Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Obama's 75%Follow

#53 Nov 18 2012 at 12:02 PM Rating: Excellent
***
1,877 posts
Quote:
The Democrats have a vested interest in keeping the unemployment roles high. The simple fact is most people that work vote Republican. And there's a reason for this.


Because that tid bit of information has been pulled out of your ass. It has already been mathematically proven that you are full of it. Unless of course you can show us, mathematically, that your stance is based somewhere in reality.
____________________________
#swaggerjacker
#54 Nov 18 2012 at 2:07 PM Rating: Excellent
crazylegz1975 wrote:
Monsieur Driftwood wrote:
crazylegz1975 wrote:
The economy is not improving.

And obama is responsible for the current economy.

And despite your denials obama knows that Democrats benefit from increasing the number dependent on govn and is doing what he can to ensure that doesn't change.

So when unemployment is 10% in four years and the number of people on food stamps doubles from today? What will be your excuse then?


So you're asserting that Obama travelled through time, gave reagan his economic ideas, told bush sr. To attack iraq(although I'll make a note here that I actually feel that Desert Storm was both justified and right) hence convincing his son that that needed to be done again later, convinced clinton to do some major deregulation of banks and wall street, then went and told W. To not only remember to attack Iraq, but also to pay for it with deficit spending. Then, he went and told bankers and the big wigs on wall street that the best way to do business was to basically play with imaginary money and bet against their other financial commitments(or whatever), and then he came back, and beatt he sh*t out of every governor and state senator/congressman(however that works) until they agreed to increase the food stamps. So now he's just waiting, biding his time until the time machine has recharged, and then he'll go and cause the great depression...and...

Wait, where was I going with this?

...

Right! Now I remember, I was going to say that you have no grasp on either reality or what's actually possible within it...again...

Edited, Nov 18th 2012 12:59am by Driftwood


The sad thing is you're to stupid to even bother to check and see who the attorneys were that went after banks who didn't want to lend money to unqualified people. Obama was one of the lead attorneys when that whole community reinvestment act went down.

That's right obama was a primary player during the mtg crisis.

But again none of this matters to you.

We all know that Democrats rely on minority votes. We also know that people who rely on govn handouts vote primarily Democrat.

The Democrats have a vested interest in keeping the unemployment roles high. The simple fact is most people that work vote Republican. And there's a reason for this.


At which stage was he present? as a lead attorney? If you're talking about the 1994 lawsuit against citi-bank(which has nothing to do with the CRA, but was over the practice of "redlining", basically refusing mortgages and loans to people based solely on the area where they currently lived being relatively poor on average, whether they could pay it back or not), he wasn't the lead lawyer, nor did he file the lawsuit, he was a junior attorney on the legal team.

If you're implying that the CRA had anything to do with the current financial crisis, there were assertions made about that, however no conclusive evidence was ever put forward to prove them correct, and in fact, there was a large quantity of fairly concrete evidence indicating that banks regulated by the CRA were far less likely to make sub-prime loans,, as well as half as likely to resell any loans, hence having a very marginalized role in the crisis.

As for the rest of what you said:

Criminy wrote:
Quote:
The Democrats have a vested interest in keeping the unemployment roles high. The simple fact is most people that work vote Republican. And there's a reason for this.


Because that tid bit of information has been pulled out of your ass. It has already been mathematically proven that you are full of it. Unless of course you can show us, mathematically, that your stance is based somewhere in reality.
____________________________
Master Meleagant Driftwood of Stromm, Warrior of the 69th level(EQ)
Rhyys, Human Warrior of 67th level(WoW)

The World Is Not A Cold Dead Place.
Alan Watts wrote:
I am omnipotent insofar as I am the Universe, but I am not an omnipotent in the role of Alan Watts, only cunning


Eske wrote:
I've always read Driftwood as the straight man in varus' double act. It helps if you read all of his posts in the voice of Droopy Dog.
#55 Nov 19 2012 at 8:19 AM Rating: Excellent
******
43,469 posts
Is this the math that Republicans do to make themselves feel better?
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#56 Nov 19 2012 at 8:57 AM Rating: Excellent
***
1,877 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Is this the math that Republicans do to make themselves feel better?


Quote:
is based somewhere in reality.


So no, not Republican "feel good" math. Smiley: tongue
____________________________
#swaggerjacker
#57 Nov 19 2012 at 9:52 AM Rating: Excellent
Needs More Smut
Avatar
******
20,236 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Is this the math that Republicans do to make themselves feel better?


My favorite part of that quote is that it came from Fox News.
____________________________
FFXI: Catwho on Bismarck. Once again a top bard on the server: Dardaubla 90 on 1/6/2014
Thayos wrote:
I can't understand anyone who skips the cutscenes of a Final Fantasy game. That's like going to Texas and not getting barbecue.

FFXIV: Katarh Mest on Lamia - Member of The Swarm and leader of Grammarian Tea House chat LS
#58 Nov 19 2012 at 10:43 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
11,625 posts
crazylegz1975 wrote:
So when unemployment is 10% in four years and the number of people on food stamps doubles from today?


Smiley: confused

I'm not sure that's a question.

crazylegz1975 wrote:
What will be your excuse then?


There are jobs, they're just mobile. They're kept in the back of specially designed trucks. They dash from town to town staying just ahead of people's attempts to apply for them. Every time you think you'll nab one, they seem to move just before someone shows up for the interview. Seriously, you can see them in the satellite images if you look close enough. My guess is they have someone on the inside, who's been tipping them off, posing as a temp in the unemployment office or something. Anyway, you can't believe the numbers, you have to trust what your people are telling you.
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#59 Nov 19 2012 at 10:52 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*****
11,929 posts
If dems had a vested interest in keeping unemployment high, why wouldn't they push up the unemployment above the 5-7% range in the people's republic of Massachusetts? Dems more or less have a lock on the government down here, so either they are incredibly incompetent at destroying jobs, or your statement needs a rethinking. A lot of rethinking.
____________________________
"India black magic anal sex zionist blow job terrorism child rape bicycle"
Just as Planned.
#60 Nov 19 2012 at 12:59 PM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
15,691 posts
crazylegz1975 wrote:

The Democrats have a vested interest in keeping the unemployment roles high. The simple fact is most people that work vote Republican. And there's a reason for this.
Besides the fact that this isn't fact (ain't even close), what is this vested interest that the dems have in keeping the unemployment roles high?
____________________________
Alma wrote:
Post and be happy!
#61 Nov 19 2012 at 2:46 PM Rating: Excellent
Annoying Ass
ZAM Administrator
Avatar
*****
11,934 posts
Timelordwho wrote:
the people's republic of Massachusetts?

Commonwealth of Massachusetts, in actuality Smiley: schooled
____________________________
Retired News Writer for the ZAM Network
WoW - Aureliano the Insane - level 90 Druid on Sen'Jin
Nanaoki - level 90 Mage on Sen'Jin
#62 Nov 19 2012 at 5:51 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*****
11,929 posts
LockeColeMA wrote:
Timelordwho wrote:
the people's republic of Massachusetts?

Commonwealth of Massachusetts, in actuality Smiley: schooled


That's a weird way of spelling Communist State.
____________________________
"India black magic anal sex zionist blow job terrorism child rape bicycle"
Just as Planned.
#63 Nov 20 2012 at 4:13 AM Rating: Excellent
Everyone's Oiran
Avatar
*****
15,915 posts
Pensive tried getting into Communist State, but he was overqualified.
____________________________
<3

http://www.reddit.com/r/Forum4/
#64 Nov 20 2012 at 9:14 AM Rating: Good
******
43,469 posts
Timelordwho wrote:
A lot of rethinking.
You're implying there was thought the first time around.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#65 Nov 20 2012 at 5:28 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
9,242 posts
I like that when I read up on "red states" I get ads that say things like "37 things to hoard"
____________________________
lolgaxe wrote:
When it comes to sitting around not doing anything for long periods of time, only being active for short windows, and marginal changes and sidegrades I'd say FFXI players were the perfect choice for politicians.

clicky
#68 Nov 20 2012 at 6:42 PM Rating: Excellent
Prodigal Son
*****
19,894 posts
crazylegz1975 wrote:
Food stamp usage up 70% since 2007.

All part of Obama's 75% and the democrat plan.

Might want to check your date to some time after Obama won the nomination...just sayin'.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#69 Nov 20 2012 at 6:46 PM Rating: Good
Prodigal Son
*****
19,894 posts
crazylegz1975 wrote:
Elinda wrote:
crazylegz1975 wrote:

The Democrats have a vested interest in keeping the unemployment roles high. The simple fact is most people that work vote Republican. And there's a reason for this.
Besides the fact that this isn't fact (ain't even close), what is this vested interest that the dems have in keeping the unemployment roles high?

It most certainly is a fact.

Just because you refuse to recognize the truth in the fact that Democrats have always supported increasing the roles of people on welfare doesn't make it any less true.

I challenge you to show me one Democrat in the last 30yrs that has run for national office and supported reducing welfare.

Food stamp useage dropped from 26Mil to 17Mil during Clinton's term.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#72 Nov 20 2012 at 7:33 PM Rating: Excellent
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
14,742 posts
crazylegz1975 wrote:
And where was obama in 2007?


Kenya? Eating dogs, smoking pot, and worshiping muslim-god?
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#73 Nov 20 2012 at 7:46 PM Rating: Excellent
******
21,717 posts
Quote:
Quote:
crazylegz1975 wrote:
I challenge you to show me one Democrat in the last 30yrs that has run for national office and supported reducing welfare.

Food stamp useage dropped from 26Mil to 17Mil during Clinton's term.

Not what I said you illiterate @#%^.

Show me where clinton ran on reducing welfare.


Bill Clinton signed PRWORA into law on August 22, 1996, fulfilling his 1992 campaign promise to "end welfare as we have come to know it."


And just in case you refuse to believe it, WAYYYYY back in October 1992:

Here is a surprise: The platform approved in July by the Democratic National Conventionin New York is more aggressive in challenging the status quo with regard to welfare than the platform adopted by the Republicans in Houston.

A second surprise: Gov. Bill Clinton proposes to ``end welfare as we know it`` and that ``those who are able must go to work.`` His campaign is actually running a television spot with this message.

So here is a prediction: The welfare state will look very different very soon.



This might be amusing if you weren't so **** retarded.
____________________________
R.I.P. Jessica M. 5/3/2010
This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.
gbaji wrote:
You guys keep tossing facts out there like they mean something.


#74 Nov 20 2012 at 8:29 PM Rating: Excellent
******
43,469 posts
crazylegz1975 wrote:
All true.
Except all of it.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#75 Nov 20 2012 at 9:25 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
*****
19,894 posts
My bad; I made the mistake of showing results instead of campaign promises.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#76 Nov 20 2012 at 10:26 PM Rating: Good
crazylegz1975 wrote:
Food stamp usage up 70% since 2007.

All part of Obama's 75% and the democrat plan.

Unemployment was 4.5 when w and a gop congress ran things. The economy didn't tank until the dems took over congress.

All true.


Firstly, no, it did not increase by 75 percent, hell, anyone who passed high school math classes can look at the graphs and charts in the articles linked throughout this thread and see that that's mathematically impossible. This leads me to believe that you're uneducated, likely a high school dropout, who just blames everyone else(up to and ncluding the government) for the fact that they're going nowhere in life. Nothing wrong with being a droput, mind you, but at least try not to pretend that its anyone's fault but yours.

Secondly, congress has nothing to do with the food stamps program iirc.

Third, how do you figure that congress is to blame for the economy? Or that an economic issue of the sort that's been ongoing since '08 can possibly be fixed, through any action or legislation, in as few as 4 years? Its just not even remotely possible. What about the banks doing shady business? Deregulation? Paying for a war(approved by a republican congress by the way) with deficit spending?

I really feel like we're all starting to sound like broken records at this point, is it really such a difficulty, legz, for you to just give us one valid source(pundits aren't valid sources of information), to at least back up some of what you say? How can you believe anything without evidence? Seriously. How? How do you even remember to breathe with the level of intelligence you show here?
____________________________
Master Meleagant Driftwood of Stromm, Warrior of the 69th level(EQ)
Rhyys, Human Warrior of 67th level(WoW)

The World Is Not A Cold Dead Place.
Alan Watts wrote:
I am omnipotent insofar as I am the Universe, but I am not an omnipotent in the role of Alan Watts, only cunning


Eske wrote:
I've always read Driftwood as the straight man in varus' double act. It helps if you read all of his posts in the voice of Droopy Dog.
#77 Nov 21 2012 at 12:03 AM Rating: Good
Prodigal Son
*****
19,894 posts
No, because sources are liberal bias conspiracy.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#78 Nov 21 2012 at 12:19 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
***
2,534 posts
crazylegz1975 wrote:
Remind me again who controlled congress when that happened


The Illuminati, obviously, Ah Doy!!!!
____________________________
Dandruffshampoo wrote:
Curses, beaten by Professor stupidopo-opo.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Stupidmonkey is more organized than a bag of raccoons.
#79 Nov 21 2012 at 8:11 AM Rating: Excellent
******
43,469 posts
Monsieur Driftwood wrote:
Firstly, no, it did not increase by 75 percent, hell, anyone who passed high school math classes can look at the graphs and charts in the articles linked throughout this thread and see that that's mathematically impossible.
Why do you think the angry pseudo-conservatives absolutely abhor education? They thrive on ignorance.

Edited, Nov 21st 2012 9:22am by lolgaxe
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#80 Nov 21 2012 at 8:19 AM Rating: Decent
It's Just a Flesh Wound
******
22,688 posts
Fact is 110% of the people who voted for Romney wrote in their votes with food stamps.
____________________________
Dear people I don't like: 凸(●´―`●)凸
#81 Nov 21 2012 at 9:31 AM Rating: Excellent
Tracer Bullet
*****
12,564 posts

Can't wait until we get abortion stamps issued monthly.

____________________________
Na Zdrowie
#83 Nov 21 2012 at 3:43 PM Rating: Good
Unforkgettable
*****
13,219 posts
trickybeck wrote:

Can't wait until we get abortion stamps issued monthly.

Black Friday deals! Prepay for three abortions (redeemable within one year of date of purchase) and receive an Obamaphone!
____________________________
Banh
#84 Nov 21 2012 at 6:38 PM Rating: Excellent
******
21,717 posts
crazylegz1975 wrote:
Boy you struggle with basic reading comp. And yes food stamp usage is up 70% since 2007. You're in denial and absolutely refuse to look at the data.

Tell me has unemployment and food stamp usage gone up under obama?


Unemployment? Nope. 7.9% when he took office, 7.9% now. In fact the numbers clearly show that he halted one of the largest steepest unemployment peaks in history.

Also, food stamp users sat at 26.3 million in 2007 and sits at 44.7 million as of last year. Yes, 26.3m + (26.3m * 0.7) = 44.7. This is undeniable fact. However, Obama didn't take office until 2009, and his fiscal response to the crisis created by Dubya didn't take effect until the beginning of the next year. So at the end of fiscal year 2009 (just 9 short months into his term, the number of food stamp claims sat at 33.5m. So it would be reasonable to suggest that from fiscal year 2007 to 2009 under Dubya, food stamp claims rose ((33.5-26.3m) / 33.5m, or roughly 21.5%, and they rose again under Obama's watch from 33.5m to 44.7m, or ((44.7m-33.5m)/44.7m), roughly 25%. If you want to get serious about numbers, food stamp claims rose sharply from fiscal year 2001 to fiscal year 2009, a whopping 34.2% under Dubya.

Score? Dubya 34.2%, Obama 25%.

Given that the majority of Obama's first term economic responsibility was to halt the great recession and get the economy into recover mode, I'm OK with that. I would expect a similarly sharp drop over the next 4 years as the economy continues to recover.

If you had 1/5th a brain in that tiny empty cavity atop your neck, you'd understand the numbers you're spouting have absolutely zero relevance to any point you were trying to make, but I don't suspect that to be the case.

Edited, Nov 21st 2012 6:40pm by BrownDuck
____________________________
R.I.P. Jessica M. 5/3/2010
This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.
gbaji wrote:
You guys keep tossing facts out there like they mean something.


#85 Nov 21 2012 at 7:43 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
8,944 posts
Brown Duck wrote:
However, Obama didn't take office until 2009,


You obviously don't understand politics. As soon as a politician wins an election, everything immediately changes and all blame is due to the election that just occurred. Look at all of the businesses who said that they had to cut people due to Obama winning the election, that wasn't an issue on that Tuesday morning.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#86 Nov 22 2012 at 8:35 AM Rating: Good
crazylegz1975 wrote:
Monsieur Driftwood wrote:
crazylegz1975 wrote:
Food stamp usage up 70% since 2007.

All part of Obama's 75% and the democrat plan.

Unemployment was 4.5 when w and a gop congress ran things. The economy didn't tank until the dems took over congress.

All true.


Firstly, no, it did not increase by 75 percent, hell, anyone who passed high school math classes can look at the graphs and charts in the articles linked throughout this thread and see that that's mathematically impossible. This leads me to believe that you're uneducated, likely a high school dropout, who just blames everyone else(up to and ncluding the government) for the fact that they're going nowhere in life. Nothing wrong with being a droput, mind you, but at least try not to pretend that its anyone's fault but yours.

Secondly, congress has nothing to do with the food stamps program iirc.

Third, how do you figure that congress is to blame for the economy? Or that an economic issue of the sort that's been ongoing since '08 can possibly be fixed, through any action or legislation, in as few as 4 years? Its just not even remotely possible. What about the banks doing shady business? Deregulation? Paying for a war(approved by a republican congress by the way) with deficit spending?

I really feel like we're all starting to sound like broken records at this point, is it really such a difficulty, legz, for you to just give us one valid source(pundits aren't valid sources of information), to at least back up some of what you say? How can you believe anything without evidence? Seriously. How? How do you even remember to breathe with the level of intelligence you show here?

Boy you struggle with basic reading comp. And yes food stamp usage is up 70% since 2007. You're in denial and absolutely refuse to look at the data.

Tell me has unemployment and food stamp usage gone up under obama?

This is a very simple question even for you.



Sir, I have looked at the data, I posted the data!.

Quote:
Tell me has unemployment and food stamp usage gone up under obama?


Food stamp usage? Yes, but they were going up long before that. And there can be many underlying factors that caused it, including, but not limited to the prices of foodstuffs rising, while the wages remain stuck in place. Here in Ontario, Canada, we kind of dealt with that by having the minimum wage rise from 7.75/hr, to 10.25/hr slowly over 3 years. I'm not going to go into some heavy research about the food stamps program in each state(because again, and I'll bold this for you so you see it, food stamps programs are controlled at the state level), but I'm assuming that you don't have to be unemployed to be on it, as the numbers don't make sense in that way(also, and I find this to be in direct contradiction to your insistence that the dems are responsible, republican led states(as in Republican state congress, governor, etc.) actually have the highest food stamp usage in the nation.) But lets look at the all-around worst:

Georgia: 17.9% of the population is on food stamps, and 8.9% are unemployed. You may notice, that these numbers don't match. The minimum wage is 5.15/hr, employees in places where tips are received are paid, a third-world worthy 2.13/hr. 2.13. Now, I'm not 100% certain, but do these get bumped up to the Federal minimum? If so, who's paying for that? Someone is getting screwed. If not, then it's no surprise that food stamp usage would be high when the people are barely making more than the kids who make your shoes.

Quote:
Tell me has unemployment and food stamp usage gone up under obama?


It did, at first, in the wake of one of the biggest financial crisis ever, it had actually already been rising since about '05, but has been dropping at a steady rate since early-mid 2010, and is still dropping, rather sharply in comparison to other periods of time, implying continual improvement in the economic situation. It is, in fact, as the poster 2 posts above mine pointed out, at the same point it was when Obama took office. And it's DROPPING. This is a good thing, take it as such.

I've already provided my sources, as have others. This thread is full of links to various places, from both sides of the political spectrum, that basically tell you that you're wrong. That you're telling me to look at the data when you refuse to do so yourself(or if you do, you're refusing to show us where you got your data), is kind of telling about your intelligence and level of education. Even a 7th grader can do research and cite their sources. This has been bolded for maximum visibility to the apparently blind/illiterate.

Edited, Nov 22nd 2012 9:37am by Driftwood

Edited, Nov 22nd 2012 9:37am by Driftwood
____________________________
Master Meleagant Driftwood of Stromm, Warrior of the 69th level(EQ)
Rhyys, Human Warrior of 67th level(WoW)

The World Is Not A Cold Dead Place.
Alan Watts wrote:
I am omnipotent insofar as I am the Universe, but I am not an omnipotent in the role of Alan Watts, only cunning


Eske wrote:
I've always read Driftwood as the straight man in varus' double act. It helps if you read all of his posts in the voice of Droopy Dog.
#87 Nov 22 2012 at 8:43 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Monsieur Driftwood wrote:
I've already provided my sources, as have others.

You don't think he cares or will even read it, do you? He's an even less interesting or provocative version of Varus, trying to troll the boards.

Some people say that he is Varus. Who cares? If he is, he's doing a worse job than usual. If it's someone else, they're trying to emulate an idiot and yet still failing at it.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#88 Nov 22 2012 at 8:46 AM Rating: Decent
True, however, as someone with over 100k posts, can you really argue with a good reason to boost post count with large posts? God knows that's a good portion of yours, is large posts arguing with Gbaji, Varus, whoever.

Edited, Nov 22nd 2012 9:50am by Driftwood
____________________________
Master Meleagant Driftwood of Stromm, Warrior of the 69th level(EQ)
Rhyys, Human Warrior of 67th level(WoW)

The World Is Not A Cold Dead Place.
Alan Watts wrote:
I am omnipotent insofar as I am the Universe, but I am not an omnipotent in the role of Alan Watts, only cunning


Eske wrote:
I've always read Driftwood as the straight man in varus' double act. It helps if you read all of his posts in the voice of Droopy Dog.
#89 Nov 22 2012 at 9:36 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
I have over 60k, not 100k.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#90 Nov 22 2012 at 10:03 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,678 posts
He's already been told that and if Mr Winky can't wake him up to it, what makes you think you can?
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#91 Nov 22 2012 at 10:13 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Maybe he's trolling!
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#93 Nov 22 2012 at 9:09 PM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
14,742 posts
Hey, at least he gives you something to complain about.
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#95 Nov 22 2012 at 9:24 PM Rating: Excellent
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
14,742 posts
crazylegz1975 wrote:
TirithRR wrote:
Hey, at least he gives you something to complain about.

Yeah I can see you really care about unemployment and the millions upon millions on food stamps.

I don't have to care about it. You care about it enough to make up for my lack of caring (plus some).

Edit:
See what I did there? I went all Communism on your emotions.

Edited, Nov 22nd 2012 10:30pm by TirithRR
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#96 Nov 22 2012 at 10:53 PM Rating: Good
Prodigal Son
*****
19,894 posts
Quote:
Again all your blathering doesn't change the fact that Democrats main goal is to increase government dependence and decrease individual liberty. So yeah when Obama's finished we all will be poorer and liberty will be a nostalgic concept long since dead.

But we now have the liberty of smoking pot, marrying gays and killing unborn babies. Sounds like progress to me!
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#97 Nov 23 2012 at 12:29 AM Rating: Good
crazylegz1975 wrote:
Monsieur Driftwood wrote:
crazylegz1975 wrote:
Monsieur Driftwood wrote:
crazylegz1975 wrote:
Food stamp usage up 70% since 2007.

All part of Obama's 75% and the democrat plan.

Unemployment was 4.5 when w and a gop congress ran things. The economy didn't tank until the dems took over congress.

All true.


Firstly, no, it did not increase by 75 percent, hell, anyone who passed high school math classes can look at the graphs and charts in the articles linked throughout this thread and see that that's mathematically impossible. This leads me to believe that you're uneducated, likely a high school dropout, who just blames everyone else(up to and ncluding the government) for the fact that they're going nowhere in life. Nothing wrong with being a droput, mind you, but at least try not to pretend that its anyone's fault but yours.

Secondly, congress has nothing to do with the food stamps program iirc.

Third, how do you figure that congress is to blame for the economy? Or that an economic issue of the sort that's been ongoing since '08 can possibly be fixed, through any action or legislation, in as few as 4 years? Its just not even remotely possible. What about the banks doing shady business? Deregulation? Paying for a war(approved by a republican congress by the way) with deficit spending?

I really feel like we're all starting to sound like broken records at this point, is it really such a difficulty, legz, for you to just give us one valid source(pundits aren't valid sources of information), to at least back up some of what you say? How can you believe anything without evidence? Seriously. How? How do you even remember to breathe with the level of intelligence you show here?

Boy you struggle with basic reading comp. And yes food stamp usage is up 70% since 2007. You're in denial and absolutely refuse to look at the data.

Tell me has unemployment and food stamp usage gone up under obama?

This is a very simple question even for you.



Sir, I have looked at the data, I posted the data!.

Quote:
Tell me has unemployment and food stamp usage gone up under obama?


Food stamp usage? Yes, but they were going up long before that. And there can be many underlying factors that caused it, including, but not limited to the prices of foodstuffs rising, while the wages remain stuck in place. Here in Ontario, Canada, we kind of dealt with that by having the minimum wage rise from 7.75/hr, to 10.25/hr slowly over 3 years. I'm not going to go into some heavy research about the food stamps program in each state(because again, and I'll bold this for you so you see it, food stamps programs are controlled at the state level), but I'm assuming that you don't have to be unemployed to be on it, as the numbers don't make sense in that way(also, and I find this to be in direct contradiction to your insistence that the dems are responsible, republican led states(as in Republican state congress, governor, etc.) actually have the highest food stamp usage in the nation.) But lets look at the all-around worst:

Georgia: 17.9% of the population is on food stamps, and 8.9% are unemployed. You may notice, that these numbers don't match. The minimum wage is 5.15/hr, employees in places where tips are received are paid, a third-world worthy 2.13/hr. 2.13. Now, I'm not 100% certain, but do these get bumped up to the Federal minimum? If so, who's paying for that? Someone is getting screwed. If not, then it's no surprise that food stamp usage would be high when the people are barely making more than the kids who make your shoes.

Quote:
Tell me has unemployment and food stamp usage gone up under obama?


It did, at first, in the wake of one of the biggest financial crisis ever, it had actually already been rising since about '05, but has been dropping at a steady rate since early-mid 2010, and is still dropping, rather sharply in comparison to other periods of time, implying continual improvement in the economic situation. It is, in fact, as the poster 2 posts above mine pointed out, at the same point it was when Obama took office. And it's DROPPING. This is a good thing, take it as such.

I've already provided my sources, as have others. This thread is full of links to various places, from both sides of the political spectrum, that basically tell you that you're wrong. That you're telling me to look at the data when you refuse to do so yourself(or if you do, you're refusing to show us where you got your data), is kind of telling about your intelligence and level of education. Even a 7th grader can do research and cite their sources. This has been bolded for maximum visibility to the apparently blrnd/illiterate.

Edited, Nov 22nd 2012 9:37am by Driftwood

Edited, Nov 22nd 2012 9:37am by Driftwood


You used all those words to basically blame W.

Sorry kid but food stamp usage is at record levels. And most of this occurred under obama.

Unemployment is still right at 8%. How many years ago was the stimulus plan obama and the dems pushed through?

There is absolutely no evidence the economy is improving.

As a matter of fact dual income houses earn a combined 100k will be taking an approximate 6% federal tax increase. That's at least a 6k annual tax increase for millions of americans.

Again all your blathering doesn't change the fact that Democrats main goal is to increase government dependence and decrease individual liberty. So yeah when Obama's finished we all will be poorer and liberty will be a nostalgic concept long since dead.


At no point did I even come close to blaming W. In that post. Hell, I generally lay far more blame on the banks and wall street than on any one presidentr person. Really, there are so many people to blame, its not really worth the effort of writing at any great length about it. At least not here, and most definitely not whemn I'm posting from my phone.

Next up, I'm admitting that, while the levels aren't as high as you claim, food stamp usage is, in fact at record levels. I've made no claims against that fact, only claims that your figures are quite wrong. I'm also wondering exactly how obama has been personally responsible for something decided at the state level, that is actually at its highest in traditionally republican led states. Please, enlighten me to the exact action, that obama has personally taken, all on his own, with no co-operation by anyone at the senate, congressional, or state levels.

Now, there's plenty of evidence that the economy is improving. You're making a common mistale where one assumes that everything that happens with the economy is caused as an immediate(as in, near-instant) effect by something. The frustrating, but necessary reality is that in many cases, sort of a delayed reaction to an action as it's implemented over the course of time. This is very much the case with both the recession, and the slow but steady levelling out, and beginnings of a recovery. You claim that because the unemployment rate is the saem as it was 3 years ago, that there has been no improvement, however, it is at 7.9 now after a steady decline from the 10% it was at in 2010. Its actually a fairly decent achievement to be able to slow, level out, and then reverse the increase in unemployment. Fixing the economy can't be done in a relatively short period of time. It takes years, it will still take a few years from now, it would be no different a situation with the republicans at the helm. Its just not possible. Not in any way. Not with a recession of this extent.

Next point. I'm for tax increases on that level of income and higher. Some people act like they're so poor, only making 100k per year for their household. I hate to break it to you(I don't really, it just sounds better if I say that), but an extra 600/year/100k isn't going to hurt that much, and those people/families will still be quite well off, and still, by a longshot, ahead of a higher number of people than those at those income levels. Sure, they might have to wait a little longer for some luxury or another, but, regardless of any increase, they're not going to lose out on the basic necessities of life, and they will still be able to afford a good many luxuries.

You have provided no evidence to back up your claims that either Obama or the Democrats are intent on keeping unemployment and food stamps up, nor is there any evidence to back up your claims of a decrease in freedom(and in recent years, if you want to get technical, the dems have pushed for more individual freedom. And no, increasing a tax rate is not a cut to freedom, and enacting tax cuts during a recession is stupid, and so insanely irresponsible, that I can't for the life of me, figure out why anyone would do that for any reason past self-interest, but I digress, this has been a long aside, and I think I'll get back to the meat of the post now).

All you've done, is point out a current issue, and then lay blame on Obama and the democrats, and said that they've done so purposefully and consciously and shall continue to do it, but, you haven't said exactly what it is they've done. Which pieces of legislation are responsible? What individual actions has obama undertaken? To what extent did each one have an effect? I form and change my opinions based on the closest things to irrefutable evidence that I can find,, and you've not said a single thing to sway my opinion even in the slightest.. If you think you're so right about these claims, prove it. Show us the evidence that we must clearly(sarcasm) be ignoring or missing that makes your statement so absolutely true and correct. What exactly is it, that we're missing, sir, by all means let us know.
____________________________
Master Meleagant Driftwood of Stromm, Warrior of the 69th level(EQ)
Rhyys, Human Warrior of 67th level(WoW)

The World Is Not A Cold Dead Place.
Alan Watts wrote:
I am omnipotent insofar as I am the Universe, but I am not an omnipotent in the role of Alan Watts, only cunning


Eske wrote:
I've always read Driftwood as the straight man in varus' double act. It helps if you read all of his posts in the voice of Droopy Dog.
#98 Nov 23 2012 at 4:18 AM Rating: Decent
******
21,717 posts
Nobody likes quote pyramids, especially the really vertical ones.
____________________________
R.I.P. Jessica M. 5/3/2010
This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.
gbaji wrote:
You guys keep tossing facts out there like they mean something.


#100 Nov 23 2012 at 10:55 AM Rating: Good
Unforkgettable
*****
13,219 posts
What about if it's a family of five with two mommies or two daddies?

Edited, Nov 23rd 2012 11:55am by Spoonless
____________________________
Banh
#101 Nov 23 2012 at 10:56 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
***
2,534 posts
crazylegz1975 wrote:
A family of five where the mother works and earns 50k and the father works and earns 50k. Are now going to have to pay an extra 6-9k annually to the leeches.

If you cant see what's wrong with this considering the cost of living you probably aren't even capable of taking care of yourself in the first place.


The fact that they couldn't get affordable contraception?
____________________________
Dandruffshampoo wrote:
Curses, beaten by Professor stupidopo-opo.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Stupidmonkey is more organized than a bag of raccoons.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 45 All times are in CDT
Elinda, Jophiel, Kaolian, lolgaxe, Samira, TirithRR, Anonymous Guests (39)