What Does AOC Have That Boebert Does Not?

[PostmodernProphet]

a $50M homeless shelter for illegals in the middle of her congressional district?.......

[LurchAddams]

Hello LurchAddams,



All the little mini-Trumps were predicted. I was quite dismayed to read of it shortly after he was elected. I didn't want it to be so, but I knew the author was correct. And now here we are.

We so need to get Trump convicted of SOMETHING for the good of America, hopefully many things. It is remarkable that he has eluded justice thus far but it does appear that is becoming less available to him.

The best way out of this mess I can see is Trump gets convicted, then Trumpism falls back out to the fringes, the cult is more widely ridiculed and marginalized. Then the Democratic Party learns a lesson that they must renew focus on inclusion of Republicans into legislation, even if Republicans resist. They must always be included at whatever level possible. And the rhetoric needs to subside. America cannot heal from Trumpism if grudges are going to be held. That's gonna be a tough challenge, but forgiveness is the right thing to do.

We have to let it go, forgive, make a place for the brighter more cohesive future we would like to see.

I'm not saying forget. Hardly. We learn a big lesson from this and part of it is that we need to have more respect for people in this nation even if they disagree. And if they go low, we go high. If they embarrass themselves by lashing out, we let it go like water off a ducks back. Then we feel badly for them having lost their cool. And we let all that go and we make a place for more civil discourse when the dust has settled.

It would help if Republicans admit their mistakes. Some will. Most won't. The bigger thing to do is to overlook that. Either let them rant and wait or simply distance from them if they are just never going to become cordial. When we engage then we are going low. Both sides going low is not the way forward for America. Resist that even when others around you cannot. The more people who rise above this animosity the better it is for America.

This is America, not the Jerry Springer Show.

Let's make America work for America, not just the rumor/gossip/confrontation profiteers.

Time to dial up our feng shui.

What comes around goes around. If we want good vibes coming around, then good vibes is what we need to put out. And be patient.

Find me an elected Republican willing to work with us, stop denying the 2020 election was legitimate and work with us to shore up voting rights, I'm with them 100%.

By the way, the "elected Republican" I just described, doesn't exist. This is NOT a "both sides" situation. Republicans think elections don't matter unless they win.

We can't have that.

[Flash]

Only one person out of ten is working in the example. That one person is working 3 jobs. The system reports that employment is up and unemployment is down because it only reports the jobs filled as if three separate people are working instead of just one.

I don't think that is the way it works. It is not based on the jobs filled but:

"The unemployment rate is the percentage of the labor force without a job."

In a labor force of 10 only one person (10%) has a job although he is working 3 jobs. 90% of the workforce is unemployed.

[Flash]

NO. It counts people, not jobs.

Agreed, that was my point. AOC should have known better.

[Flash]

Hello Flash,

Sounds pretty accurate to me. The figure is calculated based on the premise that an individual working just one hour per week is defined as 'employed.' If capitalism is going to mainly create jobs which cannot be lived on, then they will be filled by individuals who hold several of that type of job. That's not a great existence, particularly with increased transportation expenditures in personal budgets due to having to commute to multiple jobs, but those who resist or do not qualify for government assistance programs have to do what they have to do to pay the rent and eat. It is understandable why so many have participated in the big quit.

Maybe we would be better off by ending all these social assistance programs and simply replacing them with a UBI. Tax the rich more heavily to pay for it. I really do not see a problem with this. As a matter of fact, I think it is kind of inevitable and I'm just waiting for the rest of the country to figure it out. We have taxed the rich at 90% of their income above everyone else's income in the past and the country was just fine. As a matter of fact, some consider that time to be when when America 'was great.'

That 90% tax rate was the top marginal rate. The effective tax rate was always much lower. If you look at the historical figures in the government budget the revenue as a percent of the GDP was lower under those very high marginal rates that it was later when top marginal rate was reduced.

AOC's claim was not accurate because a person is employed no matter how many jobs he holds. Working three jobs does not count for three employed persons.

Government also creates jobs which cannot be lived on and who must work more than one job-police, teachers, janitors, etc. So, it has little to do with capitalism.

[Doc Dutch]

What Does AOC Have That Boebert Does Not?

A Penis...

Laura, like MTG, has a lot of penises inside her. Often in the same night at those wild coke and pedo parties the Party of Trump is known for having.

[Doc Dutch]

Is that what you think college is for


Getting penis?

A little TMI from the Chief? LOL

[evince]

Laura, like MTG, has a lot of penises inside her. Often in the same night at those wild coke and pedo parties the Party of Trump is known for having.

But first they tape their mouths shut

[Doc Dutch]

But first they tape their mouths shut

...or stick something in them. Some members of JPP are obsessed with sucking cock....all Trump/Putin supporters.

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
Only one person out of ten is working in the example. That one person is working 3 jobs. The system reports that employment is up and unemployment is down because it only reports the jobs filled as if three separate people are working instead of just one.

I don't think that is the way it works. It is not based on the jobs filled but:

"The unemployment rate is the percentage of the labor force without a job."

In a labor force of 10 only one person (10%) has a job although he is working 3 jobs. 90% of the workforce is unemployed.

That doesn't make sense as you say. Think about it: One of the major indicators of the economy is employment. One of the ways that is used to rate such is how many folk are on unemployment benefits. Those benefits are limited depending on a person's actual employment time and how much they made. Now, when that time is up, those people are off the rolls Yet, they are NOT counted as unemployed...in fact the lessened unemployment list is counted as positive indicator that unemployment is down. The closest it's come to accounting for these folk was a vague reference that "people have given up looking for jobs" (never a quantifiable number given). I'm referring to FACT as done by the gov't & private agencies who report in the broadcast/print media in my life time.

Add to this the FACT that 3 different jobs report x-amount of employees each, but the one person working three jobs does NOT fit into that tally, you have flawed report. So in reality, 2 people are NOT employed but one person is being counted as such.

[Taichiliberal]

NO. It counts people, not jobs.

Not accurately, unless you can show me where there is a differential in the labor market count that shows 1 person holding 3 jobs as opposed to 3 separate people holding 1 job each.

[Flash]

Add to this the FACT that 3 different jobs report x-amount of employees each, but the one person working three jobs does NOT fit into that tally, you have flawed report. So in reality, 2 people are NOT employed but one person is being counted as such.

In your example if a workforce consists of 10 people and only one works but he has ten jobs, does that mean unemployment level is 0 although 9/10 are not working?

I agree that claiming people have given up looking for jobs is not a realistic measure. Many people I knew on unemployment were not really looking for a job until their benefits expired.

[Celticguy]

a face like a horse.

[Doc Dutch]

a face like a horse.

Better looking than MTG and 10X saner than either MTG or LB. AOC's biggest problem is youthful idealism.

AOC 32
MTG 48
LB 35

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal View Post
Add to this the FACT that 3 different jobs report x-amount of employees each, but the one person working three jobs does NOT fit into that tally, you have flawed report. So in reality, 2 people are NOT employed but one person is being counted as such.

In your example if a workforce consists of 10 people and only one works but he has ten jobs, does that mean unemployment level is 0 although 9/10 are not working?

I agree that claiming people have given up looking for jobs is not a realistic measure. Many people I knew on unemployment were not really looking for a job until their benefits expired.

In your first paragraph, you've just answered your own question as to the sheer illogic and inaccuracy of the current economic indicators regarding actual employment and unemployed numbers. My example is based on fact (i.e., the famous GW Bush town hall where a woman tells of working 3 jobs to make ends meet. Subsequent reports of a lower rate of unemployment does not include that little caveat....never did. If you can find such, let us know.

Your personal experience is NOT an indicator of reality. When I was unemployed once, there was a mandate that in order to receive unemployment insurance you had to show up and get interviewed by a personnel manager who would assist you in your job search. So just sitting around wasn't an option, because failure to comply with those employment suspended your payments.