Economy Is Improving

dukeanthony

New Member
So why havnt you launched any? Cos there's a shitload of countries that could nuke the shit out of you back.

Nuclear weapons are a good deterrent, but as for their practical applications...they're basically unusable. As for domestic gun ownership...you really think if you were attacked by a military force you could defend yourselves just cos you've aload of AR-15's and hunting rifles? Lol, the arrogance never ceases to amaze me.
Nukes work fine
And yes Hunting rifles and sporting rifles are just what is needed to get bigger weapons
think about the Phillipine where for less than a buck we sent them a stamped gun and some bullets

Go look up the fp45 liberator

Design
The FP-45 was a crude, single-shot pistol designed to be cheaply and quickly mass produced. The Liberator had just 23 largely stamped and turned steel parts that were cheap and easy to manufacture. It fired a .45 caliber pistol cartridge from an unrifled barrel. Due to the unrifled barrel, it was intended for very close ambush (1-4 m). Its maximum effective range was only about 25 feet (less than 8 m). At longer range, the bullet would begin to tumble and stray off course. Because of the low quality, it was nicknamed the "Woolworth gun."
[edit] Use

The Liberator was shipped in a cardboard box with 10 rounds of .45 ACP ammunition, a wooden dowel to remove the empty cartridge case, and an instruction sheet in comic strip form[1] showing how to load and fire the weapon. Extra rounds of ammunition could be stored in the pistol grip.
After production, the Army turned the Liberators over to the OSS. A crude and clumsy weapon, the Liberator was never intended for front line service. It was originally intended as an insurgency weapon to be mass dropped behind enemy lines to resistance fighters in occupied territory. A resistance fighter was to recover the weapon, sneak up on an Axis occupier, kill or incapacitate him, and retrieve his weapons.
 

MuyLocoNC

Well-Known Member
Nukes work fine
And yes Hunting rifles and sporting rifles are just what is needed to get bigger weapons
think about the Phillipine where for less than a buck we sent them a stamped gun and some bullets

Go look up the fp45 liberator

Design
The FP-45 was a crude, single-shot pistol designed to be cheaply and quickly mass produced. The Liberator had just 23 largely stamped and turned steel parts that were cheap and easy to manufacture. It fired a .45 caliber pistol cartridge from an unrifled barrel. Due to the unrifled barrel, it was intended for very close ambush (1-4 m). Its maximum effective range was only about 25 feet (less than 8 m). At longer range, the bullet would begin to tumble and stray off course. Because of the low quality, it was nicknamed the "Woolworth gun."
[edit] Use

The Liberator was shipped in a cardboard box with 10 rounds of .45 ACP ammunition, a wooden dowel to remove the empty cartridge case, and an instruction sheet in comic strip form[1] showing how to load and fire the weapon. Extra rounds of ammunition could be stored in the pistol grip.
After production, the Army turned the Liberators over to the OSS. A crude and clumsy weapon, the Liberator was never intended for front line service. It was originally intended as an insurgency weapon to be mass dropped behind enemy lines to resistance fighters in occupied territory. A resistance fighter was to recover the weapon, sneak up on an Axis occupier, kill or incapacitate him, and retrieve his weapons.
Never heard of it, but it's brilliant.
 

dukeanthony

New Member
My Grandfather in law (is that right?)
has one
And the way he tells it. they didnt parachute these things in they Just dropped the Crate out of the plane and they got spreade all over the place along with the rest of the supplies
 

Brick Top

New Member
Read the news
It has been for over a year
Unemployment is under 400k new claims which is about normal during good times
Would of been that way for several months But State Goverments were laying off people
From:

November 4, 2011 National job growth still falling short; Unemployment at 9 percent



Yep. Things are MUCH better. Unemployment has fallen from 9.1% all the way down to 9%. and the Federal Reserve this week lowered its forecast from economic growth to 1.7 percent for this year, down from a forecast of 2.7 percent issued over the summer. It also says unemployment will not come down substantially through the end of 2012.

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said Wednesday that growth is likely to be "frustratingly slow." The unemployment rate has hovered around 9 percent for more than two years.

http://dailyitem.com/0100_news/x2039720464/National-job-growth-still-falling-short-Unemployment-at-9-percent

Gee, things really are looking up! I guess Obama might not be the worst president of all time after all. He might turn out to only be the second worst president of all time.
 

Hemlock

Well-Known Member
From:

November 4, 2011 National job growth still falling short; Unemployment at 9 percent



Yep. Things are MUCH better. Unemployment has fallen from 9.1% all the way down to 9%. and the Federal Reserve this week lowered its forecast from economic growth to 1.7 percent for this year, down from a forecast of 2.7 percent issued over the summer. It also says unemployment will not come down substantially through the end of 2012.

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said Wednesday that growth is likely to be "frustratingly slow." The unemployment rate has hovered around 9 percent for more than two years.

http://dailyitem.com/0100_news/x2039720464/National-job-growth-still-falling-short-Unemployment-at-9-percent

Gee, things really are looking up! I guess Obama might not be the worst president of all time after all. He might turn out to only be the second worst president of all time.
Well Said Sir, I could not have put it better myself. On top of that the fukin pay for the job that are out there is so low its not worth doin.
 

Brick Top

New Member
Well Said Sir, I could not have put it better myself. On top of that the fukin pay for the job that are out there is so low its not worth doin.

The BIG LIE came from Harry "Let's Not Do A Damn Thing In The Senate" Reid when he made the totally inaccurate claim that the private sector was doing well job-wise but the public sector was hurting.


Remind me again who it is that funds the public sector?

Posted by Jeff Emanuel (Diary)
Wednesday, October 19th at 2:00PM EST
19 Comments
UPDATE: Jim Geraghty crunches some numbers in this post on the topic.
Via Adam Bitely, that direct quote can be seen in the video below:

For context, here’s Sen. Reid’s (D-NV) statement from the Senate floor today:
“The massive layoffs we’ve had in America today-of course they’re rooted in the last administration-and it’s very clear that private sector jobs are doing just fine. It’s the public sector jobs where we’ve lost huge numbers, and that’s what this legislation’s all about. And it’s unfortunate my friend the Republican Leader is complaining about that. I would also note that my friend said the House passed another bill. Well, they pass lots of bills, but they rarely go anyplace.”
Here’s a fact that Reid should look over before he opens his mouth again. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, government workers have the lowest unemployment rate of any industry or class recorded, at 4.7%, while the national unemployment rate is 9.1% – nearly twice that of public sector workers.

Further, I seem to recall – contrary to Reid’s assertion that the private sector is “doing just fine” but that public sector employment funding has been overlooked – an almost $1 Trillion ($1,000,000,000,000.00) “stimulus” bill being passed and signed into law early in the Obama administration whose major purpose was to fund “shovel-ready” public-sector jobs and to “save essential government services.” Now, Harry Reid is telling us that the public sector needs another fiscal shot in the arm, while Vice President Joe Biden (D-DE) is telling audiences that a failure to pass another stimulus bill to follow the first, utterly failed one will lead to mass rape and murder of…somebody.
Via Michelle Malkin, here’s a graph from the Mercatus Center’s Veronique de Rugy showing just what Obama and Reid’s last attempt to implement their version of economic reform has wrought on employment across the board in America:

Here’s a video from the Senate Republicans, juxtaposing Reid’s statement with financial reporters declaring the private sector to be stuck in a rut of unemployment and growing financial strain:
Additionally, recent Census Bureau figures show that the top median household income in America is now…in Washington, DC. That obviously includes contractors, consultants, and the K Street lobbyists who keep flowing in and out of the Obama administration’s revolving door of ultimate government insiders, but it also boasts the highest percentage of government employees to total population in the nation. According to Bloomberg:
The U.S. capital has swapped top spots with Silicon Valley, according to recent Census Bureau figures, with the typical household in the Washington metro area earning $84,523 last year. The national median income for 2010 was $50,046. … . The unemployment rate in the Washington metro area in August was 6.1 percent, compared with 10 percent in San Jose, according to Labor Department figures.
Despite these simple facts – as well as the fact that the public sector is only able to exist through the presence of a prosperous, employed private sector to fund it – Washington Democrats continue to peddle the myths that public sector employment is hurting worse than private sector – a blatant lie based on the data provided by the government itself – and that the job of a union dues-paying teacher is more important to the nation than any form of private sector employment.

http://www.redstate.com/jeff_emanuel/2011/10/19/harry-reid-private-sector-jobs-are-doing-just-fine-its-the-public-sector-jobs-where-weve-lost-huge-numbers/
 

dukeanthony

New Member
So what was tge job loss picture looking like end of 2008 and beginning of 2009?
Guess we are gianing jobs
You guys are a deceitful bunch arent ya?
 

Hemlock

Well-Known Member
So what was tge job loss picture looking like end of 2008 and beginning of 2009?
Guess we are gianing jobs
You guys are a deceitful bunch arent ya?
No,,, you just seem to be ill informed all the time.
Thats a good response when faced with FACTS start to call names. NICE.
 

maineyankee

Active Member
It is very obvious ( at least to me ) that we alone created our unemployment. We did this with robots and machines that are all from computers. No longer does it take 1,000 people to build one car, nor build, nor anything. We are a service industrial nation now and that is only our own fault. And, it will get worse before better because we are not taking the time or effort to restructure America. We just do not have any funding for that side of the coin. Then and only then, can people get back to work, I mean meaningful work, labor intense. After that, the trickle down economy happens and people have money to spend. Don't believe me ... Look at Las Vegas.

The MaineYankee
 

dukeanthony

New Member
No one wants to work in a factory. We have 20 positions open and even if you have no skills we will pay you 12 An hour.
There are jobs out there. People just dont want to do them
 

Harrekin

Well-Known Member
AH fuk off. you sayin we weren't involved, how the hell would Europe been able to fight without us. You were broke and germany was knocking at your door.
Are you joking me? I said prior to WW2 the US has a policy of isolationism and appeasement. It's in the history books, it is fact. It's why it took so long for the US to join in WW2.

The only reason you's even joined is because the Japanese thought they deserved to own more of the Pacific and allied themselves with the Axis.

Prior to this I don't think the US was ever attacked domestically.

Do you honestly think its a coincidence that after WW2 when the US started spreading itself around and getting involved (see "interferring") in other countries business that they started making enemies.

Point is that US imperialism is making your country completely broke. Enjoy your automatic 2 trillion dollars+ in cutbacks next year ;)
 

Coals

Active Member
I have to ask what immuno country you live in. Unless your from Somalia, your probably in the same mess as the US, Greece, Canada etc...
 

Dan Kone

Well-Known Member
Yep. Things are MUCH better. Unemployment has fallen from 9.1% all the way down to 9%. and the Federal Reserve this week lowered its forecast from economic growth to 1.7 percent for this year, down from a forecast of 2.7 percent issued over the summer. It also says unemployment will not come down substantially through the end of 2012.
And that tiny drop in unemployment is almost certainly due to people who's unemployment ran out but still can't find a job.

People sometimes forget that unemployment only counts those who are on unemployment, not the people who are unemployed but not on unemployment. True unemployment is likely 25-30%.

Anyone who thinks the economy is significantly improving for the majority of Americans is delusional.
 

MuyLocoNC

Well-Known Member
The latest numbers I've been seeing puts the "real" unemployment number around 17% and it jumps to 22% when you add in the underemployed (people working part-time who want to be working full-time). Maybe those numbers have risen, but they're ugly even at those levels.

I have a good friend about to lose his job in two weeks and unless a miracle happens, he will be unemployed for the forseeable future. I'm probably going to have to take my small business out of part-time status into a full-time venture, so we can keep him in his house.
 

WillyBagseed

Active Member
No one wants to work in a factory. We have 20 positions open and even if you have no skills we will pay you 12 An hour.
There are jobs out there. People just dont want to do them
Good non union factory and warehouse jobs were paying $12.00 an hour in 1982........... union was $15-$17.00
WTF , $12.00 /hour in 2011...lol???

And righties wonder why some people are all pissed off......

keeping in mind insane CEO pay and/or inflation, minimum wage should be somewhere between $13.50 and $17.00 an hour (depends on which formula you want to use, minimum wage being starting pay for unskilled labor)

But we can't pay fair wages to the regular guy now can we, we would need to charge too much for our products for anybody to afford..... oh hell no, I refuse to lower upper management pay and pay a fair blue collar rate to keep our prices the same.
 

MuyLocoNC

Well-Known Member
Works out to about $25k a year for an entry level blue collar job. If it includes full benefits, the total compensation is probably close to $30-$35 thousand. If I was unemployed with little hope of scoring a job in my chosen field and about to lose my home, I wouldn't hesitate for a second to take it. Would you?
 

WillyBagseed

Active Member
You have to do what you have to do, BUT... On a typical $25k job you will pay about $200 per month on your medical and up to $500 a month for family medical. If your employer sucks more than usual it can be much more. So now your 25k job, if you have a family, is now a 20k per year job...... see where we are heading??? Don't forget your $1000.00 - $2000.00 deductible per person in your family, somebody gets sick and your 20k is now 18k or even 16k..................A race to the bottom for the average person while getting raped by upper management who get paid insane amounts just to fail.

Enjoy that $385.00 per week BEFORE SSN, Medi and local taxes. After all that you will be lucky to take home $8.50 - $9.00 an hour. Pray nobody in your family gets hurt or sick. Then you have to take out the cost of employment, fuel/bus pass etc to get to work and more. You will be lucky to have $300 per week for a family of 3-4.............. If you think this is right and proper while Board members and CEO's make millions and in some cases Billions with stock options, you are either insane or stupid or both. No disrespect intended... lol =)

Please tell me how you are taking care of your family on this wage and still "saving" your home from foreclosure?

And NO, you and your wife both working 2 jobs is not a good answer(needed in many cases but still bullshit, should not happen in America).

The middle class and working poor are getting fucked, period.
 

maineyankee

Active Member
If you think that is bad ... My wife has been employed as a cook in the same restaurant for 28 years straight. She has a few bennies; (2) weeks paid vaca (40) hours each, and paid (8) hour holidays only if they fall on Tuesday through Saturday ( The 5 days that she works) ... If they fall on Sunday, she gets nothing for them and only (4) hours if they are on Mondays, and then it is only Memorial Day, and Labor Day. The Cheapo Owner does not pay any other holidays. She has missed less than 7 days of work in the 28 years. She has never, never been late. She knows her job and does it well. She makes $7.50 an hour !! That is .25 cents more than Minimum here in Maine.

Just in our town over the past 10 years, we have lost 13 factories. The ones that remain are just a sneeze away from closing and moving to a lower nation such as Mexico, VietNam, and India because of lower labor costs to manufacture. The only big game in town is T- Mobile at 225 employees ( Call Centre), and we may loose them if AT & T purchases them and move them.

When I graduated high school in 1977 I got a job working for the railroad. I was paid as a laborer sweeping out box cars at $15.73 per hour, while min wage was in the $3.00 range. If I worked 2 hours a day, I was doing lucky because it was a labor shop. Well that ended when we went on strike in 1979 and never went back to work.

The bottom line is that Americans do want to work. Sure we would all like to be the boss or CEO and start at the top. But we can's, and until we do, we will just hit the unemployment line and collect for Obama's 99 weeks. We need to restructure America and it's people now ... not tomorrow ... Today !!

God Bless, Peace and Love
The MaineYankee
 
Top