Obama stated "the private sector is doing fine." How could he say that?

[Shaudius]

listen, I belive that you believe its true. I commend you on your respectful debating skills however. You are the exception to the rule.

That's the thing, nothing I said requires me to believe anything is true. They are undeniable facts. It is Obama's public position, it has always been Obama's public position, there is not any debate about what he wants, unless you're into conspiracy theories and thinking he wants something secretly in his mind that he doesn't talk about. The Republicans did attempt to block the Affordable Care Act through filibuster, that is why it was passed through reconciliation, this is objective truth.

Has either side shown much willingness to compromise? If so, show me when, otherwise that is also true.

Have I mischaracterized the Ryan budget in your eyes? If so how? If I have not than that stands too. Face it everything I said is factually accurate, you just don't have a rebuttal so you go with the run and hide strategy, its okay to admit you don't have any good answers to my statements.

[DwightShrute]

That's the thing, nothing I said requires me to believe anything is true. They are undeniable facts. It is Obama's public position, it has always been Obama's public position, there is not any debate about what he wants, unless you're into conspiracy theories and thinking he wants something secretly in his mind that he doesn't talk about. The Republicans did attempt to block the Affordable Care Act through filibuster, that is why it was passed through reconciliation, this is objective truth.

Has either side shown much willingness to compromise? If so, show me when, otherwise that is also true.

Have I mischaracterized the Ryan budget in your eyes? If so how? If I have not than that stands too. Face it everything I said is factually accurate, you just don't have a rebuttal so you go with the run and hide strategy, its okay to admit you don't have any good answers to my statements.

do you honestly think both sides don't want to fix healthcare? and when (if) its overturned by the supreme court wouldn't that show that the GOP were right?

what happened to .....
Health Care deals will be covered on C-span
Obama Lies

and how on earth can you stomach this from any politician ...

Ya, lets just pass the thing and then let's see what's in it. Thousands of pages that no one read. Trust us. LOL. And so many Americans just do. Amazing. They rob and lie right to your faces and you will just give them a pass rather that admit you were wong or at the very least, criticize them for it.

Ryan and the GOP have sent Harry Reid several budgets. As the Senate majority leader he doesn't have to even bring it to the floor for a vote. They are just sitting on his desk somewhere. Defend that.

Again, I much prefer to deal in facts and the lack of character on this president and those that he decided to surround himself with. Spin it how you like.

[King Mayan]

Why is Dwight debating here???

The fukk can't vote. unreal.

[DwightShrute]

Why is Dwight debating here???

The fukk can't vote. unreal.

how bout them Devils?

[Shaudius]

do you honestly think both sides don't want to fix healthcare? and when (if) its overturned by the supreme court wouldn't that show that the GOP were right?

what happened to .....
Health Care deals will be covered on C-span
Obama Lies

and how on earth can you stomach this from any politician ...

Ya, lets just pass the thing and then let's see what's in it. Thousands of pages that no one read. Trust us. LOL. And so many Americans just do. Amazing. They rob and lie right to your faces and you will just give them a pass rather that admit you were wong or at the very least, criticize them for it.

What does that have to do with what I said? The Democrats didn't have a filibuster proof majority in the Senate, they had to pass it quickly to get the votes to pass it through reconciliation. Please show me where I made a value judgment about that being right or wrong. You made the argument that Obama could have done anything he wanted for 2 years, as I pointed out the Senate was not filibuster proof after 6 months of Obama being in office.

As for the constitutionality of the individual mandate, its not as simple as which side was right and which side was wrong. The constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act is an artifact of the way in which our constitution is written, it is a strange situation where an individual mandate to buy health care is potentially unconstitutional(and probably is) but a taxpayer funded single payer system is not. Its really hard to get your head around that if you think about it. The federal government(note this is a federal government powers issue, not a government powers issue) could force everyone to pay a progressive tax that doesn't happen until after the first 100,000 of earnings(say 1% on the first 10,000 of earnings over 100,000, 2% on the next 10,000 etc.), and use that money to fund a single payer system whereby everyone got health insurance coverage, but they cannot force people to buy insurance or face a penalty if they do not, and give low income people exemptions. Which would effectively work out to the exact same thing. Doesn't that seem strange to you?

Ryan and the GOP have sent Harry Reid several budgets. As the Senate majority leader he doesn't have to even bring it to the floor for a vote. They are just sitting on his desk somewhere. Defend that.

I told you, they have sent him the Ryan budget, which is a non-starter for Democrats in the Senate. Additionally, I have told you the Democratic stance which is that they don't need to pass a budget because the government is operational until the end of the year based on the budget battle last year. Who is defending anything? I am telling you, the Republicans have sent the Senate budgets that they will not pass, the Senate democrats don't believe they have to pass a budget of their own at this current moment, and so they are not. Again, this is not a value judgement, this is what is going on, anyone who has read anything about this debate should know that.

Again, I much prefer to deal in facts and the lack of character on this president and those that he decided to surround himself with. Spin it how you like.

The only one making value judgments and spinning things here is you. I am telling you the objective situation, with facts, to which you respond with rants about the Affordable Care Act and blame on the Democrats for not passing a budget which is just Republican talking points. I am telling you both sides of the issues, and you're whining and blaming one side.

[dante1]

That's the thing, nothing I said requires me to believe anything is true. They are undeniable facts. It is Obama's public position, it has always been Obama's public position, there is not any debate about what he wants, unless you're into conspiracy theories and thinking he wants something secretly in his mind that he doesn't talk about. The Republicans did attempt to block the Affordable Care Act through filibuster, that is why it was passed through reconciliation, this is objective truth.

Has either side shown much willingness to compromise? If so, show me when, otherwise that is also true.

Have I mischaracterized the Ryan budget in your eyes? If so how? If I have not than that stands too. Face it everything I said is factually accurate, you just don't have a rebuttal so you go with the run and hide strategy, its okay to admit you don't have any good answers to my statements.

Dwight with a good answer, I see you don't know Dwight. Check back if you are so inclined a year or two or three or four and find me one good answer or even one good statement from Dwight. Take a lunch.

[DwightShrute]

Dwight with a good answer, I see you don't know Dwight. Check back if you are so inclined a year or two or three or four and find me one good answer or even one good statement from Dwight. Take a lunch.

Out on a weekend pass?

Listen, we can go back and forth all day long and it won't go anywhere. I have one advantage over you guys. Its a HUGE advantage. I don't care if a D or R is in power. I don't make my comments simply to suite any political affiliation like you guys do. You guys still blame Reagan when someone criticizes Omaba for anything. Never mind Bush. LOL. If this kind behavior was being done by a R president I would still be saying the same things. You will see after Jan 20/13. Whereas, you guys would only criticize the R guys but spin all negative shit against your D guy to give the best light possible. Most of you will do this until the day you die. I know it and you know it. These again are facts.

Paul Ryan could save someone drowning in a lake and you guys would criticize him that it took him too long and a democrats would done it quicker while Harry Reid could be caught of tape pushing an old lady in a wheelchair off a the edge of cliff to her death and you would blame the republicans that its there fault there was no guard railing put in place because further stimulus money wasn't approved by the GOP and probably blame Bush also.

[fishmonger]

Giving health to people that can't afford it sounds like some commy bullshit to me.

[Shaudius]

Out on a weekend pass?

Listen, we can go back and forth all day long and it won't go anywhere. I have one advantage over you guys. Its a HUGE advantage. I don't care if a D or R is in power. I don't make my comments simply to suite any political affiliation like you guys do.

Nothing that I have written in this thread has anything to do with supporting someone because they're a Democrat or a Republican, you on the other hand have demonized Democrats and granted a free pass to Republicans re: the Budget, even though that only expresses the Republican view of the story. As well as personally attacked President Obama for not having a clue what to do about the Bush tax cuts, even though he has made his personal position on them absolutely clear. The only one here with political blinders between me and you is you with your statements like:

"Ryan and the GOP have sent Harry Reid several budgets. As the Senate majority leader he doesn't have to even bring it to the floor for a vote. They are just sitting on his desk somewhere. Defend that."

Oh which I have told you the reason, twice in fact, you just refuse to acknowledge that that is the Democratic position. We don't need a budget because we already have one and we don't need another one until after the election; and

"Again, I much prefer to deal in facts and the lack of character on this president and those that he decided to surround himself with. Spin it how you like."

Except that nothing you have provided has been facts, it has been one side of the issue, the Republican side, and personal attacks on the President, i.e. he doesn't know what he's doing regarding the Bush tax cuts, Democrats(presumably exclusively since you only point that side of the debate out) have lack of character, etc. which I have responded to with both sides of the issue. I hate to break it to you but regurgitated Republican talking points aren't facts, they are one side of a two sided debate.

Paul Ryan could save someone drowning in a lake and you guys would criticize him that it took him too long and a democrats would done it quicker while Harry Reid could be caught of tape pushing an old lady in a wheelchair off a the edge of cliff to her death and you would blame the republicans that its there fault there was no guard railing put in place because further stimulus money wasn't approved by the GOP and probably blame Bush also.

My problems with the Ryan budget have nothing to do with the fact that Paul Ryan is a Republican. My problems with the Ryan budget stem from the fact that is exactly the opposite of progressive taxation, and is instead while not regressive, some weird situation where prior to it passing rich people pay more taxes, poor people pay less, and after it passing rich people pay less taxes and poor people pay more. I see that as an awful solution to a demand side recession, or tax policy in general. Trying to crouch this as it does in "expanding the tax base" is just another way of saying "lets make people who were paying no taxes before, i.e. the poor, pay taxes now" Its effectively attempting to get blood out of a stone.

My additional problem with the Ryan budget is that rather than cut military spending which makes up at least a quarter of the federal budget, it actually increases it. On top of that it doesn't actually lower federal government spending overall. So in effect it keeps the budget the same. Do you know how it purports to mostly balance the budget? By a trillion dollars of increased revenue by 2016. In case you're not following the math that's 25% growth in money to be taxed over the baseline taxation system in the next four years. How does it do this? By taxing the rich less and the poor more, so somehow it thinks that by increasing the tax burden on the poor, and decreasing the tax burden on the rich we will somehow find 25% more collectible taxes through growth. I don't know about you, but how any rational person could see anything there but complete bullshit I don't know, but that's Paul Ryan's position, and my indite of it has nothing to do with the R in front of his name, its just horrible policy.

[fishmonger]

Not taxing the poor and taxing the rich is some commy bullshit too.

[dante1]

Nothing that I have written in this thread has anything to do with supporting someone because they're a Democrat or a Republican, you on the other hand have demonized Democrats and granted a free pass to Republicans re: the Budget, even though that only expresses the Republican view of the story. As well as personally attacked President Obama for not having a clue what to do about the Bush tax cuts, even though he has made his personal position on them absolutely clear. The only one here with political blinders between me and you is you.



My problems with the Ryan budget have nothing to do with the fact that Paul Ryan is a Republican. My problems with the Ryan budget stem from the fact that is exactly the opposite of progressive taxation, and is instead while not regressive, some weird situation where prior to it passing rich people pay more taxes, poor people pay less, and after it passing rich people pay less taxes and poor people pay more. I see that as an awful solution to a demand side recession, or tax policy in general. Trying to crouch this as it does in "expanding the tax base" is just another way of saying "lets make people who were paying no taxes before, i.e. the poor, pay taxes now" Its effectively attempting to get blood out of a stone.

My additional problem with the Ryan budget is that rather than cut military spending which makes up at least a quarter of the federal budget, it actually increases it. On top of that it doesn't actually lower federal government spending overall. So in effect it keeps the budget the same. Do you know how it purports to mostly balance the budget? By a trillion dollars of increased revenue by 2016. In case you're not following the math that's 25% growth in money to be taxed over the baseline taxation system in the next four years. How does it do this? By taxing the rich less and the poor more, so somehow it thinks that by increasing the tax burden on the poor, and decreasing the tax burden on the rich we will somehow find 25% more collectible taxes through growth. I don't know about you, but how any rational person could see anything there but complete bullshit I don't know, but that's Paul Ryan's position, and my indite of it has nothing to do with the R in front of his name, its just horrible policy.

Exactly, if you research and think and do some real impartial soul searching the policies of the R are more often than not the policies that hurt the middle class. I can give many examples of this across the board. Here is one, just one. The US worker has increased productivity almost without fail every year in the past 25 or 30 years probably even longer. The chart I just viewed clearly shows that. However, the middle class in this same country receives less and less as their share of the wealth in these same time periods. This exactly coincides with the demise of organized unions in this country. The decline matches almost perfectly
with the loss of shared wealth Is this the only reason? Probably not. Does it contribute probably does.

Dwight look up the exact economic definition of productivity. Economists give it a very specific meaning. Ponder that meaning for a minute and attempt to understand how this is anywhere near fair in a capitalistic/democratic society. R are on the wrong side of this issue.

I said one but here is another. Almost this exact same health insurance idea was first introduced by the R in this country. It was their idea. They rarely have a great idea but this one was. Now all of a sudden because it is embraced by the president this idea is no longer valid. Is this crazy? A national health care plan cannot work if doesn't include all or nearly all. Dwight, do you have any idea how costly prescription drugs are for poor, near poor and lower middle class families? Defending the health of the nation should be a shared duty of the government. Note the word shared. Without a mandate government health care is nearly impossible. What answer do the R have, no answer just criticism and hateful dialogue.

[rkelly110]

Look, here it is plain and simple. Repubs do not want a Black man in the White house anymore than
they want them in their neighborhood. Until a white man gets in, nothing will be done.

If you Repub lovers would only admit that, instead of making up excuses about how 'bama is screwing up.


I won't vote for a party who does nothing but stone wall, act like children, turn down their own ideas
and is for the richest of Americans.


All that has to be done to get this country going is to have a min of a 5 year tax and health care plan
so business' will know what their liabilities will be and plan accordingly. Simple!

[fishmonger]

I just wish their was a country where if I worked hard I got rewarded instead of punished. And the people that didn't work hard didn't get the same things I had to work for free.

[dante1]

Look, here it is plain and simple. Repubs do not want a Black man in the White house anymore than
they want them in their neighborhood. Until a white man gets in, nothing will be done.

If you Repub lovers would only admit that, instead of making up excuses about how 'bama is screwing up.


I won't vote for a party who does nothing but stone wall, act like children, turn down their own ideas
and is for the richest of Americans.


All that has to be done to get this country going is to have a min of a 5 year tax and health care plan
so business' will know what their liabilities will be and plan accordingly. Simple!

Mr Kelly, I agree some R believe this but by no means all of them. It I thought it was all of them then there is no use in attempting to bargain with them and your premise and conclusion would be valid and true. The key imo is actual dialogue and compromise. It is clear to all but the very stupid that the R right now are the people unable or unwilling to negotiate. You can't have an entire group of politicians stuck on the idea that no matter what we will have no tax increase. That is just crazy.

Europe has taught us that austerity did not work. The US has presently a meager 2% growth. However Europe is contracting at an even larger %. Yes, things aren't great but without future investment in infrastructure things will be even worse. Without a compromise on infrastructure investment I am afraid we will remain stagnant. R refuse to compromise or even talk about it.

[dante1]

I just wish their was a country where if I worked hard I got rewarded instead of punished. And the people that didn't work hard didn't get the same things I had to work for free.

I don't think that people on welfare and public assistance of any kind are better off than most people that are working. Do abuses occur, of course. Should they be remedied, sure and many were. Would I give up what I have and my entire working career and change identities and standard of living with welfare recipients. Of course not that is ridiculous. I am not jealous of a poor family receiving cheese and food stamps. Please don't misunderstand me, I am not saying you are jealous either and your point is valid. It reflects exactly my point a few posts back. Standard of living for the hard working productive middle class has been decreasing and something is very wrong with that. I believe eight more years of Bush like policies will make things much worse.

[mathdotcom]

because its true?

Hmm why does it only go back to 2008.... Wonder what it looks like going back to 2000.

Also, classic that J7 likes this. Clueless about stats.


Oh look, a different story

[rkelly110]

A different story alright, Bush didn't have good numbers until his 2nd term, compared to 'bama's 1st term.

[King Mayan]

only a clown like math can compare a small recession to a depression...

[mathdotcom]

No I'm just saying why did the poster choose the graph with only Bush's bad years?
Post it all and let the reader decide.

Obama has had 4 years to fix the economy and it still sucks. No one is expecting it to improve the next 5 years.

[crustyme]

I just wish their was a country where if I worked hard I got rewarded instead of punished. And the people that didn't work hard didn't get the same things I had to work for free.

sick of hearing the same lame rhetoric from neocon leadership. the same people who were born with silverspoons up their asses and skated through life on their parents money.

in the real world, there are tons who work 60-80 hr weeks for little to no money. america doesnt reward you for working hard, they reward you for working smarter.

for example, there was a guy who appeared on "shark tank" peddling a business selling shitty drawings of cats. he is now making so much money that he had to hire several employees to help him draw.

when a guy who sells drawings of cats makes more money than a single mom with 3 jobs, you know the system is screwed up.

but whats wrong with millionaires paying more? do you honestly think oprah deserved her $300 mil salary with her grueling 5-hour work weeks? i mean the only reason who got popular was luck, cause other talk show hosts worked just as hard as her but just didnt click with the audience.

[dante1]

sick of hearing the same lame rhetoric from neocon leadership. the same people who were born with silverspoons up their asses and skated through life on their parents money.

in the real world, there are tons who work 60-80 hr weeks for little to no money. america doesnt reward you for working hard, they reward you for working smarter.

for example, there was a guy who appeared on "shark tank" peddling a business selling shitty drawings of cats. he is now making so much money that he had to hire several employees to help him draw.

when a guy who sells drawings of cats makes more money than a single mom with 3 jobs, you know the system is screwed up.

but whats wrong with millionaires paying more? do you honestly think oprah deserved her $300 mil salary with her grueling 5-hour work weeks? i mean the only reason who got popular was luck, cause other talk show hosts worked just as hard as her but just didnt click with the audience.

"What's wrong with millionaires..." you socialist, communist Obama lover, shame on you.

[fishmonger]

Yeah and the people that are working 60-80 hours a week for little money are the same fck ups that screwed around in school while I was paying attention to the teacher so I didn't have to. And you don't know my family crusty. I grew up in the trailer park and my family didn't get food stamps. My father was too proud. Now he now make close to 6 figures and so do I.

[dante1]

Yeah and the people that are working 60-80 hours a week for little money are the same fck ups that screwed around in school while I was paying attention to the teacher so I didn't have to. And you don't know my family crusty. I grew up in the trailer park and my family didn't get food stamps. My father was too proud. Now he now make close to 6 figures and so do I.

Hmmm, I don't understand your previous posts, obviously you got a fair shake and are getting compensated fairly. Is it you don't like paying taxes, nobody does but paying your fair share is patriotic, much more patriotic than slapping on a bumper sticker.

[fishmonger]

Hmmm, I don't understand your previous posts, obviously you got a fair shake and are getting compensated fairly. Is it you don't like paying taxes, nobody does but paying your fair share is patriotic, much more patriotic than slapping on a bumper sticker.

I don't mind paying taxes. But to say poor don't have to pay taxes either is communist.

[crustyme]

Yeah and the people that are working 60-80 hours a week for little money are the same fck ups that screwed around in school while I was paying attention to the teacher so I didn't have to. And you don't know my family crusty. I grew up in the trailer park and my family didn't get food stamps. My father was too proud. Now he now make close to 6 figures and so do I.

wait, you dont want others to judge you or your family but you are judging others?

yeah, college grads all have 6-figure jobs lined up to reward all their hard work in school, right?

uh, no..... heres a reality check:

About 1.5 million, or 53.6 percent, of bachelor's degree-holders under the age of 25 last year were jobless or underemployed, the highest share in at least 11 years.

http://m.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/04/53-of-recent-college-grads-are-jobless-or-underemployed-how/256237/

the reality is many college grads are jobless or work as waiters, drive taxis or toil in other low wage jobs.

plus many business owners such as in restaurants work 60-80hrs a week yet cant even pay themselves. are they lazy in your eyes because they dont make as much as you?

just more proof that your neo-con rhetoric is bullshit.

"work smarter not harder" better fits. i mean look at the people who invented pet rock and a stupid blanket with sleeves (snuggies).... theyre millionaires! do you think they work harder than you?

luck also plays a huge role. just look at carrie underwood, a hugely rich superstar. she was working as a waitress for little money. then she gets discovered on a tv show and becomes a multi-millionaire singer. sure, talent and looks helped but there are probably millions like her that can sing as well but havent gotten the same break.

since you are all about accountability and getting only what you earn.... shouldnt inheritance be disallowed? i mean you didnt earn it so why should you get any of it?

[Shaudius]

I don't mind paying taxes. But to say poor don't have to pay taxes either is communist.

When you were living the trailer park I guarantee your father paid little to any federal income taxes, this isn't a new system that suddenly has existed the last four years. Now lets extend your personal analogy to the Ryan budget plan, suppose someone told you and your father when you were living in the trailer park that you have to pay $6,000 more a year in income tax, but that law firm partner over there or CEO of a large company making a million dollars a year, has to pay $150,000 less than he was before, but don't worry, you'll get yours because his personal income is used to create jobs so the system will make it so we actually get more tax revenue because that lawyer or CEO will directly create jobs with his income. That's how we'll balance the budget, not through decreased spending because we're not actually going to decrease the federal outlays by one cent, but we are going to do it by making the guy who makes a million dollars pay less and you pay more.

But you say, I needed that $6,000 to eat! Too bad, you weren't paying your fair share, we needed to expand the tax base. That $6,000 you were going to spend on food and other necessities, oh well, too bad, that's what you get for being poor. Guess you'll just have to pick up another job(if you can find one) or make your kid work instead of going to school, good luck educating your way out of that one.

The truth is the Ryan budget can propose this because Republicans know they won't get poor minorities to vote for them no matter what but they don't need them(for now) they will still get poor white people to vote for them because of the canard of social issues, some amount of hatred of minorities, and some amount of false hope that a significant portion of them will one day become rich, the fallacy of the American Dream, the reality is that the American Dream of effectively rags to riches only happens to a small minority, but since that apparently happened to be you, to some extent you have extended your personal experience to the whole.

[fishmonger]

Crust i never said having a college degree would guarantee someone a job. I do have a degree, that I paid for by serving my country in the Marines because my family could not afford it. I did try to get a job straight out of college and it didn't work. That's what happens when your young and inexperienced. Who would hire someone straight out of college with no experience? I am a restaurant owner and I do work alot. It's not my fault that other restaurants can't get their shit together. You serve a shitty product to people and they are not going to come back. Restaurants are risky business to begin with, everyone knows that. I consider myself a self made person and if more people stop wanting something for nothing we would not be arguing about this shit.

[fishmonger]

Shaudius i never said said that the poor should pay more. you are turning things totally around. I merely stated that they should pay just like the rich do. I'm not rich. Yeah my dad probably paid "less" because of his income but he made less. And i did work to help pay bills while i was in high school and college. You can do both you know, most people do. And to say that Republicans hate minorities is just irresponsible. My father is a Chinese immigrant and he is republican and my mother is a conservative libertarian. And to assume i am republican is what donkeys do. Because im not republican. And rags to riches do happen, all the time. Just look at every strip mall in america and any of them worth a shit have a chinese take out in them. I guarantee those people working in those came from nothing and are living comfortably with out government assistance.

[Sam Odom]

he was lying so he backtracked ... it was bad before Obama said it was fine than said it was bad


'Private Sector' Comment Becomes a Public Gaffe

Mr. Obama sought to clarify the remarks later in the day, saying "it is absolutely clear that the economy is not doing fine."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...hatsNewsSecond

Bottom line of this thread.... ^^

[ByeShea]

Agreed 100%, the guy is trying to please too many people. He is a great politician, and one of the best campaigners I have ever seen in my lifetime, but he really needs to stick to his convictions, regardless.

Well, let's forget momentarily (and mercifully) about Obama's job performance as President.

You've seen him campaign against Hillary Clinton and John "we won't say any thing bad about Reverend Wright or Barack Obama" McCain.

Now you've been watching his campaign getting its ass kicked by Romney, a tough qualified candidate. I believe that Obama and the Democratic party has been foolishly taking the biased press at its own word on assessing Mitt Romney.

At best Obama is a pick'em right now - when he should have a commanding lead. He's off InTrade 10+% in the past two weeks and it's not going to get any prettier; he made the campaign gaffe "private sector is just fine" too big to ignore just on Friday, the economy can only hurt him further at this point, and he cannot match Romney's fundraising.

Obama is toast.

[jarvol]

wait, you dont want others to judge you or your family but you are judging others?

yeah, college grads all have 6-figure jobs lined up to reward all their hard work in school, right?

uh, no..... heres a reality check:

About 1.5 million, or 53.6 percent, of bachelor's degree-holders under the age of 25 last year were jobless or underemployed, the highest share in at least 11 years.

http://m.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/04/53-of-recent-college-grads-are-jobless-or-underemployed-how/256237/

the reality is many college grads are jobless or work as waiters, drive taxis or toil in other low wage jobs.

plus many business owners such as in restaurants work 60-80hrs a week yet cant even pay themselves. are they lazy in your eyes because they dont make as much as you?

just more proof that your neo-con rhetoric is bullshit.

"work smarter not harder" better fits. i mean look at the people who invented pet rock and a stupid blanket with sleeves (snuggies).... theyre millionaires! do you think they work harder than you?

luck also plays a huge role. just look at carrie underwood, a hugely rich superstar. she was working as a waitress for little money. then she gets discovered on a tv show and becomes a multi-millionaire singer. sure, talent and looks helped but there are probably millions like her that can sing as well but havent gotten the same break.

since you are all about accountability and getting only what you earn.... shouldnt inheritance be disallowed? i mean you didnt earn it so why should you get any of it?

What percentage of those grads who are unemployed have worthwhile degrees and obtained an actual skill like those who graduated with degrees in engineering, nursing, accounting, computer science, etc?

I am not going to cry a river for those who went to college for 6 years to party and finally got a degree in psychology or history or anthropology or excercise science, who never was an intern or pursued meaningful summer jobs, and have no relevant job skills for the jobs in which they are applying.

[The Madcap]

When you were living the trailer park I guarantee your father paid little to any federal income taxes, this isn't a new system that suddenly has existed the last four years. Now lets extend your personal analogy to the Ryan budget plan, suppose someone told you and your father when you were living in the trailer park that you have to pay $6,000 more a year in income tax, but that law firm partner over there or CEO of a large company making a million dollars a year, has to pay $150,000 less than he was before, but don't worry, you'll get yours because his personal income is used to create jobs so the system will make it so we actually get more tax revenue because that lawyer or CEO will directly create jobs with his income. That's how we'll balance the budget, not through decreased spending because we're not actually going to decrease the federal outlays by one cent, but we are going to do it by making the guy who makes a million dollars pay less and you pay more.

But you say, I needed that $6,000 to eat! Too bad, you weren't paying your fair share, we needed to expand the tax base. That $6,000 you were going to spend on food and other necessities, oh well, too bad, that's what you get for being poor. Guess you'll just have to pick up another job(if you can find one) or make your kid work instead of going to school, good luck educating your way out of that one.

The truth is the Ryan budget can propose this because Republicans know they won't get poor minorities to vote for them no matter what but they don't need them(for now) they will still get poor white people to vote for them because of the canard of social issues, some amount of hatred of minorities, and some amount of false hope that a significant portion of them will one day become rich, the fallacy of the American Dream, the reality is that the American Dream of effectively rags to riches only happens to a small minority, but since that apparently happened to be you, to some extent you have extended your personal experience to the whole.

It's like a wise man once told me, "Generalize wildly from your own experiences, you're not that fukking special."

Why shouldn't he extend his personal experience to the whole? Isn't that what we all do?

Why don't you listen to what he's saying, seriously. Think about it. You're talking to a guy whose parents came to this country from China, most-likely with little in the way of money, or an understanding of English or our cultural values. Foreign faces with a foreign name and a foreign language, and little more than a sense of backbone and determination. And they made it. And it sounds like he knows plenty of other people who made it the same way just like his parents. Like he said, every strip mall in America has some chinese takeout making bank. So if they can do it, shouldn't anybody?

What's holding other Americans back that wasn't holding him or his family back?

NOTHING.

Nothing other than personal outlook and the excuses of commie pussies like you. Maybe if you believed more in the human spirit and less in centralized bureaucracy you would be successful too.

The Fishmonger is first generation and understands more about what it means to be American than you ever will. Grow a pair or pack your bags pussy. America ain't for the weak-minded ankle grabbers who want the government to subsidize their complacent acceptance of mediocrity. It's for people who want to strive for greatness. If you want to quit on yourself, fine, but take that cancerous negativity and get the **** out of our country woman.

[Shaudius]

Shaudius i never said said that the poor should pay more. you are turning things totally around. I merely stated that they should pay just like the rich do. I'm not rich. Yeah my dad probably paid "less" because of his income but he made less. And i did work to help pay bills while i was in high school and college. You can do both you know, most people do. And to say that Republicans hate minorities is just irresponsible. My father is a Chinese immigrant and he is republican and my mother is a conservative libertarian. And to assume i am republican is what donkeys do. Because im not republican. And rags to riches do happen, all the time. Just look at every strip mall in america and any of them worth a shit have a chinese take out in them. I guarantee those people working in those came from nothing and are living comfortably with out government assistance.

I assumed you were responding to what I wrote, since it now appears you were in fact responding to some strawman argument that no one made I apologize. I was talking about the Ryan budget plan, no one else in this thread that I can tell was talking about the Ryan budget plan and taxation and you wrote, "[n]ot taxing the poor and taxing the rich is some commy bullshit too." So apparently you think not taxing people who live in poverty and close to poverty is commy bullshit, that's fine you're entitled to your opinion, I only showed you how the Ryan budget plan would effect someone of your individual circumstances.

You go on to say,

"And to say that Republicans hate minorities is just irresponsible. My father is a Chinese immigrant and he is republican and my mother is a conservative libertarian. And to assume i am republican is what donkeys do."

Please explain to me where I said that ALL Republicans hate minorities. I merely stated that Republicans running for office don't particularly care about the minority vote. Which is true, they don't(or at least haven't in the past), they don't court it, except recently for Hispanics because of the demographic shift meaning they have to. I didn't say Republicans hate minorities in general either, I only stated that some percentage of the Republican party does, just as some percentage of the Republican party is voting against their economic self-interests in the interest of something else, be it their latent racism, their religious convictions, or some sense that even though they are poor the American Dream still works, note that these groups are not mutually exclusive nor does each of them constitute the whole.

Also, I never said you were Republican, apparently you have reading comprehension skills, what I did do is extent my argument in my previous post to talk about the Ryan budget plan again, not related to you, and show what I saw as the reasons Republicans supported it, I never said you supported it.

"And rags to riches do happen, all the time. Just look at every strip mall in america and any of them worth a shit have a chinese take out in them. I guarantee those people working in those came from nothing and are living comfortably with out government assistance."

I said that it happens, what makes you think I don't think it happens, I said it right in my post, "the reality is that the American Dream of effectively rags to riches only happens to a small minority, but since that apparently happened to be you, to some extent you have extended your personal experience to the whole." I agree that it happens, the problem is that people see it happen to a minority of people and think that means that it can happen to everyone, newsflash, this isn't a meritocracy and it can't.

[PAULYPOKER]

Nobody @ this forum is in the 1%, why do you still support them?

[Shaudius]

Now you've been watching his campaign getting its ass kicked by Romney, a tough qualified candidate. I believe that Obama and the Democratic party has been foolishly taking the biased press at its own word on assessing Mitt Romney.

At best Obama is a pick'em right now - when he should have a commanding lead. He's off InTrade 10+% in the past two weeks and it's not going to get any prettier; he made the campaign gaffe "private sector is just fine" too big to ignore just on Friday, the economy can only hurt him further at this point, and he cannot match Romney's fundraising.

Obama is toast.

Romney is not that strong of a candidate, all the truly strong candidates stayed out this time. Romney is the best of slim pickings, what you are seeing is a lot of people holding their nose and voting for Obama in an Anyone But Obama backlash, how many of you who are supposedly voting for Romney think he is the best man in the Republican Party to lead, or even one of the strongest? It doesn't seem like its very many.

It's like a wise man once told me, "Generalize wildly from your own experiences, you're not that fukking special."

Why shouldn't he extend his personal experience to the whole? Isn't that what we all do?

We all do it, but we shouldn't do it, its part of the reason that so many people lack empathy for those who can't succeed like them for whatever reason. Its a logical fallacy to apply your own individual situation to the whole, you see your own success and think why can't other people do what I do. But the truth is that there is a combination of circumstances that are unique to every person and the plural of anecdote is not data. Fishmonger's story is no more useful than someone saying, "smoking doesn't increase morbidity, my grandmother smoked 2 packs and day and lived til she was 90. QED." This would also be like the people who say, "racism is dead in this country, a black man was able to become President."(and yes there are people who make that argument)

What we instead need to look at is aggregate data about how many people start some place and end somewhere else, and the unique combination of factors that each of them has, instead of saying, well fishmonger did it, why can't you?

The Fishmonger is first generation and understands more about what it means to be American than you ever will. Grow a pair or pack your bags pussy. America ain't for the weak-minded ankle grabbers who want the government to subsidize their complacent acceptance of mediocrity. It's for people who want to strive for greatness. If you want to quit on yourself, fine, but take that cancerous negativity and get the **** out of our country woman.

Who said I wanted to accept mediocrity? I think everyone should try hard, and shouldn't be getting hand outs without trying hard, but what you fail to understand is that people can work their whole lives, as hard as they can and still not succeed. Should we throw our hands up in the air and say, oh well, you tried and you failed, guess your choices are starve to death or kill yourself, cuz we aren't gonna help you. Because the truth is we don't live in a true meritocracy, you won't necessarily get ahead by working hard.

I am very successful, but I also recognize that I came from a position very solidly in the middle class, I also worked hard to get where I am, and have enough latent intelligence to know how to get ahead, everyone isn't lucky(and most of our success is luck, despite what people want to blather on about hard work, whether it be luck that we stumble upon or fortune of birth) like me though, and to claim that people aren't successful because they are "women"(which I guess you equate with being weak and lazy) is ridiculous and the fact that you use ankle grabbing just shows your blatant homophobia and chauvinism.