Columns Retired Columns & Blogs |
July 23, 2010 - 9:13am
#1
Hard (as possible) facts you might need
Loudspeakers Amplification | Digital Sources Analog Sources Featured | Accessories Music |
Columns Retired Columns & Blogs |
Loudspeakers Amplification Digital Sources | Analog Sources Accessories Featured | Music Columns Retired Columns | Show Reports | Features Latest News Community | Resources Subscriptions |
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0901/11/se.01.html
http://portalseven.com/employment/unemployment_rate.jsp?fromYear=1988&toYear=2010
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/down...r=c&local=s
Consider the economic recession cycle of the US and then think about which party was in power in the White House - or had just been voted out of power - and how deeply the country was affected by the downturn or for what reason the recession occurred. Draw your own conclusions ...
http://useconomy.about.com/od/grossdomesticproduct/a/recession_histo.htm
http://useconomy.about.com/od/stockmarketcomponents/a/Dow_History.htm
http://useconomy.about.com/od/economicindicators/a/GDP-statistics.htm
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/down...r=c&local=s
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/down...r=c&local=s
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/down...r=c&local=s
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/down...r=c&local=s
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/down...r=c&local=s
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/down...r=c&local=s
http://www.opensecrets.org/revolving/top.php?display=Z
Politifact is a great site. One of the few sources on the Internet that can be trusted.
Four Deformations of the Apocalypse
By DAVID STOCKMAN
Published: July 31, 2010
"But the new catechism, as practiced by Republican policymakers for decades now, has amounted to little more than money printing and deficit finance
... the new policy doctrines have caused four great deformations of the national economy, and modern Republicans have turned a blind eye to each one.
The first of these started when the Nixon administration defaulted on American obligations ...
The second unhappy change in the American economy has been the extraordinary growth of our public debt. In 1970 it was just 40 percent of gross domestic product, or about $425 billion. When it reaches $18 trillion, it will be 40 times greater than in 1970. This debt explosion has resulted not from big spending by the Democrats, but instead the Republican Party
Editorial
What They
The New York Times? How gay.
"Lamont Sanford", how consistently gay-bashing.
Great comeback, LS. You're a "thinker", you are.
"I love my dead gay son!"
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/eci.nr0.htm
Looking at the raw data - which might still be revised somewhat but which stands at the moment within a 12 month database ...
"Compensation costs for civilian workers increased 1.8 percent for the 12-month period ending June 2010."
Compensation costs for private industry workers increased 1.9 percent for the 12-month period ...
Compensation costs for State and local government workers increased 1.8 percent for the 12-month period ... "
Compare that to "Productivity" ...
"Nonfarm business sector labor productivity increased at a 2.8 percent
annual rate during the first quarter of 2010, the U.S. Bureau of Labor
Statistics reported today, with output rising 4.0 percent and hours rising
1.1 percent. (All quarterly percent changes in this release are seasonally
adjusted annual rates.) From the first quarter of 2009 to the first
quarter of 2010, output increased 3.0 percent while hours fell 3.0
percent, yielding an increase in productivity of 6.1 percent (tables A,
and 2). This gain in productivity from the same quarter a year ago was the
largest since output per hour increased 6.1 percent over the four-quarter
period ending in the first quarter of 2002."
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/prod2.nr0.htm
Now, compare that to "Corporate Profits" ...
http://www.bea.gov/briefrm/corpprof.htm
Most everything above put together as one single graph ...
http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2006/08/28/business/28wages_chart.html
Benefits compensation is also down across the board when compare to profits ...
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/eci.t12.htm
Consumer debt has fallen slightly as people with jobs are paying off more debt and saving slightly more than in previous years ...
http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/housedebt/
This is a double edged sword as consumer debt had been the driving force of the pre-recession economy. Now, with fewer people spending, there is less demand for goods (except at the higher end of sales which are actually increasing) which spells trouble for the future economic outlook. With less demand, fewer workers will be required to maintain those high "Corporate Profits". Always a glass half full/glass half empty affair here.
Finally, The NASDAQ composite has remained relatively stable since rebounding from late 2008 lows ...
http://money.cnn.com/data/markets/nasdaq/
Those companies whose earnings exceeded expectations have surpassed those which did not so corporate earnings are good on average ...
http://www.nasdaq.com/
Now, if only they would go ahead and invest their reserves ...
"Flush with $1.8 trillion, corporate America sits on the sidelines"
http://blogs.ajc.com/jay-bookman-blog/2010/07/15/flush-with-1-8-trillion-corpora te-america-sits-on-the-sidelines/
American workers are working either longer hours with fewer workers to do the work while getting paid the same (or less when benefits are compared to rising consumer costs) as when times were (supposedly) good. Or, people are working fewer hours with more time off and work to do sitting undone while the workers accept fewer benefits and lower total, inflation adjusted wages while doing the same amount of work. It's an employer's market by anyone's estimation with the fact you have a job being a prime motivator to the worker. A far cry from the last years of Clinton when I was selling to college graudates with their $40-60k sign on bonuses due to a shortage of skilled workers and corporations willing to pay top dollar to those who qualified basically just by breathing. For all but the top 2-5%, things are rough while, with record low interest rates on credit, that top 2% have few if any worries beyond where to take that second vacation or how to add another parking space to their four car garage or to just buy another house with a bigger garage.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/...xceeded-9-perc/
http://www.politico.com/wuerker/
http://mediamatters.org/research/201008020068
Yesterday I heard Limbaugh make a statement, the same one I've heard from him on numerous occasions. To sum it up as closely as I can remember it goes, "Show me any place where there are financial troubles and I (Limbaugh) will show you a Union at the heart of it all."
I've been looking but I can't seem to find an proof of any Union being in existence at AIG, Lehman, Bank of America, etc. Does anyone know which Union the derivatives traders would have belonged to?
This has been posted elsewhere in this Open Bar section but I thought it worth repeating assuming not everyone can make it beyond the vulgarities of Lamont.
Why any Consitutional challenge to the health care "mandate" will fail. Case Law;
Quote:
JACOBSEN v. MASSACHUSETTS (1905)
In 1796, a British doctor discovered a vaccine for smallpox, which was a deadly disease. In 1902, Cambridge, Massachusetts, passed a law forcing everyone in the city to receive a smallpox vaccination. Henning Jacobsen refused to be vaccinated and was charged with violating the law. At his trial, Jacobsen offered evidence that the vaccination did not really protect people against smallpox. He also offered evidence that he and his son experienced harmful reactions to vaccinations. The trial court rejected Jacobsen's evidence and convicted him.
Jacobsen appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. He argued that forcing him to be injected with a vaccine violated his liberty under the Fourteenth Amendment. Jacobsen said it violated the "right of every freeman to care for his own body and health" and was "nothing short of an assault upon his person." The Supreme Court rejected these arguments and affirmed Jacobsen's conviction. The Court said liberty does not prevent the government from deciding how people should take care of their health.
http://www.enotes.com/supreme-court-drama/whalen-v-roe
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Herd immunity"; http://www.harvardlawreview.org/issues/1...ssachusetts.pdf
The Orange Worm squirms - and refuses to answer a direct question; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vv8lXO9u3Jo
"Funny accounting"? John, do you mean like not funding Medicare Part "D" while telling us it would only cost $700 billion (all in borrowed money) yet at the same time you were threatening to fire the CBO accountant who tried to warn us the final cost would be more like $3 trillion over ten years? And you still managed to screw both the Medicare participants and the taxpayers?! Or, do you mean the process whereby the Republicans waged two unfunded, under equipped and ill managed foreign wars - all not accounted for in the year to year budgets for seven years at the cost of hundreds of thousands if not millions of lifes destroyed by your greed and hubris? Now that's "funny accounting", JB.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/08/opinion/08sun3.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=&st=nyt
Republican Trickie Dickie, the gift that keeps on proving "be careful what you wish for".
Do click on the audio link.
Go West young gay couples, go West ...
http://www.thedailyshow.com/
6'10" in, bless her little pea-pickin' heart, she just couldn't bring herself to say on camera a Republican President nominated a faggot to the Bench - That's why he's biased for godssake!!!
And that's the best the Republicans have to offer on anything. Where's the emoticon for bursting into tears over what's happened to reasoned discourse in this Country?
What time is it, Bullwinkle?
Time to check the "Truth-O-Meter", Rockie.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/
Jan, hows your priaprism and Alzheimers?
you still telling kids to get off your lawn? May I interest you in some AARP?
Here's the "as possible" ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0nERTFo-Sk
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/...ative-tax-cuts/
http://search.yahoo.com/search?ei=utf-8&...ction&type=
If an "illegal" is not under the jurisdiction of the US government or the individual state by way of being within the boundaries of the US or a state, what right is claimed by the US government or the state to arrest and try the "illegal"?
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/...ll-fully-paid-/
If someone trying to tell you about all those people "who pay no taxes"? Show them this; http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/22287.html
If they tell you US corporate taxes are among the highest in the world, show them this; http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/69xx/doc6902/11-28-CorporateTax.pdf
Yet the largest portion of the Stimulus Bill has gone to tax cuts and tax benefits; http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2010/08/18/business/20100818_Stimulus_graphic.html?ref=business
So when the Republicans ask, "Where are the jobs?", tell them doing the same ol' thing (tax cuts) didn't bring them.
While much of the Stimulus monies have been allocated much is yet to be awarded; http://www.recovery.gov/Pages/home.aspx
Where money has flowed to states for "shovel ready" jobs their unemployment is reported as; http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2010/08/18/business/20100818_Stimulus_graphic.html?ref=business
Despite taking Federal $$$'s, the Republicans can't see the new State Highway for the ideological blinders they are wearing.
How Much Stimulus Funding is Going to Your County?
http://projects.propublica.org/recovery
Eye on the Bailout
http://www.propublica.org/ion/bailout
Bailout Recipients
http://bailout.propublica.org/list/index
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100821/ap_on_go_ot/us_party_fundraising
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2010/aug/20/fact-checking-ground-zero-mosque-debate/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/19/jon-stewart-mosque_n_688546.html
Is it fact or fiction that over 700 Muslims failed to show up for work at or around the World Trade Center on 9/11?
It seems to always be: "Who knew, and when did they know it?"
There are a number of interesting parallels that can be drawn into this argument. New Yorkers will figure it out.
I have my theories down, but I'm not happy to discuss politics on the web.
Jim, that one's beneath you.
Perhaps you'd be interested in the "4,000 Jews didn't show up for work on 9/11" lie as part of the fantasy?
Seriously, now.
Why ask, Jim? First, you could actually find out for yourself rather than sticking things in your head which are the basis of hatred and ditrust. Second, it is a fact that US Government offficials were not flying commerical aircraft on and around 9-11. Make what you will of that given your preferred party was in power and, if you think that is a low blow, then consider your original question. Finally, you are trying to distract from the fact presented in the post.
Here's the fact, in case you couldn't make it all the way through a post critical of Fox News. They are ginning up hatred and bigotry by reporting what "might" happen. Not what has happened that can be proven or disproven. They are staking their ground on who "might" contribute monetarily to a cause they see as grist for their rumormill. Most importantly, they are demonizing this imam for a possible association they have not proven and cannot prove. They are only showing you the picture of the person they wish you to see as the face of evil while ignoring the fact the person they are saying "might" contribute to the imam is the second largest investor in Fox News. They are not telling you vital information but instead they are feeding you guilt by possible association while leaving out their complicity in the matter. They are not telling you the whole story. They are not telling you about the Saudi Prince's associations with GWB or that GWB chose this imam to head Department of State goodwill tasks. Try to think that if this Saudi Prince is bad and this imam is bad, then GWB must be bad and he was also not flying commercial airliners on 9-11 (). Got that connection, Jim?
Jim, I began this thread to present facts with as much truth as I can find. I'm not going to discuss this absurd idea of yours or go any further with this issue of who might contribute and who might be evil based upon the misinformation you wish to place in your head. If you prefer to remain ignorant of facts and believe you are better off not letting proof get in the way of your thinking, then you can stay that way for all I care. I didn't begin this thread to change anyone's mind and I know there are some minds that will never be changed no matter what fact is presented. Some people prefer to simply not know and to find guilt in possible associations.
If you have contrary facts to what has been presented, then show your facts. I'm hoping that is how this thread will operate and we won't be dragged through the crap of the insults which work their way into any political thread. Present contrary facts or please do not comment and certainly do not use rumors you have seen on the internet to disparage an entire religion or group of people.
http://www.colbertnation.com/home (terror bunker 5200)
How's that anymore ridiculous than 700 Muslims not showing up for work at the World Trade Center?
A lot of government officials showed up for work at the World Trade Center and The Pentagon. The death and casualties lists prove this much. You're trying to tell us no government officials got on planes on or before September 11, 2001?
Until and unless those who wish to grasp the essentials of religious bigotry devote some study to the 'Holy Books' that are foundation for all kinds of fundamentalism, endless arguments of the kind conducted here are pointless. For instance (and I could quote the Old Testament with equal force here ) examine this passage from the Koran Sura 3: V:7 -10.
"O our Lord! For the day of whose coming there is not a doubt, thou wilt surely gather mankind together. Verily, God will not fail the promise.
As for the infidels, their wealth, and their children, shall avail them nothing against God, They shall be fuel for the fire.
After the wont of the Pharoah, and of those who went before them, they treated our signs as falsehoods, Therefore God laid hold of them in their sins; and God is severe in punishing!
Say to the infidels: ye shall be worsted, and to Hell shall ye be gathered together; and wretched the couch!"
Duplicate post removed.
Ooooooooooh! you make my head hurt.
But, since you asked ...
No, you fucking idiot! I'm not trying to to tell you that and anyone with a nano-smithereen of common sense should be able to figure that much out. However, since you put it that way, do you think all Government Officials were flying Government aircraft on or about 9-11? It is a "fact" they were not. Got it? See how this game works? Lamont, how many games of checkers have you lost to a gerbil?
So now it is all government officials flying government aircraft on or about September 11, 2001? I don't get it.
It's really not difficult to see how Fox News gets away with it.
http://www.followthemoney.org/index.phtml
Well, which is it? No government officials boarded commercial flights on September 11, 2001 or was it no government officials flew government aircraft on September 11, 2001? Jesus wants to know.
Jesus and Gomez are busy cutting lawns. Ask 'em when they're done.
That's stereotyping Latinos.
Pages