Jobless rate falls to 7.8 %

[Oerets]

Originally Posted by BlueStreak

Ahhhhhh, Jack Welch.......Another miserable failure who managed to spin his gross incompetence into convincing people it was "success". Sorry, Jack, but leaving tens of thousands unemployed and dozens of communities devastated behind you ISN'T "success" you utterly worthless piece of shit.

When did we start idolizing people for their ability to shutter factories and fuck others out of their livelyhoods in the name of nothing more than their own personal gain?

That's what I'd like to know.

And, I'd really like it to stop, because it's ruining my country.

Regards,
Dave

Jack one of the A$$ Wipes that promoted Six Sigma Management. Next to outsourcing jobs overseas is the greatest contributer to the downfall of the US economy and the weakening of the middle class workers IMO!



Barney

[d-ray657]

Originally Posted by whell

That wasn't my question. My question was specific to Santelli, not entire tea party. Please stay on topic.

Geez, we have moderators popping up everywhere.

Regards,

D-Ray

[ebacon]

Originally Posted by d-ray657

Geez, we have moderators popping up everywhere.

Regards,

D-Ray

Like pods!

I just learned the sci-fi root of that word so I'm giddy.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

No it wasn't.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/busine...IxI_story.html

From the article:

"... the credit rating company said “political brinkmanship” in the debate over the debt had made the U.S. government’s ability to manage its finances “less stable, less effective and less predictable.”

That pretty much says exactly what I did.

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by wgrr

Jude, goo, goo, government, Wanniski was an asshole.

Actually, "goo goo" was Paul Weyrich but, hey, an asshole's an asshole!

John

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by finnbow

From the article:

"... the credit rating company said “political brinkmanship” in the debate over the debt had made the U.S. government’s ability to manage its finances “less stable, less effective and less predictable.”

That pretty much says exactly what I did.

I don't think whell has the patience to read all the stuff he links to to make his points. This isn't the first time he linked to something that ended up destroying his own argument.

John

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by d-ray657

Geez, we have moderators popping up everywhere.

Regards,

D-Ray

I figured whell was just being whell until I remembered that I was the one who started this thread. I guess losing in the polls is souring his outlook. He's getting almost as bad as Mezz..

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by Boreas

I don't think whell has the patience to read all the stuff he links to to make his points. This isn't the first time he linked to something that ended up destroying his own argument.

John

Getting him to admit he's wrong is another thing entirely...

[whell]

Originally Posted by bobabode

Bite me whell, the topic is as I started it. Start your own thread if you don't like it, schmuck.

Testy little tempest in a teapot, aren't you?

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

From the article:

"... the credit rating company said “political brinkmanship” in the debate over the debt had made the U.S. government’s ability to manage its finances “less stable, less effective and less predictable.”

That pretty much says exactly what I did.

You actually need to read the article, not just the first paragraph or two.

"S&P’s downgrade was as much a political critique as a financial conclusion. It is based on a view that U.S. political leaders would be unable to come up with at least $4****trillion in savings, which is needed to bring the nation’s debt to a manageable level over the next decade.

The debt deal swung earlier this week proposed spending cuts in two phases. Democrats and Republicans agreed to the first round, worth nearly $1 trillion. But a congressional committee must decide on the remaining $1.2****trillion to $1.5 trillion — and S&P questioned whether that would ever happen."

So, the point I was responding to was how sequestration was going to cause further credit downgrades. Since sequestration will result in additional savings, and the concern about reaching additional savings objectives, caused the initial downgrade, the likelyhood of additional credit rating reductions would be reduced with sequestration.