Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-32 last
To: reaganator
. . . . and they’ll just riot and recall those nasty Tea Party Republicans they elected in the last election and install the Democrats in their RIGHTFUL place of rulership like their BIRTHRIGHT is meant by nature to be.
41 posted on
03/06/2011 8:52:29 AM PST by
Twinkie
( PEACE)
To: reaganator
![](http://theinspirationroom.com/daily/commercials/2010/8/geico-mike-mcglone.jpg)
Whattya live under a rock?
43 posted on
03/06/2011 8:54:03 AM PST by
McGruff
(Is it time to Drill Baby Drill yet?)
To: reaganator
Du-ah! Is a frogs ass water-tight? Of course they cook the books on unemployment, just as they have with inflation. And the media and the REPUBLICANS let them get away with it. The left continues to hand the right ammo, but the right never uses it - I truely don’t understand.
To: reaganator
Yes and not for the better. The rate is probably twice what they say it is.
47 posted on
03/06/2011 9:28:47 AM PST by
freekitty
(Give me back my conservative vote; then find me a real conservative to vote for)
To: reaganator
Yes - actual full unemployment is about 10% and when you add in the underemployed it is about 20%. Another dirty secret is that a number of jobs have actually disappeared and that is being skewed to make the numbers look lower.
Mission just about accomplished - a few more blows and it will be time to flush.
48 posted on
03/06/2011 10:00:15 AM PST by
trebb
("If a man will not work, he should not eat" From 2 Thes 3)
To: reaganator
They will adjust them until unemployment appears to be under 8%. That’s all they care about, because for re-election they need the ‘magic number’ to be under 8%. No sitting president except FDR won re-election with unemployment higher than 8%.
So they’ll just revise it until it gets below, the press will orgasmically report on how the number keeps going down, how O-hole is so great and life is wonderful and it’s springtime in Russia (err the USSA) and they sold another Volt today to someone....
49 posted on
03/06/2011 10:15:43 AM PST by
Secret Agent Man
(I'd like to tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.)
To: reaganator
Keep in mind these are the same people that manipulate the CPI which says there is no inflation so all you retired has beens can go suck an egg, providing you have enough money after Obamalamadingdong raises your energy costs to necessarily high levels (a paraphrase of his words).
50 posted on
03/06/2011 10:43:20 AM PST by
cashless
(Unlike Obama and his supporters, I'd rather be a TEA BAGGER than a TEA BAGGEE.)
To: reaganator
Shadowstats.com for today's numbers expressed the way they use to be reported before truth became an option.
51 posted on
03/06/2011 10:50:45 AM PST by
cashless
(Unlike Obama and his supporters, I'd rather be a TEA BAGGER than a TEA BAGGEE.)
To: reaganator
Keep in mind these are the same people that manipulate the CPI which says there is no inflation so all you retired has beens can go suck an egg, providing you have enough money after Obamalamadingdong raises your energy costs to necessarily high levels (a paraphrase of his words).
52 posted on
03/06/2011 10:51:12 AM PST by
cashless
(Unlike Obama and his supporters, I'd rather be a TEA BAGGER than a TEA BAGGEE.)
To: reaganator
Bear is to Catholic as Pope is to Woods
54 posted on
03/06/2011 11:44:54 AM PST by
NonValueAdded
(Palin 2012: don't retreat, just restock [chg'd to comply w/ The Civility in Discourse Act of 2011])
To: reaganator
The unemployed, the underemployed, THE UNDERPAID
...e.g. City and County of San Francisco
Fiscal Year 2009 upper Income Limits public Housing, City and County of San Francisco:
~ 65k for Single
~ 80K for family of 3
60% of residents DO qualify for low income Public Housing
that means only 40% have some kind of traditional american style comfortable living with some spare change left when the next Paycheck comes in.
100k [gross] is needed for a single person living in a 1 Bdrm Aprtmnt to have a carefree live.
The city of San Francisco contains 13.6 percent of the Bay Areas households, but only 12.3 percent of the households with annual incomes of more than $100,000.
55 posted on
03/06/2011 12:22:07 PM PST by
Koracan
To: reaganator
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-32 last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson