{BS} Nancy Pelosi: Unemployment insurance creates jobs.
in [Toyota]
|
Prev: * ŞEBNEM FERAH-BEN ŞARKIMI SÖYLERKEN
Next: This is a f**king sperm whale in the Gulf of Mexico!!!!
From: Hachiroku ハチロク on 3 Jul 2010 15:51 On Sat, 03 Jul 2010 12:27:55 -0700, Aratzio wrote: > On Sat, 03 Jul 2010 12:17:51 -0400, in the land of alt.autos.toyota, > Hachiroku ???? <Trueno(a)e86.GTS> got double secret probation for writing: > >>On Sat, 03 Jul 2010 03:41:13 -0700, edspyhill01 wrote: >> >>>> That money will be going to pay a mortgage, which does not create >>>> jobs, or to pay for groceries, which does not create jobs, or to buy >>>> Chinese made goods, which ships the dfollar overseas.- Hide quoted >>>> text - >>>> >>>> - Show quoted text - >>> >>> Well, business genius, grocery shopping keeps people employed in >>> minimum wage jobs >> >>That's about all it does. It does not "create" jobs. >> >>As far as expanding jobs, nope. It maintains jobs already there. >> >>However, since the people have money to spend, it does not decrease jobs, >>either. If the UB were to go away, there would be more job loss. >> >>But saying it "creates" jobs only magnifies Pelousy's ignorance. >> >> > One less unemployed person vs one person not unemployed. is such a huge > net difference in the local economy. It might mean that the people that have jobs can keep them. It is not 'creating' jobs. There is also less discretionary spending, so if you went to the movies once every two weeks, you might only go once every 6 weeks. This does not "create" jobs. Try to stay on-topic for once, fool. > > But hell, if you think you can score political points with the stupid, go > for it. You're the one attempting to do that by cross posting, nutcase. Hoiw does it feel to be right less than a broken clock?
From: Hachiroku ハチロク on 3 Jul 2010 17:44 On Sat, 03 Jul 2010 14:35:21 -0700, Aratzio wrote: >>How is getting 75% of your original pay expanding spending, nutcase? > > Yes, he is that dumb. Who said that unemployment was the ONLY method, > retard. Why don't you READ THE SUBJECT LINE before going off on one of your endless, nutcase rants? Try to stay on-topic. I know that's hard for someone with as addled a brain as yours.
From: Hachiroku ハチロク on 3 Jul 2010 17:45 On Sat, 03 Jul 2010 14:35:21 -0700, Aratzio wrote: > > Now I understand you cannot conceptualize the concept that not losing jobs > is the virtual equivalent of adding jobs but that is because you are a > wingnut and not an American. Off we go to LALA Land again. As usual, Aratzio adds 2+2 and comes up with Blue.
From: Hachiroku ハチロク on 3 Jul 2010 17:51 On Sat, 03 Jul 2010 14:46:55 -0700, Aratzio wrote: > it is the democrats that are fiscally irresponsible. Wow. For maybe the third time I can agree with you on something.
From: Hachiroku ハチロク on 3 Jul 2010 18:00
On Sat, 03 Jul 2010 14:56:47 -0700, Aratzio wrote: > On Sat, 03 Jul 2010 15:30:35 -0400, in the land of alt.autos.toyota, > Hachiroku ???? <Trueno(a)e86.GTS> got double secret probation for writing: > >>On Sat, 03 Jul 2010 12:22:09 -0700, Aratzio wrote: >> >>>>Does not create jobs. Maintains the jobs that are already there. >>>> >>>> >>> Really Gary, what could you be thinking. To equate not losing jobs with >>> creating jobs. Can't you see the incredible difference? >> >>Keeping jobs /= "creating" jobs. >> >>Why does you're not seeing this not surprise me? >> >> > See, the virtual effects are not of any relevance. See, the following of logic goes completely over his head. |