Comments on: The Growing Class Of "Underemployed"

As Unemployment Rises, Sometimes Part-Time Work Doesn't Cut It

[deacon20081]

Posted by cmp271 .... It sounds as if you have a severe case of "SUV Envy"

[cmp271]

The people who have been living beyond their means, with the help of cardit cards, and not saving their income, can only blame themselves for losing their homes. It is difficult to feel sorry for anyone who drives an SUV, Hummer, or even a van, yet can''t afford their mortgage. Ever hear of earning your way upwards??? We can only blame ourselves for falling for the marketing ploy of a bigger vehicle, and home, neither of which we couldn''t afford. I am glad I do not have this problem!!!

Maybe now those who always thought they were better than others will feel what it is like to be poor!

[edintex]

If you cannot find work where you live, the you need to change where you live! If you choose to stay, you have NO RIGHT to complain. Its your own fault.

[txgrouch2006]

If you believe, as I do, that Iraq was a waste of time, energy, and money, then its wasted money. Posted by ubrew12 at 11:06 PM : Aug 02, 2008
---------------
WHERE DID THE MONEY GO??? Did it go up in smoke? Did it get thrown in the ocean? Did it get launched into space and fall into the sun? WHERE DID IT GO???

Somebody got it. Somebody spent it. THAT''S WHY IT''S INCLUDED IN THE GDP.

[txgrouch2006]

I believe that a trillion dollars, properly invested in goal-based alternative energy infrastructural investments, would have solved America''''s foreign oil problem in perpetuity. To me, thats a trillion on GDP that is actual ''''growth''''.

Posted by ubrew12 at 11:08 PM : Aug 02, 2008
-------------
I totally agree about that. But considering the time it takes to develop new technology and bring it to market, that research should have been started over 10 years ago - when we HAD the money to spend, and everyone was driving monster SUV''s and Humers as if the supplies of oil were limitless. I remember thinking how stupid is this.

Drat that rotten Clinton for failing to take that opportunity when it was there.

ANOTHER CLINTON FAILURE.

[ubrew12]

I believe that a trillion dollars, properly invested in goal-based alternative energy infrastructural investments, would have solved America''s foreign oil problem in perpetuity. To me, thats a trillion on GDP that is actual ''growth''.

[ubrew12]

txgrouch2006 said: "Was our economy wrecked by WW1? No, it went onto a decade-long speculative bubble just like the 1990''s. And you seem to think that was SO GOOD. What''s the ruckus?"

It depends on the strategic value of the accomplished mission. If you believe, as I do, that Iraq was a waste of time, energy, and money, then its wasted money. But, if we''d spent it providing for free health insurance for Americans, many would probably think it was wasted money. Its all in what you get for it. Normally we ''let the market decide'', but on public expenditures it gets dicey.

[forasongca]

terrorislamv: Are you stoned, or just stupid?

[txgrouch2006]

if we spend a trillion dollars chasing terrorists in Iraq (when they are in Afghanistan), it goes on GDP
Posted by ubrew12 at 10:41 PM : Aug 02, 2008
-----------
That reminds me - when we say we spent x dollars on a war - WHO GOT THE MONEY?

Didn''t it go to defense companies and military personnel? Doesn''t that translate into wages? Don''t wages go to PEOPLE who can then SPEND it????

I don''t understand this thinking that the money just went up in smoke. The same thing happens in all wars, including WW1 and WW2. I just read that our brief involvement in WW1 cost $30 billion, when our nation''s total pre-war annual federal budget was LESS THAN $1 BILLION.

Was our economy wrecked by WW1? No, it went onto a decade-long speculative bubble just like the 1990''s. And you seem to think that was SO GOOD.

What''s the ruckus?

[ubrew12]

The Economist Magazine says:
"Between 2002 and 2006 the incomes of 99% [of Americans] rose by... 1% a year in real terms, while those of the top 1% rose by 11% a year; three-quarters of the economic gains during Mr Bush''s presidency went to that top 1%."

I''m so glad we''re not ''technically'' in a recession and that economic growth remains positive. Take out the richest 1% of Americans, however, and we''ve been in a recession for two years.

But, as Phil Gramm, McCains economic adviser, would say, ''quit whining''.

[ubrew12]

txgrouch2006 said: "GDP is a measure of the economic output of the ENTIRE economy. You want to interject undocumented information about who benefited from the GDP growth."

Well. Blame the Economist. They were the ones who said, and I quote: "three-quarters of the economic gains during Mr Bush''s presidency went to that top 1%"

When people say ''the economies not in recession, just look at GDP growth'', its fair to ask ''who''s economy is growing?''. The Economist (hardly a liberal rag) just answered that for me. For 3/4th of Bush''s economic growth, it was the richest 1% who profited. The remaining 99% of Americans profited with 1/4th of the growth. Problem with that statement? Take it up with the Economist.

BTW, GDP is not a measure of economic output. Its a measure of economic activity. BIG difference. It means, if we spend a trillion dollars chasing terrorists in Iraq (when they are in Afghanistan), it goes on GDP, even though WE know its a waste of money. So, ironically, in times of peace GDP may SHRINK. If California burns up $300 million a year fighting forest fires, Eureka! That''s added to GDP!

People should start more fires: its good for the economy.

[drjackryan]

"What is all this nonsense talk about a bad economy? Exxon just logged a record multi-billion dollar profit and sales of luxury goods are up 30% over last year. Like Bush said, the economy is on sound footing. The guy''''s a genius."

well, stop complaining about someone else having a buck more than you and go get an oil job and earn BIG $$$$. http://www.oilcareer.com/ Do you know who else complained about someone else making a buck more than the next man? Karl Marx, a loser....keep reading Das Kapital.

[txgrouch2006]

we can admit mistakes, it''''s just we disagree on what they are.
Posted by drjackryan1 at 09:56 PM : Aug 02, 2008
------------
I''m starting to get the picture. When it''s a Democrat making a mistake like THE VIETNAM WAR, it''s "everybody makes mistakes."

When it''s a Republican making a mistake like THE IRAQ WAR, which is NOWHERE NEAR KILLING AS MANY AMERICANS, then he''s a "loser of historic proportions."

My mother warned me about jerks like you. Oh, wait. No, that was Ann Coulter.

Whatever.

[txgrouch2006]

"Graph 5: Wow, I''''m surprised the GDP grew so much during GWB.... All in all, these graphs show GWB did a better job than I thought." Remove the wealthiest 1% of all income earners, and economic growth stalled for the other 99% of us several years ago. The Economist: "three-quarters of the economic gains during Mr Bush''''s presidency went to that top 1%" You should check out ''''The Economist'''', its a conservative rag you would (otherwise) enjoy.

Posted by ubrew12 at 09:08 PM : Aug 02, 2008
--------------
GDP is a measure of the economic output of the ENTIRE economy. You want to interject undocumented information about who benefited from the GDP growth.

If that''s what you wanted to say, then the graphs should have shown that. NONE of the graphs presented ANY of the data you''ve interjected above.

Like I said, I read "War and Peace" for you, and you want to interject information that appears NOWHERE in what you gave me to read. You can''t find fault with the way I interpreted the information you presented. So I guess you presented the WRONG INFORMATION in the first place.

Once again - NEVER AGAIN will I look at any website for anyone. It''s a total waste of time.

[ontheleft]

What is all this nonsense talk about a bad economy? Exxon just logged a record multi-billion dollar profit and sales of luxury goods are up 30% over last year. Like Bush said, the economy is on sound footing. The guy''s a genius.

[ontheleft]

What is all this nonsense talk about a bad economy? Exxon just logged a record multi-billion dollar profit and sales of luxury goods are up 30% over last year. Like Bush said, the economy is on sound footing. The guy''s a genius.

[drjackryan]

trillion1 said: "drjack, Loser of historic proportions? You clowns are in such denial."

denial? no one is denying anything. All presidents make mistakes, but I don''t buy into the empty, emontional kneejerk comments you make about GWB. Show us how is is a loser?

"You losers have to go all the way back to the mess of Viet Nam.Basically everyone admits that was a mistake. Why is it you can''''t ever admit your mistakes?

we can admit mistakes, it''s just we disagree on what they are.

"And for that matter tell Americans what you have done to make this country better."

This gentleman has done a great job...unfortunately your don''t hear anything about it in the maintream press, CNN, ABC, CBS NBC, et al.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1066122/posts

"And why am I debating with a paid troll."

another false assumption.

[ubrew12]

txgrouch2006 said: "Graph 4: GHB fought the Gulf War,...GWB had to deal with 9/11 and the Taliban. What war did Clinton fight? crickets chirping" Graph 4 was the main point of my post, and you COMPLETELY misread it. Honestly, you misread it SO COMPLETELY, I know not to even TRY to clue you to its true trend (hint: it has to do with cutting taxes). As I indicated before, YOU [and your demographic] are the true targets of those tax cuts. If you can''t even see why or how you were targeted, why should I educate you. Go ahead and believe it was to pay for various ''wars for freedom''. You''ll pay it either way, so you might as well feel good about paying it.

"Graph 5: Wow, I''m surprised the GDP grew so much during GWB.... All in all, these graphs show GWB did a better job than I thought." Remove the wealthiest 1% of all income earners, and economic growth stalled for the other 99% of us several years ago. The Economist: "three-quarters of the economic gains during Mr Bush''s presidency went to that top 1%" You should check out ''The Economist'', its a conservative rag you would (otherwise) enjoy.

All in all, your ego is consistent with a neocon. Good luck spinning the truth on these pages.

[obama441]

will ya get a load of that fat cow!! bald headed b.astard!! America is doomed!! HA,HA,HA

[ubrew12]

txgrouch2006 said: "Graph 1: On average, unemployment is lower under GWB than GHB." On average, employed workers are probably making 10% less, or working 10% more.

"Graph 2: Too bad most of those Clinton jobs were filled by H1-B visa holders." Too bad you have no proof of that.

"Graph 3: Look at the HUGE speculative bubble starting in 1995....GWB did a MASTERFUL job of keeping it from dropping more than it did when the bubble burse" I don''t believe the stock market necessarily trends ANYTHING having to do with the economy anymore. It did before globalization, and before the dollar devaluation. Consider that during Bush''s tenure, the dollar has fallen 30-40%. Since stocks are valued in dollars, the fact that they''ve held steady means nothing: they are falling in value on the global market. I''m amazed that you would paint Bush as ''protecting'' us from a Clintonesque stock market bubble. Clinton''s bubble was in the NASDAQ. Bush''s was in housing. The difference was that high technology actually makes something of value to the future, not a McMansion where Republicans can be ''ruler of all they survey'', while outside the country goes to pot.
.