Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Little things like facts, reality and statistics are irrelevant for Billy Major Fail, worst poster on USMB. He gets a factoid to show whatever and runs with it.How America's middle class fell behind its Canadian neighboursOK so you have no answer. Pure, straight ignorance.Do you not understand what an economic class is? Of course you don't. How silly of me.What is a "better middle class"? What does that even mean?
I sense another spectacular Billy Fail Thread coming.
Do they have higher average incomes? Higher average household wealth? Longer life spans? Higher rates of consumption? Higher personal satisfaction?
Nothing. You've got nothing. You haven't quantified what you wrote, much less backed it up by any evidence.
You fail because you are Billy Triple Zero.
If you’re a proud member of America’s middle class, you may have been startled to learn last week that your after-tax income now makes you worse off than your Canadian neighbors to the north. They can now claim the title of the richest middle class on the planet.
Let’s take a look at the bombshell that the New York Times dropped in our midstlast week. It’s based on data from the Luxembourg Income Study Database, and focuses squarely on median income.
That means that instead of being distorted by the impact of millionaires and billionaires becoming still richer and the wealth gap becoming still wider, using this data gives analysts a sense of the experience of the average household in any given country. It also means an economist can compare overall economic growth of a country to the experience of individual households in that country – and by those standards, the United States just doesn’t come off that well.
Because while our economy has been growing more rapidly than those of other nations, a smaller percentage of those households is sharing in that prosperity, the data suggests. (Income inequality is at its highest level since 1928.)
Income, take home pay, better for the middle class Canandian than for the middle class American. looks like Billy was right on this.
If you’re a proud member of America’s middle class, you may have been startled to learn last week that your after-tax income now makes you worse off than your Canadian neighbors to the north.
Median per capita income in the U.S. has barely budged since 2000, while Canadians have seen their median income jump 20 percent.
Holy crap! There may be a less useful stat than "median per capita income", but I'll be damned if I can think of it.
Median means you line up all the numbers from lowest to highest and the number in the middle is the median.
How you turn that into a per capita number is some kind of liberal head-up-assery for sure.
Did they take the median household income and divide it by the average household size?
Wow, moronic for sure.
.
And somehow the idea that Obama, who has been president for nearly 8years is actually responsible for the shitty economy never enters his mind.
Little things like facts, reality and statistics are irrelevant for Billy Major Fail, worst poster on USMB.
The median would be the middle class duh. The average would be higher because of the HUGE income of the few megarich at the top after 35 years of Voodoo, dupe...How America's middle class fell behind its Canadian neighbours
If you’re a proud member of America’s middle class, you may have been startled to learn last week that your after-tax income now makes you worse off than your Canadian neighbors to the north. They can now claim the title of the richest middle class on the planet.
Let’s take a look at the bombshell that the New York Times dropped in our midstlast week. It’s based on data from the Luxembourg Income Study Database, and focuses squarely on median income.
That means that instead of being distorted by the impact of millionaires and billionaires becoming still richer and the wealth gap becoming still wider, using this data gives analysts a sense of the experience of the average household in any given country. It also means an economist can compare overall economic growth of a country to the experience of individual households in that country – and by those standards, the United States just doesn’t come off that well.
Because while our economy has been growing more rapidly than those of other nations, a smaller percentage of those households is sharing in that prosperity, the data suggests. (Income inequality is at its highest level since 1928.)
Income, take home pay, better for the middle class Canandian than for the middle class American. looks like Billy was right on this.
If you’re a proud member of America’s middle class, you may have been startled to learn last week that your after-tax income now makes you worse off than your Canadian neighbors to the north.
Median per capita income in the U.S. has barely budged since 2000, while Canadians have seen their median income jump 20 percent.
Holy crap! There may be a less useful stat than "median per capita income", but I'll be damned if I can think of it.
Median means you line up all the numbers from lowest to highest and the number in the middle is the median.
How you turn that into a per capita number is some kind of liberal head-up-assery for sure.
Did they take the median household income and divide it by the average household size?
Wow, moronic for sure.
.
The median would be the middle class duh.
Bullshit. You think the middle class is $18,700 per person? Dupe.
If that's the median, just proves what a bust Reaganism is, except for the richest.The median would be the middle class duh. The average would be higher because of the HUGE income of the few megarich at the top after 35 years of Voodoo, dupe...How America's middle class fell behind its Canadian neighbours
If you’re a proud member of America’s middle class, you may have been startled to learn last week that your after-tax income now makes you worse off than your Canadian neighbors to the north. They can now claim the title of the richest middle class on the planet.
Let’s take a look at the bombshell that the New York Times dropped in our midstlast week. It’s based on data from the Luxembourg Income Study Database, and focuses squarely on median income.
That means that instead of being distorted by the impact of millionaires and billionaires becoming still richer and the wealth gap becoming still wider, using this data gives analysts a sense of the experience of the average household in any given country. It also means an economist can compare overall economic growth of a country to the experience of individual households in that country – and by those standards, the United States just doesn’t come off that well.
Because while our economy has been growing more rapidly than those of other nations, a smaller percentage of those households is sharing in that prosperity, the data suggests. (Income inequality is at its highest level since 1928.)
Income, take home pay, better for the middle class Canandian than for the middle class American. looks like Billy was right on this.
If you’re a proud member of America’s middle class, you may have been startled to learn last week that your after-tax income now makes you worse off than your Canadian neighbors to the north.
Median per capita income in the U.S. has barely budged since 2000, while Canadians have seen their median income jump 20 percent.
Holy crap! There may be a less useful stat than "median per capita income", but I'll be damned if I can think of it.
Median means you line up all the numbers from lowest to highest and the number in the middle is the median.
How you turn that into a per capita number is some kind of liberal head-up-assery for sure.
Did they take the median household income and divide it by the average household size?
Wow, moronic for sure.
.
The median would be the middle class duh.
Bullshit. You think the middle class is $18,700 per person? Dupe.
If that's the median
Median per capita. Derp!
just proves what a bust Reaganism is,
8 years of Clinton and 8 years of Obama still couldn't fix it? That's funny.
So does the New BS GOP believe in honeymoon periods and compromise like the Dems? lol.All GOP's, dummie. Or where is the infrastructure, immigration bills, min wage hike, free community college, training for 4 million tech jobs going begginf, tax reform or ANYTHING he wanted the last 6 years. Duh dupe.Just what corrupt Booshies did and allowed. Thanks for the depression and the resultant messes we have around the world. Almost as bad as the 30's. Thank god Dems got in fast this time. GD stupid greedy corrupt GOP.Regulators pushing bad mortgages, great idea!
Yup, Bush allowed the stupid push to give mortgages to bad risks.
Even helped it along.
Thank god Dems got in fast this time.
Yeah, Obama fixed things so fast, the recession ended in June 2009.
I know he's a magic negro, but even you can't credit the recession's end to anything he did.
Of course the weakest recovery ever is all his.
Stimulus worked, ran out in 2010. Along with working congress.
All GOP's, dummie.
Reagan never had a GOP House. Only had a GOP Senate for 6 years.
Obama had House and Senate, with large majorities, for 2 years. Had the Senate for 6 years.
And you've been whining about how much Reagan got done and how little Obama got done.
Are Dems always gonna be such whiney pussies?
Dupe.
Stimulus worked,
Derp.
Dupes believe BS propaganda. We don't have a propaganda machine or lies. See sig. Add "Obama had 2 years of control", "47% don't pay taxes", "stand down", oh hell, most of what you believe, actual dupe. "highest taxes in the world" lol...''had the Senate for 6 years"- You need 60 votes to have the Senate against the lock step, bought off New BS GOP.
Still have Reaganist tax rates and loopholes wrecking the middle class, dupe. WHAT OBAMA LAWS AND POLICIES?!?They dont get it. They complain about rising income inequality and then somehoe turn around and believe that Democrats have not run things for 8+ years.1) Canada having a higher minimum wage
2) Canada having a higher tax rate on the wealthy
3) Canada having Widespread unions
4) Canada having strong bank regulations
5) Canada having free healthcare
obama's policies have really hurt the middle class in the USA. For the first time I can recall their overall net worth has dropped. Simply amazing that you progressives think he's a good POTUS.
Loopholes everywhere. Everyone is paying 20-30% in all taxes and fees and all the new wealth goes to the richest.Still have Reaganist tax rates and loopholes wrecking the middle classStill have Reaganist tax rates and loopholes wrecking the middle class, dupe. WHAT OBAMA LAWS AND POLICIES?!?They dont get it. They complain about rising income inequality and then somehoe turn around and believe that Democrats have not run things for 8+ years.1) Canada having a higher minimum wage
2) Canada having a higher tax rate on the wealthy
3) Canada having Widespread unions
4) Canada having strong bank regulations
5) Canada having free healthcare
obama's policies have really hurt the middle class in the USA. For the first time I can recall their overall net worth has dropped. Simply amazing that you progressives think he's a good POTUS.
Reagan's top rate was 28%, the current 41% highest rate is because of liberals.
Why hasn't that helped the middle class?
All GOP's, dummie. Or where is the infrastructure, immigration bills, min wage hike, free community college, training for 4 million tech jobs going begginf, tax reform or ANYTHING he wanted the last 6 years. Duh dupe.Just what corrupt Booshies did and allowed. Thanks for the depression and the resultant messes we have around the world. Almost as bad as the 30's. Thank god Dems got in fast this time. GD stupid greedy corrupt GOP.Thanks, corrupt GOP and silly dupes. Canada didn't have Boooshie cronies as regulators.
Regulators pushing bad mortgages, great idea!
Yup, Bush allowed the stupid push to give mortgages to bad risks.
Even helped it along.
Thank god Dems got in fast this time.
Yeah, Obama fixed things so fast, the recession ended in June 2009.
I know he's a magic negro, but even you can't credit the recession's end to anything he did.
Of course the weakest recovery ever is all his.
Stimulus worked, ran out in 2010. Along with working congress.
All GOP's, dummie.
Reagan never had a GOP House. Only had a GOP Senate for 6 years.
Obama had House and Senate, with large majorities, for 2 years. Had the Senate for 6 years.
And you've been whining about how much Reagan got done and how little Obama got done.
Are Dems always gonna be such whiney pussies?
Dupe.
Stimulus worked,
Derp.
How America's middle class fell behind its Canadian neighboursOK so you have no answer. Pure, straight ignorance.Do you not understand what an economic class is? Of course you don't. How silly of me.What is a "better middle class"? What does that even mean?
I sense another spectacular Billy Fail Thread coming.
Do they have higher average incomes? Higher average household wealth? Longer life spans? Higher rates of consumption? Higher personal satisfaction?
Nothing. You've got nothing. You haven't quantified what you wrote, much less backed it up by any evidence.
You fail because you are Billy Triple Zero.
If you’re a proud member of America’s middle class, you may have been startled to learn last week that your after-tax income now makes you worse off than your Canadian neighbors to the north. They can now claim the title of the richest middle class on the planet.
Let’s take a look at the bombshell that the New York Times dropped in our midstlast week. It’s based on data from the Luxembourg Income Study Database, and focuses squarely on median income.
That means that instead of being distorted by the impact of millionaires and billionaires becoming still richer and the wealth gap becoming still wider, using this data gives analysts a sense of the experience of the average household in any given country. It also means an economist can compare overall economic growth of a country to the experience of individual households in that country – and by those standards, the United States just doesn’t come off that well.
Because while our economy has been growing more rapidly than those of other nations, a smaller percentage of those households is sharing in that prosperity, the data suggests. (Income inequality is at its highest level since 1928.)
Income, take home pay, better for the middle class Canandian than for the middle class American. looks like Billy was right on this.
If you’re a proud member of America’s middle class, you may have been startled to learn last week that your after-tax income now makes you worse off than your Canadian neighbors to the north.
Median per capita income in the U.S. has barely budged since 2000, while Canadians have seen their median income jump 20 percent.
Holy crap! There may be a less useful stat than "median per capita income", but I'll be damned if I can think of it.
Median means you line up all the numbers from lowest to highest and the number in the middle is the median.
How you turn that into a per capita number is some kind of liberal head-up-assery for sure.
Did they take the median household income and divide it by the average household size?
Wow, moronic for sure.
.
If median earners aren't the middle class, then what does the middle mean?
The median would be the middle class duh. The average would be higher because of the HUGE income of the few megarich at the top after 35 years of Voodoo, dupe...How America's middle class fell behind its Canadian neighboursOK so you have no answer. Pure, straight ignorance.
Do they have higher average incomes? Higher average household wealth? Longer life spans? Higher rates of consumption? Higher personal satisfaction?
Nothing. You've got nothing. You haven't quantified what you wrote, much less backed it up by any evidence.
You fail because you are Billy Triple Zero.
If you’re a proud member of America’s middle class, you may have been startled to learn last week that your after-tax income now makes you worse off than your Canadian neighbors to the north. They can now claim the title of the richest middle class on the planet.
Let’s take a look at the bombshell that the New York Times dropped in our midstlast week. It’s based on data from the Luxembourg Income Study Database, and focuses squarely on median income.
That means that instead of being distorted by the impact of millionaires and billionaires becoming still richer and the wealth gap becoming still wider, using this data gives analysts a sense of the experience of the average household in any given country. It also means an economist can compare overall economic growth of a country to the experience of individual households in that country – and by those standards, the United States just doesn’t come off that well.
Because while our economy has been growing more rapidly than those of other nations, a smaller percentage of those households is sharing in that prosperity, the data suggests. (Income inequality is at its highest level since 1928.)
Income, take home pay, better for the middle class Canandian than for the middle class American. looks like Billy was right on this.
If you’re a proud member of America’s middle class, you may have been startled to learn last week that your after-tax income now makes you worse off than your Canadian neighbors to the north.
Median per capita income in the U.S. has barely budged since 2000, while Canadians have seen their median income jump 20 percent.
Holy crap! There may be a less useful stat than "median per capita income", but I'll be damned if I can think of it.
Median means you line up all the numbers from lowest to highest and the number in the middle is the median.
How you turn that into a per capita number is some kind of liberal head-up-assery for sure.
Did they take the median household income and divide it by the average household size?
Wow, moronic for sure.
.
The median would be the middle class duh.
Bullshit. You think the middle class is $18,700 per person? Dupe.
^ Dope.
The median would be the middle class duh. The average would be higher because of the HUGE income of the few megarich at the top after 35 years of Voodoo, dupe...
If you’re a proud member of America’s middle class, you may have been startled to learn last week that your after-tax income now makes you worse off than your Canadian neighbors to the north.
Median per capita income in the U.S. has barely budged since 2000, while Canadians have seen their median income jump 20 percent.
Holy crap! There may be a less useful stat than "median per capita income", but I'll be damned if I can think of it.
Median means you line up all the numbers from lowest to highest and the number in the middle is the median.
How you turn that into a per capita number is some kind of liberal head-up-assery for sure.
Did they take the median household income and divide it by the average household size?
Wow, moronic for sure.
.
The median would be the middle class duh.
Bullshit. You think the middle class is $18,700 per person? Dupe.
If that's the median, just proves what a bust Reaganism is, except for the richest.The median would be the middle class duh. The average would be higher because of the HUGE income of the few megarich at the top after 35 years of Voodoo, dupe...
If you’re a proud member of America’s middle class, you may have been startled to learn last week that your after-tax income now makes you worse off than your Canadian neighbors to the north.
Median per capita income in the U.S. has barely budged since 2000, while Canadians have seen their median income jump 20 percent.
Holy crap! There may be a less useful stat than "median per capita income", but I'll be damned if I can think of it.
Median means you line up all the numbers from lowest to highest and the number in the middle is the median.
How you turn that into a per capita number is some kind of liberal head-up-assery for sure.
Did they take the median household income and divide it by the average household size?
Wow, moronic for sure.
.
The median would be the middle class duh.
Bullshit. You think the middle class is $18,700 per person? Dupe.
If that's the median
Median per capita. Derp!
just proves what a bust Reaganism is,
8 years of Clinton and 8 years of Obama still couldn't fix it? That's funny.
Median per capita?
Per capita of what?
The median is the median.
Loopholes everywhere. Everyone is paying 20-30% in all taxes and fees and all the new wealth goes to the richest.Still have Reaganist tax rates and loopholes wrecking the middle classStill have Reaganist tax rates and loopholes wrecking the middle class, dupe. WHAT OBAMA LAWS AND POLICIES?!?They dont get it. They complain about rising income inequality and then somehoe turn around and believe that Democrats have not run things for 8+ years.1) Canada having a higher minimum wage
2) Canada having a higher tax rate on the wealthy
3) Canada having Widespread unions
4) Canada having strong bank regulations
5) Canada having free healthcare
obama's policies have really hurt the middle class in the USA. For the first time I can recall their overall net worth has dropped. Simply amazing that you progressives think he's a good POTUS.
Reagan's top rate was 28%, the current 41% highest rate is because of liberals.
Why hasn't that helped the middle class?
All GOP's, dummie. Or where is the infrastructure, immigration bills, min wage hike, free community college, training for 4 million tech jobs going begginf, tax reform or ANYTHING he wanted the last 6 years. Duh dupe.Just what corrupt Booshies did and allowed. Thanks for the depression and the resultant messes we have around the world. Almost as bad as the 30's. Thank god Dems got in fast this time. GD stupid greedy corrupt GOP.Regulators pushing bad mortgages, great idea!
Yup, Bush allowed the stupid push to give mortgages to bad risks.
Even helped it along.
Thank god Dems got in fast this time.
Yeah, Obama fixed things so fast, the recession ended in June 2009.
I know he's a magic negro, but even you can't credit the recession's end to anything he did.
Of course the weakest recovery ever is all his.
Stimulus worked, ran out in 2010. Along with working congress.
All GOP's, dummie.
Reagan never had a GOP House. Only had a GOP Senate for 6 years.
Obama had House and Senate, with large majorities, for 2 years. Had the Senate for 6 years.
And you've been whining about how much Reagan got done and how little Obama got done.
Are Dems always gonna be such whiney pussies?
Dupe.
Stimulus worked,
Derp.
You know, it's so dumb to point out the Dem majority and assert that it's their fault that the world's problems weren't solved during that time and say nothing of the party who has the majority of the rest of the time.
The Repubs will have had both houses for the same time come Jan 17. Should the world be fixed by then?
How America's middle class fell behind its Canadian neighboursOK so you have no answer. Pure, straight ignorance.Do you not understand what an economic class is? Of course you don't. How silly of me.
Do they have higher average incomes? Higher average household wealth? Longer life spans? Higher rates of consumption? Higher personal satisfaction?
Nothing. You've got nothing. You haven't quantified what you wrote, much less backed it up by any evidence.
You fail because you are Billy Triple Zero.
If you’re a proud member of America’s middle class, you may have been startled to learn last week that your after-tax income now makes you worse off than your Canadian neighbors to the north. They can now claim the title of the richest middle class on the planet.
Let’s take a look at the bombshell that the New York Times dropped in our midstlast week. It’s based on data from the Luxembourg Income Study Database, and focuses squarely on median income.
That means that instead of being distorted by the impact of millionaires and billionaires becoming still richer and the wealth gap becoming still wider, using this data gives analysts a sense of the experience of the average household in any given country. It also means an economist can compare overall economic growth of a country to the experience of individual households in that country – and by those standards, the United States just doesn’t come off that well.
Because while our economy has been growing more rapidly than those of other nations, a smaller percentage of those households is sharing in that prosperity, the data suggests. (Income inequality is at its highest level since 1928.)
Income, take home pay, better for the middle class Canandian than for the middle class American. looks like Billy was right on this.
If you’re a proud member of America’s middle class, you may have been startled to learn last week that your after-tax income now makes you worse off than your Canadian neighbors to the north.
Median per capita income in the U.S. has barely budged since 2000, while Canadians have seen their median income jump 20 percent.
Holy crap! There may be a less useful stat than "median per capita income", but I'll be damned if I can think of it.
Median means you line up all the numbers from lowest to highest and the number in the middle is the median.
How you turn that into a per capita number is some kind of liberal head-up-assery for sure.
Did they take the median household income and divide it by the average household size?
Wow, moronic for sure.
.
If median earners aren't the middle class, then what does the middle mean?
Median earners are $50,000-$200,000.
That's half the earners and half the money.
A median of 18k is pathetic. And I suppose it's all because of all Obama's policies and laws, which the dupes pontificate about, but can't identify- mainly because of total GOP obstruction all of his administration. The New BS GOP and its dupes are a disgrace.The median would be the middle class duh. The average would be higher because of the HUGE income of the few megarich at the top after 35 years of Voodoo, dupe...How America's middle class fell behind its Canadian neighbours
If you’re a proud member of America’s middle class, you may have been startled to learn last week that your after-tax income now makes you worse off than your Canadian neighbors to the north. They can now claim the title of the richest middle class on the planet.
Let’s take a look at the bombshell that the New York Times dropped in our midstlast week. It’s based on data from the Luxembourg Income Study Database, and focuses squarely on median income.
That means that instead of being distorted by the impact of millionaires and billionaires becoming still richer and the wealth gap becoming still wider, using this data gives analysts a sense of the experience of the average household in any given country. It also means an economist can compare overall economic growth of a country to the experience of individual households in that country – and by those standards, the United States just doesn’t come off that well.
Because while our economy has been growing more rapidly than those of other nations, a smaller percentage of those households is sharing in that prosperity, the data suggests. (Income inequality is at its highest level since 1928.)
Income, take home pay, better for the middle class Canandian than for the middle class American. looks like Billy was right on this.
If you’re a proud member of America’s middle class, you may have been startled to learn last week that your after-tax income now makes you worse off than your Canadian neighbors to the north.
Median per capita income in the U.S. has barely budged since 2000, while Canadians have seen their median income jump 20 percent.
Holy crap! There may be a less useful stat than "median per capita income", but I'll be damned if I can think of it.
Median means you line up all the numbers from lowest to highest and the number in the middle is the median.
How you turn that into a per capita number is some kind of liberal head-up-assery for sure.
Did they take the median household income and divide it by the average household size?
Wow, moronic for sure.
.
The median would be the middle class duh.
Bullshit. You think the middle class is $18,700 per person? Dupe.
^ Dope.
Frank is a dope, dork and dupe.
The median would be the middle class duh. The average would be higher because of the HUGE income of the few megarich at the top after 35 years of Voodoo, dupe...
The median would be the middle class duh.
Bullshit. You think the middle class is $18,700 per person? Dupe.
If that's the median, just proves what a bust Reaganism is, except for the richest.The median would be the middle class duh. The average would be higher because of the HUGE income of the few megarich at the top after 35 years of Voodoo, dupe...
The median would be the middle class duh.
Bullshit. You think the middle class is $18,700 per person? Dupe.
If that's the median
Median per capita. Derp!
just proves what a bust Reaganism is,
8 years of Clinton and 8 years of Obama still couldn't fix it? That's funny.
Median per capita?
Per capita of what?
The median is the median.
Median per capita?
Per capita of what?
I agree, one of the dumbest stats I've ever seen.
We're blaming the Reaganism that still dominates the US, not Reagan himself. He would think today's Reaganism is ridiculous under these circumstances. Idiot.All GOP's, dummie. Or where is the infrastructure, immigration bills, min wage hike, free community college, training for 4 million tech jobs going begginf, tax reform or ANYTHING he wanted the last 6 years. Duh dupe.Just what corrupt Booshies did and allowed. Thanks for the depression and the resultant messes we have around the world. Almost as bad as the 30's. Thank god Dems got in fast this time. GD stupid greedy corrupt GOP.
Yup, Bush allowed the stupid push to give mortgages to bad risks.
Even helped it along.
Thank god Dems got in fast this time.
Yeah, Obama fixed things so fast, the recession ended in June 2009.
I know he's a magic negro, but even you can't credit the recession's end to anything he did.
Of course the weakest recovery ever is all his.
Stimulus worked, ran out in 2010. Along with working congress.
All GOP's, dummie.
Reagan never had a GOP House. Only had a GOP Senate for 6 years.
Obama had House and Senate, with large majorities, for 2 years. Had the Senate for 6 years.
And you've been whining about how much Reagan got done and how little Obama got done.
Are Dems always gonna be such whiney pussies?
Dupe.
Stimulus worked,
Derp.
You know, it's so dumb to point out the Dem majority and assert that it's their fault that the world's problems weren't solved during that time and say nothing of the party who has the majority of the rest of the time.
The Repubs will have had both houses for the same time come Jan 17. Should the world be fixed by then?
You know, it's so dumb to point out the Dem majority and assert that it's their fault
Not as dumb as blaming a guy elected 36 years ago and ignoring the 16 years of Dem Presidents since.
All GOP's, dummie. Or where is the infrastructure, immigration bills, min wage hike, free community college, training for 4 million tech jobs going begginf, tax reform or ANYTHING he wanted the last 6 years. Duh dupe.Just what corrupt Booshies did and allowed. Thanks for the depression and the resultant messes we have around the world. Almost as bad as the 30's. Thank god Dems got in fast this time. GD stupid greedy corrupt GOP.
Yup, Bush allowed the stupid push to give mortgages to bad risks.
Even helped it along.
Thank god Dems got in fast this time.
Yeah, Obama fixed things so fast, the recession ended in June 2009.
I know he's a magic negro, but even you can't credit the recession's end to anything he did.
Of course the weakest recovery ever is all his.
Stimulus worked, ran out in 2010. Along with working congress.
All GOP's, dummie.
Reagan never had a GOP House. Only had a GOP Senate for 6 years.
Obama had House and Senate, with large majorities, for 2 years. Had the Senate for 6 years.
And you've been whining about how much Reagan got done and how little Obama got done.
Are Dems always gonna be such whiney pussies?
Dupe.
Stimulus worked,
Derp.
You know, it's so dumb to point out the Dem majority and assert that it's their fault that the world's problems weren't solved during that time and say nothing of the party who has the majority of the rest of the time.
The Repubs will have had both houses for the same time come Jan 17. Should the world be fixed by then?
You know, it's so dumb to point out the Dem majority and assert that it's their fault
Not as dumb as blaming a guy elected 36 years ago and ignoring the 16 years of Dem Presidents since.
How America's middle class fell behind its Canadian neighboursOK so you have no answer. Pure, straight ignorance.
Do they have higher average incomes? Higher average household wealth? Longer life spans? Higher rates of consumption? Higher personal satisfaction?
Nothing. You've got nothing. You haven't quantified what you wrote, much less backed it up by any evidence.
You fail because you are Billy Triple Zero.
If you’re a proud member of America’s middle class, you may have been startled to learn last week that your after-tax income now makes you worse off than your Canadian neighbors to the north. They can now claim the title of the richest middle class on the planet.
Let’s take a look at the bombshell that the New York Times dropped in our midstlast week. It’s based on data from the Luxembourg Income Study Database, and focuses squarely on median income.
That means that instead of being distorted by the impact of millionaires and billionaires becoming still richer and the wealth gap becoming still wider, using this data gives analysts a sense of the experience of the average household in any given country. It also means an economist can compare overall economic growth of a country to the experience of individual households in that country – and by those standards, the United States just doesn’t come off that well.
Because while our economy has been growing more rapidly than those of other nations, a smaller percentage of those households is sharing in that prosperity, the data suggests. (Income inequality is at its highest level since 1928.)
Income, take home pay, better for the middle class Canandian than for the middle class American. looks like Billy was right on this.
If you’re a proud member of America’s middle class, you may have been startled to learn last week that your after-tax income now makes you worse off than your Canadian neighbors to the north.
Median per capita income in the U.S. has barely budged since 2000, while Canadians have seen their median income jump 20 percent.
Holy crap! There may be a less useful stat than "median per capita income", but I'll be damned if I can think of it.
Median means you line up all the numbers from lowest to highest and the number in the middle is the median.
How you turn that into a per capita number is some kind of liberal head-up-assery for sure.
Did they take the median household income and divide it by the average household size?
Wow, moronic for sure.
.
If median earners aren't the middle class, then what does the middle mean?
Median earners are $50,000-$200,000.
That's half the earners and half the money.
You are truly dumb my friend.
Median means exactly the 50th percentile.
By definition, the MIDDLE CLASS would have to be something like the 40th to 60th
percentile.
A 200K earner is a 1%er in the 99th percentile.
To the far left the middle class are union jobs only..
That is why this is another failed far left thread..
