Get the F off this newsgroup!

"Jim and Becky" wrote in message
. ..
Get the F off this newsgroup!

Becky, the "F" word is of no use here. We're all desensitized.

"Jim and Becky" wrote in message ...
Get the F off this newsgroup!

What's an "F"? Fluff? Foam?

Get the F off this newsgroup!

What's an "F"? Fluff? Foam?

"F" stands for facts. Too many of them distract from the political rheotric.
:-)

GO AWAY! THIS GROUP IS ABOUT BOATS, YA STUPID CRUSTATION.

MadDogDave wrote:

Thank Bush and Jesus that we Republicans are putting more distance
between "us" and "them." So long as there are more poor people, there's
more for us rich people. We need the lower class to help us be superior.


Two years in a row, more in poverty

By Peronet Despeignes, USA TODAY

More than a million Americans sank into poverty last year, an annual
Census report is expected to show today. It would be the first time in
nearly a decade that the number of poor rose two years in a row.

Experts at the University of Michigan, the conservative-leaning Heritage
Foundation and the liberal-leaning Center on Budget and Policy
Priorities said they expected official figures to show the U.S. poverty
rate growing from 11.7% in 2001 to around 12.3% in 2002. Their
predictions generally are accurate within a few decimal points.

The figures were previewed three weeks ago by a Census survey testing a
new methodology. Today's figures are considered more authoritative and
comprehensive. They're the ones used by the government in calculating
unemployment and setting policies.

Although the economy is showing signs of improvement, poverty rates lag
behind economic shifts. Today's report will give Democrats ammunition to
attack President Bush's stewardship of the economy.

The official definition of poverty varies by family size and age and can
change annually with the cost of living. In 2001, a family of two
parents under 65 and two children younger than 18 were considered poor
with a household income below $12,207. That year, 32.9 million people
were defined as poor.

David Wyss, chief economist at Standard & Poor's, said, "Clearly, with a
hiring slump going on, you'd expect poverty to get worse."

The economy was stagnant in 2002 amid layoffs and spending cuts by
employers and state governments. More people were unemployed for longer
periods, and more saw their jobless benefits run out.

But Robert Rector, who studies poverty at the Heritage Foundation, says
the 2002 poverty rate reported today is still likely to be close to a
40-year low. The recession, job losses and slumping income of the past
few years have not completely erased the gains of the 1990s boom, he said.

And fresher indicators suggest the economy is staging a comeback: Retail
sales are rising, corporate profits are rebounding, investing is picking
up, and the stock market has rallied.

But a hiring rebound remains little more than a forecast — and a shaky
prospect that has proven elusive for nearly three years. Even if
economic growth continues to accelerate, it might be too uncertain and
subpar to encourage a quick hiring revival, or to stop the rise in
unemployment and poverty.

For the first time in 15 years, the poverty report is being released on
a Friday. That has prompted charges by Democrats such as Reps. Carolyn
Maloney of New York and William Lacy Clay of Missouri that the White
House hopes to see the bad news buried in little-seen Friday night and
Saturday news coverage.

Census officials strongly deny the accusation.

"The news conference was moved from Sept. 23 to Sept. 26 because the
professional staff asked for extra time to process this round of data,"
Census spokesman Lawrence Neal said. "The Sunday public affairs shows
will make a meal of the data and spit them back into the news cycle on
Monday. ... The notion that we should, could or would suppress these
numbers doesn't pass the laugh test."

Fungus? Flame Arrestor?

basskisser wrote:

"Jim and Becky" wrote in message ...

Get the F off this newsgroup!


What's an "F"? Fluff? Foam?

Hey come on now captain, I've got friends that are crustaceans, and they'd
be insulted to be compared to these guys. :-)
Paul

"Capt. Frank Hopkins" wrote in message
k.net...
GO AWAY! THIS GROUP IS ABOUT BOATS, YA STUPID CRUSTATION.

Text deleted

What about mollusks?

-W

"Paul Schilter" paulschilter@comcast,dot,net wrote in message
...
Hey come on now captain, I've got friends that are crustaceans, and they'd
be insulted to be compared to these guys. :-)
Paul

"Capt. Frank Hopkins" wrote in message
k.net...
GO AWAY! THIS GROUP IS ABOUT BOATS, YA STUPID CRUSTATION.

Text deleted

Clams,
Well I like escargot but I'm not to crazy about zebra mussels (live in
the Great Lakes region). On the other hand I'm a fan of Clams when its last
name is Canino :-)
I'm a diver so I appreciate the under sea world. It's a little noisy down
there with open circuit scuba gear but at least there isn't any political
dissuasions. :-)
Paul

"Clams Canino" wrote in message
news:ICFgb.59165$%h1.43214@sccrnsc02...
What about mollusks?

-W

"Paul Schilter" paulschilter@comcast,dot,net wrote in message
...
Hey come on now captain, I've got friends that are crustaceans, and
they'd
be insulted to be compared to these guys. :-)
Paul

"Capt. Frank Hopkins" wrote in message
k.net...
GO AWAY! THIS GROUP IS ABOUT BOATS, YA STUPID CRUSTATION.

Text deleted

all those "Exoskeletors" G
Some days I just don't feel well.
C.F.

Clams Canino wrote:

What about mollusks?

-W

"Paul Schilter" paulschilter@comcast,dot,net wrote in message
...

Hey come on now captain, I've got friends that are crustaceans, and they'd
be insulted to be compared to these guys. :-)
Paul

"Capt. Frank Hopkins" wrote in message
ink.net...

GO AWAY! THIS GROUP IS ABOUT BOATS, YA STUPID CRUSTATION.


Text deleted