On Sun, 10 Jan 2010 14:53:28 -0600, wrote:

On Sun, 10 Jan 2010 15:49:42 -0500, bpuharic wrote:
?

because you can look it up yourself. it's standard economic knowledge

I beg forgiveness, oh Royal Cop Out.

and here's more information you backwards, inbred intellectually dead
limbaugh listener. you have no idea what's going one in the real
world. you prefer your fairy tailes.

http://www.voxeu.org/index.php?q=node/264

It therefore is problematic that recent productivity gains have not
significantly raised incomes for most American workers. In the quarter
century between 1980 and 2005, business productivity increased by 71%.
Over the same quarter century, median weekly earnings of full-time
workers rose from $613 to $705, a gain of only 14% (figures in 2005
dollars), as our recent research shows.

This is related to boats HOW?


"bpuharic" wrote in message
...
conservatives are getting everything they want for the middle class:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34769831...iness-careers/


The forecast for the next five to 10 years: more of the same, with
paltry pay gains, worsening working conditions, and little job
security. Right on up to the C-suite, more jobs will be freelance and
temporary, and even seemingly permanent positions will be at greater
risk. "When I hear people talk about temp vs. permanent jobs, I
laugh," says Barry Asin, chief analyst at the Los Altos (Calif.)
labor-analysis firm Staffing Industry Analysts. "The idea that any job
is permanent has been well proven not to be true." As Kelly Services,
CEO Carl Camden puts it: "We're all temps now."

All that cutting has been good for corporate profits. Earnings
rebounded smartly as companies kept payrolls down after the 2001
recession; by 2006 profits had hit a 40-year high as a share of
national income, at 10.2 percent, according to Bureau of Economic
Analysis data.

and for the ultra rich:


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34784964...ew_york_times/

The bank bonus season, that annual rite of big money and bigger egos,
begins in earnest this week, and it looks as if it will be one of the
largest and most controversial blowouts the industry has ever seen.

Bank executives are grappling with a question that exasperates, even
infuriates, many recession-weary Americans: Just how big should their
paydays be? Despite calls for restraint from Washington and a chafed
public, resurgent banks are preparing to pay out bonuses that rival
those of the boom years. The haul, in cash and stock, will run into
many billions of dollars.

----------------

but the rich have nothing to worry about. under rush limbaugh,
american workers will continue to destroy themselves so that the rich
will be protected.

On Sun, 10 Jan 2010 17:09:48 -0500, "Charles G"
wrote:

This is related to boats HOW?


----------------

but the rich have nothing to worry about. under rush limbaugh,
american workers will continue to destroy themselves so that the rich
will be protected.




Everyone wonders what yacht Rush will buy.

Personally, I think he should subscribe to Northwest Passage. Some
good boats for sale in there.
--

America needs Obamacare like Nancy Pelosi needs a Halloween mask.

John H

John H wrote:

America needs Obamacare like Nancy Pelosi needs a Halloween mask.

John H


You and yours should look in a mirror.

On Sun, 10 Jan 2010 16:12:36 -0500, bpuharic wrote:

On Sun, 10 Jan 2010 14:53:28 -0600, wrote:

On Sun, 10 Jan 2010 15:49:42 -0500, bpuharic wrote:


A declaration without corroboration or supporting statistical studies?
Why should I be skeptical?

because you can look it up yourself. it's standard economic knowledge

I beg forgiveness, oh Royal Cop Out.

can't help it if you're lazy.



http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/20...o-income-gain/

The typical American household made less money last year than the
typical household made a full decade ago.

To me, that’s the big news from the Census Bureau’s annual report on
income, poverty and health insurance, which was released this morning.
Median household fell to $50,303 last year, from $52,163 in 2007. In
1998, median income was $51,295. All these numbers are adjusted for
inflation.



so while the rich got richer, they stole their money from america's
middle class...

of course, the limbaugh/palin GOP doesn't want you to know this.


This is the typical Jesus the insurance salesman obfuscation. Once
you prove your point, he'll either try to change the subject, cherry
pick for points or go crickets on you.

On Sun, 10 Jan 2010 17:09:48 -0500, "Charles G"
wrote:

This is related to boats HOW?

Being able to afford one?

On 10/01/2010 12:43 PM, bpuharic wrote:
conservatives are getting everything they want for the middle class:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34769831...iness-careers/


The forecast for the next five to 10 years: more of the same, with
paltry pay gains, worsening working conditions, and little job
security. Right on up to the C-suite, more jobs will be freelance and
temporary, and even seemingly permanent positions will be at greater
risk. "When I hear people talk about temp vs. permanent jobs, I
laugh," says Barry Asin, chief analyst at the Los Altos (Calif.)
labor-analysis firm Staffing Industry Analysts. "The idea that any job
is permanent has been well proven not to be true." As Kelly Services,
CEO Carl Camden puts it: "We're all temps now."

All that cutting has been good for corporate profits. Earnings
rebounded smartly as companies kept payrolls down after the 2001
recession; by 2006 profits had hit a 40-year high as a share of
national income, at 10.2 percent, according to Bureau of Economic
Analysis data.

and for the ultra rich:


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34784964...ew_york_times/

The bank bonus season, that annual rite of big money and bigger egos,
begins in earnest this week, and it looks as if it will be one of the
largest and most controversial blowouts the industry has ever seen.

Bank executives are grappling with a question that exasperates, even
infuriates, many recession-weary Americans: Just how big should their
paydays be? Despite calls for restraint from Washington and a chafed
public, resurgent banks are preparing to pay out bonuses that rival
those of the boom years. The haul, in cash and stock, will run into
many billions of dollars.

----------------

but the rich have nothing to worry about. under rush limbaugh,
american workers will continue to destroy themselves so that the rich
will be protected.

Think, all this liberal debt mongering caused the crash. Not only are
more than 17% unemployed, many have to take crappy jobs after being
forced out of good jobs. All for debt mongers and mongrels not paying
their debts. Welchers and losers are getting away with murder. And not
one GM exec, not one bank exec in jail even after SOX.

When unemployment is low people get treated better. I wonder how many
realize even the biggest debtor in the land, government, is racking more
debt taxing them for dysfuntional corporations, in what amounts to
corporate slavery in America.

All with 100% support from a democrat Congress and president. People
are going to get a wicked lesson in liberal-debt-mania. Lets see if
this generation is upt o it's Pearl Harbor, with the enemy from within.

On Sun, 10 Jan 2010 16:33:01 -0500, bpuharic wrote:

On Sun, 10 Jan 2010 14:53:28 -0600, wrote:

On Sun, 10 Jan 2010 15:49:42 -0500, bpuharic wrote:
?

because you can look it up yourself. it's standard economic knowledge

I beg forgiveness, oh Royal Cop Out.

and here's more information you backwards, inbred intellectually dead
limbaugh listener. you have no idea what's going one in the real
world. you prefer your fairy tailes.

http://www.voxeu.org/index.php?q=node/264

It therefore is problematic that recent productivity gains have not
significantly raised incomes for most American workers. In the quarter
century between 1980 and 2005, business productivity increased by 71%.
Over the same quarter century, median weekly earnings of full-time
workers rose from $613 to $705, a gain of only 14% (figures in 2005
dollars), as our recent research shows.

" * Helped by the strong overall creation of wealth in the US, the
absolute amount of net worth for each wealth bracket has increased
over time, even if the relative share of wealth continues to be
distributed very unevenly in favor of the rich.
* About 1/3 of US household had a net worth of less than $50,000
(red plus orange bars in Graph) as of year-end 2005. About 18% had a
net worth of less than $5,000 (red bars in the graph).
* From 1965 to 2005 the portion of US households having a net
worth in excess of $100,000 grew from 30% to nearly 50%.
* The portion of US Households reaching the “Million Dollar Club”
grew from a mere 1% in 1965 to an estimated 9% as of year-end 2005.
* Similarly, the portion of households with a net worth in excess
of $250,000 grew from 6% to about 33% during the 40-year period from
1965 to 2005.
* Considering that the US population grew by over 100 million
(from 194 million to 296 million) during the period 1965 to 2005, the
number of family members living in a household with a net worth of
more than $250,000 increased nearly 10-fold from about 11.6 million in
1965 to nearly 100 million today.

Lessons

* While it may be true that the rich get richer, this graph shows
that the poor are getting richer too. The downwards sloping dividers
between wealth brackets demonstrate that the “trickle-down effect”
does work in the long run and that the United States gets richer as a
whole, not just as a few wealth individuals."

http://solutions.powersimsolutions.c...rspective.aspx

--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
-------http://www.NewsDemon.com------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access

On 10/01/2010 1:38 PM, Harry wrote:
bpuharic wrote:
conservatives are getting everything they want for the middle class:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34769831...iness-careers/


The forecast for the next five to 10 years: more of the same, with
paltry pay gains, worsening working conditions, and little job
security. Right on up to the C-suite, more jobs will be freelance and
temporary, and even seemingly permanent positions will be at greater
risk. "When I hear people talk about temp vs. permanent jobs, I
laugh," says Barry Asin, chief analyst at the Los Altos (Calif.)
labor-analysis firm Staffing Industry Analysts. "The idea that any job
is permanent has been well proven not to be true." As Kelly Services,
CEO Carl Camden puts it: "We're all temps now."
All that cutting has been good for corporate profits. Earnings
rebounded smartly as companies kept payrolls down after the 2001
recession; by 2006 profits had hit a 40-year high as a share of
national income, at 10.2 percent, according to Bureau of Economic
Analysis data.

Being an investor, you must be pleased. No?

Actually I am. The market ups and downs are a savvy investors dream. I
thank democrat congress, senate and Obama for making it so volitile.

We are about due for a major pullback, thinking February or March like
when January/February numbers come out.

On 10/01/2010 3:09 PM, Charles G wrote:

This is related to boats HOW?

Takes money and time off to enjoy a boat. One without the other is useless.


"bpuharic" wrote in message
...
conservatives are getting everything they want for the middle class:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34769831...iness-careers/


The forecast for the next five to 10 years: more of the same, with
paltry pay gains, worsening working conditions, and little job
security. Right on up to the C-suite, more jobs will be freelance and
temporary, and even seemingly permanent positions will be at greater
risk. "When I hear people talk about temp vs. permanent jobs, I
laugh," says Barry Asin, chief analyst at the Los Altos (Calif.)
labor-analysis firm Staffing Industry Analysts. "The idea that any job
is permanent has been well proven not to be true." As Kelly Services,
CEO Carl Camden puts it: "We're all temps now."

All that cutting has been good for corporate profits. Earnings
rebounded smartly as companies kept payrolls down after the 2001
recession; by 2006 profits had hit a 40-year high as a share of
national income, at 10.2 percent, according to Bureau of Economic
Analysis data.

and for the ultra rich:


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34784964...ew_york_times/

The bank bonus season, that annual rite of big money and bigger egos,
begins in earnest this week, and it looks as if it will be one of the
largest and most controversial blowouts the industry has ever seen.

Bank executives are grappling with a question that exasperates, even
infuriates, many recession-weary Americans: Just how big should their
paydays be? Despite calls for restraint from Washington and a chafed
public, resurgent banks are preparing to pay out bonuses that rival
those of the boom years. The haul, in cash and stock, will run into
many billions of dollars.

----------------

but the rich have nothing to worry about. under rush limbaugh,
american workers will continue to destroy themselves so that the rich
will be protected.