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.
Didn't he end both wars?
You'd think with his addition of over $9 trillion to the debt, the economy would have soared.
You failed to answer my question.
He gave us the weakest recovery in 70 years because he couldn't wind down 2 wars that were already over?
You'd think the smartest President ever would have sucked less.
Wars are difficult. You failed to answer again. He also had the housing bubble. Would have been easy to go backwards, look at Bush.
Wars are difficult.
You're right. His poor performance wasn't limited to the economy.
Poor Obama, if the job was going to be too difficult for him, he shouldn't have run.
He also had the housing bubble.
What do you mean he had it? It had already burst before he took office. Starting in 2006.
Waiting for you to give a president with as many problems to fix that did better.
Sorry, but I believe the jobs situation can be greatly improved. Sorry you are defeated, I'm not. Heck, even Trump knows it can improve.
Okay, fair enough, how do you improve it?
How do you influence companies to overpay workers that their consumers will not support? How do you provide good paying jobs where such costs gets transferred to the product or service that will steer customers away from your company to lower priced services or goods?
Companies can provide three things to the public: good paying jobs, good investment opportunities, and low cost products or services. You can have one or two, but not all three. It's just impossible to provide.
So we as a society decided that our priorities are low cost products and services, and good investment opportunities secondary. Good paying monkey jobs are last on the list. So how does one go about changing that?
Good questions. Just to begin. Do you agree there is more than enough wealth to go around. I have seen no reason to believe there isn't.
Wealth doesn't "go around" wealth is created.
Diseases go around, rumors go around, gossip goes around, but not wealth.
The problem we have in this country is many wait for others to create wealth and give their earnings to them. Is it not better to teach people to create wealth for themselves instead of hoping others will give them their wealth?
Who complains the most about lack of wealth? Those who have never invested their own money to create wealth.
Companies make outrageous profits! Okay, so why not buy stocks in those companies and share in those profits?
CEO"s are overpaid! Okay, then why not become a CEO yourself and get overpaid?
We can create better jobs! Okay, so start your own company and create those jobs you speak of!
Companies try to get the cheapest labor they can. Okay, but don't you do the very same? If you get three estimates for lawn care of your home, do you not choose the cheapest company? If you need the transmission rebuilt on your car, do you not choose the cheapest garage to rebuild it? If you want to put an addition on your home, don't you choose the cheapest construction company to do the job?
You didn't really answer the question. Do companies still generate enough profit to pay well?
View attachment 120629
Compensation of employees is over $10 trillion.
You failed to answer my question.
He gave us the weakest recovery in 70 years because he couldn't wind down 2 wars that were already over?
You'd think the smartest President ever would have sucked less.
Wars are difficult. You failed to answer again. He also had the housing bubble. Would have been easy to go backwards, look at Bush.
Wars are difficult.
You're right. His poor performance wasn't limited to the economy.
Poor Obama, if the job was going to be too difficult for him, he shouldn't have run.
He also had the housing bubble.
What do you mean he had it? It had already burst before he took office. Starting in 2006.
Waiting for you to give a president with as many problems to fix that did better.
He had more problems than any other President? LOL!
That has to be the funniest thing I've heard in a long time.
Feel free to explain what it was about the 2 wars, that he ended, that made it impossible for us to have a decent recovery.
Sorry, but I believe the jobs situation can be greatly improved. Sorry you are defeated, I'm not. Heck, even Trump knows it can improve.
Okay, fair enough, how do you improve it?
How do you influence companies to overpay workers that their consumers will not support? How do you provide good paying jobs where such costs gets transferred to the product or service that will steer customers away from your company to lower priced services or goods?
Companies can provide three things to the public: good paying jobs, good investment opportunities, and low cost products or services. You can have one or two, but not all three. It's just impossible to provide.
So we as a society decided that our priorities are low cost products and services, and good investment opportunities secondary. Good paying monkey jobs are last on the list. So how does one go about changing that?
Good questions. Just to begin. Do you agree there is more than enough wealth to go around. I have seen no reason to believe there isn't.
Wealth doesn't "go around" wealth is created.
Diseases go around, rumors go around, gossip goes around, but not wealth.
The problem we have in this country is many wait for others to create wealth and give their earnings to them. Is it not better to teach people to create wealth for themselves instead of hoping others will give them their wealth?
Who complains the most about lack of wealth? Those who have never invested their own money to create wealth.
Companies make outrageous profits! Okay, so why not buy stocks in those companies and share in those profits?
CEO"s are overpaid! Okay, then why not become a CEO yourself and get overpaid?
We can create better jobs! Okay, so start your own company and create those jobs you speak of!
Companies try to get the cheapest labor they can. Okay, but don't you do the very same? If you get three estimates for lawn care of your home, do you not choose the cheapest company? If you need the transmission rebuilt on your car, do you not choose the cheapest garage to rebuild it? If you want to put an addition on your home, don't you choose the cheapest construction company to do the job?
You didn't really answer the question. Do companies still generate enough profit to pay well?
Companies do not rely on gross profit. Companies rely on investments.
For you to understand this better, let's say you ran into a small fortune: A lottery winning, a relative that passed away, a lawsuit.
In any case, you end up (after taxes) with about 400K. Now your house is paid for, your car is paid for you have no outstanding debts. So what do you do with this 400K if you were smart? You invest it.
So you address a reputable investment company and have them do research on making your money grow. You don't want anything too aggressive, you want a conservative lower risk growth, and your company presents two options:
Company A has been around for a long time. Their growth rate is 5.5% per year. Company B is very similar, but they only have a 3.5% growth. Which company will you invest your new money in?
Before you make your final decision, I have to tell you that company A has a gross profit of 1.5 million a year. Company B has a gross profit of 2 billion a year. Does that make any difference to you when choosing who to invest your money with?
Of course not. You could care less what a company makes every year, you only care about how your money is going to grow. So if company A announces they are going to pay their employees more than their labor is worth, and that reduces their investment growth, would you still invest in their company?
I didn't think so, because nobody would.
Okay, fair enough, how do you improve it?
How do you influence companies to overpay workers that their consumers will not support? How do you provide good paying jobs where such costs gets transferred to the product or service that will steer customers away from your company to lower priced services or goods?
Companies can provide three things to the public: good paying jobs, good investment opportunities, and low cost products or services. You can have one or two, but not all three. It's just impossible to provide.
So we as a society decided that our priorities are low cost products and services, and good investment opportunities secondary. Good paying monkey jobs are last on the list. So how does one go about changing that?
Good questions. Just to begin. Do you agree there is more than enough wealth to go around. I have seen no reason to believe there isn't.
Wealth doesn't "go around" wealth is created.
Diseases go around, rumors go around, gossip goes around, but not wealth.
The problem we have in this country is many wait for others to create wealth and give their earnings to them. Is it not better to teach people to create wealth for themselves instead of hoping others will give them their wealth?
Who complains the most about lack of wealth? Those who have never invested their own money to create wealth.
Companies make outrageous profits! Okay, so why not buy stocks in those companies and share in those profits?
CEO"s are overpaid! Okay, then why not become a CEO yourself and get overpaid?
We can create better jobs! Okay, so start your own company and create those jobs you speak of!
Companies try to get the cheapest labor they can. Okay, but don't you do the very same? If you get three estimates for lawn care of your home, do you not choose the cheapest company? If you need the transmission rebuilt on your car, do you not choose the cheapest garage to rebuild it? If you want to put an addition on your home, don't you choose the cheapest construction company to do the job?
You didn't really answer the question. Do companies still generate enough profit to pay well?
View attachment 120629
Compensation of employees is over $10 trillion.
Interesting number. So like over $60k for each person in the workforce? Does that number include all forms of compensation?
He gave us the weakest recovery in 70 years because he couldn't wind down 2 wars that were already over?
You'd think the smartest President ever would have sucked less.
Wars are difficult. You failed to answer again. He also had the housing bubble. Would have been easy to go backwards, look at Bush.
Wars are difficult.
You're right. His poor performance wasn't limited to the economy.
Poor Obama, if the job was going to be too difficult for him, he shouldn't have run.
He also had the housing bubble.
What do you mean he had it? It had already burst before he took office. Starting in 2006.
Waiting for you to give a president with as many problems to fix that did better.
He had more problems than any other President? LOL!
That has to be the funniest thing I've heard in a long time.
Feel free to explain what it was about the 2 wars, that he ended, that made it impossible for us to have a decent recovery.
Still waiting.
Wars are difficult. You failed to answer again. He also had the housing bubble. Would have been easy to go backwards, look at Bush.
Wars are difficult.
You're right. His poor performance wasn't limited to the economy.
Poor Obama, if the job was going to be too difficult for him, he shouldn't have run.
He also had the housing bubble.
What do you mean he had it? It had already burst before he took office. Starting in 2006.
Waiting for you to give a president with as many problems to fix that did better.
He had more problems than any other President? LOL!
That has to be the funniest thing I've heard in a long time.
Feel free to explain what it was about the 2 wars, that he ended, that made it impossible for us to have a decent recovery.
Still waiting.
You're waiting for a list of Presidents that dealt with bigger problems than Obama had?
What are you, 12?
Lincoln, Wilson, FDR, Truman, LBJ, Nixon, Carter, Reagan.
And plenty more. And none of them added $9+ trillion to the debt while delivering such a weak recovery.
Good questions. Just to begin. Do you agree there is more than enough wealth to go around. I have seen no reason to believe there isn't.
Wealth doesn't "go around" wealth is created.
Diseases go around, rumors go around, gossip goes around, but not wealth.
The problem we have in this country is many wait for others to create wealth and give their earnings to them. Is it not better to teach people to create wealth for themselves instead of hoping others will give them their wealth?
Who complains the most about lack of wealth? Those who have never invested their own money to create wealth.
Companies make outrageous profits! Okay, so why not buy stocks in those companies and share in those profits?
CEO"s are overpaid! Okay, then why not become a CEO yourself and get overpaid?
We can create better jobs! Okay, so start your own company and create those jobs you speak of!
Companies try to get the cheapest labor they can. Okay, but don't you do the very same? If you get three estimates for lawn care of your home, do you not choose the cheapest company? If you need the transmission rebuilt on your car, do you not choose the cheapest garage to rebuild it? If you want to put an addition on your home, don't you choose the cheapest construction company to do the job?
You didn't really answer the question. Do companies still generate enough profit to pay well?
View attachment 120629
Compensation of employees is over $10 trillion.
Interesting number. So like over $60k for each person in the workforce? Does that number include all forms of compensation?
U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA)
Wars are difficult.
You're right. His poor performance wasn't limited to the economy.
Poor Obama, if the job was going to be too difficult for him, he shouldn't have run.
He also had the housing bubble.
What do you mean he had it? It had already burst before he took office. Starting in 2006.
Waiting for you to give a president with as many problems to fix that did better.
He had more problems than any other President? LOL!
That has to be the funniest thing I've heard in a long time.
Feel free to explain what it was about the 2 wars, that he ended, that made it impossible for us to have a decent recovery.
Still waiting.
You're waiting for a list of Presidents that dealt with bigger problems than Obama had?
What are you, 12?
Lincoln, Wilson, FDR, Truman, LBJ, Nixon, Carter, Reagan.
And plenty more. And none of them added $9+ trillion to the debt while delivering such a weak recovery.
That is funny. Reagan had no wars and started our debt problem.
Waiting for you to give a president with as many problems to fix that did better.
He had more problems than any other President? LOL!
That has to be the funniest thing I've heard in a long time.
Feel free to explain what it was about the 2 wars, that he ended, that made it impossible for us to have a decent recovery.
Still waiting.
You're waiting for a list of Presidents that dealt with bigger problems than Obama had?
What are you, 12?
Lincoln, Wilson, FDR, Truman, LBJ, Nixon, Carter, Reagan.
And plenty more. And none of them added $9+ trillion to the debt while delivering such a weak recovery.
That is funny. Reagan had no wars and started our debt problem.
Reagan had a double dip recession, double digit inflation, double digit interest rates and a Cold War to fight.
It's true, Reagan added $1.8 trillion to the debt, won the Cold War and had awesome GDP growth.
Obama added $9.3 trillion to the debt, lost Iraq, Syria and Libya and had sucky GDP growth.
Reagan almost tripled the debt, started incredibly stupid ME chaos with his pal Saddam, and left Booosh a corrupt S+L mega bubble. We're lucky he didn't bring back Soviet hard liners with his bs bluster. Thank god for Gorby. Then 35 years legacy of pander to the rich ruin of the middle class and our infrastructure, dupes. And the bs New BS GOP propaganda machine and the zombie racist GOP. That obstructed the Obama recovery for no reason but hate.Waiting for you to give a president with as many problems to fix that did better.
He had more problems than any other President? LOL!
That has to be the funniest thing I've heard in a long time.
Feel free to explain what it was about the 2 wars, that he ended, that made it impossible for us to have a decent recovery.
Still waiting.
You're waiting for a list of Presidents that dealt with bigger problems than Obama had?
What are you, 12?
Lincoln, Wilson, FDR, Truman, LBJ, Nixon, Carter, Reagan.
And plenty more. And none of them added $9+ trillion to the debt while delivering such a weak recovery.
That is funny. Reagan had no wars and started our debt problem.
Reagan had a double dip recession, double digit inflation, double digit interest rates and a Cold War to fight.
It's true, Reagan added $1.8 trillion to the debt, won the Cold War and had awesome GDP growth.
Obama added $9.3 trillion to the debt, lost Iraq, Syria and Libya and had sucky GDP growth.
OP- Balderdash BS, for dupes only. Could we possibly tax the greedy idiot racist GOP rich and giant corps their fair share so we could do something for the ruined nonrich and and our pathetic infrastructure for the first time in 35 years?
Only in dupe world, dupe.OP- Balderdash BS, for dupes only. Could we possibly tax the greedy idiot racist GOP rich and giant corps their fair share so we could do something for the ruined nonrich and and our pathetic infrastructure for the first time in 35 years?
The rich already pay the lions share of the taxes and more than their fair share. FACT!
DUHHHHH. Dupe.OP- Balderdash BS, for dupes only. Could we possibly tax the greedy idiot racist GOP rich and giant corps their fair share so we could do something for the ruined nonrich and and our pathetic infrastructure for the first time in 35 years?
The rich already pay the lions share of the taxes and more than their fair share. FACT!
Only in dupe world, dupe.OP- Balderdash BS, for dupes only. Could we possibly tax the greedy idiot racist GOP rich and giant corps their fair share so we could do something for the ruined nonrich and and our pathetic infrastructure for the first time in 35 years?
The rich already pay the lions share of the taxes and more than their fair share. FACT!
That's pathetic. And why they basically get all the new wealth and you dupes feel sick...
DUHHHHH. Dupe.OP- Balderdash BS, for dupes only. Could we possibly tax the greedy idiot racist GOP rich and giant corps their fair share so we could do something for the ruined nonrich and and our pathetic infrastructure for the first time in 35 years?
The rich already pay the lions share of the taxes and more than their fair share. FACT!
The Demise of the American Middle Class In Numbers.
Over the past 35 years the American dream has gradually disappeared. The process was slow, so most people didn’t notice. They just worked a few more hours, borrowed a little more and cut back on non-essentials. But looking at the numbers and comparing them over long time periods, it is obvious that things have changed drastically. Here are the details:
1. WORKERS PRODUCE MORE BUT THE GAINS GO TO BUSINESS.
Over the past 63 years worker productivity has grown by 2.0% per year.
But after 1980, workers received a smaller share every year. Labor’s share of income (1992 = 100%):
1950 = 101%
1960 = 105%
1970 = 105%
1980 = 105% – Reagan
1990 = 100%
2000 = 96%
2007 = 92%
A 13% drop since 1980
2. THE TOP 10% GET A LARGER SHARE.
Share of National Income going to Top 10%:
1950 = 35%
1960 = 34%
1970 = 34%
1980 = 34% – Reagan
1990 = 40%
2000 = 47%
2007 = 50%
An increase of 16% since Reagan.
3. WORKERS COMPENSATED FOR THE LOSS OF INCOME BY SPENDING THEIR SAVINGS.
The savings Rose up to Reagan and fell during and after.
1950 = 6.0%
1960 = 7.0%
1970 = 8.5%
1980 = 10.0% – Reagan
1982 = 11.2% – Peak
1990 = 7.0%
2000 = 2.0%
2006 = -1.1% (Negative = withdrawing from savings)
A 12.3% drop after Reagan.
4. WORKERS ALSO BORROWED TO MAKE UP FOR THE LOSS.
Household Debt as percentage of GDP:
1965 = 46%
1970 = 45%
1980 = 50% – Reagan
1990 = 61%
2000 = 69%
2007 = 95%
A 45% increase after 1980.
5. SO THE GAP BETWEEN THE RICHEST AND THE POOREST HAS GROWN.
Gap Between the Share of Capital Income earned by the top 1%
and the bottom 80%:
1980 = 10%
2003 = 56%
A 5.6 times increase.
6. AND THE AMERICAN DREAM IS GONE.
The Probably of Moving Up from the Bottom 40% to the Top 40%:
1945 = 12%
1958 = 6%
1990 = 3%
2000 = 2%
A 10% Decrease.
Links:
1 = ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/pf/totalf1.txt
1 = https://www.clevelandfed.org/Research/PolicyDis/No7Nov04.pdf
1 = Clipboard01.jpg (image)
2 – http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/blog/09/04/27/CongratulationstoEmmanuelSaez/
3 = http://www.demos.org/inequality/images/charts/uspersonalsaving_thumb.gif
3 = U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA)
4 = Federated Prudent Bear Fund (A): Overview
4 = FRB: Z.1 Release - Financial Accounts of the United States - Current Release
5/6 = 15 Mind-Blowing Facts About Wealth And Inequality In America
Overview = http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2010062415/reagan-revolution-home-roost-charts
Only in dupe world, dupe.OP- Balderdash BS, for dupes only. Could we possibly tax the greedy idiot racist GOP rich and giant corps their fair share so we could do something for the ruined nonrich and and our pathetic infrastructure for the first time in 35 years?
The rich already pay the lions share of the taxes and more than their fair share. FACT!
That's pathetic. And why they basically get all the new wealth and you dupes feel sick...
The top 10% pay 61% of the taxes you moron, its on your own chart.
Only in dupe world, dupe.OP- Balderdash BS, for dupes only. Could we possibly tax the greedy idiot racist GOP rich and giant corps their fair share so we could do something for the ruined nonrich and and our pathetic infrastructure for the first time in 35 years?
The rich already pay the lions share of the taxes and more than their fair share. FACT!
That's pathetic. And why they basically get all the new wealth and you dupes feel sick...
The top 10% pay 61% of the taxes you moron, its on your own chart.
Of course they do, nobody else has income to pay.
Yep...every city should strive for literacy rates equal to the NYC school system.Imagine that
If they are so poor, it would seem easy for Republicans to offer something better
Why don't they?
when the dems control the city it's impossible for republicans to make any changes. Here in New Orleans our stupid mayor and council are more interested in removing historical statues than in doing anything about crime or poverty. But they do have measures in place to raise taxes----------on the poor who have no way to pay them.
City governments have no effect whatsoever on poverty within their boundaries. City policies don't create jobs. Cities governments get the most blame for conditions not of their making, and have fewer resources to deal with the problems. When the steel industry left Pittsburg, whose fault was that? When the auto industry left Detroit, was the local government at fault?
It's a chicken and egg question. Which came first - the poverty, or the democratic government. In every case, it's the poverty. Cities don't become poor because the vote Democrat - they vote Democrat because Republicans do NOTHING for poor people.
That is not to say that poor people want free stuff, what they want is opportunities, just like everyone else, and Republicans don't offer opportunity at all. In fact, Republican policies make it harder and harder for people to work themselves out of poverty.
Conservatives hate "affirmative action" programs which see less qualified students of color gain admittance to Ivy League universities ahead of more qualified white students. They say this is wrong and everyone should be admitted on their merits. Really? They why do they support "legacy" admittance?
Undeserving and less qualifed sons and daughters of graduates of these fine institutions go to the front of the admittance line. Do you think that George W. Bush would have gotten into Harvard or Yale with his C average if his Daddy hadn't been Speaker of the House? If you do, then I have a ski resort in Miami I'd like to sell you.
Liberal cities are America's success story - from the revival of New York, to Los Angeles and Seattle, these are the engines which drive the US economy, with innovation, drive, and left wing policies. Not all are as successful, but compared to the Red States, the Blue Cities are in much, much better shape both economically and socially.
