TakeAStepBack
Gold Member
- Mar 29, 2011
- 13,935
- 1,742
- 245
Aren't the 1% supposed to be the "job creators" and aren't they more likely to be in the market? It's easy to make snarky comments, but the fact is if some of those profits were re-invested, Main St. would be doing better. Whether or not they caused the crash or who whined about what is irrelevant.
I'm sure you'd call it 'hypocracy', but those with some education and knowledge of the English language would call it 'hypocrisy'.![]()
That's very witty, Connie. Very, very witty.
In the end, it was your ilk that bitched about wall st. only to use them now as some kind of indicator of recovery. BTW, those with any economics knowledge know there is a difference between "wall st." and job creators. And for that matter, who the job creators are. Unless you want to go find a post of mine saying "the 1% are job creators".
Don't see the hypocrisy you're talking about. One can criticize when it's warranted and praise when it's warranted. I'll go looking for your post when you show me the ones where I bitched about Wall St. It just seems a convenient way for you to not have to say much of anything. The bottom line is the jobs aren't there. Your "ilk" will say it's Obama's fault for getting the ACA passed so that businesses don't know what their costs are going to be and then turn around a scream that businesses are dropping insurance programs BECAUSE OF the ACA. Which is it? The second option would indicate they'd have MORE money to hire people!![]()
I can certainly not compete with this level of dullardry.