| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
three charts for Republicans who are not crazy
http://www.truth-out.org/three-chart...law/1314626142
Federal spending dramatically increased under former president, George W. Bush and it has not increased much under President Obama. |
three charts for Republicans who are not crazy
|
three charts for Republicans who are not crazy
On 03/09/2011 11:46 AM, BeachBum wrote:
On 9/3/2011 1:41 PM, wrote: http://www.truth-out.org/three-chart...law/1314626142 Federal spending dramatically increased under former president, George W. Bush and it has not increased much under President Obama. WHAT? It's too early for you to be sucking on the bong. If defume and others think Bush was the problem, then how come Obama doing more of the same to new high levels of fraud, corruption and debt be anything else but insane? -- If it is all Bush's fault, then how come Obama is doing much more of the same and expecting different results? |
three charts for Republicans who are not crazy
On 03/09/2011 12:50 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 03 Sep 2011 13:46:00 -0400, BeachBum"not a wrote: On 9/3/2011 1:41 PM, wrote: http://www.truth-out.org/three-chart...law/1314626142 Federal spending dramatically increased under former president, George W. Bush and it has not increased much under President Obama. WHAT? It's too early for you to be sucking on the bong. I have seen that jobs chart bouncing around the internet for a while. It is turd polishing at it's finest. The BLS said we created exactly ZERO jobs last month. You would think you would get more for almost $5 trillion in debt fraud. -- If it is all Bush's fault, then how come Obama is doing much more of the same and expecting different results? |
three charts for Republicans who are not crazy
On 9/3/2011 4:07 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 03/09/2011 12:50 PM, wrote: On Sat, 03 Sep 2011 13:46:00 -0400, BeachBum"not a wrote: On 9/3/2011 1:41 PM, wrote: http://www.truth-out.org/three-chart...law/1314626142 Federal spending dramatically increased under former president, George W. Bush and it has not increased much under President Obama. WHAT? It's too early for you to be sucking on the bong. I have seen that jobs chart bouncing around the internet for a while. It is turd polishing at it's finest. The BLS said we created exactly ZERO jobs last month. You would think you would get more for almost $5 trillion in debt fraud. The bozo in charge isn't a savvy shopper. I wonder if he's collecting green stamps? |
three charts for Republicans who are not crazy
On Sat, 03 Sep 2011 14:50:41 -0400, wrote:
On Sat, 03 Sep 2011 13:46:00 -0400, BeachBum "not a wrote: On 9/3/2011 1:41 PM, wrote: http://www.truth-out.org/three-chart...law/1314626142 Federal spending dramatically increased under former president, George W. Bush and it has not increased much under President Obama. WHAT? It's too early for you to be sucking on the bong. I have seen that jobs chart bouncing around the internet for a while. It is turd polishing at it's finest. The BLS said we created exactly ZERO jobs last month. The three charts are facts. Sorry if you can't handle facts. Interesting about the jobs numbers actually... private sector increased by 17K. Public jobs decreased by the same amount. So, the right wing BULL**** is to moan about lack of jobs, when if money was spent on infrastructure projects, there wouldn't be a 17K hit in the numbers. Of course, right wing assholes are only interested in trashing the economy, because that would hurt Obama. |
three charts for Republicans who are not crazy
On Sat, 03 Sep 2011 14:07:13 -0600, Canuck57
wrote: On 03/09/2011 12:50 PM, wrote: On Sat, 03 Sep 2011 13:46:00 -0400, BeachBum"not a wrote: On 9/3/2011 1:41 PM, wrote: http://www.truth-out.org/three-chart...law/1314626142 Federal spending dramatically increased under former president, George W. Bush and it has not increased much under President Obama. WHAT? It's too early for you to be sucking on the bong. I have seen that jobs chart bouncing around the internet for a while. It is turd polishing at it's finest. The BLS said we created exactly ZERO jobs last month. You would think you would get more for almost $5 trillion in debt fraud. Talk to Bush II moron. |
three charts for Republicans who are not crazy
On Sat, 03 Sep 2011 13:00:37 -0600, Canuck57
wrote: On 03/09/2011 11:46 AM, BeachBum wrote: On 9/3/2011 1:41 PM, wrote: http://www.truth-out.org/three-chart...law/1314626142 Federal spending dramatically increased under former president, George W. Bush and it has not increased much under President Obama. WHAT? It's too early for you to be sucking on the bong. If defume and others think Bush was the problem, then how come Obama doing more of the same to new high levels of fraud, corruption and debt be anything else but insane? Only morons like you think that. Sane people actually look at facts. |
three charts for Republicans who are not crazy
On Sat, 03 Sep 2011 12:58:59 -0600, Canuck57
wrote: On 03/09/2011 11:41 AM, wrote: http://www.truth-out.org/three-chart...law/1314626142 Federal spending dramatically increased under former president, George W. Bush and it has not increased much under President Obama. Look closer at the chart fleabagger. It was 2007 once the democrat 2006 congress debt lovers and Bernanke money print took right off. Also right about the time unemployment rose with government debt and overspending. DC has been running on bull**** and fraud ever since. And Obama shovels more debt and bull**** than all before him. Fact is ass holes like you vote for fleabaggers that has ruined the USA. Look closer MORON. You are defending the worst president in the history of the country. Bush and his cronies just about destroyed our economy, but of course, any effort to create jobs is BLOCKED by right wing assholes who's job #1 is to replace Obama. |
three charts for Republicans who are not crazy
On 03/09/2011 4:28 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 03 Sep 2011 12:58:59 -0600, wrote: On 03/09/2011 11:41 AM, wrote: http://www.truth-out.org/three-chart...law/1314626142 Federal spending dramatically increased under former president, George W. Bush and it has not increased much under President Obama. Look closer at the chart fleabagger. It was 2007 once the democrat 2006 congress debt lovers and Bernanke money print took right off. Also right about the time unemployment rose with government debt and overspending. DC has been running on bull**** and fraud ever since. And Obama shovels more debt and bull**** than all before him. Fact is ass holes like you vote for fleabaggers that has ruined the USA. Look closer MORON. You are defending the worst president in the history of the country. Bush and his cronies just about destroyed our economy, but of course, any effort to create jobs is BLOCKED by right wing assholes who's job #1 is to replace Obama. In Sept 2008, Bush was the worst president. Today, Obama has shown that he can burn good money faster than Bush. Obama can rack up debt like no other on the planet. OMG - Obama Must Go!!! Simply put, America can't afford Obama debt, corruption and waste. -- If it is all Bush's fault, then how come Obama is doing much more of the same and expecting different results? |
three charts for Republicans who are not crazy
On Sat, 03 Sep 2011 16:53:10 -0600, Canuck57
wrote: On 03/09/2011 4:28 PM, wrote: On Sat, 03 Sep 2011 12:58:59 -0600, wrote: On 03/09/2011 11:41 AM, wrote: http://www.truth-out.org/three-chart...law/1314626142 Federal spending dramatically increased under former president, George W. Bush and it has not increased much under President Obama. Look closer at the chart fleabagger. It was 2007 once the democrat 2006 congress debt lovers and Bernanke money print took right off. Also right about the time unemployment rose with government debt and overspending. DC has been running on bull**** and fraud ever since. And Obama shovels more debt and bull**** than all before him. Fact is ass holes like you vote for fleabaggers that has ruined the USA. Look closer MORON. You are defending the worst president in the history of the country. Bush and his cronies just about destroyed our economy, but of course, any effort to create jobs is BLOCKED by right wing assholes who's job #1 is to replace Obama. In Sept 2008, Bush was the worst president. Today, Obama has shown that he can burn good money faster than Bush. Obama can rack up debt like no other on the planet. OMG - Obama Must Go!!! Simply put, America can't afford Obama debt, corruption and waste. No, you're just an idiot. Feel free to vote for Perry. Oh wait, you CAN'T VOTE! |
three charts for Republicans who are not crazy
On Sep 3, 5:26*pm, wrote:
On Sat, 03 Sep 2011 14:50:41 -0400, wrote: On Sat, 03 Sep 2011 13:46:00 -0400, BeachBum "not a wrote: On 9/3/2011 1:41 PM, wrote: http://www.truth-out.org/three-chart...wing-brother-l.... Federal spending dramatically increased under former president, George W. Bush and it has not increased much under President Obama. WHAT? It's too early for you to be sucking on the bong. I have seen that jobs chart bouncing around the internet for a while. It is turd polishing at it's finest. The BLS said we created exactly ZERO jobs last month. The three charts are facts. Sorry if you can't handle facts. Charts are drawn by those who are told how to draw the charts, D'Plume. Is that leftists rag where you get your so-called 'facts'? Read the comments, the audience is targeted. Who knows, you're probably in there as well. |
three charts for Republicans who are not crazy
On Sep 4, 12:57*am, wrote:
On Sat, 3 Sep 2011 19:05:12 -0700 (PDT), TopBassDog wrote: On Sep 3, 5:26*pm, wrote: On Sat, 03 Sep 2011 14:50:41 -0400, wrote: On Sat, 03 Sep 2011 13:46:00 -0400, BeachBum "not a wrote: On 9/3/2011 1:41 PM, wrote: http://www.truth-out.org/three-chart...wing-brother-l... Federal spending dramatically increased under former president, George W. Bush and it has not increased much under President Obama. WHAT? It's too early for you to be sucking on the bong. I have seen that jobs chart bouncing around the internet for a while. It is turd polishing at it's finest. The BLS said we created exactly ZERO jobs last month. The three charts are facts. Sorry if you can't handle facts. Charts are drawn by those who are told how to draw the charts, D'Plume. Is that leftists rag where you get your so-called 'facts'? Read the comments, the audience is targeted. Who knows, you're probably in there as well. The fact is, unemployment was 7.3% on 1/20/09 and it is 9.1% now. BLS says there was no net job creation last month. I am not sure what *data they cherry picked to create those charts. Precisely! |
three charts for Republicans who are not crazy
On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 01:57:49 -0400, wrote:
On Sat, 3 Sep 2011 19:05:12 -0700 (PDT), TopBassDog wrote: On Sep 3, 5:26*pm, wrote: On Sat, 03 Sep 2011 14:50:41 -0400, wrote: On Sat, 03 Sep 2011 13:46:00 -0400, BeachBum "not a wrote: On 9/3/2011 1:41 PM, wrote: http://www.truth-out.org/three-chart...wing-brother-l... Federal spending dramatically increased under former president, George W. Bush and it has not increased much under President Obama. WHAT? It's too early for you to be sucking on the bong. I have seen that jobs chart bouncing around the internet for a while. It is turd polishing at it's finest. The BLS said we created exactly ZERO jobs last month. The three charts are facts. Sorry if you can't handle facts. Charts are drawn by those who are told how to draw the charts, D'Plume. Is that leftists rag where you get your so-called 'facts'? Read the comments, the audience is targeted. Who knows, you're probably in there as well. The fact is, unemployment was 7.3% on 1/20/09 and it is 9.1% now. BLS says there was no net job creation last month. I am not sure what data they cherry picked to create those charts. They're called facts. Those are the things that were "cherry picked." The fact is that Bush destroyed the US economy. You and your right wing buddies somehow believe that it's actually possible to fix his mess, now with a tea party controlled House, in a couple of years. Feel free to hide from me and play with a stalker. He's obviously more your speed. |
three charts for Republicans who are not crazy
On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 09:06:20 -0400, wrote:
On Sat, 03 Sep 2011 12:58:59 -0600, Canuck57 wrote: On 03/09/2011 11:41 AM, wrote: http://www.truth-out.org/three-chart...law/1314626142 Federal spending dramatically increased under former president, George W. Bush and it has not increased much under President Obama. Look closer at the chart fleabagger. It was 2007 once the democrat 2006 congress debt lovers and Bernanke money print took right off. Also right about the time unemployment rose with government debt and overspending. DC has been running on bull**** and fraud ever since. And Obama shovels more debt and bull**** than all before him. Fact is ass holes like you vote for fleabaggers that has ruined the USA. Did Bush have a veto? Not really. Cheney would have slapped him. |
three charts for Republicans who are not crazy
On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 09:06:20 -0400, wrote:
On Sat, 03 Sep 2011 12:58:59 -0600, Canuck57 wrote: On 03/09/2011 11:41 AM, wrote: http://www.truth-out.org/three-chart...law/1314626142 Federal spending dramatically increased under former president, George W. Bush and it has not increased much under President Obama. Look closer at the chart fleabagger. It was 2007 once the democrat 2006 congress debt lovers and Bernanke money print took right off. Also right about the time unemployment rose with government debt and overspending. DC has been running on bull**** and fraud ever since. And Obama shovels more debt and bull**** than all before him. Fact is ass holes like you vote for fleabaggers that has ruined the USA. Did Bush have a veto? Over continuing resolutions? |
three charts for Republicans who are not crazy
On Sep 4, 1:33*pm, wrote:
On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 01:57:49 -0400, wrote: On Sat, 3 Sep 2011 19:05:12 -0700 (PDT), TopBassDog wrote: On Sep 3, 5:26*pm, wrote: On Sat, 03 Sep 2011 14:50:41 -0400, wrote: On Sat, 03 Sep 2011 13:46:00 -0400, BeachBum "not a wrote: On 9/3/2011 1:41 PM, wrote: http://www.truth-out.org/three-chart...wing-brother-l... Federal spending dramatically increased under former president, George W. Bush and it has not increased much under President Obama. WHAT? It's too early for you to be sucking on the bong. I have seen that jobs chart bouncing around the internet for a while.. It is turd polishing at it's finest. The BLS said we created exactly ZERO jobs last month. The three charts are facts. Sorry if you can't handle facts. Charts are drawn by those who are told how to draw the charts, D'Plume. Is that leftists rag where you get your so-called 'facts'? Read the comments, the audience is targeted. Who knows, you're probably in there as well. The fact is, unemployment was 7.3% on 1/20/09 and it is 9.1% now. BLS says there was no net job creation last month. I am not sure what *data they cherry picked to create those charts. They're called facts. Those are the things that were "cherry picked." The fact is that Bush destroyed the US economy. You and your right wing buddies somehow believe that it's actually possible to fix his mess, now with a tea party controlled House, in a couple of years. Feel free to hide from me and play with a stalker. He's obviously more your speed. Who is the stalker D'Plume? You chase the Canuck far more than I have ever you. You are such a simpleton, D'Plume. |
three charts for Republicans who are not crazy
On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 23:42:21 -0400, wrote:
On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 11:33:39 -0700, wrote: The fact is, unemployment was 7.3% on 1/1/09 and it is 9.1% now. BLS says there was no net job creation last month. I am not sure what data they cherry picked to create those charts. They're called facts. Those are the things that were "cherry picked." You have a chart showing job growth and unemployment went up 13.14% (For the math challenged, 9.1 - 7.3 = 1.8 7.3/1.8 = 13.14%) You have to be very careful to reject a lot of facts and only use the ones that result in your agenda, AKA "cherry picking", to produce that chart. I'm not sure where you're getting your numbers, but the chart in question clearly shows that job growth has been pretty steadily climbing since Jan. 09. No "unemployment" numbers chart was included, so you're getting that from somewhere else. That's fine, but there is likely only a correlation between job growth and unemployment not a causation effect. As I said, these three charts are hard to dispute. So far, you haven't been very successful in doing so. |
three charts for Republicans who are not crazy
On 9/5/2011 1:23 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 21:18:25 -0700, wrote: On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 23:42:21 -0400, wrote: On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 11:33:39 -0700, wrote: The fact is, unemployment was 7.3% on 1/1/09 and it is 9.1% now. BLS says there was no net job creation last month. I am not sure what data they cherry picked to create those charts. They're called facts. Those are the things that were "cherry picked." You have a chart showing job growth and unemployment went up 13.14% (For the math challenged, 9.1 - 7.3 = 1.8 7.3/1.8 = 13.14%) You have to be very careful to reject a lot of facts and only use the ones that result in your agenda, AKA "cherry picking", to produce that chart. I'm not sure where you're getting your numbers, but the chart in question clearly shows that job growth has been pretty steadily climbing since Jan. 09. No "unemployment" numbers chart was included, so you're getting that from somewhere else. That's fine, but there is likely only a correlation between job growth and unemployment not a causation effect. As I said, these three charts are hard to dispute. So far, you haven't been very successful in doing so. Job growth is not keeping up with population growth but if you actually did "tons of research"(or any research at all) you would know that. Instead you just post things you get in an Email and call them facts. http://metricmash.com/unemployment.a...de=LNS13327709 If you look at Labor force participation rate you will see some surprising statistics. |
three charts for Republicans who are not crazy
On Mon, 05 Sep 2011 01:23:37 -0400, wrote:
On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 21:18:25 -0700, wrote: On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 23:42:21 -0400, wrote: On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 11:33:39 -0700, wrote: The fact is, unemployment was 7.3% on 1/1/09 and it is 9.1% now. BLS says there was no net job creation last month. I am not sure what data they cherry picked to create those charts. They're called facts. Those are the things that were "cherry picked." You have a chart showing job growth and unemployment went up 13.14% (For the math challenged, 9.1 - 7.3 = 1.8 7.3/1.8 = 13.14%) You have to be very careful to reject a lot of facts and only use the ones that result in your agenda, AKA "cherry picking", to produce that chart. I'm not sure where you're getting your numbers, but the chart in question clearly shows that job growth has been pretty steadily climbing since Jan. 09. No "unemployment" numbers chart was included, so you're getting that from somewhere else. That's fine, but there is likely only a correlation between job growth and unemployment not a causation effect. As I said, these three charts are hard to dispute. So far, you haven't been very successful in doing so. Job growth is not keeping up with population growth but if you actually did "tons of research"(or any research at all) you would know that. Instead you just post things you get in an Email and call them facts. http://metricmash.com/unemployment.a...de=LNS13327709 And, you blame who for this? Assuming this is true, this still has nothing to do with the fact that the stim created jobs, the trend is UP not DOWN (as under Bush) and that Obama is "to blame" for that. http://www.truth-out.org/three-chart...law/1314626142 Feel free to continue to be a jerk in your language to me. I'm sure it makes you feel good. |
three charts for Republicans who are not crazy
On 05/09/2011 11:01 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 05 Sep 2011 01:23:37 -0400, wrote: On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 21:18:25 -0700, wrote: On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 23:42:21 -0400, wrote: On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 11:33:39 -0700, wrote: The fact is, unemployment was 7.3% on 1/1/09 and it is 9.1% now. BLS says there was no net job creation last month. I am not sure what data they cherry picked to create those charts. They're called facts. Those are the things that were "cherry picked." You have a chart showing job growth and unemployment went up 13.14% (For the math challenged, 9.1 - 7.3 = 1.8 7.3/1.8 = 13.14%) You have to be very careful to reject a lot of facts and only use the ones that result in your agenda, AKA "cherry picking", to produce that chart. I'm not sure where you're getting your numbers, but the chart in question clearly shows that job growth has been pretty steadily climbing since Jan. 09. No "unemployment" numbers chart was included, so you're getting that from somewhere else. That's fine, but there is likely only a correlation between job growth and unemployment not a causation effect. As I said, these three charts are hard to dispute. So far, you haven't been very successful in doing so. Job growth is not keeping up with population growth but if you actually did "tons of research"(or any research at all) you would know that. Instead you just post things you get in an Email and call them facts. http://metricmash.com/unemployment.a...de=LNS13327709 And, you blame who for this? Assuming this is true, this still has nothing to do with the fact that the stim created jobs, the trend is UP not DOWN (as under Bush) and that Obama is "to blame" for that. http://www.truth-out.org/three-chart...law/1314626142 Feel free to continue to be a jerk in your language to me. I'm sure it makes you feel good. Those charts are pure fleabagger bull****. No talk of ponzi fraudsters Bernanke or the democrat 2006 congress **** ups. Fact s USA is broke and can no longer pay its bills with real money. Bernanke has to electronically counterfeit it in the ruse of US treasury solvency. Just a huge fraud. -- If it is all Bush's fault, then how come Obama is doing much more of the same and expecting different results? |
three charts for Republicans who are not crazy
On Mon, 05 Sep 2011 11:23:45 -0600, Canuck57
wrote: On 05/09/2011 11:01 AM, wrote: On Mon, 05 Sep 2011 01:23:37 -0400, wrote: On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 21:18:25 -0700, wrote: On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 23:42:21 -0400, wrote: On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 11:33:39 -0700, wrote: The fact is, unemployment was 7.3% on 1/1/09 and it is 9.1% now. BLS says there was no net job creation last month. I am not sure what data they cherry picked to create those charts. They're called facts. Those are the things that were "cherry picked." You have a chart showing job growth and unemployment went up 13.14% (For the math challenged, 9.1 - 7.3 = 1.8 7.3/1.8 = 13.14%) You have to be very careful to reject a lot of facts and only use the ones that result in your agenda, AKA "cherry picking", to produce that chart. I'm not sure where you're getting your numbers, but the chart in question clearly shows that job growth has been pretty steadily climbing since Jan. 09. No "unemployment" numbers chart was included, so you're getting that from somewhere else. That's fine, but there is likely only a correlation between job growth and unemployment not a causation effect. As I said, these three charts are hard to dispute. So far, you haven't been very successful in doing so. Job growth is not keeping up with population growth but if you actually did "tons of research"(or any research at all) you would know that. Instead you just post things you get in an Email and call them facts. http://metricmash.com/unemployment.a...de=LNS13327709 And, you blame who for this? Assuming this is true, this still has nothing to do with the fact that the stim created jobs, the trend is UP not DOWN (as under Bush) and that Obama is "to blame" for that. http://www.truth-out.org/three-chart...law/1314626142 Feel free to continue to be a jerk in your language to me. I'm sure it makes you feel good. Those charts are pure fleabagger bull****. No talk of ponzi fraudsters Bernanke or the democrat 2006 congress **** ups. Fact s USA is broke and can no longer pay its bills with real money. Bernanke has to electronically counterfeit it in the ruse of US treasury solvency. Just a huge fraud. Well, you know bull****. You are bull****. You've always been bull**** and you always will be bull****. You're leaking bull**** from your ears. |
three charts for Republicans who are not crazy
On 9/5/2011 3:25 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 05 Sep 2011 09:56:01 -0400, BeachBum"not a wrote: On 9/5/2011 1:23 AM, wrote: On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 21:18:25 -0700, wrote: On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 23:42:21 -0400, wrote: On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 11:33:39 -0700, wrote: The fact is, unemployment was 7.3% on 1/1/09 and it is 9.1% now. BLS says there was no net job creation last month. I am not sure what data they cherry picked to create those charts. They're called facts. Those are the things that were "cherry picked." You have a chart showing job growth and unemployment went up 13.14% (For the math challenged, 9.1 - 7.3 = 1.8 7.3/1.8 = 13.14%) You have to be very careful to reject a lot of facts and only use the ones that result in your agenda, AKA "cherry picking", to produce that chart. I'm not sure where you're getting your numbers, but the chart in question clearly shows that job growth has been pretty steadily climbing since Jan. 09. No "unemployment" numbers chart was included, so you're getting that from somewhere else. That's fine, but there is likely only a correlation between job growth and unemployment not a causation effect. As I said, these three charts are hard to dispute. So far, you haven't been very successful in doing so. Job growth is not keeping up with population growth but if you actually did "tons of research"(or any research at all) you would know that. Instead you just post things you get in an Email and call them facts. http://metricmash.com/unemployment.a...de=LNS13327709 If you look at Labor force participation rate you will see some surprising statistics. Yup that is scary. Look at the crash since the end of the housing bubble. There isn't even a significant bump since the end of 2008. All the housing boom did was flatten the curve a little. It has really been falling since the end of the tech bubble. http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000 Look at this. It shows that Latinos employment ratio is the highest. Even with the lack of new housing starts. http://metricmash.com/unemployment.a...de=LNS13327709 |
three charts for Republicans who are not crazy
On 05/09/2011 1:25 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 05 Sep 2011 09:56:01 -0400, BeachBum"not a wrote: On 9/5/2011 1:23 AM, wrote: On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 21:18:25 -0700, wrote: On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 23:42:21 -0400, wrote: On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 11:33:39 -0700, wrote: The fact is, unemployment was 7.3% on 1/1/09 and it is 9.1% now. BLS says there was no net job creation last month. I am not sure what data they cherry picked to create those charts. They're called facts. Those are the things that were "cherry picked." You have a chart showing job growth and unemployment went up 13.14% (For the math challenged, 9.1 - 7.3 = 1.8 7.3/1.8 = 13.14%) You have to be very careful to reject a lot of facts and only use the ones that result in your agenda, AKA "cherry picking", to produce that chart. I'm not sure where you're getting your numbers, but the chart in question clearly shows that job growth has been pretty steadily climbing since Jan. 09. No "unemployment" numbers chart was included, so you're getting that from somewhere else. That's fine, but there is likely only a correlation between job growth and unemployment not a causation effect. As I said, these three charts are hard to dispute. So far, you haven't been very successful in doing so. Job growth is not keeping up with population growth but if you actually did "tons of research"(or any research at all) you would know that. Instead you just post things you get in an Email and call them facts. http://metricmash.com/unemployment.a...de=LNS13327709 If you look at Labor force participation rate you will see some surprising statistics. Yup that is scary. Look at the crash since the end of the housing bubble. There isn't even a significant bump since the end of 2008. All the housing boom did was flatten the curve a little. It has really been falling since the end of the tech bubble. http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000 Liable to get worse too. Bernanke will print more money, creating more hidden inflation, people will acquire less stuff, so fewer jobs are needed. Pretty good chance like Japan's lost decades this will continue for the foreseeable future. -- If it is all Bush's fault, then how come Obama is doing much more of the same and expecting different results? |
three charts for Republicans who are not crazy
On Mon, 05 Sep 2011 15:25:32 -0400, wrote:
On Mon, 05 Sep 2011 09:56:01 -0400, BeachBum "not a wrote: On 9/5/2011 1:23 AM, wrote: On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 21:18:25 -0700, wrote: On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 23:42:21 -0400, wrote: On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 11:33:39 -0700, wrote: The fact is, unemployment was 7.3% on 1/1/09 and it is 9.1% now. BLS says there was no net job creation last month. I am not sure what data they cherry picked to create those charts. They're called facts. Those are the things that were "cherry picked." You have a chart showing job growth and unemployment went up 13.14% (For the math challenged, 9.1 - 7.3 = 1.8 7.3/1.8 = 13.14%) You have to be very careful to reject a lot of facts and only use the ones that result in your agenda, AKA "cherry picking", to produce that chart. I'm not sure where you're getting your numbers, but the chart in question clearly shows that job growth has been pretty steadily climbing since Jan. 09. No "unemployment" numbers chart was included, so you're getting that from somewhere else. That's fine, but there is likely only a correlation between job growth and unemployment not a causation effect. As I said, these three charts are hard to dispute. So far, you haven't been very successful in doing so. Job growth is not keeping up with population growth but if you actually did "tons of research"(or any research at all) you would know that. Instead you just post things you get in an Email and call them facts. http://metricmash.com/unemployment.a...de=LNS13327709 If you look at Labor force participation rate you will see some surprising statistics. Yup that is scary. Look at the crash since the end of the housing bubble. There isn't even a significant bump since the end of 2008. All the housing boom did was flatten the curve a little. It has really been falling since the end of the tech bubble. http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000 Yup, well everything you see is scary, apparently. You might want to stop being so paranoid. |
three charts for Republicans who are not crazy
On Mon, 05 Sep 2011 16:59:39 -0400, wrote:
On Mon, 05 Sep 2011 15:54:42 -0400, BeachBum "not a wrote: On 9/5/2011 3:25 PM, wrote: On Mon, 05 Sep 2011 09:56:01 -0400, BeachBum"not a wrote: On 9/5/2011 1:23 AM, wrote: On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 21:18:25 -0700, wrote: On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 23:42:21 -0400, wrote: On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 11:33:39 -0700, wrote: The fact is, unemployment was 7.3% on 1/1/09 and it is 9.1% now. BLS says there was no net job creation last month. I am not sure what data they cherry picked to create those charts. They're called facts. Those are the things that were "cherry picked." You have a chart showing job growth and unemployment went up 13.14% (For the math challenged, 9.1 - 7.3 = 1.8 7.3/1.8 = 13.14%) You have to be very careful to reject a lot of facts and only use the ones that result in your agenda, AKA "cherry picking", to produce that chart. I'm not sure where you're getting your numbers, but the chart in question clearly shows that job growth has been pretty steadily climbing since Jan. 09. No "unemployment" numbers chart was included, so you're getting that from somewhere else. That's fine, but there is likely only a correlation between job growth and unemployment not a causation effect. As I said, these three charts are hard to dispute. So far, you haven't been very successful in doing so. Job growth is not keeping up with population growth but if you actually did "tons of research"(or any research at all) you would know that. Instead you just post things you get in an Email and call them facts. http://metricmash.com/unemployment.a...de=LNS13327709 If you look at Labor force participation rate you will see some surprising statistics. Yup that is scary. Look at the crash since the end of the housing bubble. There isn't even a significant bump since the end of 2008. All the housing boom did was flatten the curve a little. It has really been falling since the end of the tech bubble. http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000 Look at this. It shows that Latinos employment ratio is the highest. Even with the lack of new housing starts. http://metricmash.com/unemployment.a...de=LNS13327709 That is because they will go for those "Green Jobs". The houses may get foreclosed on but that grass keeps on growing and the county makes the bank mow it. The Mexicans are in competition with a lot of anglos tho, including more than a few college grads. Sure. Blame Mexicans. I'm sure that fits in your xenophobia quite nicely. |
three charts for Republicans who are not crazy
On Mon, 05 Sep 2011 14:32:49 -0600, Canuck57
wrote: On 05/09/2011 1:25 PM, wrote: On Mon, 05 Sep 2011 09:56:01 -0400, BeachBum"not a wrote: On 9/5/2011 1:23 AM, wrote: On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 21:18:25 -0700, wrote: On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 23:42:21 -0400, wrote: On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 11:33:39 -0700, wrote: The fact is, unemployment was 7.3% on 1/1/09 and it is 9.1% now. BLS says there was no net job creation last month. I am not sure what data they cherry picked to create those charts. They're called facts. Those are the things that were "cherry picked." You have a chart showing job growth and unemployment went up 13.14% (For the math challenged, 9.1 - 7.3 = 1.8 7.3/1.8 = 13.14%) You have to be very careful to reject a lot of facts and only use the ones that result in your agenda, AKA "cherry picking", to produce that chart. I'm not sure where you're getting your numbers, but the chart in question clearly shows that job growth has been pretty steadily climbing since Jan. 09. No "unemployment" numbers chart was included, so you're getting that from somewhere else. That's fine, but there is likely only a correlation between job growth and unemployment not a causation effect. As I said, these three charts are hard to dispute. So far, you haven't been very successful in doing so. Job growth is not keeping up with population growth but if you actually did "tons of research"(or any research at all) you would know that. Instead you just post things you get in an Email and call them facts. http://metricmash.com/unemployment.a...de=LNS13327709 If you look at Labor force participation rate you will see some surprising statistics. Yup that is scary. Look at the crash since the end of the housing bubble. There isn't even a significant bump since the end of 2008. All the housing boom did was flatten the curve a little. It has really been falling since the end of the tech bubble. http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000 Liable to get worse too. Bernanke will print more money, creating more hidden inflation, people will acquire less stuff, so fewer jobs are needed. Pretty good chance like Japan's lost decades this will continue for the foreseeable future. You are not liable to get dumber. That's really not possible. |
three charts for Republicans who are not crazy
On Mon, 05 Sep 2011 15:52:38 -0400, wrote:
On Mon, 05 Sep 2011 10:01:14 -0700, wrote: On Mon, 05 Sep 2011 01:23:37 -0400, wrote: On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 21:18:25 -0700, wrote: On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 23:42:21 -0400, wrote: On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 11:33:39 -0700, wrote: The fact is, unemployment was 7.3% on 1/1/09 and it is 9.1% now. BLS says there was no net job creation last month. I am not sure what data they cherry picked to create those charts. They're called facts. Those are the things that were "cherry picked." You have a chart showing job growth and unemployment went up 13.14% (For the math challenged, 9.1 - 7.3 = 1.8 7.3/1.8 = 13.14%) You have to be very careful to reject a lot of facts and only use the ones that result in your agenda, AKA "cherry picking", to produce that chart. I'm not sure where you're getting your numbers, but the chart in question clearly shows that job growth has been pretty steadily climbing since Jan. 09. No "unemployment" numbers chart was included, so you're getting that from somewhere else. That's fine, but there is likely only a correlation between job growth and unemployment not a causation effect. As I said, these three charts are hard to dispute. So far, you haven't been very successful in doing so. Job growth is not keeping up with population growth but if you actually did "tons of research"(or any research at all) you would know that. Instead you just post things you get in an Email and call them facts. http://metricmash.com/unemployment.a...de=LNS13327709 And, you blame who for this? Assuming this is true, this still has nothing to do with the fact that the stim created jobs, the trend is UP not DOWN (as under Bush) and that Obama is "to blame" for that. http://www.truth-out.org/three-chart...law/1314626142 Yeah right. http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000 Feel free to continue to be a jerk in your language to me. I'm sure it makes you feel good. It makes me sad that a person who purports to have all the education you say you have, lacks the intellectual curiosity to actually do a little research before you forward junk mail you get. How is that Nigerian Prince thing working out? It makes me sad that a person who purports to be intellectually honest would stoop to hiding and using false equivalent arguments as though they are valid... Why don't you tell me about your "research" about how the stim actually created jobs and how Bush's tax cuts did nothing for the economy. Oh wait, you're not willing or, it seems, able. Did you get burned by a scam? If so, maybe you should take one of those handyman jobs for $15/hour. |
three charts for Republicans who are not crazy
On 9/5/2011 5:26 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 05 Sep 2011 16:59:39 -0400, wrote: On Mon, 05 Sep 2011 15:54:42 -0400, BeachBum"not a wrote: On 9/5/2011 3:25 PM, wrote: On Mon, 05 Sep 2011 09:56:01 -0400, BeachBum"not a wrote: On 9/5/2011 1:23 AM, wrote: On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 21:18:25 -0700, wrote: On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 23:42:21 -0400, wrote: On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 11:33:39 -0700, wrote: The fact is, unemployment was 7.3% on 1/1/09 and it is 9.1% now. BLS says there was no net job creation last month. I am not sure what data they cherry picked to create those charts. They're called facts. Those are the things that were "cherry picked." You have a chart showing job growth and unemployment went up 13.14% (For the math challenged, 9.1 - 7.3 = 1.8 7.3/1.8 = 13.14%) You have to be very careful to reject a lot of facts and only use the ones that result in your agenda, AKA "cherry picking", to produce that chart. I'm not sure where you're getting your numbers, but the chart in question clearly shows that job growth has been pretty steadily climbing since Jan. 09. No "unemployment" numbers chart was included, so you're getting that from somewhere else. That's fine, but there is likely only a correlation between job growth and unemployment not a causation effect. As I said, these three charts are hard to dispute. So far, you haven't been very successful in doing so. Job growth is not keeping up with population growth but if you actually did "tons of research"(or any research at all) you would know that. Instead you just post things you get in an Email and call them facts. http://metricmash.com/unemployment.a...de=LNS13327709 If you look at Labor force participation rate you will see some surprising statistics. Yup that is scary. Look at the crash since the end of the housing bubble. There isn't even a significant bump since the end of 2008. All the housing boom did was flatten the curve a little. It has really been falling since the end of the tech bubble. http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000 Look at this. It shows that Latinos employment ratio is the highest. Even with the lack of new housing starts. http://metricmash.com/unemployment.a...de=LNS13327709 That is because they will go for those "Green Jobs". The houses may get foreclosed on but that grass keeps on growing and the county makes the bank mow it. The Mexicans are in competition with a lot of anglos tho, including more than a few college grads. Sure. Blame Mexicans. I'm sure that fits in your xenophobia quite nicely. Well they did put you out of work at the car wash. |
three charts for Republicans who are not crazy
On 9/5/11 6:34 PM, BeachBum wrote:
On 9/5/2011 5:26 PM, wrote: On Mon, 05 Sep 2011 16:59:39 -0400, wrote: On Mon, 05 Sep 2011 15:54:42 -0400, BeachBum"not a wrote: On 9/5/2011 3:25 PM, wrote: On Mon, 05 Sep 2011 09:56:01 -0400, BeachBum"not a wrote: On 9/5/2011 1:23 AM, wrote: On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 21:18:25 -0700, wrote: On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 23:42:21 -0400, wrote: On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 11:33:39 -0700, wrote: The fact is, unemployment was 7.3% on 1/1/09 and it is 9.1% now. BLS says there was no net job creation last month. I am not sure what data they cherry picked to create those charts. They're called facts. Those are the things that were "cherry picked." You have a chart showing job growth and unemployment went up 13.14% (For the math challenged, 9.1 - 7.3 = 1.8 7.3/1.8 = 13.14%) You have to be very careful to reject a lot of facts and only use the ones that result in your agenda, AKA "cherry picking", to produce that chart. I'm not sure where you're getting your numbers, but the chart in question clearly shows that job growth has been pretty steadily climbing since Jan. 09. No "unemployment" numbers chart was included, so you're getting that from somewhere else. That's fine, but there is likely only a correlation between job growth and unemployment not a causation effect. As I said, these three charts are hard to dispute. So far, you haven't been very successful in doing so. Job growth is not keeping up with population growth but if you actually did "tons of research"(or any research at all) you would know that. Instead you just post things you get in an Email and call them facts. http://metricmash.com/unemployment.a...de=LNS13327709 If you look at Labor force participation rate you will see some surprising statistics. Yup that is scary. Look at the crash since the end of the housing bubble. There isn't even a significant bump since the end of 2008. All the housing boom did was flatten the curve a little. It has really been falling since the end of the tech bubble. http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000 Look at this. It shows that Latinos employment ratio is the highest. Even with the lack of new housing starts. http://metricmash.com/unemployment.a...de=LNS13327709 That is because they will go for those "Green Jobs". The houses may get foreclosed on but that grass keeps on growing and the county makes the bank mow it. The Mexicans are in competition with a lot of anglos tho, including more than a few college grads. Sure. Blame Mexicans. I'm sure that fits in your xenophobia quite nicely. Well they did put you out of work at the car wash. A mop and a bucket retired you from the navy. -- I'd much rather be a champion of the powerless than a lickspittle of the powerful. |
three charts for Republicans who are not crazy
|
three charts for Republicans who are not crazy
On Mon, 05 Sep 2011 17:10:40 -0400, wrote:
On Mon, 05 Sep 2011 14:32:49 -0600, Canuck57 wrote: On 05/09/2011 1:25 PM, wrote: Yup that is scary. Look at the crash since the end of the housing bubble. There isn't even a significant bump since the end of 2008. All the housing boom did was flatten the curve a little. It has really been falling since the end of the tech bubble. http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000 Liable to get worse too. Bernanke will print more money, creating more hidden inflation, people will acquire less stuff, so fewer jobs are needed. Pretty good chance like Japan's lost decades this will continue for the foreseeable future. I hope you are wrong but I am having a hard time seeing what is going to make this better. Building roads and bridges will put a few people to work but we are buying machines from Asia to do it and we will have to print the money to pay the operators. We really need to find something we can export so we can get some of our money coming back here. I do understand there are orders coming in for the F-35 JSF already. If we were not selling weapons we would be in worse shape than we are but I am not sure that is the best thing to do in the long run. They seem to get aimed at us more often than we would like. I hope we are at least putting a trojan horse in the software so we can crash them if we need to. I believe we exported something on the order of $1.5T last year or the year before. As usual, you're just paranoid. |
three charts for Republicans who are not crazy
On Sep 5, 8:02*pm, X ` Man wrote:
On 9/5/11 6:34 PM, BeachBum wrote: On 9/5/2011 5:26 PM, wrote: On Mon, 05 Sep 2011 16:59:39 -0400, wrote: On Mon, 05 Sep 2011 15:54:42 -0400, BeachBum"not a wrote: On 9/5/2011 3:25 PM, wrote: On Mon, 05 Sep 2011 09:56:01 -0400, BeachBum"not a wrote: On 9/5/2011 1:23 AM, wrote: On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 21:18:25 -0700, wrote: On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 23:42:21 -0400, wrote: On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 11:33:39 -0700, wrote: The fact is, unemployment was 7.3% on 1/1/09 and it is 9.1% now. BLS says there was no net job creation last month. I am not sure what data they cherry picked to create those charts. They're called facts. Those are the things that were "cherry picked." You have a chart showing job growth and unemployment went up 13.14% (For the math challenged, 9.1 - 7.3 = 1.8 7.3/1.8 = 13.14%) You have to be very careful to reject a lot of facts and only use the ones that result in your agenda, AKA "cherry picking", to produce that chart. I'm not sure where you're getting your numbers, but the chart in question clearly shows that job growth has been pretty steadily climbing since Jan. 09. No "unemployment" numbers chart was included, so you're getting that from somewhere else. That's fine, but there is likely only a correlation between job growth and unemployment not a causation effect. As I said, these three charts are hard to dispute. So far, you haven't been very successful in doing so. Job growth is not keeping up with population growth but if you actually did "tons of research"(or any research at all) you would know that. Instead you just post things you get in an Email and call them facts. http://metricmash.com/unemployment.a...de=LNS13327709 If you look at Labor force participation rate you will see some surprising statistics. Yup that is scary. Look at the crash since the end of the housing bubble. There isn't even a significant bump since the end of 2008. All the housing boom did was flatten the curve a little. It has really been falling since the end of the tech bubble. http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000 Look at this. It shows that Latinos employment ratio is the highest. Even with the lack of new housing starts. http://metricmash.com/unemployment.a...de=LNS13327709 That is because they will go for those "Green Jobs". The houses may get foreclosed on but that grass keeps on growing and the county makes the bank mow it. The Mexicans are in competition with a lot of anglos tho, including more than a few college grads. Sure. Blame Mexicans. I'm sure that fits in your xenophobia quite nicely. Well they did put you out of work at the car wash. A mop and a bucket retired you from the navy. .... and none too soon, from what I hear. |
three charts for Republicans who are not crazy
On Mon, 05 Sep 2011 20:24:44 -0400, wrote:
On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 16:46:40 -0400, John H wrote: On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 09:06:20 -0400, wrote: On Sat, 03 Sep 2011 12:58:59 -0600, Canuck57 wrote: On 03/09/2011 11:41 AM, wrote: http://www.truth-out.org/three-chart...law/1314626142 Federal spending dramatically increased under former president, George W. Bush and it has not increased much under President Obama. Look closer at the chart fleabagger. It was 2007 once the democrat 2006 congress debt lovers and Bernanke money print took right off. Also right about the time unemployment rose with government debt and overspending. DC has been running on bull**** and fraud ever since. And Obama shovels more debt and bull**** than all before him. Fact is ass holes like you vote for fleabaggers that has ruined the USA. Did Bush have a veto? Over continuing resolutions? Which ones? Any. |
three charts for Republicans who are not crazy
In article ebc56b0b-79e7-43cb-a763-bb36a6c64415
@m38g2000vbn.googlegroups.com, says... On Sep 5, 8:02*pm, X ` Man wrote: On 9/5/11 6:34 PM, BeachBum wrote: On 9/5/2011 5:26 PM, wrote: On Mon, 05 Sep 2011 16:59:39 -0400, wrote: On Mon, 05 Sep 2011 15:54:42 -0400, BeachBum"not a wrote: On 9/5/2011 3:25 PM, wrote: On Mon, 05 Sep 2011 09:56:01 -0400, BeachBum"not a wrote: On 9/5/2011 1:23 AM, wrote: On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 21:18:25 -0700, wrote: On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 23:42:21 -0400, wrote: On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 11:33:39 -0700, wrote: The fact is, unemployment was 7.3% on 1/1/09 and it is 9.1% now. BLS says there was no net job creation last month. I am not sure what data they cherry picked to create those charts. They're called facts. Those are the things that were "cherry picked." You have a chart showing job growth and unemployment went up 13.14% (For the math challenged, 9.1 - 7.3 = 1.8 7.3/1.8 = 13.14%) You have to be very careful to reject a lot of facts and only use the ones that result in your agenda, AKA "cherry picking", to produce that chart. I'm not sure where you're getting your numbers, but the chart in question clearly shows that job growth has been pretty steadily climbing since Jan. 09. No "unemployment" numbers chart was included, so you're getting that from somewhere else. That's fine, but there is likely only a correlation between job growth and unemployment not a causation effect. As I said, these three charts are hard to dispute. So far, you haven't been very successful in doing so. Job growth is not keeping up with population growth but if you actually did "tons of research"(or any research at all) you would know that. Instead you just post things you get in an Email and call them facts. http://metricmash.com/unemployment.a...de=LNS13327709 If you look at Labor force participation rate you will see some surprising statistics. Yup that is scary. Look at the crash since the end of the housing bubble. There isn't even a significant bump since the end of 2008. All the housing boom did was flatten the curve a little. It has really been falling since the end of the tech bubble. http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000 Look at this. It shows that Latinos employment ratio is the highest. Even with the lack of new housing starts. http://metricmash.com/unemployment.a...de=LNS13327709 That is because they will go for those "Green Jobs". The houses may get foreclosed on but that grass keeps on growing and the county makes the bank mow it. The Mexicans are in competition with a lot of anglos tho, including more than a few college grads. Sure. Blame Mexicans. I'm sure that fits in your xenophobia quite nicely. Well they did put you out of work at the car wash. A mop and a bucket retired you from the navy. ... and none too soon, from what I hear. What did you "hear" about it, and from whom? |
three charts for Republicans who are not crazy
On 9/6/2011 8:53 AM, John H wrote:
On Mon, 05 Sep 2011 20:24:44 -0400, wrote: On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 16:46:40 -0400, John wrote: On Sun, 04 Sep 2011 09:06:20 -0400, wrote: On Sat, 03 Sep 2011 12:58:59 -0600, wrote: On 03/09/2011 11:41 AM, wrote: http://www.truth-out.org/three-chart...law/1314626142 Federal spending dramatically increased under former president, George W. Bush and it has not increased much under President Obama. Look closer at the chart fleabagger. It was 2007 once the democrat 2006 congress debt lovers and Bernanke money print took right off. Also right about the time unemployment rose with government debt and overspending. DC has been running on bull**** and fraud ever since. And Obama shovels more debt and bull**** than all before him. Fact is ass holes like you vote for fleabaggers that has ruined the USA. Did Bush have a veto? Over continuing resolutions? Which ones? Any. John, play fair. How can she make an argument out of that? |
three charts for Republicans who are not crazy
|
three charts for Republicans who are not crazy
On 9/6/11 10:22 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 9/6/11 10:18 AM, wrote: My son in law is in law school too. He said he is tired of being poor, trying to save the environment and he is switching sides. As they say about lawyers. "you can do good or you can do well, pick one" That's too bad. He was probably bright enough to do something useful. http://ncsss.cua.edu/degree-field/phd/2011grads.cfm Harry, tell us about your beautiful young bride. |
three charts for Republicans who are not crazy
In article ,
says... On Mon, 05 Sep 2011 19:09:36 -0700, wrote: I believe we exported something on the order of $1.5T last year or the year before. As usual, you're just paranoid. ... and we imported $2.5T Always found it odd how people don't look at balance of trade charts. They'll pick something like Boeing to show manufacturing is alive and well. How many of us buy a 757? Or Apple, which uses foreign labor to produce their products. People spend a good deal of their money on electronics, tools, and household appliances, then fluff. It's nearly all foreign labor. What's so hard at looking at the label on what you buy? Not saying that should guide your decision. In most cases you don't have a choice. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:27 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com