100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: jobless | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Nearly 3.4 million jobs have been lost already in the first half of 2009, more than the 3,1 million lost in all of 2008.
july 28, 2009. 1:56pm. cnn money |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's sad but that's what happens in a recession.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
good to know...i guess
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And none of are leaders are alarmed. Funny how the one's in the wheel house are the last ones to know the ship is sinking.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And none of are leaders are alarmed. Funny how the one's in the wheel house are the last ones to know the ship is sinking. What makes you think that they are not alarmed? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That sucks
  
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You kidding me there retirement accounts all got bailed out with A.I.G., they don't have a care in the world.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's sad but that's what happens in a recession. As the Government would not admit we were in a recession until a year after the fact, under Bush, nor will they admit we are near a depression now. some cities have 17% unemployment, and that is only what is recorded, not the ones that have run out of benefits...jmo |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We are in a pretty deep recession, yes. We aren't in a depression yet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We are in a pretty deep recession, yes. We aren't in a depression yet. Even if we were the Government would not admit it...was my point. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's sad but that's what happens in a recession. As the Government would not admit we were in a recession until a year after the fact, under Bush, nor will they admit we are near a depression now. some cities have 17% unemployment, and that is only what is recorded, not the ones that have run out of benefits...jmo Labor and Statistics says that the state with the highest unemployment rate is Michigan at 15%. http://www.bls.gov/web/lauhsthl.htm The unemployment rate during the depression reached 23%. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We are in a pretty deep recession, yes. We aren't in a depression yet. Even if we were the Government would not admit it...was my point. Before the election, both Obama and McCain said that we were in a recession. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You kidding me there retirement accounts all got bailed out with A.I.G., they don't have a care in the world. They know that if they fail, our country fails. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We are in a pretty deep recession, yes. We aren't in a depression yet. Even if we were the Government would not admit it...was my point. Before the election, both Obama and McCain said that we were in a recession. I know that...but the recession started in the beginning of 208, yet the Bush administration said we weren't. Then at the end of 2008 the GAO admitted we were in a recession for the past year. Like we didn't already know that. States unemployment rates are high, but some cities have much higher rates then the state average. Wait till inflation kicks in. That is the only thing keeping us out of a depression right now. 10% unemployment with an inflation rate of 8 to 10% will be real tough on people. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
recession maybe so, depression... no way.
This is a opportunity for us all to rise and up and find joy in the simple things and really find out what is important to us. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If the government really wanted to stop the massive bleeding of red ink that it is spurting like a oil well it would realize that if it lowered the tax rates it is charging to companies who make over $650,000 a year (which stands at around 34%)those companies would move their operations back to the United states and it would create millions of new jobs and billions of dollars in new taxes.
George bush's tax cuts for the rich(or for people making over $650,000)worked very well because it lowered the high taxes these people were having to pay and they had more to invest in their companies which led to both industry growth and new job openings.There is no doubt if you lowered the taxes for the rich down to say 20% you would have a explosion of new jobs and new companies as the savings would be massive.A billion dollar company that normaly pays $340,000,000 dollars in taxes off of a billion dollar net now would only pay $200,000,000.$140,000,000 extra dollars for basically nothing the company did leaves a lot of room to expand and hire new people. George bush also took office during a recession,a all time record drop and low on the stock market,ran two wars,and still managed to set record level highs for the stock market and job growth. It seems to me that Obama is either too stupid or afraid to admit that he should try the same tactics as G bush did.And those tactics is to lower taxes for the big companies,and give rebate checks to the tax payers.Both were very well for this country. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If the government really wanted to stop the massive bleeding of red ink that it is spurting like a oil well it would realize that if it lowered the tax rates it is charging to companies who make over $650,000 a year (which stands at around 34%)those companies would move their operations back to the United states and it would create millions of new jobs and billions of dollars in new taxes. George bush's tax cuts for the rich(or for people making over $650,000)worked very well because it lowered the high taxes these people were having to pay and they had more to invest in their companies which led to both industry growth and new job openings.There is no doubt if you lowered the taxes for the rich down to say 20% you would have a explosion of new jobs and new companies as the savings would be massive.A billion dollar company that normaly pays $340,000,000 dollars in taxes off of a billion dollar net now would only pay $200,000,000.$140,000,000 extra dollars for basically nothing the company did leaves a lot of room to expand and hire new people. George bush also took office during a recession,a all time record drop and low on the stock market,ran two wars,and still managed to set record level highs for the stock market and job growth. It seems to me that Obama is either too stupid or afraid to admit that he should try the same tactics as G bush did.And those tactics is to lower taxes for the big companies,and give rebate checks to the tax payers.Both were very well for this country. If Bush's way was working so well, then how come so many American companies went overseas during his time? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If the government really wanted to stop the massive bleeding of red ink that it is spurting like a oil well it would realize that if it lowered the tax rates it is charging to companies who make over $650,000 a year (which stands at around 34%)those companies would move their operations back to the United states and it would create millions of new jobs and billions of dollars in new taxes. George bush's tax cuts for the rich(or for people making over $650,000)worked very well because it lowered the high taxes these people were having to pay and they had more to invest in their companies which led to both industry growth and new job openings.There is no doubt if you lowered the taxes for the rich down to say 20% you would have a explosion of new jobs and new companies as the savings would be massive.A billion dollar company that normaly pays $340,000,000 dollars in taxes off of a billion dollar net now would only pay $200,000,000.$140,000,000 extra dollars for basically nothing the company did leaves a lot of room to expand and hire new people. George bush also took office during a recession,a all time record drop and low on the stock market,ran two wars,and still managed to set record level highs for the stock market and job growth. It seems to me that Obama is either too stupid or afraid to admit that he should try the same tactics as G bush did.And those tactics is to lower taxes for the big companies,and give rebate checks to the tax payers.Both were very well for this country. If Bush's way was working so well, then how come so many American companies went overseas during his time? Our so called free trade policy is both a Democrat and Republican issue. Clinton signed NAFTA into law, Bush II did nothing to stop the mass exodus of US jobs overseas. Neither tried to stop the flood of illegal aliens by securing the borders. jmo |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If the government really wanted to stop the massive bleeding of red ink that it is spurting like a oil well it would realize that if it lowered the tax rates it is charging to companies who make over $650,000 a year (which stands at around 34%)those companies would move their operations back to the United states and it would create millions of new jobs and billions of dollars in new taxes. George bush's tax cuts for the rich(or for people making over $650,000)worked very well because it lowered the high taxes these people were having to pay and they had more to invest in their companies which led to both industry growth and new job openings.There is no doubt if you lowered the taxes for the rich down to say 20% you would have a explosion of new jobs and new companies as the savings would be massive.A billion dollar company that normaly pays $340,000,000 dollars in taxes off of a billion dollar net now would only pay $200,000,000.$140,000,000 extra dollars for basically nothing the company did leaves a lot of room to expand and hire new people. George bush also took office during a recession,a all time record drop and low on the stock market,ran two wars,and still managed to set record level highs for the stock market and job growth. It seems to me that Obama is either too stupid or afraid to admit that he should try the same tactics as G bush did.And those tactics is to lower taxes for the big companies,and give rebate checks to the tax payers.Both were very well for this country. If Bush's way was working so well, then how come so many American companies went overseas during his time? Because it was still too high.I don't remember exactly how much he cut it.I think it was around 32%.Clinton put the nail in the coffin by taxing companies up to 44% when the economy was booming and it took several years for the companies to put into motion the logistics of moving a billion dollar company operation overseas.Even with a huge tax decrease by the government it probably still wouldn't make sense to spend years of planning and hundreds of millions of dollars to move a company overseas,and then to spend years of planning and millions of dollars back the the United states on a president that might not be there in 4 years.The only way these companies will come back would be to give them a huge tax break where they would profit regardless if they had to move the companies operations back overseas in a few years. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If the government really wanted to stop the massive bleeding of red ink that it is spurting like a oil well it would realize that if it lowered the tax rates it is charging to companies who make over $650,000 a year (which stands at around 34%)those companies would move their operations back to the United states and it would create millions of new jobs and billions of dollars in new taxes. George bush's tax cuts for the rich(or for people making over $650,000)worked very well because it lowered the high taxes these people were having to pay and they had more to invest in their companies which led to both industry growth and new job openings.There is no doubt if you lowered the taxes for the rich down to say 20% you would have a explosion of new jobs and new companies as the savings would be massive.A billion dollar company that normaly pays $340,000,000 dollars in taxes off of a billion dollar net now would only pay $200,000,000.$140,000,000 extra dollars for basically nothing the company did leaves a lot of room to expand and hire new people. George bush also took office during a recession,a all time record drop and low on the stock market,ran two wars,and still managed to set record level highs for the stock market and job growth. It seems to me that Obama is either too stupid or afraid to admit that he should try the same tactics as G bush did.And those tactics is to lower taxes for the big companies,and give rebate checks to the tax payers.Both were very well for this country. If Bush's way was working so well, then how come so many American companies went overseas during his time? Our so called free trade policy is both a Democrat and Republican issue. Clinton signed NAFTA into law, Bush II did nothing to stop the mass exodus of US jobs overseas. Neither tried to stop the flood of illegal aliens by securing the borders. jmo This is not true.Bush gave huge tax breaks for the big companies to move their operations back from overseas and to keep the big companies from moving because of high taxes.You can check Bush's offical record and he deported more illegal aliens than any other president in history.Bush also singned into law funding for a 600 plus mile border fence(against the Democrats who didn't want it) and sent the national guard to the border to secrure it.It is the Democrats and espcially Nancy prune fact pelosi who faught the president every inch of the way for amnesty for illegals,tried to stop deportation,and supported safe haven cites for illegals. |
|
|
|
|
