Republicans are right.
|
Linda_K
|
posted on September 1, 2004 01:07:02 PM new
reamond - We're not comparing their TWO terms....we can do that in FOUR MORE YEARS ....we're comparing where we were/are at the same point in time.
And again...our economy is solid...and growing...our job market continues to improve....and kerry's only going to make it worse by more and more spending...raising our taxes....limiting corporations ability to sell their products.
|
kraftdinner
|
posted on September 1, 2004 01:08:40 PM new
This thread has me in tears from laughing so hard. You guys are funny - really!
Libra, that's why I didn't make a comment about the convention - because I didn't watch it.
Twelve, I pay property taxes to the U.S. If you could put the bottle down for a couple hours a day, you'd pick up on more stuff.
Kiara, Fenix & Logan - you guys rule!
|
fenix03
|
posted on September 1, 2004 01:32:49 PM new
::"4.2% of the nations GDP it would represent a smaller share of the economy than the deficits of the mid-1980's and early 1990's."::
You realize that encompasses the reagan administration as opposed to the CLinton Admin right? Now I was a youngun back then but weren't we in a recession during that period?
::The reason it's telling different stories is that you used one that only gives the 'Sacramento' figures....the one's from the link I have are for the whole U.S. - an overall picture....not just one cities/counties picture.::
Actually Linda - Sacremento Forcast Project is the name of the gropup that put the information together. Those are national numbers that they compiled. I know, bad name for the group - too easily leads to confusion.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
|
Linda_K
|
posted on September 1, 2004 01:40:41 PM new
Thanks for explaining that fenix.
My numbers were taken from the U.S. Labor Department. The numbers used whenever anyone/any media outlet refers to where the job market is at any given time. It's the same one that was always used during the clinton administration.
And mentioning the recession....the Bush administration faced and had to deal with a recession right as they entered office. And everything else I've already mentioned that we needed to deal with following 9-11.
I'd say our economy is in excellent shape....everything considered.
|
kiara
|
posted on September 1, 2004 01:45:56 PM new
Hi kraft! Sometimes the most innocent comments seem to get us in trouble.
Linda_K, I now see your edit.
so many jobs
You took that out of context.
Let me try this one more time.
so many jobs that Canada benefits from is what I said.
I was not talking about the total number of jobs being outsourced worldwide by the Bush administration. I said that Canada benefits from so many of the jobs that have been outsourced here from the US. I wasn't implying anything else.
|
Linda_K
|
posted on September 1, 2004 01:55:53 PM new
LOL Petty, petty, petty. You are so petty.
I didn't edit anything but a [ so it would be bolded.
And it still refers to 'job loss' no matter where the jobs are going.
banter with someone else.....you're childish.
|
kiara
|
posted on September 1, 2004 02:00:56 PM new
Linda_K, I wasn't being petty at all.
You called me on it FOUR times telling me to check my facts. I was only trying to explain to you each time that what I was saying was correct.
|
kraftdinner
|
posted on September 1, 2004 02:08:47 PM new
|
kiara
|
posted on September 1, 2004 02:11:00 PM new
LOL !
|
logansdad
|
posted on September 1, 2004 02:17:28 PM new
And again...our economy is solid...and growing...our job market continues to improve....
Shrunken, Stagnant Income
Another indicator: the Census Bureau reported that median household income declined by $63 from 2002 to 2003 , to $43,318. "Median" means that half of all households had more income than that, and half less. Census officials characterized the median income figure as "unchanged" in 2003 because the decline was so small as to be well within the margin of error.
But even so, median income has declined by $1,535 since Bush took office , or 3.4 percent. And while the decline leveled off last year and may even be climbing again in 2004, most households are clearly worse off economically now than they were when the President was sworn in.
Falling Into Poverty
Another indication that the middle class continued to shrink in 2003 is the increase in the number and percentage of persons living in poverty. According to the Census Bureau, the number of people living below the official poverty line grew by 1.3 million in 2003, to 35.9 million. That's nearly 4.3 million more poor persons than when Bush took office , an increase of nearly 14%.
Is It Still Shrinking?
We of course can't say what the Census Bureau figures will say next year about what is happening to income and poverty rates in 2004. We do know that employment has been growing all year, so more people have jobs. Average wages are rising, too. But prices have been rising even faster -- especially for food, health care and fuel.
We also don't know what happened to after-tax income in 2003, because the Census Bureau was unable to complete its annual release of "alternative measures" of income in time for release with the poverty and household income figures. The 2003 figures might look better once the Bush tax cuts are factored in and take-home pay is considered. On the other hand, we do know that another 1 million persons were without health insurance in 2003. Since Bush took office, the number without health insurance has grown by 5.2 million, to 45 million.
http://factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=249
Let's have a BBQ, Texas style, ROAST BUSH
------------------------------
YOU CAN'T HAVE BULLSH** WITH OUT BUSH.
------------------------------
We the people, in order to form a more perfect Union....
.....one Nation indivisible, With Liberty and Justice for ALL.
|
Linda_K
|
posted on September 1, 2004 03:15:19 PM new
logansdad - As we ALL know....the economy WAS in a different place in 2003 than it is now. So all those numbers - that you copied and pasted aren't current.
Then your link goes on to say:
Kerry's other economic statements remain at least as dubious as we reported. Recent figures show inflation-adjusted hourly earnings actually went up in July just as Kerry was announcing that "wages are falling," for example.
If anyone wants to check hour the hourly wage HAS been going up for months....the US Labor Department link will show it has only INCREASED....hasn't decreased in months.
It's this defeatist attitude from the left seems to flourish on. Good news to you is when the news is bad for our economy. When it's going well...growing then to you it's bad.
Sad you can't look at the glass as half full rather than half empty. Our economy has improved remarkablely this year.
|
Linda_K
|
posted on September 1, 2004 03:19:51 PM new
also from factcheck.org
Kerry's Dubious Economics
He says new jobs are paying $9,000 less than the old ones. That's not a fact.
August 3, 2004
Modified: September 1, 2004
eMail to a friend Printer Friendly Version
Summary
In his acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention July 29 Kerry repeated a claim that the economy is creating jobs that pay $9,000 a year less than those they replace. He bases that on disputed analysis from a liberal think tank. [like that's a real unbiased source ]
In fact, economists disagree about whether jobs are getting worse or better. As we said before, there's evidence both ways. Even some Democratic economists say the economic numbers are simply too rough and contradictory to allow any conclusion about the direction of change, let alone about how much less or more the new jobs pay.
Kerry also said "wages are falling" when in fact they are increasing. It's true wages haven't kept up with inflation for the past several months. But even after adjusting for inflation they're still higher than when Bush took office.
|
neroter12
|
posted on September 1, 2004 06:20:08 PM new
Sad you can't look at the glass as half full rather than half empty. Our economy has improved remarkablely this year.
You know Linda, there is an old biblical principle that goes, in effect: "You will have what you say." If you keep saying things will never get any better, more than likely they wont. In order to accomplish anything you have to have the belief it can be done to start with - and the confidence that belief will prevail. Without that, Newtons apple would just be a dumb apple that fell to the ground.
..
..
~~ Keep thy heart with all diligence for out of it are the issues(forces)of life..Proverbs 4:23~~
|
Reamond
|
posted on September 1, 2004 07:47:00 PM new
reamond - We're not comparing their TWO terms....we can do that in FOUR MORE YEARS ....we're comparing where we were/are at the same point in time.
Compare as many terms as you want, Clinton produced an economy that had the best growth in our history.
The Bush unemployment figure you point out is meaningless and in fact horrid when you add to it that we have had a net loss of jobs under his watch.
Bush's recession started in March of his first year in office. It is his recession, he didn't inherit it.
And this big bad stay the course he-man Bush was and is seen by the terrorists as a someone easily manipulated by the terrorists and complacent enough for them to attack us on our own soil. And Bush attacking Iraq just proved them right in their assessment of the retard we have in the White House.
|
Twelvepole
|
posted on September 1, 2004 08:07:01 PM new
As it turned out reamond that was artificial growth, how many companies now have been caught with cooked books? all before 2000... artificially inflated wages... yep Clinton did a great job... got to bail before it all fell apart...
AIN'T LIFE GRAND...
Re-Elect President Bush... the only true choice.
|
yeager
|
posted on September 2, 2004 03:47:01 AM new
yellowstone says,
I can just see you at your keyboard with your skinny, boney fingers with filthy, dirty finger nails cackling while typing and thinking this....
Sorry to disappoint you on that. I don't have skinny, bony fingers or have dirty finger nails either. When I go out to a bar, women are always remarking on how very masculine my hands are. My hands are 8 inches long from the crease in my wrist, to the tip of my middle finger. They are almost 5.5 inches wide too. My middle fingers are almost as round as quarters.
They would make you hands look like girlie man hands! I would post a pic, but 12 might get excited from it.
Bigots are miserable people.  Prevent Bigotry through Education.
Work to keep Church and State separate! http://www.au.org/site/PageServer
This long time republican is voting for John Kerry!
[ edited by yeager on Sep 2, 2004 03:48 AM ]
|
neroter12
|
posted on September 2, 2004 04:24:45 AM new
....outsourcing so many jobs.
Linda, WHAT IS the matter with you? Cant you read and understand sentence structure? Always taking words out of context!!
Perhaps if it read: outsourcing jobs that Canada benefits so much from... you might have understood. But as it stands, you're really just plain silly if you dont comprehend that sentence the way it reads.
..
..
~~ Keep thy heart with all diligence for out of it are the issues(forces)of life..Proverbs 4:23~~
|
logansdad
|
posted on September 2, 2004 06:28:01 AM new
As we ALL know....the economy WAS in a different place in 2003 than it is now. So all those numbers - that you copied and pasted aren't current.
How much different is it really? So what about all those jobs Bush has been claiming will be created over the past 2 years. When will they be created. Bush has been saying the same line of BS since 2002. It is time he does something or get out of office. The economy is not "strong" like you keep saying.
I think it is time you check your facts again.
http://www.jobwatch.org/
As you can see the recession started in March 2001 not under Clinton as you want to believe. As you can see Bush's tax cut strategy to create jobs has not worked. What is Bush going to do now???
Let's have a BBQ, Texas style, ROAST BUSH
------------------------------
YOU CAN'T HAVE BULLSH** WITH OUT BUSH.
------------------------------
We the people, in order to form a more perfect Union....
.....one Nation indivisible, With Liberty and Justice for ALL.
|
kiara
|
posted on September 2, 2004 08:32:01 AM new
neroter12, I do believe that Linda_K finally understood what I said and it was a slight misunderstanding between the two of us that didn't involve you. I doubt she needs her lap dog to continue this a day later for her.
But then again.........
|
