Welcome to ECCIE - Sign up today!

i'va biggen · 03-07-2015, 08:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/ali-...-low-11-months

No, I meant 92,898,000 Americans are not in the labor force according to the BLS. I didn't mean to be that tricky. If you don't have a job then you're included as in jobless for whatever reason you want to cite.

In 2010 there were 40.3 million retired people in the US, the number is probably higher now. Be sure and add them to your "jobless" count judy.

JD Barleycorn · 03-07-2015, 09:18 PM

Take your shitty argument to Obama and his Bureau of Labor Statistics.

i'va biggen · 03-07-2015, 10:18 PM

LMAO, you can always see when it hits close to home.

LexusLover · 03-08-2015, 03:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by i'va biggen

LMAO, you can always see when it hits close to home.

I think that is the point of these spurious claims of a "good economy."

It does hit "close to home" with many/most U.S. citizens and they ask: "Where?"

LMAOing, name-calling, marginalizing critics, and pure ugliness is not a "solution."

Gasoline prices are going back up, as predicted by people who know in the petroleum business, and those who were running their mouths about it was a plus for Obaminable when gasoline prices fell will call those who turn it back on them "idiots" and "racists" for suggesting he is to blame for the prices going up again ....

it's what liberals do.

i'va biggen · 03-08-2015, 07:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LexusLover

I think that is the point of these spurious claims of a "good economy."

It does hit "close to home" with many/most U.S. citizens and they ask: "Where?"

LMAOing, name-calling, marginalizing critics, and pure ugliness is not a "solution."

Gasoline prices are going back up, as predicted by people who know in the petroleum business, and those who were running their mouths about it was a plus for Obaminable when gasoline prices fell will call those who turn it back on them "idiots" and "racists" for suggesting he is to blame for the prices going up again ....

it's what liberals do.

Did the ones in the petroleum business tell you we have such a surplus they are running out of room to store it? rising gas prices will be blamed on changing to summer blend, strikes, and fires. You should be very aware of what liberals do as you are one.

JD Barleycorn · 03-08-2015, 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by i'va biggen

LMAO, you can always see when it hits close to home.

Do you realize how stupid that sounds? All of those people losing their health insurance, their jobs, their homes and you want to make a joke. The fact is that I was correct and I quoted the BLS accurately. You can't seem to take it when I'm correct again and you're wrong again. My frustration comes from the FACT that you will never understand because your head is so far up your partisan ass that you can't see straight.. I give you numbers and the source, and you publicly choose not to believe them. That says so much more about you than anything.

Here is a favorite word of the Obama adminstration: Robust Care to explain what that means from the leftie point of view.

shanm · 03-08-2015, 01:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Do you realize how stupid that sounds? All of those people losing their health insurance, their jobs, their homes and you want to make a joke. The fact is that I was correct and I quoted the BLS accurately. You can't seem to take it when I'm correct again and you're wrong again. My frustration comes from the FACT that you will never understand because your head is so far up your partisan ass that you can't see straight.. I give you numbers and the source, and you publicly choose not to believe them. That says so much more about you than anything.

Here is a favorite word of the Obama adminstration: Robust Care to explain what that means from the leftie point of view.

The fact is JD, that number (93 million) is the most baseless useless number that you could have come up with if you were arguing for/against ANY problem facing the U.S, except perhaps over population.

That 93 million includes babies, do you see them not having a job as a problem?? That includes seniors, that have retired and are possibly living comfortably on their life's earnings and/or social security, pensions etc. Hell, that number even includes those trust fund babies who've never tried to work a day in their life and never will, because they are doing so well they don't have to. So tell me, JD, what exactly were you trying to prove with that number?
My guess is, other than fueling unfounded hysteria, absolutely NOTHING.

i'va biggen · 03-08-2015, 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Do you realize how stupid that sounds? All of those people losing their health insurance, their jobs, their homes and you want to make a joke. The fact is that I was correct and I quoted the BLS accurately. You can't seem to take it when I'm correct again and you're wrong again. My frustration comes from the FACT that you will never understand because your head is so far up your partisan ass that you can't see straight.. I give you numbers and the source, and you publicly choose not to believe them. That says so much more about you than anything.

Here is a favorite word of the Obama adminstration: Robust Care to explain what that means from the leftie point of view.

Barleycornball people started losing their jobs, cars, homes, insurance when they started outsourcing so the 1% ers could make more profits. It has not been a joke for a long time. I just get sick of the ones that as soon that there is a small upturn they jump in poor mouthing any numbers. If there was a republican president you would be trumpeting the recovery.

flghtr65 · 03-08-2015, 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by i'va biggen

Barleycornball people started losing their jobs, cars, homes, insurance when they started outsourcing so the 1% ers could make more profits. It has not been a joke for a long time. I just get sick of the ones that as soon that there is a small upturn they in poor mouthing any numbers. If there was a republican president you would be trumpeting the recovery.

+1,000

Tell us J.D. if there are 93 million people out of work, why did the republican party vote not extend unemployment benefits beyond 6 months. They voted for the extension in 2009 and 2010.

JD Barleycorn · 03-08-2015, 07:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shanm

The fact is JD, that number (93 million) is the most baseless useless number that you could have come up with if you were arguing for/against ANY problem facing the U.S, except perhaps over population.

That 93 million includes babies, do you see them not having a job as a problem?? That includes seniors, that have retired and are possibly living comfortably on their life's earnings and/or social security, pensions etc. Hell, that number even includes those trust fund babies who've never tried to work a day in their life and never will, because they are doing so well they don't have to. So tell me, JD, what exactly were you trying to prove with that number?
My guess is, other than fueling unfounded hysteria, absolutely NOTHING.

As I said (you must have missed the other postings) the Bureau of Labor Statistics came up with the number, not me. I just relayed what the great and powerful Obama wanted you to know.

Why do you believe that it is the sole responsibility for the government to misuse taxpayers money to support EVERYONE without a job? No wonder you're a libtard. If we had a recovery this slow (and it is very slow) then we would be looking for a new candidate moron. We would not be circling the wagons to protect him.

shanm · 03-08-2015, 07:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

As I said (you must have missed the other postings) the Bureau of Labor Statistics came up with the number, not me. I just relayed what the great and powerful Obama wanted you to know.

Why do you believe that it is the sole responsibility for the government to misuse taxpayers money to support EVERYONE without a job? No wonder you're a libtard. If we had a recovery this slow (and it is very slow) then we would be looking for a new candidate moron. We would not be circling the wagons to protect him.

Oh great, so I should take it up with the Bureau the fact that you deliberately misrepresented a number that they came up with. Great. Juuuust great.
Typical republican. Make error after error without realizing it or actually apologizing for once.The BLS comes up with lots of numbers, doesn't mean you should start a new thread about each one. You have yet to prove the slightest relevance that this number has to anything even slightly political or economical. And you have the gall to defend yourself.

Why do you believe that it is the sole responsibility for the government to misuse taxpayers money to support EVERYONE without a job?

When exactly did I say that? the amount of sense you make by making up bullshit like this is exactly equal to the amount of relevance your "93 million Americans" number has to any issue in our economy: ZERO. Maybe if you said "93 million people in America do not work" or something like that, it would at least make halfway more sense. Then the only question would be "why the fuck is this in the political thread?" Instead your title is "93 million out of work!". Last time I did, I didn't look at a baby and go, "Oh look, that toddler is out of work! What a lazy cunt!"

JD Barleycorn · 03-09-2015, 01:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shanm

Oh great, so I should take it up with the Bureau the fact that you deliberately misrepresented a number that they came up with. Great. Juuuust great.
Typical republican. Make error after error without realizing it or actually apologizing for once.The BLS comes up with lots of numbers, doesn't mean you should start a new thread about each one. You have yet to prove the slightest relevance that this number has to anything even slightly political or economical. And you have the gall to defend yourself.

Why do you believe that it is the sole responsibility for the government to misuse taxpayers money to support EVERYONE without a job?

When exactly did I say that? the amount of sense you make by making up bullshit like this is exactly equal to the amount of relevance your "93 million Americans" number has to any issue in our economy: ZERO. Maybe if you said "93 million people in America do not work" or something like that, it would at least make halfway more sense. Then the only question would be "why the fuck is this in the political thread?" Instead your title is "93 million out of work!". Last time I did, I didn't look at a baby and go, "Oh look, that toddler is out of work! What a lazy cunt!"

I gave you the link. You can look it up and then you can kiss my ass. Sounds like you don't trust Obama to tell the truth.

LexusLover · 03-09-2015, 03:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by i'va biggen

Did the ones in the petroleum business tell you .....

Yes. Almost daily. Visited with some yesterday (Sunday) in fact. Kind of a broad spectrum:

Company officers, supervisors, engineers, plant workers, offshore personnel, pilots, support staff/secretaries, drivers, and station owners/operators. Some are headquartered in the local area, and others spend most of their time traveling overseas.

LexusLover · 03-09-2015, 04:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Sounds like you don't trust Obama to tell the truth.

Actually, he "sounds" like a little Chihuahua yapping endlessly and snapping around the ankles "just because" with no purpose, direction, or even knowledge as to why he is yapping and snapping. You know the ones to which I am referring. He's annoying, but it becomes background noise.

shanm · 03-09-2015, 01:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Actually, he "sounds" like a little Chihuahua yapping endlessly and snapping around the ankles.

HAHA! seems like LLidiot has grown a bit tired of having his ass handed to him in every thread. He wishes he could go back to the days before BT was constantly humiliating him on every corner. I especially love the way he can guess correctly when LLIdiot has been properly medicated and when he is haviing a meltdown.