GG Posted July 19, 2010 Posted July 19, 2010 You are an idiot. Do you understand that to get to 10 you need to get to five first? Oh, that's right, you also think Obama stole money from BP Please call your math teacher and have him explain how 2,000 is not 5% of 500,000. And I'm the idiot.
Chef Jim Posted July 19, 2010 Posted July 19, 2010 Please call your math teacher and have him explain how 2,000 is not 5% of 500,000. And I'm the idiot. Yes but 2,000 is on it's way to 25,000 which is on it's way to 50,000 so it's good news.
Alaska Darin Posted July 19, 2010 Posted July 19, 2010 Please call your math teacher and have him explain how 2,000 is not 5% of 500,000. And I'm the idiot. In Dave's defense, he is a complete !@#$ing drone who is incapable of thinking for himself.
Magox Posted July 20, 2010 Author Posted July 20, 2010 Please call your math teacher and have him explain how 2,000 is not 5% of 500,000. And I'm the idiot. No no no, you clearly didn't understand what he was saying. In order to get to 500,000 you have to get to 5, I mean if you don't get to 10 then you can't get to 2,000, umm, hold on, if you don't get to 10 then 25,000 isn't possible, or was it if you don't get to 10 you can't get to 5. Yeah, yeah if you don't get to 10 then 5 is impossible.
Chef Jim Posted July 20, 2010 Posted July 20, 2010 No no no, you clearly didn't understand what he was saying. In order to get to 500,000 you have to get to 5, I mean if you don't get to 10 then you can't get to 2,000, umm, hold on, if you don't get to 10 then 25,000 isn't possible, or was it if you don't get to 10 you can't get to 5. Yeah, yeah if you don't get to 10 then 5 is impossible. Double rainbow man.
/dev/null Posted July 20, 2010 Posted July 20, 2010 No no no, you clearly didn't understand what he was saying. In order to get to 500,000 you have to get to 5, I mean if you don't get to 10 then you can't get to 2,000, umm, hold on, if you don't get to 10 then 25,000 isn't possible, or was it if you don't get to 10 you can't get to 5. Yeah, yeah if you don't get to 10 then 5 is impossible. I propose that we name this theory the Dave_In_Norfolk Addendumb to the Quantum Theoruhhmm of 3.5
GG Posted July 20, 2010 Posted July 20, 2010 Yes but 2,000 is on it's way to 25,000 which is on it's way to 50,000 so it's good news. And at this rate, you'll get to 5% in 12 years!! Talk about a successful rebound. Who says this administration knows nothing about job growth?
Magox Posted July 20, 2010 Author Posted July 20, 2010 In other news. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-07-19/o...ody-s-says.html BP Plc’s oil spill may cost the U.S. Gulf Coast region 17,000 jobs and about $1.2 billion in lost economic growth by year-end even if the flow is stanched permanently next month, Moody’s Analytics said. Under a more pessimistic scenario in which the oil spill continues through December and President Barack Obama’s six- month moratorium on deepwater drilling is extended, economic losses may reach $7.4 billion, and more than 100,000 jobs would be lost, Moody’s said today in a report written by Marisa Di Natale, a director based in West Chester, Pennsylvania. The report warns that the six-month moratorium on new deepwater oil-drilling alone may cause more job losses than the spill’s direct impact on Florida tourism. The oil leak may potentially be stopped sooner than Moody’s baseline scenario. BP Plc halted the flow of oil from the well for the first time July 16 and was given permission earlier today to keep the well closed for another 24 hours. A separate, industry-funded report released today also warned of the impact of the moratorium on new deepwater drilling, saying it is “crippling the local economy” and may cost the region 8,169 jobs and about $2.1 billion in economic losses in its first six months. The study, commissioned by the American Energy Alliance, the advocacy arm of the Institute for Energy Research, a Washington-based research group, predicted that nationwide job losses will reach 12,000 in six months, costing the U.S. economy about $2.8 billion in lost growth and $219 million in tax revenue. “The moratorium could be more costly than the oil spill itself,” Joseph R. Mason, author of the study and professor at Louisiana State University in Baton Rouge, said in a release accompanying the report. “By stifling one of the area’s primary economic engines, the administration is crippling the local economy and risking long-term consequences.”
IDBillzFan Posted July 20, 2010 Posted July 20, 2010 In other news. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-07-19/o...ody-s-says.html I remember when Obama first issued the moratorium, and people started suggesting that those with work in the Gulf would simply pull up stakes and head for other places, like Brazil; the argument being that while it was called a six-month moratorium, the reality was that once the companies left, they wouldn't be back for years. Many libs here yelled "Oh, those are just conservative fear tactics and talking points. No one is going anywhere." Funny how libs are the first to cast blame when the GOP won't approve extended unemployment until it's proven to be paid for, but not a one will stand up to the people who earn their living off the drilling industry and say "Oh, we had no idea they'd actually leave." So ridiculous. So bad for the economy. But hey...it's nothing 129 weeks of unfunded unemployment benefits won't cure.
Dave_In_Norfolk Posted July 20, 2010 Posted July 20, 2010 That darn Obama!! His anti-business policies are to blame for this disaster! Apple says its fiscal third-quarter net income rose 78 percent, thanks to sales of its iPhone and the new iPad tablet computer. Apple said Tuesday it sold about 3.3 million iPads in April through June, the gadget's first three months on the market. IPhone unit sales rose 61 percent, with a boost at the end of the quarter from the launch of the iPhone 4.
Rob's House Posted July 20, 2010 Posted July 20, 2010 That darn Obama!! His anti-business policies are to blame for this disaster! Get a clue, man. He's been aggressively pushing his agenda, passed a lot of significant legislation, spent unprecedented sums of "stimulus" money and everythings going from bad to worse and the outlook on the horizon is grim too. Is there any point at which the evidence becomes so overwhelming that you have the humility to objectively question your political/economic theory?
/dev/null Posted July 20, 2010 Posted July 20, 2010 That darn Obama!! His anti-business policies are to blame for this disaster! The ObamaPad ObamaPad Video Blog, Day 1
....lybob Posted July 20, 2010 Posted July 20, 2010 No, but bailing out the banks sure does! And by "anti-business" are you actually implying he is trying to destroy the business community? Dave, Obama is neither pro business nor anti-business he is simply owned by corporate interests as are most Republicans and the majority of Democrats - don't confuse owned by corporate interests as being pro-business, we are talking 1. Wall Street, Big bank, finance 2. Military industries 3. Big Pharm 4. Big Farm (agriculture) 5. Big insurance/medical industry. those are omnipresent going concerns - other corporate interests or heaven's forbid Union/ special interest occasionally make an appearance but they are small fry - the Auto companies might have been left to fend for themselves except that they share supply chains with the Military industries and there were concerns that those supply chains might not survive without the auto companies.
Magox Posted July 20, 2010 Author Posted July 20, 2010 That darn Obama!! His anti-business policies are to blame for this disaster! one word: Inconsequential
Alaska Darin Posted July 20, 2010 Posted July 20, 2010 That darn Obama!! His anti-business policies are to blame for this disaster! Wow. So now the President is getting credit for something he had absolutely NOTHING to do with. There's literally not a level of stupidity you're not willing to dig through. The saddest part of this administration's "accomplishments" is they won't be around to face the music when the real effects of all of this leftislation truly takes affect.
Dave_In_Norfolk Posted July 22, 2010 Posted July 22, 2010 Those Democrats trying to kill business again!! Luckily the Republicans are standing firm on political firm economic grounds to stop this socialist, anti-business measure WASHINGTON — Perhaps the last best hope of Democrats to pass legislation aimed at creating jobs before the November elections seemed to be crumbling in the Senate on Wednesday as Republicans signaled that they would block a bill to expand government lending programs and grant an array of tax breaks to small businesses. President Obama called on the Senate to approve the bill in a statement in the Rose Garden on Monday. “We all have to continue our efforts to do everything in our power to spur growth and hiring,” he said. “And I hope the Senate acts this week on a package of tax cuts and expanded lending for small businesses, where most of America’s jobs are created.”
Dave_In_Norfolk Posted July 22, 2010 Posted July 22, 2010 Wow. So now the President is getting credit for something he had absolutely NOTHING to do with. There's literally not a level of stupidity you're not willing to dig through. The saddest part of this administration's "accomplishments" is they won't be around to face the music when the real effects of all of this leftislation truly takes affect. Heads I win tails you lose? So if economy is bad its because Obama is anti-business, but when things are good don't look at the Prez. What effects are you talking about Darin? Some nebulous far off danger we should all be afraid of? You should work for Fox News you scare monger you. Boo! Leftistlation? Oh cute. Libertarians with humor, now that is funny.
Dave_In_Norfolk Posted July 22, 2010 Posted July 22, 2010 In Dave's defense, he is a complete !@#$ing drone who is incapable of thinking for himself. Ha ha!! That from YOU is very funny!
Dave_In_Norfolk Posted July 22, 2010 Posted July 22, 2010 That makes him pro-business HOW, exactly? Forcing them to fire cheap labor hurts their bottom lines. Sarcasm, man. Just pointing out how the right wing agenda has its very anti-business side. We had a Mexican restaurant here that everyone loved, except that they had some Mexicans working there. The local Tea Party scum flooded the immigration police with calls and the place was raided every other week and now they are closed down. Anti-immigration is anti-business.
erynthered Posted July 22, 2010 Posted July 22, 2010 Sarcasm, man. Just pointing out how the right wing agenda has its very anti-business side. We had a Mexican restaurant here that everyone loved, except that they had some Mexicans working there. The local Tea Party scum flooded the immigration police with calls and the place was raided every other week and now they are closed down. Anti-immigration is anti-business. Were the mexicans leagal residents of the US or Ileagal?
Recommended Posts