Well all except for confidence numbers being in the toilet, and commodities prices not being appreciably different, i am going to go with no.

Well, at least you admit that your commodity price/blame is wrong.

In 2/3/5/10 years when things are better, then you can cut. The only things they should really be looking at cutting are ways to fix medicare and social security in the future. You have got to figure out a way to cut the costs going into the future before those programs self-destruct.

 

But those things have nothing to do with the economy today, which is why.

Well, at least you admit that your commodity price/blame is wrong.

 

More like CPI is wrong.

Guys, we know why the GOP won't make a deal here.

 

Obama is black. Duh.

tbh that's more reasonable than whatever real reason they're refusing to make a deal.

tbh that's more reasonable than whatever real reason they're refusing to make a deal.

 

You really think race has something to do with this? Wow.

 

Jackson-Lee is completely insane (did you guys hear about Neil Armstrong going to Mars?), and as far as I'm concerned, one of the most despicable people in Congress. Just ask her staff.

 

I don't oppose Jackson Lee or Obama because they're black. I oppose them because I believe their policies are terrible for America, and in Jackson Lee's case, she's just incredibly idiotic and mean spirited.

 

Yet people like yourself will still pull the race card in order to delegitimize your adversaries. It's pitiful, and honestly, being called a racist by some leftist goon isn't even an insult anymore. Grow up, dude.

You really think race has something to do with this? Wow.

 

Jackson-Lee is completely insane (did you guys hear about Neil Armstrong going to Mars?), and as far as I'm concerned, one of the most despicable people in Congress. Just ask her staff.

 

I don't oppose Jackson Lee or Obama because they're black. I oppose them because I believe their policies are terrible for America, and in Jackson Lee's case, she's just incredibly idiotic and mean spirited.

 

Yet people like yourself will still pull the race card in order to delegitimize your adversaries. It's pitiful, and honestly, being called a racist by some leftist goon isn't even an insult anymore. Grow up, dude.

That was clearly sarcasm from him.

That was clearly sarcasm from him.

 

It was sarcasm from Jenks, but not from Strange.

It was sarcasm from Jenks, but not from Strange.

No, it was clearly sarcasm from SS as well.

No, it was clearly sarcasm from SS as well.

 

That surprises me. Leftists play the race card so much I don't see any sarcasm in it.

lol

Obama is willing to go to $4T, if the GOP is willing to look at ending the Bush tax cuts for the top bracket.

 

I would be in favor of that.

So, just curious... what do all you GOP'ers think of Jon Huntsman?

 

unelectable

 

 

unelectable

 

^

But then again, so is every single person officially in the race.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/27208...ox-ken-mcintyre

Data from the Department of Energy and other agencies show that the average poor family, as defined by Census officials:

 

● Lives in a home that is in good repair, not crowded, and equipped with air conditioning, clothes washer and dryer, and cable or satellite TV service.

 

● Prepares meals in a kitchen with a refrigerator, coffee maker and microwave as well as oven and stove.

 

● Enjoys two color TVs, a DVD player, VCR and — if children are there — an Xbox, PlayStation, or other video game system.

 

● Had enough money in the past year to meet essential needs, including adequate food and medical care.

 

Edited July 19, 201114 yr by Jenksismybitch

So if you have a microwave you are not poor?

Edited July 19, 201114 yr by GoSox05

I'd like to see the definition for "adequate food and medical care." You'll also notice that less than a 1/3 of poor households have internet access, which is ever-more vital in today's world. But a slight majority have ceiling fans!

 

eta: they've been publishing essentially the same claims since at least 1999. And the same "ZOMG! poor people have window AC units!" claims in 2007, which appear to be incorrect. This article on the report notes that this focuses solely on material possessions and neglects many other issues of poverty. A Daily Kos article! and a fdl article mocking the Heritage foundation's definition of poor (it's DK and fdl, take it fwiw).

 

Edited July 19, 201114 yr by StrangeSox

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/27208...ox-ken-mcintyre

 

 

5% of people making less than $22,000 a year have a photo copier? WTF? Why?

 

Not really making a comment about the whole poorpeople and necessities thing, as much as just saying... photocopier? Really?

 

I like that poor is in scare quotes for a family of four making less than $22k a year.

5% of people making less than $22,000 a year have a photo copier? WTF? Why?

 

Not really making a comment about the whole poorpeople and necessities thing, as much as just saying... photocopier? Really?

I can offer 2 possibilities.

 

1. A lot of business owners start off making below that line and need to own those sorts of supplies for the business that they're running.

2. They've counted something that does photocopies, like an all-in-1 printer.

Another takedown of this same doofus trying to argue that poor people don't suffer from food or nutrition deficiencies because they're obese.

Another takedown of this same doofus trying to argue that poor people don't suffer from food or nutrition deficiencies because they're obese.

now you are getting into semantics. Poor fat people are not starving. They may be lacking lots of nutrients, but that is often a combination of lack of availability and willingness of them to get & eat it.

He says they eat just fine and increasing food subsidies won't matter because they obviously can afford a nutritious diet now. This isn't true; they lack the ability to actually plan food purchases in advance and buy more nutritious food because they are living hand-to-mouth. That's not semantics, that's Heritage making more patently dumb claims.

He says they eat just fine and increasing food subsidies won't matter because they obviously can afford a nutritious diet now. This isn't true; they lack the ability to actually plan food purchases in advance and buy more nutritious food because they are living hand-to-mouth. That's not semantics, that's Heritage making more patently dumb claims.

It is lack of fresh foods available because the neighborhoods suck and their desire for quick food that isnt good for them. They can plan to buy a bag of chips but not an apple? They can plan to but oil to fry things but not rice or something else more healthy?