Barack Obama, our next President

"The road ahead will be long. Our climb will be steep," Obama cautioned. Young and charismatic but with little experience on the national level, Obama smashed through racial barriers and easily defeated ... Full Story
Whatever

Gering, NE

#983194 Sep 15, 2013
1. my post was a reply to your post, so it should be "That isn't what "I" was talking about"

Folks, if you are changing the topic, the original poster has the right to challenge you for obfuscating the issue.

Since: Apr 09

Elmont, Long Island NY

#983197 Sep 15, 2013
Whatever wrote:
<quoted text>
Why should he be demanded to prove his conclusion is false; that would be you job as opposition.
First paragraph
According to the Sentier research, households headed by single women, with and without children present, saw their incomes fall by roughly 7%. Those under age 25 experienced an income decline of 9.6%. Black heads of households saw their income tumble by 10.9%, while Hispanic heads-of-households' income fell 4.5%, slightly more than the national average. The incomes of workers with a high-school diploma or less fell by about 8%(-6.9% for those with less than a high-school diploma and -9.3% for those with only a high-school diploma).
geesh, you are a little slow on the uptake there. I never asked him to provide evidence that his conclusion was false.

I PROVIDED THE EVIDENCE, IN NUMEROUS LINKS ABOUT THE STATE OF INCOME AND WEALTH INEQUALITY IN THE U.S.

All those studies revealed that the income and wealth of the middle class and poor have decreased since 1980. Ergo, it would be pretty difficult for the income and wealth of blacks and women to have increased since the 80's and under George W Bush only to decline since President Obama took office.

Since: May 11

Gettysburg, PA

#983198 Sep 15, 2013
TheIndependentMajority wrote:
<quoted text>
Did you miss that blurb about places like Sea World, cutting staff/hours, due to Obirdcarelinerworthybillagecar e?
Posted September 11, 2013 at 1:27 PM
Sea World parks released a statement that was reported by the ORLANDO SENTINEL newspaper that confirms that their part time employee work force of about 18,000 will soon have their hours cut. Currently, their part time workers top off at 32 hours scheduled a week. The new cut off will be 28 hours in order to not comply with the offering of healthcare benefits which the Affordable Care Law, or Obamacare as it is known in the vernacular, requires as of this October 1st.
Its sad to see these theme park employees (of the parks' total 22k employees, 18K are part time or seasonal)get this treatment. I remember when I was younger and worked part time a 4 hour cut in hours really could sting...I can't imagine how badly it would be for an unskilled worker with two part time jobs and a couple of kids.
Catlett, J., "Part Time Sea World Employees". ThemeParkInsider. 9/11/2013.
Not toooo gooDuh there Duh A Vey, when rather LARGE employers start jumping the sinking ship.
OMG OMG OMG cut 4 hours a week. The cheapsass b*astard were already using PT help to avoid paying certain benefits.
John Galt

Temecula, CA

#983199 Sep 15, 2013
OzRitz wrote:
<quoted text>
Hillary won't have to worry, she can blame the republican congress for saying NO to everything including events like Syria and at the same time expecting to say NO to Putin as well. In their world its all about the NO's , no progress, no growth, no taxes, no global warming, no brains.
Hillary will need to defend the failures of Obama, including Benghazi, if she runs...which she will not...

Since: Apr 09

Elmont, Long Island NY

#983200 Sep 15, 2013
Whatever wrote:
1. my post was a reply to your post, so it should be "That isn't what "I" was talking about"
Folks, if you are changing the topic, the original poster has the right to challenge you for obfuscating the issue.
folks if you lack reading and comprehension skills, maybe you shouldn't be posting...it just confirms what everyone knows,

the subject was income gains of blacks and women since the 80's as compared to under President Obama.
lily boca raton fl

Boca Raton, FL

#983201 Sep 15, 2013
Whatever wrote:
1. my post was a reply to your post, so it should be "That isn't what "I" was talking about"
Folks, if you are changing the topic, the original poster has the right to challenge you for obfuscating the issue.
oh gfy
Joe

United States

#983202 Sep 15, 2013
We need a new president that will lessen our debt, so our citizens can have a better way of living for theirself and their familys and future generations.
John Galt

Temecula, CA

#983203 Sep 15, 2013
Kill Crooked Jews wrote:
The Big Business lobby stepped up its game earlier this week when human resource officers from more than 100 large corporations sent a letter to House Leadership pushing for an immigration bill that would grant a blanket amnesty and provide dramatic increases in the number of work permits given to new foreign workers each year. It coincided with a "Day of Action" organized by FWD.us - the organization co-founded by Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg.
A few of the companies that signed the letter included: General Electric, Disney, Marriott, Hilton, McDonalds, Wendy's, Coca-Cola, Cheesecake Factory, Cisco, and Verizon.
Last week's monthly unemployment report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics depicted a declining situation for American workers. More than half a million working-aged Americans left the labor force, raising the total number to more than 90 million. Plus, a slightly better report from July was revised to show that only 104,000 new jobs were created that month compared to the 162,000 jobs first thought. In June, BLS reported that 195,000 jobs had been created, but last week's report revised the number down to 172,000.
not to mention that those hit hardest by job competition from illegal aliens are blacks, who nevertheless vote like sheep for those who keep them in poverty...

Since: May 11

Gettysburg, PA

#983204 Sep 15, 2013
flack wrote:
<quoted text> No I'm not saying that. Learn to read. The economy would be this bad or better if Obama had done absolutely NOTHING! Once all the deadwood was cut the job market stabilized. It would have done so if Mickey Mouse was elected. Obama had nothing to do with it except cause the layoffs in the first place. Obama hasn't done jack squat but screw the economy up even worse.
"The economy would be this bad or better if Obama had done absolutely NOTHING!"

Prove it dumbass. Prove we would be we we are today in the same amount of time.

I knew that when Obama took office & when the economy improved you f*cking morons would scream how it would have improved any how. This is how PATHETIC you people are.

Obama & hos stimulus took us from looking nearly 800,000 jobs a month to zero is less than a year.

And then this whopper: Flack said: "Obama had nothing to do with it except cause the layoffs in the first place."

This GD idiot is blaming Obama for the Bush recession saying he caused all the layoffs.

The only people that have done squat are your heroes the Republicans who blocked nearly every effort to get our economy growing faster.

John Galt

Temecula, CA

#983205 Sep 15, 2013
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
So, what Flack is saying that Bush really lost 900,000 jobs in January of 2009.
Thanks for pointing that out.
Flack, when the f*ck will you fricken morons learn that "better" is not the same as great.
Obama has made the economy better. No one said it was where it needed to be.
Obama has no economic plan except to place more people on welfare and more people in government jobs, a plan similar to the Detroit plan.
Whatever

Gering, NE

#983206 Sep 15, 2013
Karma is a_______ wrote:
<quoted text>
geesh, you are a little slow on the uptake there. I never asked him to provide evidence that his conclusion was false.
I PROVIDED THE EVIDENCE, IN NUMEROUS LINKS ABOUT THE STATE OF INCOME AND WEALTH INEQUALITY IN THE U.S.
All those studies revealed that the income and wealth of the middle class and poor have decreased since 1980. Ergo, it would be pretty difficult for the income and wealth of blacks and women to have increased since the 80's and under George W Bush only to decline since President Obama took office.
Yes, you did ask him to prove his conclusion false-re-read your post.

The income of blacks and women were showing gains some 18% in the recent two decades but has stopped and reversed itself during the Obama admin are backed by census data.
John Galt

Temecula, CA

#983207 Sep 15, 2013
TheIndependentMajority wrote:
<quoted text>
Did you miss that blurb about places like Sea World, cutting staff/hours, due to Obirdcarelinerworthybillagecar e?
Posted September 11, 2013 at 1:27 PM
Sea World parks released a statement that was reported by the ORLANDO SENTINEL newspaper that confirms that their part time employee work force of about 18,000 will soon have their hours cut. Currently, their part time workers top off at 32 hours scheduled a week. The new cut off will be 28 hours in order to not comply with the offering of healthcare benefits which the Affordable Care Law, or Obamacare as it is known in the vernacular, requires as of this October 1st.
Its sad to see these theme park employees (of the parks' total 22k employees, 18K are part time or seasonal)get this treatment. I remember when I was younger and worked part time a 4 hour cut in hours really could sting...I can't imagine how badly it would be for an unskilled worker with two part time jobs and a couple of kids.
Catlett, J., "Part Time Sea World Employees". ThemeParkInsider. 9/11/2013.
Not toooo gooDuh there Duh A Vey, when rather LARGE employers start jumping the sinking ship.
Obama and the DemoKKKrats do not care about people losing income and/or their jobs as long as they gain more control over people's lives.
Whatever

Gering, NE

#983208 Sep 15, 2013
Karma is a_______ wrote:
<quoted text>
folks if you lack reading and comprehension skills, maybe you shouldn't be posting...it just confirms what everyone knows,
the subject was income gains of blacks and women since the 80's as compared to under President Obama.
According to the other poster the reading comprehension issue lies with you.
John Galt

Temecula, CA

#983209 Sep 15, 2013
flack wrote:
You see worse. The ones suffering the most are the ones who voted for him.
Marginal employees, those that companies can survive without, will always be hurt the most by a rotten economy....the unskilled and uneducated...

Since: Apr 09

Elmont, Long Island NY

#983210 Sep 15, 2013
Joe wrote:
We need a new president that will lessen our debt, so our citizens can have a better way of living for theirself and their familys and future generations.
we already have one

Who Is The Smallest Government Spender Since Eisenhower? Would You Believe It's Barack Obama?/ 5/24/2012 / http://tinyurl.com/c6b2acy
It’s enough to make even the most ardent Obama cynic scratch his head in confusion.
Amidst all the cries of Barack Obama being the most prolific big government spender the nation has ever suffered, Marketwatch is reporting that our president has actually been tighter with a buck than any United States president since Dwight D. Eisenhower.
In fiscal 2010 (the first Obama budget) spending fell 1.8% to $3.46 trillion. In fiscal 2011, spending rose 4.3% to $3.60 trillion. In fiscal 2012, spending is set to rise 0.7% to $3.63 trillion, according to the Congressional Budget Office’s estimate of the budget that was agreed to last August. Finally in fiscal 2013 — the final budget of Obama’s term — spending is scheduled to fall 1.3% to $3.58 trillion. Read the CBO’s latest budget outlook.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2012/05 ...

Since: Apr 09

Elmont, Long Island NY

#983211 Sep 15, 2013
Whatever wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, you did ask him to prove his conclusion false-re-read your post.
The income of blacks and women were showing gains some 18% in the recent two decades but has stopped and reversed itself during the Obama admin are backed by census data.
where did I ask him to prove his conclusion was false?????

just go back and point it out.
John Galt

Temecula, CA

#983212 Sep 15, 2013
Whatever wrote:
Obama, in an ABC interview airing now, is blaming ATMs again for the bad job market.
are you serious?

time to ban those racist machines...

Since: May 11

Gettysburg, PA

#983213 Sep 15, 2013
flack wrote:
<quoted text> y
STEPHEN MOORE
For better or worse, a truism of American politics is that voters vote their pocketbooks. Yet according to a new report on median household incomes by Sentier Research, in 2012 millions of American voters apparently cast ballots contrary to their economic self-interest.
Each month the consultants at Sentier analyze the numbers from the Census Bureau's Current Population Survey and estimate the trend in median annual household income adjusted for inflation. On Aug. 21, Sentier released "Household Income on the Fourth Anniversary of the Economic Recovery: June 2009 to June 2013." The finding that grabbed headlines was that real median household income "has fallen by 4.4 percent since the 'economic recovery' began in June 2009." In dollar terms, median household income fell to $52,098 from $54,478, a loss of $2,380.
What was largely overlooked, however, is that those who were most likely to vote for Barack Obama in 2012 were members of demographic groups most likely to have suffered the steepest income declines. Mr. Obama was re-elected with 51% of the vote. Five demographic groups were crucial to his victory: young voters, single women, those with only a high-school diploma or less, blacks and Hispanics. He cleaned up with 60% of the youth vote, 67% of single women, 93% of blacks, 71% of Hispanics, and 64% of those without a high-school diploma, according to exit polls.
According to the Sentier research, households headed by single women, with and without children present, saw their incomes fall by roughly 7%. Those under age 25 experienced an income decline of 9.6%. Black heads of households saw their income tumble by 10.9%, while Hispanic heads-of-households' income fell 4.5%, slightly more than the national average. The incomes of workers with a high-school diploma or less fell by about 8%(-6.9% for those with less than a high-school diploma and -9.3% for those with only a high-school diploma).
Blaming Obama yet again for the effects of the Bush recession.
Whatever

Gering, NE

#983214 Sep 15, 2013
Karma is a_______ wrote:
<quoted text>
folks if you lack reading and comprehension skills, maybe you shouldn't be posting...it just confirms what everyone knows,
the subject was income gains of blacks and women since the 80's as compared to under President Obama.
Don't point fingers when you were the one to change the topic and failing to notice this.

The discussion was documented gains that blacks and women were making in income prior to Obama.

Your attempt to obfuscate this and claim the figures wrong by using income inequality data is mixing apple and oranges.

Ergos isn't a magic word that overcomes this mixing of stats.
John Galt

Temecula, CA

#983215 Sep 15, 2013
Karma is a_______ wrote:
<quoted text>
actually, from everything I've read, real earnings of the middle class and poor have been shrinking since the 80's
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2011/02/i...
http://www.npr.org/2013/09/12/221425582/tired...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tag/us-income-i...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/15/inco...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/12/ineq...
http://www.reuters.com/subjects/income-inequa...
http://www.oregonlive.com/today/index.ssf/201...
The income gap between the richest 1 percent and the rest of America widened to a record last year.
The top 1 percent of U.S. earners collected 19.3 percent of household income in 2012, their largest share in Internal Revenue Service figures going back a century.
U.S. income inequality has been growing for almost three decades. But until last year, the top 1 percent's share of pre-tax income had not yet surpassed the 18.7 percent it reached in 1927, according to an analysis of IRS figures dating to 1913 by economists at the University of California, Berkeley, the Paris School of Economics and Oxford University.
One of them, Emmanuel Saez of the University of California, Berkeley, said the incomes of the richest Americans might have surged last year in part because they cashed in stock holdings to avoid higher capital gains taxes that took effect in January.
Last year, the incomes of the top 1 percent rose 19.6 percent compared with a 1 percent increase for the remaining 99 percent.
The more that society depends on advanced technology instead of manual labor, the more income will be skewed to those with superior intellect and technical skills.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Chicago Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 1 hr Mister Tonka 98,990
Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 2 hr Mothra 50,449
How to stop ants. 2 hr joey 4
I Hate my life and mom (Aug '07) 2 hr Silk 1,754
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 3 hr Jacques Ottawa 183,888
abby 1-26 3 hr j_m_w 71
Amy 1-29 4 hr Julie 10
Chicago Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 10:04 am PST

NFL10:04AM
Richardson was suspended for two Colts playoff games
ESPN10:58 AM
Colts won't commit to RB Richardson for 2015
Yahoo! Sports11:49 AM
League conducts nearly 40 interviews into 'deflate-gate'
Yahoo! Sports11:50 AM
NFL: No decision yet on deflated balls
NBC Sports12:54 PM
Grigson goes silent on NFL investigation into Patriots