The number of Americans on food stamps hit a record high in June

[PaceAdvantage]

Yup, that Obama, he's just so burdened with the mess Republicans left him...he's moving so slowly...but he's doing such a great job! (according to Bill Clinton...not so according to all those unfortunate folks on food stamps)

Record number of Americans (15%) on food stamps after four years of Obama...moving like a tortoise that man is, I tells ya...but SO effective and methodical!!The number of Americans on food stamps hit a record high in June, and economists don't expect much improvement as long as unemployment remains high.Obama's slow but steady policies: RESULTS YOU CAN'T PAY FOR! :rolleyes:

http://bottomline.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/09/05/13682742-report-15-of-americans-on-food-stamps?lite

[ElKabong]

These people on food stamps. They're not better off now than they were four years ago, then?

How can this be? Slick and Obie are touting the opposite. They're either lying, or they don't know their ass from a hole in the ground.

[JustRalph]

Mission accomplished

[PaceAdvantage]

I'm surprised Bill Clinton didn't mention this milestone in his epic speech tonight.

[ElKabong]

If the polls don't shade blue in late Oct expect this admin to announce food stamp recipients can get "Double Stamp Wednesday Rewards", that can be put toward birth control and contraceptive goodies in addition to fake drivers licenses.

i can see it now....."Sandra Fluke Wednesdays", on signs out front of the 7-11 stores.

[ElKabong]

These people on food stamps. They're not better off now than they were four years ago, then?

How can this be? Slick and Obie are touting the opposite. They're either lying, or they don't know ARITHMETIC

Fixed that for myself.

[Tom]

The trouble with food stamps is that they stick to the roof of your mouth.

[Striker]

These people on food stamps. They're not better off now than they were four years ago, then?

How can this be? Slick and Obie are touting the opposite. They're either lying, or they don't know their ass from a hole in the ground.
They ABSOLUTELY are better off than 4 years ago. There was an increase in Food Stamp Benefits in 2009 that the stimulus package paid for.
Household size of 1--$24 monthly increase benefit, of 2--$44 monthly increase, of 3--$63 monthly increase, of 4--$80 monthly increase($960 a year, not bad) and of 5--$95 monthly increase. Most workers in the public or private sector haven't seen that kind of increase in their salaries the last few years. And social security disability payments went up this past summer also.

[FantasticDan]

The Master holds court at the DNC, and a clearly addled PA resurrects a lame Newt talking point..

http://www.factcheck.org/2012/01/newts-faulty-food-stamp-claim/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/think-tanked/post/food-stamp-growth-started-before-obama-took-office/2012/09/06/36f49b00-f844-11e1-8398-0327ab83ab91_blog.html

Sounds about right. :lol:

[Wagergirl]

what sucks, is the number of them that are on food stamps because they are lying. The neighbor across the street, she says she is a single mom, and get's cash and stamps, but her baby daddy is there, and he works. They just bought a NEW car, but that's with his income.. which she doesn't claim to the government.

Or the kid who currantly is "couch surfing" who is getting food stamps because he is "homeless". But he isn't, he lives with his girlfriend and he works for Intel in Oregon making 15/hr but he doesn't claim that either.


So more might be on food stamps, but how many are lying to get there,

[boxcar]

If the polls don't shade blue in late Oct expect this admin to announce food stamp recipients can get "Double Stamp Wednesday Rewards", that can be put toward birth control and contraceptive goodies in addition to fake drivers licenses.

i can see it now....."Sandra Fluke Wednesdays", on signs out front of the 7-11 stores.

Man, you're on a roll today, Elk! :lol:

And if the birth control thingy doesn't draw 'em in, they can expand that to include sex toys as gifts from the public. :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[hcap]

They ABSOLUTELY are better off than 4 years ago. There was an increase in Food Stamp Benefits in 2009 that the stimulus package paid for.
Household size of 1--$24 monthly increase benefit, of 2--$44 monthly increase, of 3--$63 monthly increase, of 4--$80 monthly increase($960 a year, not bad) and of 5--$95 monthly increase. Most workers in the public or private sector haven't seen that kind of increase in their salaries the last few years. And social security disability payments went up this past summer also.The reason for the increase is a demonstrable rise in families falling into poverty after the unprecedented recession in 2008 caused by rethug policies and "never to be mentioned in public again" George W Bush


http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/Robert-Reich/2012/0202/Obama-is-no-food-stamp-president

They (the rethugs) argue our economic problems stem from this sharp rise in “dependency.” Get rid of these benefits and people will work harder.

But they have cause and effect backwards. The reason for the rise in food stamps, unemployment insurance, and other safety-net programs is Americans got clobbered in 2008 with the worst economic catastrophe since the Great Depression. They and their families have needed whatever helping hands they could get.

If anything, America’s safety nets have been too small and shot through with holes. That’s why the number and percentage of Americans in poverty has increased dramatically over the past three years. According to a study by Northeastern University, a third of families with young children are now in poverty.

This is the real scandal. For example, only 40 percent of the unemployed qualify for unemployment benefits because they weren’t working full time or long enough on a single job before they were canned. The unemployment system doesn’t take account of the fact that a large portion of the workforce typically works part time on several jobs, and moves from job to job.


http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3805

SNAP Plays a Critical Role in Helping Children
By Brynne Keith-Jennings

http://www.cbpp.org/images/cms/7-17-12fa-f1.jpg

The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, formerly known as the Food Stamp Program) is the nation’s largest child nutrition program, providing benefits to help one in three children in the nation to be able to eat a nutritionally sound diet. As such, SNAP is crucially important to children’s health and well-being.

# SNAP provides families with an estimated 22 million children with resources to purchase a nutritionally adequate diet. This represents close to 1 in 3 children (29 percent) in the United States. Almost half of all SNAP recipients are children (47 percent), and an additional 26 percent are adults living with children. (See Figure 1.) Forty percent of all SNAP recipients live in households with preschool-age children (ages 4 and below).

# Over 70 percent of SNAP benefits go to households with children. In 2011, SNAP provided an estimated $51 billion in benefits to families with children, over half of which went to families with preschool-age children.

# SNAP families are low-income. A typical family with children that is enrolled in SNAP has income (not including SNAP) at 57 percent of the poverty line. For a family of three, 57 percent of the poverty line corresponds with an annual income of $10,785 in 2012. A typical family with children on SNAP spends close to three-quarters of its income on housing and/or child care costs. Families with children currently receive an average of $420 a month in SNAP benefits, or about $5,000 a year.

# SNAP benefits help working families support their children. Nearly half (48 percent) of children who receive SNAP live in low-wage working families. A typical working household with children receives an average of $400 a month in SNAP benefits, representing about 30 percent of the family’s average income.

http://feedingamerica.org/how-we-fight-hunger/programs-and-services/public-assistance-programs/supplemental-nutrition-assistance-program/snap-myths-realities.aspx


Also 76% of SNAP households included a child, an elderly person, or a disabled person. These vulnerable households receive 84% of all SNAP benefits.


Not saying those who don't deserve SNAP should get any thing, but the stats are clear.


SNAP has a strong record of program integrity.

* SNAP error rates declined by 61% from FY1999 to FY2010, from 9.86% to a record low of 3.81%.[vii] The accuracy rate of 96.19% (FY2010) is now at an all-time program high and is considerably higher than other major benefit programs, for example Supplemental Security Income (90%), Medicare fee-for-service (89.5%), and Medicare Advantage Part C (85.9%).[viii] [ix]

* Two-thirds of all SNAP payment errors are a result of caseworker error.[x] Nearly one-fifth are underpayments, which occur when eligible participants receive less in benefits than they are eligible to receive.[xi]

* The national rate of food stamp trafficking declined from about 3.8 cents per dollar of benefits redeemed in 1993 to about 1.0 cent per dollar during the years 2006 to 2008. As you may have read in local news, USDA is aggressively enforcing individual cases of trafficking, but while there are individual cases of program abuse, for every one allegation of fraud, there are hundreds of stories of heartbreaking need.[xii]

It would seem the rate of fraud is low. And for the cost of under 100 billion we are helping millions of kids elderly and disabled

As Bloomberg View editors have argued, the $210 billion spent on food stamps, unemployment insurance and welfare in fiscal year 2012 is small compared to other spending. During the same period, the U.S. will spend $1.3 trillion on Social Security and Medicare, in addition to $700 billion on defense.

According to an April 2012 USDA study, SNAP reduced the poverty rate by 4.4 percent between 2000 and 2009. Since then, poverty has increased and median incomes have fallen. The program is not only keeping hunger at bay for millions of Americans. It is buttressing the nation's standard of living.

I can think of a number of military boon dongles and social welfare for corporations that should be cut WAY before SNAP is.

[acorn54]

i think the focus on the low income people to cut costs in government ridiculous, while the lions share of unwarranted costs are waste in government, and abuse of the system by government contractors, of course the little people don't have lobbyists in washington so they are easy targets.

[Native Texan III]

The continual increase in zero hours contracts , especially used for the poorly paid, where the employee only gets paid for the hours when called in by the company means they are 'in work, but not always working,' . The cost of child care at short notice and transport for a few hours work means that there is practically no gain in income by actually working. Employee and health benefits are near zero and the company pushes the problem onto the taxpayer whilst maximising its own profits.

[PaceAdvantage]

The Master holds court at the DNC, and a clearly addled PA resurrects a lame Newt talking point..That wasn't my talking point at all. I made no claim that Obama put more on food stamps than Bush.

I just made the (correct) claim that his policies have done nothing to stem the tide...

[ElKabong]

The reason for the increase is a demonstrable rise in families falling into poverty after the unprecedented recession in 2008 caused by rethug policies and "never to be mentioned in public again" George W Bush

]

You're a broken record, but I'll play.

This Geo Bush you speak of. He was voted in not once....but TWICE. The 2nd time was by a larger margin than the first. Now how can THAT be??

Things were goin' fine until dems took control of the senate and house in 2007. Then it all fell apart.

(note - that last paragraph is the same faulty logic you pimp about Clinton's so-called economy...you give him 100% credit, none to the republican congress, err, the rethugs as you 7th grade girls call them.....>>.face it, both partys are at fault. Obama's economy sucks, that's why unemployment hasn't improved, median income hasn't improved and MORE PEOPLE ARE ON STINKIN' FOOD STAMPS THAN EVER BEFORE)

As for the rest of the 35 paragraph bore you posted, it's bullshit

Have a nice day!

[Tom]

Hard to believe, some people consider food stamps and welfare as good things.

Hint - they are symptoms of FAILURE.

[ElKabong]

Hard to believe, some people consider food stamps and welfare as good things.

Hint - they are symptoms of FAILURE.

yeah, I can't believe I read that....It's like a baseball player saying losing 120 games every year is good b/c you win 42 (yippee). Amazing, the spin put on this.

[hcap]

You're a broken record, but I'll play.
You goddamn idiots on off topic are the broken record. This topic has been repeated ad nauseum. Food stamps are not a sign of failure of individuals in most cases. It is a necessary support net reflecting what is necessary and points more to the ever increasing disparity between the very rich and middle class.

http://img52.imageshack.us/img52/7060/101111krugman1blog480.jpg


This Geo Bush you speak of. He was voted in not once....but TWICE. The 2nd time was by a larger margin than the first. Now how can THAT be??

How can it be Bush was a no show at the pathetic rethug convention? Btw your full of shit Kabong this was the margin 2.4 points. Not exactly a landslide.

...............Dickhead Bush .......J. Kerry
Total.............. 50.7...............48.3%


Things were goin' fine until dems took control of the senate and house in 2007. Then it all fell apart.

Complete bullshit


Have a nice day!Had a nice day thankyou

Biden, Kerry and Obama hit it out of the park
Get ready for four more years of complaining, bitchin and the hunt for Onama's birth sertificate

[Actor]

Find out if you are eligible for food stamps. :)

http://www.gettingfoodstamps.org/canigetsnap.html

[Tom]

I am eligible for $200 per month, plus many other valuable prizes may be there for me if I call now.

I was totally honest in my replies.

This tell me how bogus this program is.

NO FRIGGING WAY IN HELL should I be getting public assistance.
The criteria are biased to encourage dependency.

[mostpost]

I am eligible for $200 per month, plus many other valuable prizes may be there for me if I call now.

I was totally honest in my replies.

This tell me how bogus this program is.

NO FRIGGING WAY IN HELL should I be getting public assistance.
The criteria are biased to encourage dependency.
You are doing something wrong. I used the calculator. I am retired and my income is under $40,000 a year. I pay rent under $1000 a month. I have assets over the $3250 but that automatically disqualifies me, so I said I did not. I do not qualify based on income.

So I said I will try to figure out Tom's eligibility. Of Course I made some assumptions. I gave you the same annual income as I make, even though you probably make more than twice as much. I do not recall you mentioning a wife, but I gave you one. She's lovely by the way. I said you pay $2000 a month as a mortgage, even though you may have already paid your house off.
I estimated your property taxes at $1,000 a month, and your homeowners insurance at $200 a month. Not certain about that. I said you had $500 a month in medical expenses. With all that you did not qualify. So one of us is doing something wrong.

[hcap]

Man, talk about ANCHORS trying to perpetrate fraud on the American Way of life!!

And you have a few computers, a color TV and are on the internet. Unless you claimed 15 or 16 7-year old kids, you must have paid off the social worker

You are not eligible Tom, go down to the local super market and load up on beer (low carb) and sausage.

[RaceBookJoe]

Might have to add a few more people getting food stamps after that pathetic jobs number.

[bigmack]

Might have to add a few more people getting food stamps after that pathetic jobs number.
Job numbers? Who cares about people out of work?

Haven't you been listening to hcap? The moron in chief is about to be reelected as a result of a few hack speeches hcap is dumb enough to buy into.

[hcap]

Job numbers? Who cares about people out of work?

Haven't you been listening to hcap? The moron in chief is about to be reelected as a result of a few hack speeches hcap is dumb enough to buy into.


Sorry goes to June but since June the job numbers all have been positive. Just imagine if the Bush (He who shall Not be Named) numbers continued.

[johnhannibalsmith]

I am eligible for $200 per month, plus many other valuable prizes may be there for me if I call now.

I was totally honest in my replies.
...

Good news! Based on the information that you have provided us, you appear to qualify for $348.00 in SNAP benefits per month. We urge you to apply because you will automatically be eligible for other substantial discounts on gas, electric and telephone bills.

Thanks for posting this whoever did originally. I just hit a lottery I didn't realize existed. :D

[bigmack]

Thanks for posting this whoever did originally. I just hit a lottery I didn't realize existed. :D
That was MA. Best dial into AZ with their 'nutrition assistance' program.
https://www.azdes.gov/main.aspx?menu=355&id=5218

By the way, Twizzlers are NOT nutritious.

[Tom]

With all that you did not qualify. So one of us is doing something wrong.

Gee, I wonder who that could be?

[Tom]

<b>Good news! Based on the information that you have provided us, you appear to qualify for $348.00 in SNAP benefits per month. We urge you to apply because you will automatically be eligible for other substantial discounts on gas, electric and telephone bills. </b>

Thanks for posting this whoever did originally. I just hit a lottery I didn't realize existed. :D

Can we use our $548 as Basterds' winnings and recalculate the standings? :lol:

Gary, check out that website......

[JustRalph]

Sorry goes to June but since June the job numbers all have been positive. Just imagine if the Bush (He who shall Not be Named) numbers continued.

Sure, If you don't count those who quit looking. Almost

400,000 people stopped looking for work!

If you factor in those people, unemployment would be almost 12%

[mostpost]

Gee, I wonder who that could be?

There is no way you could be eligible for food stamps. I said one of us must be doing something wrong because I didn't want to say you were lying.

[hcap]

Sure, If you don't count those who quit looking. Almost

400,000 people stopped looking for work!

If you factor in those people, unemployment would be almost 12%

The labor force participation rate fell two tenths of a percentage point to 63.5 percent – the lowest level since September 1981

If you use the same metrics for Bush's (He who shall not be Named) numbers, although the graph I posted above is still positive in terms of jobs added each month for Obama but it is not as dramatic, Bush's loss should be upgraded from 750,000 to close to maybe 850,000 some months the participation rate fell during Bush's (He who shall not be Named) second term

Do you honestly think losing 750,000 lobs or 850,000 compares favorably to Obamas' at least being in positive territory most months?

[mostpost]

Sure, If you don't count those who quit looking. Almost

400,000 people stopped looking for work!

If you factor in those people, unemployment would be almost 12%
The U6 unemployment rate includes those people who have stopped looking for work as well as those who are working part time but want to work full time. That rate is at 14.7% for August. Which may not sound great, but it is a .3% drop from July. So we have a .2% drop in the U3 rate (the one every one talks about) and a .3% drop in the U6 rate and we have added jobs for 30 straight months. And we have done this in the face of unrelenting GOP opposition to any jobs plan presented by the Democrats. It is clear where the blame lies both for the origin of the present crisis and for the failure to fix it. With the Republicans.

[bigmack]

The U6 unemployment rate includes those people who have stopped looking for work as well as those who are working part time but want to work full time. That rate is at 14.7% for August. Which may not sound great, but it is a .3% drop from July. So we have a .2% drop in the U3 rate (the one every one talks about) and a .3% drop in the U6 rate and we have added jobs for 30 straight months. And we have done this in the face of unrelenting GOP opposition to any jobs plan presented by the Democrats. It is clear where the blame lies both for the origin of the present crisis and for the failure to fix it. With the Republicans.
Nice work. Say, have you been able to see if Romney said he would have let 'Detroit' fail, or was your man crush and all his sycophants lying?

[PaceAdvantage]

If you use the same metrics for Bush'sWhat do you mean IF? You DID use the same metrics for Bush, often. You and every other left-leaner around here. Where do you think we learned all these tactics from? :lol:

[lsbets]

In one post we have Hcap implying that a .2 drop in workforce participation is no big deal, while in the very next post we have mostlylying implying that a .2 drop in u3 is great.

So when it looks bad for Obama, no biggie. When it looks marginally good (only if you ignore the bad), that's great!

I love the way their minds work. Its fascinating.

Its also fascinating that the job numbers for the previous two months were adjusted downward. That seems to happen a lot.

What's also fascinating is mostlylying constantly talking about the "unrelenting opposition" to Obama. He always seems to forget that Obama not only had the house and senate, he had 60 votes in the Senate for a while. If he were an effective leader, he could have passed anything he wanted. But he didn't. He is not a leader.

I still think Obama will win, but it sure will be fun watching these guys if Romney wins.

[elysiantraveller]

What's also fascinating is mostlylying constantly talking about the "unrelenting opposition" to Obama. He always seems to forget that Obama not only had the house and senate, he had 60 votes in the Senate for a while. If he were an effective leader, he could have passed anything he wanted. But he didn't. He is not a leader.

Yep this is the first time in HISTORY that there has been "unrelenting opposition". This is WAY worse than in '95 when they actually SHUT DOWN the government before coming together to work on a wide variety things in cooperation. :faint:

Mosty and hcap's perception of history is very narrow...

[ElKabong]

I
I still think Obama will win, but it sure will be fun watching these guys if Romney wins.

In hcap's case you know exactly what's going to happen. She'll disappear for 3-4 months like she did before after dems got greased up and worked over in elections.

Cowards are kinda like that...

[NJ Stinks]

I still think Obama will win, but it sure will be fun watching these guys if Romney wins.

Oh, I think it's gonna be fun here no matter who wins. :cool:

[Mike at A+]

If you don't filter in the effect of 9/11 with ANY of the Bush numbers, you are comparing APPLES AND ORANGES. It's that simple.

[PaceAdvantage]

Oh, I think it's gonna be fun here no matter who wins. :cool:Me thinks if Obama wins, you'll be sorely disappointed in our reaction.

Unless watching someone shake their head and return to normal life fun... :lol:

[Tom]

Mosty and hcap's perception of history is very narrow...

Their view of reality is non-existent!

[Dahoss9698]

In hcap's case you know exactly what's going to happen. She'll disappear for 3-4 months like she did before after dems got greased up and worked over in elections.

Cowards are kinda like that...

Look at this wannabe tough guy.

Calling people cowards while he plops his ignorant ass in a room full of people who agree with him. some might call that being a bully. Better yet...even cowardly.

It takes balls to argue in a place where you know your opinion is not going to be the popular one...not the opposite.

[ElKabong]

Look at this wannabe tough guy.

Calling people cowards while he plops his ignorant ass in a room full of people who agree with him. some might call that being a bully. Better yet...even cowardly.

It takes balls to argue in a place where you know your opinion is not going to be the popular one...not the opposite.

Translation>>

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTunhRVyREU

[Dahoss9698]

Translation>>

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTunhRVyREU

Looks like I struck a nerve, huh tough guy?

[ElKabong]

:sleeping:

[hcap]

In one post we have Hcap implying that a .2 drop in workforce participation is no big deal, while in the very next post we have mostlylying implying that a .2 drop in u3 is great.
I was talking about ny graph and total number of jobs lost. Mostpost was talking about the unemployment RATE. In either case both of us were showing in the context of GW Bush's last term (He who Shall not be Named), Obama still comes out way ahead.

In hcap's case you know exactly what's going to happen. She'll disappear for 3-4 months like she did before after dems got greased up and worked over in elections.

Cowards are kinda like that...
Would you care to back up that statement about not posting for 3-4 months?

I seem to remember after McCain/Dumbo lost in 2008, you guys were kinda quiet. Along with your mouthpiece Faux Noos. I will always treasure watching Faux on election night 2008. A morgue with cold bodies weeping in their shorts.

Pretty much what will happen here on off topic next November. She will enjoy reading sad posts (if you got the guts to post) from blowhards like you Kabong. If I remember during the Bush years you could hardly disguise your hard on for GW and gushed as he was about to give it to up the ass. You are truly one of the leading pathetic rightie babies and cowards here.

[Saratoga_Mike]

The labor force participation rate fell two tenths of a percentage point to 63.5 percent – the lowest level since September 1981

If you use the same metrics for Bush's (He who shall not be Named) numbers, although the graph I posted above is still positive in terms of jobs added each month for Obama but it is not as dramatic, Bush's loss should be upgraded from 750,000 to close to maybe 850,000 some months the participation rate fell during Bush's (He who shall not be Named) second term

Do you honestly think losing 750,000 lobs or 850,000 compares favorably to Obamas' at least being in positive territory most months?

The labor force participation rate declined 1.5 percentage points (67.2% to 65.7%) under Bush's EIGHT years in office. Under Obama, the same metric has declined by 2.2 percentage points in 44 months. If we extrapolate the current trend and assume Obama is re-elected, the participation rate over a full EIGHT years would decline 4.8 percentage points. Let's see 1.5 percentange points vs. 4.8 percentage points -- these are the same? As for the rate falling during Bush's second term, yeah it went from 65.8% to 65.7% (most of the decline was during the first term). Please refrain from making stuff up.

http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000/

[delayjf]

The reason for the increase is a demonstrable rise in families falling into poverty after the unprecedented recession in 2008 caused by rethug policies and "never to be mentioned in public again" George W Bush

You need to do some research as to the underlined cause of the recession - it was not Bushes tax rates (which by by the way lead to more Federal revenue than Clinton's - how do you explain that?) or Military spending which has proven over the years to be an major economic stimulus - all that money spend in the US paying Union wages.

[mostpost]

You need to do some research as to the underlined cause of the recession - it was not Bushes tax rates (which by by the way lead to more Federal revenue than Clinton's - how do you explain that?) or Military spending which has proven over the years to be an major economic stimulus - all that money spend in the US paying Union wages.

Normal growth of the population-more people to buy things; more people to produce things-normal growth of GDP. I admit that during Clinton's term we did not have normal growth of GDP. We had abnormal growth-abnormally high.

And the word is underlying.

[delayjf]

More money in the hands of people to buy things with.

[Saratoga_Mike]

Normal growth of the population-more people to buy things; more people to produce things-normal growth of GDP. I admit that during Clinton's term we did not have normal growth of GDP. We had abnormal growth-abnormally high.

And the word is underlying.

Oh, and there I was thinking overly accomodative monetary policy starting in the mid-80s resulted in record levels of debt that goosed the growth numbers, but what do I know

[boxcar]

It takes balls to argue in a place where you know your opinion is not going to be the popular one...not the opposite.

I'm truly framing this quote, since I'm almost always swimming against the current of popular or conventional opinion in this forum due to my Christian world view. Thanks so much, Hossy. You be the Horse, alright. :lol:

[Saratoga_Mike]

I'm truly framing this quote, since I'm almost always swimming against the current of popular or conventional opinion in this forum due to my Christian world view. Thanks so much, Hossy. You be the Horse, alright. :lol:

Do you think this forum is populated by mainly atheists? I just don't see that. My guess is you get push back because you come across as a self-righteous zealot, but hey that's just a guess. Most of your posts are entertaining, though.

[ElKabong]

Would you care to back up that statement about not posting for 3-4 months?

.

Yes little girl. After Kerry took it up the ass (your description) you couldn't be found.

You also disappeared after awhile when Scott Brown won in Mass, and didn't respond to the victory thread.

My guess is you'll reappear sometime in Feb 2013 with charts from cheap sites that cater to lemmings of the left. Looking forward to it, sweetiegirl.

[hcap]

The labor force participation rate fell two tenths of a percentage point to 63.5 percent – the lowest level since September 1981

If you use the same metrics for Bush's (He who shall not be Named) numbers, although the graph I posted above is still positive in terms of jobs added each month for Obama but it is not as dramatic, Bush's loss should be upgraded from 750,000 to close to maybe 850,000 some months the participation rate fell during Bush's (He who shall not be Named) second term

Do you honestly think losing 750,000 lobs or 850,000 compares favorably to Obamas' at least being in positive territory most months?


The labor force participation rate declined 1.5 percentage points (67.2% to 65.7%) under Bush's EIGHT years in office. Under Obama, the same metric has declined by 2.2 percentage points in 44 months. If we extrapolate the current trend and assume Obama is re-elected, the participation rate over a full EIGHT years would decline 4.8 percentage points. Let's see 1.5 percentange points vs. 4.8 percentage points -- these are the same? As for the rate falling during Bush's second term, yeah it went from 65.8% to 65.7% (most of the decline was during the first term). Please refrain from making stuff up.

http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000/
My point was the same metric when the economy was totally shot. I mentioned the worst parts of Bush's job losses. The red BARS in the chart I posted. That's were I got losses of around 750,000.

If you look at that period- the red bars in the chart start approx in Jan 2008 to Jan 09 .Mr Bush(He who Shall Not be Named) lost a cumulative total of 66.2- 65.7 or 0.5% points.
So something on the order of 800,000+ jobs just thru loss of labor participation.

Couple that with losing a cumulative loss of close to 4 million jobs Jan 2008 to Jan 09 and Obama shines like a rose. And if the rethugs did not block Obama's efforts to get job bills past, the American people would give him a landslide victory in 2012 instead of a marginal victory.

Your projections are premature. We will find out over the NEXT FOUR years

Btw, if you do a total for all jobs gained over Bush' 2 term presidency, bush loses bigtime

[Saratoga_Mike]

If you look at that period- the red bars in the chart start approx in Jan 2008 to Jan 09 .Mr Bush(He who Shall Not be Named) lost a cumulative total of 66.2- 65.7 or 0.5% points.
So something on the order of 800,000+ jobs just thru loss of labor participation.

Couple that with losing a cumulative loss of close to 4 million jobs Jan 2008 to Jan 09 and Obama shines like a rose. And if the rethugs did not block Obama's efforts to get job bills past, the American people would give him a landslide victory in 2012 instead of a marginal victory.

Your projections are premature. We will find out over the NEXT FOUR years

Btw, if you do a total for all jobs gained over Bush' 2 term presidency, bush loses bigtime

You're mixing apples and oranges here, but I'm not going to waste my time explaining to you the difference between the establishment survey and the household survey (you're applying statistics from one survey to another, which doesn't make sense).

More importantly, would you please stop making stuff up? Is it that difficult to go to the BLS and find the actual numbers? When Bush entered office in Jan 2001, there were 132.466 mm people employed (using the establishment survey--that's the number you see reported each month). When he exited office, that number stood at 133.561 mm. Is 133.561 less than 132.466? No.

Now when Obama entered office, the number stood at 133.561 mm. Where is it now? 133.300 mm. Hmm, what were you saying about Bush?

[hcap]

Yes little girl. After Kerry took it up the ass (your description) you couldn't be found.

You also disappeared after awhile when Scott Brown won in Mass, and didn't respond to the victory thread.

My guess is you'll reappear sometime in Feb 2013 with charts from cheap sites that cater to lemmings of the left. Looking forward to it, sweetiegirl.I asked you to back it up not bullshit Kabong. Schmuck, show me the proof
For instance you damn asshole here is a thread I started on 11-13-2004, titled "Masters of War"

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=16212

You have always been an asshole and usually wrong. But to swagger around as a tough guy when you are probably an chubby puffy midget is quite humorous. Anything else schmuck?

[PaceAdvantage]

I asked you to back it up not bullshit Kabong. Schmuck, show me the proof
For instance you damn asshole here is a thread I started on 11-13-2004, titled "Masters of War"

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=16212

You have always been an asshole and usually wrong. But to swagger around as a tough guy when you are probably an chubby puffy midget is quite humorous. Anything else schmuck?I may be wrong here, but is sweetiegirl supposed to be retorted with "asshole" and "Schmuck?"

And they say the righties around here are mean and nasty and full of anger?

[hcap]

You're mixing apples and oranges here, but I'm not going to waste my time explaining to you the difference between the establishment survey and the household survey (you're applying statistics from one survey to another, which doesn't make sense).

More importantly, would you please stop making stuff up? Is it that difficult to go to the BLS and find the actual numbers? When Bush entered office in Jan 2001, there were 132.466 mm people employed (using the establishment survey--that's the number you see reported each month). When he exited office, that number stood at 133.561 mm. Is 133.561 less than 132.466? No.

Now when Obama entered office, the number stood at 133.561 mm. Where is it now? 133.300 mm. Hmm, what were you saying about Bush?I was clear in my first post and my first graph which covers the last year of Bush's 2nd term. That is the beginning of the giant mess that brought us into this hole. As I said if you want to look at jobs created entirely during a presidency you make a poor choice to look at Bush. So you say look at labor participation rate, I say total jobs created. How many did bush create?

http://articles.businessinsider.com/2012-05-06/news/31591072_1_job-creation-rate-obama-administration-mitt-romney

AVERAGE NUMBER OF JOBS CREATED PER MONTH BY THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION: 20,000

AVERAGE NUMBER OF JOBS CREATED PER MONTH BY THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION EXCLUDING THE DISASTROUS LAST YEAR: 65,000

NUMBER OF MONTHS IN THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION IN WHICH THERE WERE 500,000 OR MORE JOBS CREATED: 0.

(In fact, there were no months in the Bush Administration in which there were 400,000 jobs created).

Source: The BLS

[Saratoga_Mike]

I was clear in my first post and my first graph which covers the last year of Bush's 2nd term. That is the beginning of the giant mess that brought us into this hole. As I said if you want to look at jobs created entirely during a presidency you make a poor choice to look at Bush. So you say look at labor participation rate, I say total jobs created. How many did bush create?

http://articles.businessinsider.com/2012-05-06/news/31591072_1_job-creation-rate-obama-administration-mitt-romney

AVERAGE NUMBER OF JOBS CREATED PER MONTH BY THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION: 20,000

AVERAGE NUMBER OF JOBS CREATED PER MONTH BY THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION EXCLUDING THE DISASTROUS LAST YEAR: 65,000

NUMBER OF MONTHS IN THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION IN WHICH THERE WERE 500,000 OR MORE JOBS CREATED: 0.

(In fact, there were no months in the Bush Administration in which there were 400,000 jobs created).

Source: The BLS

Look, you made several statements that were factually incorrect (e.g., jobs actually declined under GWB--I showed that to be wrong; it's right under Obama, though). Just admit it. At this point, you have zero credibility in my mind when it comes to numbers. I'm about to check the crap you just posted above.

And I thought Bush was a crappy president, so don't think for a second I'm giving you a knee-jerk defense of him b/c he was a Rep.

[hcap]

I may be wrong here, but is sweetiegirl supposed to be retorted with "asshole" and "Schmuck?"

And they say the righties around here are mean and nasty and full of anger?Ok, I will watch my tendency to react to idiots with too much annoyance. But he is wrong. Btw I did not post for almost the entire month of July. So what? And got really pissede with the idiotic occupy threads and only posted occasionally. So what?

Kabong is a fool and tries to bully people.

[PaceAdvantage]

Ok, I will watch my tendency to react to idiots with too much annoyance. But he is wrong. Btw I did not post for almost the entire month of July. So what? And got really pissede with the idiotic occupy threads and only posted occasionally. So what?

Kabong is a fool and tries to bully people.Bullying comes in many forms around here, from both sides.

[boxcar]

Do you think this forum is populated by mainly atheists?

I have no idea. But if most here are as "religious" as PA, then I'd say it's too close to call. :D

Boxcar

[PaceAdvantage]

I was clear in my first post and my first graph which covers the last year of Bush's 2nd term.It also covers the two years of Democratic majority of Congress.

[PaceAdvantage]

I have no idea. But if most here are as "religious" as PA, then I'd say it's too close to call. :D

BoxcarYour hard-on for me has turned into a priapism...best to seek medical attention before it's too late...

[Saratoga_Mike]

It also covers the two years of Democratic majority of Congress.

He makes factual assertions that are plainly wrong. When proven wrong, he puts up more numbers. At least, the second group of numbers check. Granted, he doesn't realize that the economy creating 400k jobs or more in a month is a rarity - happened only 7 out of the 96 months Clinton was prez. It's happened once under Obama - May 2010. In May 2010, the number was 516k, folllowed by NEGATIVE 167k, NEGATIVE 58k, NEGATIVE 51k, and NEGATIVE 27k in the following months. Maybe just maybe, the 516k was overstated? Oh it can't be - it's govt number - has to be reliable!

[hcap]

Look, you made several statements that were factually incorrect (e.g., jobs actually declined under GWB--I showed that to be wrong; it's right under Obama, though). Just admit it. At this point, you have zero credibility in my mind when it comes to numbers. I'm about to check the crap you just posted above.

And I thought Bush was a crappy president, so don't think for a second I'm giving you a knee-jerk defense of him b/c he was a Rep.. My first post was in the context of the graph showing Jan 08-Jan 09 onto 4/12

I stand by my contention that if you consider Bush losing .5% points labor participation his record then is much worse than Obamas in total job losses during that period. I did say the same metric

[Saratoga_Mike]

. My first post was in the context of the graph showing Jan 08-Jan 09 onto 4/12

I stand by my contention that if you consider Bush losing .5% points labor participation his record then is much worse than Obamas in total job losses during that period. I did say the same metric

I don't give a damn about your chart - go back and read the numbers I retrieved from the BLS. Can you not do math? You take issue with my math? You just don't know what you're talking about. Did you learn the difference between the household survey and the establishment survey yet?

[ElKabong]

I asked you to back it up not bullshit Kabong. Schmuck, show me the proof
For instance you damn asshole here is a thread I started on 11-13-2004, titled "Masters of War"

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=16212

You have always been an asshole and usually wrong. But to swagger around as a tough guy when you are probably an chubby puffy midget is quite humorous. Anything else schmuck?

:lol: :lol: :lol:

[badcompany]

I have to laugh at the latest talking point from the Obama waterboys, that they didn't realize the severity of the crisis.

In other, less complimentary, words, their assessment of the situation was incompetent, but gosh darnit if they don't know exactly how to fix it.:lol:

As an aside, is Hcap really a woman?

[hcap]

I don't give a damn about your chart - go back and read the numbers I retrieved from the BLS. Can you not do math? You take issue with my math? You just don't know what you're talking about. Did you learn the difference between the household survey and the establishment survey yet?I went to the BLS and used Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey

Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Seas) Employment Level
Labor force status: Employed

Shows total number employed. So it includes the labor participation rate.

http://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet

http://data.bls.gov/generated_files/graphics/LNS12000000_103998_1347174090354.gif

Shows my point about the last year of the Bush administration and what Obama inherited and what Obama has done. And reflects the trends of the first graph I posted

[hcap]

I asked you to back it up not bullshit kabong. Schmuck, show me the proof

For instance you damn asshole here is a thread I started on 11-13-2004, titled "Masters of War"

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/...ead.php?t=16212

You have always been an asshole and usually wrong. But to swagger around as a tough guy when you are probably an chubby puffy midget is quite humorous. Anything else schmuck?


:lol: :lol: :lol:So 11 days after the election I am posting. Did you use the search tool, or just make it up as you went along kabong?

Btw, Here is another post from 11-05-2004, 06:29 AM post #79 from.....An absurd thread you started
Titled.......

"Damn, how did THAT October surprise fail? "

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=15759&page=6&pp=15

A few days after the election on November 2, 2004.

I am willing to accept your apology now. And instead of referring to you as "kabong" I will hereby use "ElKabong" Your full very descriptive quite stupid avatar name. You may however continue to refer to me as "Little girl" or "She" and I will not get annoyed in deference to PA :lol: :lol: :lol:

[ElKabong]

Meh.... days after the election you're bitching about this n that....How long did you disappear shortly thereafter? Go dig that up...You've got the time :lol:

Now go dig up the Scott Brown victory thread and the absence of your posts then.

I would ask for an apology, but that's not my style. Kind of girlish, asking for an apology over something non-personal.....Know what I mean?

[hcap]

Meh.... days after the election you're bitching about this n that....How long did you disappear shortly thereafter? Go dig that up...You've got the time :lol:

Now go dig up the Scott Brown victory thread and the absence of your posts then.

I would ask for an apology, but that's not my style. Kind of girlish, asking for an apology over something non-personal.....Know what I mean?What an idiot!

I have already shown you are wrong. I can go back easily and use the search tool and find more. I don't think you know how.

I did not follow the Brown election that carefully and did not really give a shit. Nor do I really give a shit whether you apologize or not kabong.

PA, I may not be able to control myself with this idiot. Very little brains and less honor.

[ElKabong]

I have already shown you are wrong. I can go back easily and use the search tool and find more..

M'kay....go for it.

[hcap]

Meh.... days after the election you're bitching about this n that....How long did you disappear shortly thereafter? Go dig that up...You've got the time
Boy you are swift. I have already shown you are wrong again. Go back and read what I said earlier.....

For instance you damn asshole here is a thread I started on 11-13-2004, titled "Masters of War"

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/...ead.php?t=16212

So looks like I already posted an answer to what you are bitching about now.

[ElKabong]

Looking at the past several posts, it's clear who the one bitching is :lol:

Go ahead and sing along....You know the words :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XsYJyVEUaC4

[hcap]

Looking at the past several posts, it's clear who the one bitching is :lol:

Go ahead and sing along....You know the words :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XsYJyVEUaC4I suspect you were man handled as a baby

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a335/lswaidz/baby_silva.png

[Tom]

What an idiot!


PA, I may not be able to control myself with this idiot. Very little brains and less honor.

hcap, don't be so hard on yourself! :lol: :lol: :lol:

[hcap]

hcap, don't be so hard on yourself! :lol: :lol: :lol:
kabong accused me of cowardice. I responded.

The idiot lost big time.

[ElKabong]

How did I "lose it big time"? :lol:

Look at my posts...then look at yours... Yours are filled with words like idiot, schmuck, asshole (did I forget any?, LOL)

I have fun at your expense. That's how it works around here. My posts have the usual humor emoticons, yours has hatred filled rants.

Aand that's the way i like it. :)

Yes I know, it frustrates you to no end that I don't get worked up over your insults. And I don't bite on your stale inaccurate Dan Rather-esque figures and charts, haven't since 2004. It's a waste of my time.

So I let you cook in your anger, I sit back and enjoy

That's how the game is played, sweetiegirl

[hcap]

You are one delusional 8 year old.
You made a false accusation. You were wrong

You lost I won. And now you just can't let it go.

[ElKabong]

LOL, let go of what?

Your obsession is amusing, and I like it. :D

Btw, you're wrong. Go fetch the Scott Brown victory thread. Stat!!

[hcap]

LOL, let go of what?

Your obsession is amusing, and I like it. :D

Btw, you're wrong. Go fetch the Scott Brown victory thread. Stat!!



Date of Brown victory.....

January 19, 2010


In hcap's case you know exactly what's going to happen. She'll disappear for 3-4 months like she did before after dems got greased up and worked over in elections.

Cowards are kinda like that...

One of my posts 5 days after the Brown election

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=66046

01-24-2010, 05:27 PM post #4

Another

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=66025

01-24-2010, 05:37 PM post #7



Another 12 days later

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=66252&page=2&pp=15

02-02-2010, 05:48 AM post #25

It is not unusual for anyone to not post for weeks. I did not post this July. Away on business

But it is obvious you don't know how to use the search tool. And have an extremely bad memory. So before you accuse anyone of cowardice get it correct. LET IT GO jackass.

[hcap]

kabong, I am ready to accept your apology now.
Then we can go on to more important subjects like how much Obama will win the general by.

But you have to promise not to disappear for 3-4 months, after the first Tuesday in November when the Dynamic Duo gets-what is your classy term?-oh yeah greased :lol:

[hcap]

I went to the BLS and used Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey

Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Seas) Employment Level
Labor force status: Employed

Shows total number employed. So it includes the labor participation rate.

http://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet

http://data.bls.gov/generated_files/graphics/LNS12000000_103998_1347174090354.gif

Shows my point about the last year of the Bush administration and what Obama inherited and what Obama has done. And reflects the trends of the first graph I postedThe database was discontinued. So I am linking to FRED instead. I think this will show what I was talking about.

[ElKabong]

kabong, I am ready to accept your apology now.
Then we can go on to more important subjects like how much Obama will win the general by.

But you have to promise not to disappear for 3-4 months, after the first Tuesday in November when the Dynamic Duo gets-what is your classy term?-oh yeah greased :lol:


Notsofast, little girl! Where are your posts in the Scott Brown threads?? Now go fetch em, quickly! It took you 24 hours to dig those links up that don't count. That'll cost you 2 penalty strokes.

I'm waiting...................

[hcap]

Notsofast, little girl! Where are your posts in the Scott Brown threads?? Now go fetch em, quickly! It took you 24 hours to dig those links up that don't count. That'll cost you 2 penalty strokes.

I'm waiting...................You said this in post#39. You truly are pathetic .....

In hcap's case you know exactly what's going to happen. She'll disappear for 3-4 months like she did before after dems got greased up and worked over in elections.

Cowards are kinda like that...
And in post #59
Yes little girl. After Kerry took it up the ass (your description) you couldn't be found.

You also disappeared after awhile when Scott Brown won in Mass, and didn't respond to the victory thread.

My guess is you'll reappear sometime in Feb 2013 with charts from cheap sites that cater to lemmings of the left. Looking forward to it, sweetiegirl.

Now you are a weasel as well as a hysterical 8 year old with a bad memory and not an inkling on how to search. I proved conclusively I did not " disappear "after either Kerry lost or Brown won.
Yes, don't get your panties bunched up, I did not respond when Brown won on a specific"victory" thread. Big F**k**g Deal. But I did not disappear like a coward as you claimed. When Obama won many righties did nor respond specifically. What? All losers should bow gratefully to all winners here on OT?

Never happen.

So kabong, an apology on the disappearing coward crap is in order. I'm waiting.......

[ElKabong]

You said this in post#39. You truly are pathetic .....

And in post #59

Now you are a weasel as well as a hysterical 8 year old with a bad memory and not an inkling on how to search. I proved conclusively I did not " disappear "after either Kerry lost or Brown won.
Yes, don't get your panties bunched up, I did not respond when Brown won on a specific"victory" thread. Big F**k**g Deal. But I did not disappear like a coward as you claimed. When Obama won many righties did nor respond specifically. What? All losers should bow gratefully to all winners here on OT?

Never happen.

So kabong, an apology on the disappearing coward crap is in order. I'm waiting.......

Hmmmmm.....I don't see that Scott Brown victory thread post of yours. Poooof! You were MIA on political football spiking :lol:

You'll disappear once again. You'll post about "psychics working in the water department" and the likes.....But you'll disappear.

You watch.

Now go find me those Scott Brown victory thread posts of yours! Pronto, Wile E Coyote!

[hcap]

I think Baba Looey your diminutive sidekick is a lot swifter than you kabong


/hASs2YYo1zU?

[ElKabong]

Greatness hcap! LMAO several times. :lol:

"well, I better get along and do some Kabongin'."

Never gets old, the guitar over a bad guy's head. :)

[jognlope]

Food stamps is an economic stimulus and feeds families. If you're worried about govt. money spent, maybe you could give Bank of America, GE and a few others a call to get the taxes they did not pay. This is hardly a govt. program to pick on, comparatively speaking.

[bigmack]

Food stamps is an economic stimulus.
Well I'll be..

Holy Xylophone, I've learned so much these last 4 years.

[ElKabong]

Food stamps is an economic stimulus

It's becoming very clear why you require government assistance.