What happened to all of the doom and gloom economic threads?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I sure do read the full articles, and I understand both what Politifact's what-if comment AND your pathetic attempt to reframe the argument is attempting to do.

It's called the "Fallacy of the Small Sample". Vetty, for example, uses it all the time. It goes something like this: Yeah, President Obama won re-election last November, but if you take out the votes of non-white voters and white women voters, Romney would've WON!" Technically, he has a point, but it's irrelevant in the context of the big picture.

Your "but...but...Unions!" has the same stench of desparate rationalization.

Better luck next time!! :)

well

if

ALLAN KRUEGER, the PRESIDENTS OWN ADVISOR SAYS SO, IT MUST BE SO:rolleyes:
 
fishing.jpg
 
I sure do read the full articles, and I understand both what Politifact's what-if comment AND your pathetic attempt to reframe the argument is attempting to do.

It's called the "Fallacy of the Small Sample". Vetty, for example, uses it all the time. It goes something like this: Yeah, President Obama won re-election last November, but if you take out the votes of non-white voters and white women voters, Romney would've WON!" Technically, he has a point, but it's irrelevant in the context of the big picture.

Your "but...but...Unions!" has the same stench of desparate rationalization.

Better luck next time!! :)

Instead of 5 years, why didn't you go back to 1993?

The TREND, you fool, is that full time jobs are seriously trending down, and part time jobs, are on the way up.
 
fact is

Labor Dept and REAL world have different definitions of PART TIME

as I have shown:cool:
 
tumblr_mra5c5Z4cq1qfengno1_500.jpg


Pretend economic ‘realist’ Rand Paul shows he has no idea what the hell he’s talking about.

Jonathan Chait: Josh Green asks Rand Paul about his rather extreme budget proposal, and Paul replies that it’s necessary because the only alternative is Trillion-Dollar Deficits As Far As the Eye Can See:

You know, the thing is, people want to say it’s extreme. But what I would say is extreme is a trillion-dollar deficit every year. I mean, that’s an extremely bad situation.

Some good news for Senator Paul — we’re not running a trillion-dollar deficit anymore. The deficit this year is forecast at $642 billion, per the Congressional Budget Office, which also forecasts the deficit to fall to $560 billion next year and $378 billion the following year.

For Rand (and Ron) Paul, the dread specter of fiscal collapse and hyperinflation is more of a generalized fact of life than something that depends on particular “numbers.” The whole political rise of the Pauls since 2008 owes a great deal to the economic crisis and the resulting spike in the deficit, which drove large numbers of people to join the freak-out bunker where the Pauls have resided all along. Of course Rand Paul isn’t going to notice the apocalypse is receding — its imminent appearance is a fixed piece of his worldview.

The interviewer then went on to ask Paul, “Who would your ideal Fed chairman be?” He named two dead guys, one of whom would completely disagree with him about monetary policy.

The problem with pretending to be an economic whizkid is that sooner or later you’re going to have to open your mouth and blow your cover.
 
Instead of 5 years, why didn't you go back to 1993?

The TREND, you fool, is that full time jobs are seriously trending down, and part time jobs, are on the way up.

Tell us what's so magical about the arbitrary starting point of 1993?

The passage of Obamacare (aka "the beginning of the End of Days" to the wingnut right) was in 2010.

Keep flailing.
Keep failing.
It's what you do best.
 
fact

not

TONED ARMZ ON BIG BIRD with a ROCK on a CAR ROOF near the DOG who gave a HAIRCUT in a nice SWEATER


forbes-pt-ft.jpg
 
fact is

Labor Dept and REAL world have different definitions of PART TIME

as I have shown:cool:

However, a little-known section of ObamaCare defines “full-time” work as averaging only 30 hours per week, rather than 40 hours. Employers who had planned to use more part-time workers to avoid higher costs associated with the mandate will need to rethink this strategy if the law is not repealed.

so they consider those that BARELY WORK, as FULL TIME EMPLOYEMENT


jut change the definition and all is well
 
Tell us what's so magical about the arbitrary starting point of 1993?

The passage of Obamacare (aka "the beginning of the End of Days" to the wingnut right) was in 2010.

Keep flailing.
Keep failing.
It's what you do best.

There is absolutely nothing magical about it. It was the first year of the Clinton Presidency. That's about as relevant as using 2010.

Let's use an example that you MAY be able to understand, you idiot.

Company A has a widget, introduced in 2009, that was new, it was exciting, and they sold like hotcakes. They sold 5 million the first year, and 6 million the second. In 2011 however, Company B introduced a similar product, but at a cheaper price point and a few more features. Company A's sales were impacted almost immediately, and in years 3 and 4 sales fell to 2 million and 1.5 million respectively.

Company B sold 2 million units year one, and 3 million units year two.

Now, by YOUR fucked up, half-wit logic, Company A is a better company, because they sold 14.5 million units to Company B's 5 million.

DESPITE THE FACT THAT COMPANY B HAD SLAUGHTERED A FOR THE LAST 2 YEARS.

That's what you call a trend you dumb fuck. Whether it's sales or jobs, it's analogous.

You will now go into some blitherblather about redirecting the conversation to widgets instead of jobs.

Stick to installing cable.
 
Clinton was a piece of shit, drunk party boy.

Clinton did shit for the economy, but he knew how to get people to work. unlike the obama which is just a ignorant fucktard





one good thing about Clinton ... at least he gave free flavored cigars.... MonicaSwisherSweet enhanced I believe
 
.


The Real Obamacare Test is Coming




More than three years since his health-care law was enacted, President Obama continues to focus on its immediately effective, small provisions — 26-year-old “children” getting coverage from their parents, “free” preventive care, and rebates from insurance companies.

But the president didn’t say a word in his Friday-afternoon news conference about the wreckage that is coming when the law begins to take full effect. A few examples:

The individual mandate is the most despised part of the law, and yet it still is set to go into effect January 1. The president has, by illegal administrative action, delayed the reporting requirements for the employer mandate, thereby protecting businesses for a year. But next year, individuals still will be required to have expensive, government-approved health insurance or pay fines that will grow steeper and steeper. Only 12 percent of Americans think this is a good idea.

States and by the federal government are preparing to launch health-insurance exchanges, and face enormous challenges in getting these Rube Goldberg contraptions ready to launch on October 1. The exchanges that the federal government will run, wholly or in part, in about 35 states are shrouded in a black box that won’t be opened until just before they are set to begin enrolling applicants. And even Obamacare-friendly states face growing pressures and frustrations in attempting to comply with thousands of pages of regulations while ensuring the exchanges will be open for business less than two months from now.

There are very serious privacy concerns. Armies of community organizers already are fanning the country to start the process of enrolling people in the law’s subsidized coverage. These “navigators” will be gathering Social Security numbers, home addresses, and family, health, and employment information with no assurances that applicants will be protected from fraud and identity theft.

The president didn’t mention that he already has closed access to the pre-existing condition plans his administration opened with much fanfare in 2010. The plans are over budget, and new applicants with legitimate difficulty accessing coverage and care now are blocked from enrolling in thesee high-risk plans. The president could order Health Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to spend money from her slush fund to keep them open, but he’s choosing instead to spend that money — hundreds of millions of dollars — on advertising for Obamacare.

And those $100 rebates the president brags about? They are more than canceled out by the $350 in added costs from the new health-insurance taxes that increase premiums for virtually everyone.

The list of the policy, logistical, and political problems with the law could go on and on.

But in very short order, the American people will have a chance to learn about the problems firsthand.
 
TRAIN WRECK UPDATE: Administration delays ObamaCare caps on out-of-pocket costs. “The Obama administration has delayed a key provision in President Obama’s healthcare reform law that would limit out-of-pocket insurance costs for consumers until 2015. The cap, which includes deductibles and co-payments, was supposed to limit consumer costs to $6,350 for an individual and $12,700 for a family. But administration officials have quietly delayed the requirement for some insurers, allowing them to set their own limits starting in 2014.”
 
There is absolutely nothing magical about it. It was the first year of the Clinton Presidency. That's about as relevant as using 2010.

Let's use an example that you MAY be able to understand, you idiot.

Company A has a widget, introduced in 2009, that was new, it was exciting, and they sold like hotcakes. They sold 5 million the first year, and 6 million the second. In 2011 however, Company B introduced a similar product, but at a cheaper price point and a few more features. Company A's sales were impacted almost immediately, and in years 3 and 4 sales fell to 2 million and 1.5 million respectively.

Company B sold 2 million units year one, and 3 million units year two.

Now, by YOUR fucked up, half-wit logic, Company A is a better company, because they sold 14.5 million units to Company B's 5 million.

DESPITE THE FACT THAT COMPANY B HAD SLAUGHTERED A FOR THE LAST 2 YEARS.

That's what you call a trend you dumb fuck. Whether it's sales or jobs, it's analogous.

You will now go into some blitherblather about redirecting the conversation to widgets instead of jobs.

Stick to installing cable.

Anytime a wingnut starts talking about "widgets" you know that they've lost an argument.
 
There is absolutely nothing magical about it. It was the first year of the Clinton Presidency. That's about as relevant as using 2010.

<widget babble snip>

let's take a breath and review.

Wingnut nation believes that Obamacare has stifled job creation since it's passage, specifically that "all teh jobs created are part time jobs". There have multiple threads begun by RWCJ folks attesting to their belief.

I posted a link to a study proving that this simply is not true. Repeat after me, is....not....true.

This study offends you, so you've tried to discredit it any way you can.

Your latest failed gambit is a combination of "but...but...Clinton" (which has nothing to do with Obamacare) and a non-sequitur ivory tower widget misdirection.

None of your posts have any relevance to my fact that the majority of jobs created post-passage of Obamacare happen to be full-time jobs, despite the beliefs to the contrary of its detractors.
 
The Obamacare “train wreck” continues. Now, the NYT reports, the caps on out-of-pocket expenses–you know the “affordable” part of the Affordable Care Act–are being delayed a year. From the story:


In another setback for President Obama’s health care initiative, the administration has delayed until 2015 a significant consumer protection in the law that limits how much people may have to spend on their own health care. The limit on out-of-pocket costs, including deductibles and co-payments, was not supposed to exceed $6,350 for an individual and $12,700 for a family. But under a little-noticed ruling, federal officials have granted a one-year grace period to some insurers, allowing them to set higher limits, or no limit at all on some costs, in 2014.

The law is so poorly crafted and bureaucratic, I don’t see how it can ever gain its sea legs–to mix my metaphors.

So, to recap:

Employer mandate–Delayed;

Out of pocket caps–Delayed;

Verification of eligibility for premium subsidies–Delayed. Now, it’s on the honor system! That will sure control costs.

What a vivid demonstration of governing incompetence. But Democrats can take comfort that the Republican Party’s congenital political maladroitness will allow them to shift the blame to heartless conservatives. And when the thing collapses of its own weight, Harry Reid will then move us to the next planned even more disastrous step; imposing a single payer system on the country controlled from the Potomac.
 
Dems Want Oprah To Help Sell Obamacare…




Oprah will do whatever Chicago Jesus asks her to do.

Via The Hill:


Could Oprah sell ObamaCare to America?

That’s the question on the lips of healthcare activists who are hoping the talk show queen will put her considerable influence behind the promotional campaign for President Obama’s signature law.

The billionaire media mogul is a supporter and family friend of the Obamas, but has given no indication she’s interested in participating in the enrollment push that is set to begin this fall.

That said, the White House is aggressively tapping its network of allies in Hollywood as it looks to drum up publicity for ObamaCare, with Oprah among the most powerful supporters of all.

Marketing experts say her involvement would be a game-changer.

“The numbers surrounding her impact are really wild,” said Ethan Rome, executive director of the consumer group Health Care for America Now.

Rome said Oprah is the exception to the rule that political endorsements don’t affect behavior.

“Oprah transcends that in a serious way. She is not somebody who simply influences how people think. She influences what people do, and when it comes to enrollment, that’s what matters,” Rome said.
 

This.

Not to mention that coming here without documentation is NOT illegal, it's a civil issue... which the low information wingnuts don't even realize.
 
Federal deficit is down 38% as tax revenues climb.


Fuck you AJ.
Fuck you Vettebigot
Fuck you Busybody.
:D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top