What Makes Poor People Poor? - Special Segment

[danielpalos]

So rich do pay higher percentage than poor.

Didn't you just claim above that rich pay less?

He claims whatever claim he needs to to fit his agenda, instead of having the facts form his agenda.

it doesn't matter what it is; the right wing Never gets it.

You never have gotten "it" either, maybe you need to go find out what "it" is and how it fits in with THE LAW, it never fails, unlike left wing gloom.

the law is employment at will. only the right wing doesn't believe in faithful execution of the law.

Who is talking about your law? Just you?

I am talking about THE LAW and it will always override your law. It's okay, it is much more beneficial to society than yours.

You don't know what you are talking about The Law is employment at will. That is the law.

 

[danielpalos]

i gave you real world examples. you gave me nothing but gossip. no valid argument.

Let me know when you give me something other than laughs, you and your unworkable theory is getting old.

not dumb enough for the right wing; i got it.

LOL! See another laugh! We don't take you seriously and the left even ignores your cause with no cure for you. The facts are you don't provide anything, the facts is no one has picked up your cause, the facts are you are lazy and with that you are doomed.

a lack of equal protection of the law is that loss of equity in the law.

No lack, the lack is on Daniel and his no cure for any clause.

Compensation for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment can solve for that inefficiency in our First World economy.

Means testing is much less efficient as a general safety net for merely unemployed labor.

 

[Papageorgio]

He claims whatever claim he needs to to fit his agenda, instead of having the facts form his agenda.

it doesn't matter what it is; the right wing Never gets it.

You never have gotten "it" either, maybe you need to go find out what "it" is and how it fits in with THE LAW, it never fails, unlike left wing gloom.

the law is employment at will. only the right wing doesn't believe in faithful execution of the law.

Who is talking about your law? Just you?

I am talking about THE LAW and it will always override your law. It's okay, it is much more beneficial to society than yours.

You don't know what you are talking about The Law is employment at will. That is the law.

You are talking about the law, I am talking THE LAW. The employment at will falls under THE LAW, which proves again your lack of knowledge.

 

[Papageorgio]

Let me know when you give me something other than laughs, you and your unworkable theory is getting old.

not dumb enough for the right wing; i got it.

LOL! See another laugh! We don't take you seriously and the left even ignores your cause with no cure for you. The facts are you don't provide anything, the facts is no one has picked up your cause, the facts are you are lazy and with that you are doomed.

a lack of equal protection of the law is that loss of equity in the law.

No lack, the lack is on Daniel and his no cure for any clause.

Compensation for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment can solve for that inefficiency in our First World economy.

Means testing is much less efficient as a general safety net for merely unemployed labor.

Still trying to find a cure. So sad.

 

[danielpalos]

not dumb enough for the right wing; i got it.

LOL! See another laugh! We don't take you seriously and the left even ignores your cause with no cure for you. The facts are you don't provide anything, the facts is no one has picked up your cause, the facts are you are lazy and with that you are doomed.

a lack of equal protection of the law is that loss of equity in the law.

No lack, the lack is on Daniel and his no cure for any clause.

Compensation for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment can solve for that inefficiency in our First World economy.

Means testing is much less efficient as a general safety net for merely unemployed labor.

Still trying to find a cure. So sad.

what could go wrong, if any unemployed adult could apply for unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed.

even if some chose that as a lifestyle, it still circulates capital and engenders a positive multiplier effect.

means testing is more expensive and produces a less positive multiplier effect.

 

[Papageorgio]

Let me know when you give me something other than laughs, you and your unworkable theory is getting old.

not dumb enough for the right wing; i got it.

LOL! See another laugh! We don't take you seriously and the left even ignores your cause with no cure for you. The facts are you don't provide anything, the facts is no one has picked up your cause, the facts are you are lazy and with that you are doomed.

a lack of equal protection of the law is that loss of equity in the law.

No lack, the lack is on Daniel and his no cure for any clause.

Compensation for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment can solve for that inefficiency in our First World economy.

Means testing is much less efficient as a general safety net for merely unemployed labor.

Do you have facts, data analysis or research to at least see if your theory is applicable in this instance?

 

[danielpalos]

not dumb enough for the right wing; i got it.

LOL! See another laugh! We don't take you seriously and the left even ignores your cause with no cure for you. The facts are you don't provide anything, the facts is no one has picked up your cause, the facts are you are lazy and with that you are doomed.

a lack of equal protection of the law is that loss of equity in the law.

No lack, the lack is on Daniel and his no cure for any clause.

Compensation for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment can solve for that inefficiency in our First World economy.

Means testing is much less efficient as a general safety net for merely unemployed labor.

Do you have facts, data analysis or research to at least see if your theory is applicable in this instance?

you can't come up with anything negative; a positive multiplier is all it must engender.

 

[Papageorgio]

LOL! See another laugh! We don't take you seriously and the left even ignores your cause with no cure for you. The facts are you don't provide anything, the facts is no one has picked up your cause, the facts are you are lazy and with that you are doomed.

a lack of equal protection of the law is that loss of equity in the law.

No lack, the lack is on Daniel and his no cure for any clause.

Compensation for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment can solve for that inefficiency in our First World economy.

Means testing is much less efficient as a general safety net for merely unemployed labor.

Still trying to find a cure. So sad.

what could go wrong, if any unemployed adult could apply for unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed.

even if some chose that as a lifestyle, it still circulates capital and engenders a positive multiplier effect.

means testing is more expensive and produces a less positive multiplier effect.

Let's see the data on your theory, any good theory should have data to support the at least the theory.

When looking at any economic business decision, I need to see at least the numbers to support the theory.

 

[Papageorgio]

LOL! See another laugh! We don't take you seriously and the left even ignores your cause with no cure for you. The facts are you don't provide anything, the facts is no one has picked up your cause, the facts are you are lazy and with that you are doomed.

a lack of equal protection of the law is that loss of equity in the law.

No lack, the lack is on Daniel and his no cure for any clause.

Compensation for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment can solve for that inefficiency in our First World economy.

Means testing is much less efficient as a general safety net for merely unemployed labor.

Do you have facts, data analysis or research to at least see if your theory is applicable in this instance?

you can't come up with anything negative; a positive multiplier is all it must engender.

I can come up with lots of negatives, this real issue is this is your idea and you can't come up with anything positive to support the theory you claim is sound.

 

[danielpalos]

a lack of equal protection of the law is that loss of equity in the law.

No lack, the lack is on Daniel and his no cure for any clause.

Compensation for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment can solve for that inefficiency in our First World economy.

Means testing is much less efficient as a general safety net for merely unemployed labor.

Still trying to find a cure. So sad.

what could go wrong, if any unemployed adult could apply for unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed.

even if some chose that as a lifestyle, it still circulates capital and engenders a positive multiplier effect.

means testing is more expensive and produces a less positive multiplier effect.

Let's see the data on your theory, any good theory should have data to support the at least the theory.

When looking at any economic business decision, I need to see at least the numbers to support the theory.

Combining all UI components, we find that, overall, the UI program closed 0.183 of the gap in real GDP caused by the recession. There is reason to believe, however, that for this particular recession, the UI program provided stronger stabilization of real output than in many past recessions because extended benefits responded strongly. Multiplier effects in real GDP were estimated to average 2.0 for regular UI benefits and also 2.0 for extended benefits.

https://wdr.doleta.gov/research/FullText_Documents/ETAOP2010-10.pdf

 

[danielpalos]

a lack of equal protection of the law is that loss of equity in the law.

No lack, the lack is on Daniel and his no cure for any clause.

Compensation for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment can solve for that inefficiency in our First World economy.

Means testing is much less efficient as a general safety net for merely unemployed labor.

Do you have facts, data analysis or research to at least see if your theory is applicable in this instance?

you can't come up with anything negative; a positive multiplier is all it must engender.

I can come up with lots of negatives, this real issue is this is your idea and you can't come up with anything positive to support the theory you claim is sound.

how will capitalists or labor be worse off with equal protection of the law regarding the concept of employment at will?

 

[DandyDonovan]

No lack, the lack is on Daniel and his no cure for any clause.

Compensation for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment can solve for that inefficiency in our First World economy.

Means testing is much less efficient as a general safety net for merely unemployed labor.

Do you have facts, data analysis or research to at least see if your theory is applicable in this instance?

you can't come up with anything negative; a positive multiplier is all it must engender.

I can come up with lots of negatives, this real issue is this is your idea and you can't come up with anything positive to support the theory you claim is sound.

how will capitalists or labor be worse off with equal protection of the law regarding the concept of employment at will?

Does ^ this guy EVER post something that makes sense?

 

[Papageorgio]

No lack, the lack is on Daniel and his no cure for any clause.

Compensation for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment can solve for that inefficiency in our First World economy.

Means testing is much less efficient as a general safety net for merely unemployed labor.

Do you have facts, data analysis or research to at least see if your theory is applicable in this instance?

you can't come up with anything negative; a positive multiplier is all it must engender.

I can come up with lots of negatives, this real issue is this is your idea and you can't come up with anything positive to support the theory you claim is sound.

how will capitalists or labor be worse off with equal protection of the law regarding the concept of employment at will?

I am not sure, all you give me is hearsay on your idea, until you actually provide data I can't make an informed decision, with all your dodging, weaving and soothsaying, you are unable to provide solid information.

 

[Papageorgio]

Compensation for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment can solve for that inefficiency in our First World economy.

Means testing is much less efficient as a general safety net for merely unemployed labor.

Do you have facts, data analysis or research to at least see if your theory is applicable in this instance?

you can't come up with anything negative; a positive multiplier is all it must engender.

I can come up with lots of negatives, this real issue is this is your idea and you can't come up with anything positive to support the theory you claim is sound.

how will capitalists or labor be worse off with equal protection of the law regarding the concept of employment at will?

Does ^ this guy EVER post something that makes sense?

I keep trying to give him chances however so far, no.

 

[danielpalos]

 

[Papageorgio]

Great left wing propaganda.

 

[danielpalos]

Great left wing propaganda.

Only the right wing alleges their fantasy is the gospel truth.

 

[Papageorgio]

Great left wing propaganda.

Only the right wing alleges their fantasy is the gospel truth.

It seems you believe your idea is gospel truth, right winger.

 

[danielpalos]

Great left wing propaganda.

Only the right wing alleges their fantasy is the gospel truth.

It seems you believe your idea is gospel truth, right winger.

you have nothing but fallacy and repeal; I must be right even though I am on the left.

 

[Papageorgio]

Great left wing propaganda.

Only the right wing alleges their fantasy is the gospel truth.

It seems you believe your idea is gospel truth, right winger.

you have nothing but fallacy and repeal; I must be right even though I am on the left.

You have given no facts, no analysis, nothing, I have history on my side, so I really don't care about your stupid plan and that you think there is no real argument.

I know for a fact you are wrong because no serious lawmaker will touch your stupid plan and no one has for over 200 years. So, whether you think anyone has a relevant argument or not is irrelevant because you are clueless and provide no real cure, just fantasy of a lazy one. Lazy people like yourself don't contribute, so your idea is done. Thanks for the laughs!