jobs, jobs, jobs......Carrier announces timeline for eliminating Indianapolis jobs

[wjboyer1]

Carrier announces timeline for eliminating Indianapolis jobs (http://www.wndu.com/content/news/Carrier-announces-timeline-for-eliminating-Indianapolis-jobs-423809014.html)

Fact Checking Donald Trump’s Job Creation Claims
Fact Checking Donald Trump'''s Job Creation Claims - NBC News (http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/fact-check-how-many-jobs-has-trump-created-n730236)

President Trump Likes Taking Credit for Jobs. Here Are the Facts
Trump Jobs: How Many the President Actually Created | Fortune.com (http://fortune.com/2017/03/29/president-trump-job-claims-fact-check/)

No, Trump Has Not Created 600,000 Jobs Since Becoming President (http://www.newsweek.com/trump-600000-jobs-582704)

[Don Baldwin]

To live 10X better than the other countries requires being paid 10X more.

Companies can't afford it/won't pay it...so the jobs move.

They also don't have to put up with all the EEO and diversity bullsh!t...20% of the workforce is dead weight...women and minorities with quotas.

Our laws and unions have gone too far...and we're paying the price. It's just not worth it, it's not cost effective to keep manufacturing here when it's so much cheaper/easier to do it overseas. Shipping is cheap these days.

The country is lost. Liberals/progressives caused it with their insane policies. Policies that WOULD work in a small group of like minded people with equal ability. But don't with a population of 350 million and half of them incapable of taking care of themselves.

[MDLNB]

To live 10X better than the other countries requires being paid 10X more.

Companies can't afford it/won't pay it...so the jobs move.

They also don't have to put up with all the EEO and diversity bullsh!t...20% of the workforce is dead weight...women and minorities with quotas.

Our laws and unions have gone too far...and we're paying the price. It's just not worth it, it's not cost effective to keep manufacturing here when it's so much cheaper/easier to do it overseas. Shipping is cheap these days.

The country is lost. Liberals/progressives caused it with their insane policies. Policies that WOULD work in a small group of like minded people with equal ability. But don't with a population of 350 million and half of them incapable of taking care of themselves.

Yep, I agree.

[cologal]

To live 10X better than the other countries requires being paid 10X more.

Companies can't afford it/won't pay it...so the jobs move.

They also don't have to put up with all the EEO and diversity bullsh!t...20% of the workforce is dead weight...women and minorities with quotas.

Our laws and unions have gone too far...and we're paying the price. It's just not worth it, it's not cost effective to keep manufacturing here when it's so much cheaper/easier to do it overseas. Shipping is cheap these days.

The country is lost. Liberals/progressives caused it with their insane policies. Policies that WOULD work in a small group of like minded people with equal ability. But don't with a population of 350 million and half of them incapable of taking care of themselves.

The unions have lost most, if not all power, with the coming of the "RIGHT TO WORK STATES" .

I suggest if you really want to see what has happened to jobs in the United States you might get a copy of the book Glass House. It is the story about Anchor Hocking once the largest maker of glassware in the US and the town of Lancaster OH. The book not only looks at what happened to the company but also what happen to the town of Lancaster and its people.

I happened to be captive in a car for 4 days as I drove from Florida to Colorado so I listened to it as I drove.

A link to a completely non political book review

Glass House: The 1% Economy and the Shattering of the All-American Town by Brian Alexander, Hardcover | Barnes & Noble(R) (http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/glass-house-brian-alexander/1123683426#productInfoTabs)

Also found Hillbilly Elegy to be an interesting read

Hillbilly Elegy by J. D. Vance on iBooks (https://itunes.apple.com/us/book/hillbilly-elegy/id1046918625?mt=11)

COPUFF now in the Mile HIGH state

[MDLNB]

Obama started his first term by eliminating thousands of jobs No one remembers though. Then, he wasted a trillion bucks on his plan to "fix things" such as cash for clunkers (big loss), Solindra, etc. I'll take my chances with Trump. He has a better track record. Of course, Obie had NO track record, resume', experience, management or leadership training. Just another affirmative action recipient.

[Rockyrd]

The point of this thread is basically....

YOU CANNOT BELIEVE A WORD THAT COMES OUT OF THIS WHITE HOUSE.

[Rockyrd]

Obama started his first term by eliminating thousands of jobs No one remembers though. Then, he wasted a trillion bucks on his plan to "fix things" such as cash for clunkers (big loss), Solindra, etc. I'll take my chances with Trump. He has a better track record. Of course, Obie had NO track record, resume', experience, management or leadership training. Just another affirmative action recipient.

Trumps "track record" is in developing and selling real estate and he went bankrupt more than anyone else in doing it.

THAT is the sum of his track record. He, IN HIS ENTIRE LIFE, has done nothing for this country...ever...nothing.

[Don Baldwin]

The unions have lost most, if not all power, with the coming of the "RIGHT TO WORK STATES" .

I suggest if you really want to see what has happened to jobs in the United States you might get a copy of the book Glass House. It is the story about Anchor Hocking once the largest maker of glassware in the US and the town of Lancaster OH. The book not only looks at what happened to the company but also what happen to the town of Lancaster and its people.

I happened to be captive in a car for 4 days as I drove from Florida to Colorado so I listened to it as I drove.

A link to a completely non political book review

Glass House: The 1% Economy and the Shattering of the All-American Town by Brian Alexander, Hardcover | Barnes & Noble(R) (http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/glass-house-brian-alexander/1123683426#productInfoTabs)

Also found Hillbilly Elegy to be an interesting read

Hillbilly Elegy by J. D. Vance on iBooks (https://itunes.apple.com/us/book/hillbilly-elegy/id1046918625?mt=11)

COPUFF now in the Mile HIGH state

You're a WOMAN...you care about the PERSON...that's why you like these kinds of "stories"...but you MISS the BIG PICTURE!

Taken from your own link...Hillbilly:

"Hillbilly Elegy is a passionate and personal analysis of a culture in crisis—that of white working-class Americans. The decline of this group, a demographic of our country that has been slowly disintegrating over forty years, has been reported on with growing frequency and alarm"

THAT is the take home message...America is dying as the white male demographic falls. Over the last 40 years we've fallen in world ranking continuously. We're down to #25 now. BECAUSE white males were replaced by women and minorities. America is relying on the "second string", the "B" team...instead of ONLY the very best.

[Rockyrd]

"BMW, Mercedes-Benz and VW are getting their turn in the crosshairs of U.S. President Donald Trump, who’s making a habit out of attacking the visible -- and free trade-dependent -- auto industry.

“The Germans are bad, very bad,” Der Spiegel cited Trump as saying to unidentified participants at a closed-door meeting Thursday with European Union officials in Brussels. “Look at the millions of cars that they sell in the U.S. Terrible. We’re going to stop that.”

BMW, Mercedes Become Latest Carmakers Caught in Trump Crossfire - Bloomberg (https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2017-05-26/trump-blasts-german-carmakers-u-s-sales-and-threatens-barriers)

[Don Baldwin]

The point of this thread is basically....

YOU CANNOT BELIEVE A WORD THAT COMES OUT OF THIS WHITE HOUSE.

This or ANY of the previous either.

[MDLNB]

You win some and lose some. How much taxpayer money did Trump lose that he invested in Carrier? Billions right? Oops, that was Obummer and Solindra.

[cologal]

You're a WOMAN...you care about the PERSON...that's why you like these kinds of "stories"...but you MISS the BIG PICTURE!

Taken from your own link...Hillbilly:

"Hillbilly Elegy is a passionate and personal analysis of a culture in crisis—that of white working-class Americans. The decline of this group, a demographic of our country that has been slowly disintegrating over forty years, has been reported on with growing frequency and alarm"

THAT is the take home message...America is dying as the white male demographic falls. Over the last 40 years we've fallen in world ranking continuously. We're down to #25 now. BECAUSE white males were replaced by women and minorities. America is relying on the "second string", the "B" team...instead of ONLY the very best.

Don you do realize that J.D. Vance, the author of Hillbilly Elegy is a man don't you? Companies in this day an age don't care who they are cutting only that those jobs are being cut to feed the ever present dragon. If your company doesn't make the expected growth projected by Wall Street then hell fire will rain down.

The last 10 years of my employment in corporate America brought a number of those cycles.

But as of 2011 women made up 47% of the workforce so were still in the minority. But the real reason women maybe employed more is that they are only paid 77 cents to every dollar a man makes.

[autumnspring]

Don you do realize that J.D. Vance, the author of Hillbilly Elegy is a man don't you? Companies in this day an age don't care who they are cutting only that those jobs are being cut to feed the ever present dragon. If your company doesn't make the expected growth projected by Wall Street then hell fire will rain down.

The last 10 years of my employment in corporate America brought a number of those cycles.

But as of 2011 women made up 47% of the workforce so were still in the minority. But the real reason women maybe employed more is that they are only paid 77 cents to every dollar a man makes.

Your 77 cents to the dollar for women-frankly I thought the percentage was lower than that. But, in any case, the number is an AVERAGE. With most top executives, the guys with the multi million compensation packages being men. It distorts AVERAGES. Aside,the top person at pepsi is a woman. I do not recall her name. I do recall a public interview where she discussed balancing her job with her family life.
Assuming that your 47% number is correct, YOU ARE REALLY STRETCHING IT TO CALL THAT A MINORITY.

[cologal]

Your 77 cents to the dollar for women-frankly I thought the percentage was lower than that. But, in any case, the number is an AVERAGE. With most top executives, the guys with the multi million compensation packages being men. It distorts AVERAGES. Aside,the top person at pepsi is a woman. I do not recall her name. I do recall a public interview where she discussed balancing her job with her family life.
Assuming that your 47% number is correct, YOU ARE REALLY STRETCHING IT TO CALL THAT A MINORITY.

Anything under 50% is a minority! Your the one who said they had taken all the mens jobs.

[Don Baldwin]

Don you do realize that J.D. Vance, the author of Hillbilly Elegy is a man don't you? Companies in this day an age don't care who they are cutting only that those jobs are being cut to feed the ever present dragon. If your company doesn't make the expected growth projected by Wall Street then hell fire will rain down.

The last 10 years of my employment in corporate America brought a number of those cycles.

But as of 2011 women made up 47% of the workforce so were still in the minority. But the real reason women maybe employed more is that they are only paid 77 cents to every dollar a man makes.

But "dead wood" IS a majority. Add the MANDATORY 15-20 for minorities and we're down to 25% left for white men...when it USED to be 90% white men. THIS IS the reason that America has fallen from #1 to #25...the changing demographics. Women and minorities ARE NOT AS CAPABLE as white men. I defy you to prove otherwise. White men create. Invent. Make the world a BETTER place with their technology. As the whites are falling, the Asians are replacing them in intellectual endeavors. The blacks and Hispanics invading America will just drag us down. We're literally becoming 3rd world as we're invaded by 3rd worlders.

For MOST jobs...they're not even worth that. How many road construction sites do you see the ladies holding the slow/stop signs while the men are digging? Have you EVER seen the ladies digging and the men holding the signs? How many high steel worker women do you know? Industrial pipefitters? Construction? You ARE better at some thing...MANY things...just not the SAME things. You shouldn't try to be men...you should try to be women. You're NOT as strong. You never will be. Just like I'll NEVER make the NBA...YOU shouldn't try to be what you're not good at.

Your 77 cents to the dollar for women-frankly I thought the percentage was lower than that. But, in any case, the number is an AVERAGE. With most top executives, the guys with the multi million compensation packages being men. It distorts AVERAGES. Aside,the top person at pepsi is a woman. I do not recall her name. I do recall a public interview where she discussed balancing her job with her family life.
Assuming that your 47% number is correct, YOU ARE REALLY STRETCHING IT TO CALL THAT A MINORITY.

Good for you Susie...it IS stretching it considering the mandatory minority quotas too.

The top executives make obscene amounts of money...it skews averages...it skews the mean. The CEO...is there to lie to the workers/shareholders while the board loots the company.

[rubicon]

1) High corporate tax + heavy government regulations
+ unreasonable union demands that weigh down fixed costs = job losses

2) Better technology leads to less of a need for human hands

3) why work when I can make as much off government entitlements

4) The basic rule of economics known as "comparative advantage

5) Corporations will do almost anything to maximize profits which means cost effective production. The expense component is controlled which often translates into layoffs, etc

Personal Best Regards:

[cologal]

1) High corporate tax + heavy government regulations
+ unreasonable union demands that weigh down fixed costs = job losses

2) Better technology leads to less of a need for human hands

3) why work when I can make as much off government entitlements

4) The basic rule of economics known as "comparative advantage

5) Corporations will do almost anything to maximize profits which means cost effective production. The expense component is controlled which often translates into layoffs, etc

Personal Best Regards:

You say:

High corporate tax + heavy government regulations
+ unreasonable union demands that weigh down fixed costs = job losses.... However unions are in decline given all the Right to Work states. While the US corporate tax rate maybe 15% corporations pay no where near that amount, many pay 0%.

Better technology leads to less of a need for human hands, which mean less jobs for people

Corporations will do almost anything to maximize profits which means cost effective production. The expense component is controlled which often translates into layoffs, etc which means less jobs for people

And yet you say:

why work when I can make as much off government entitlements

So the corporations put the people out of work but its because the people don't want to work they just want government entitlements.

You might want to rethink your arguments cause ya lost me!

COPUFF in the MILE HIGH STATE

[Warren Kiefer]

Carrier announces timeline for eliminating Indianapolis jobs (http://www.wndu.com/content/news/Carrier-announces-timeline-for-eliminating-Indianapolis-jobs-423809014.html)

Fact Checking Donald Trump’s Job Creation Claims
Fact Checking Donald Trump'''s Job Creation Claims - NBC News (http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/fact-check-how-many-jobs-has-trump-created-n730236)

President Trump Likes Taking Credit for Jobs. Here Are the Facts
Trump Jobs: How Many the President Actually Created | Fortune.com (http://fortune.com/2017/03/29/president-trump-job-claims-fact-check/)

No, Trump Has Not Created 600,000 Jobs Since Becoming President (http://www.newsweek.com/trump-600000-jobs-582704)

Is this the same Donald Trump and the same company that a few months ago TRUMP announced those many, many jobs he had convinced Carrier to stay in the USA ????

[cologal]

Is this the same Donald Trump and the same company that a few months ago TRUMP announced those many, many jobs he had convinced Carrier to stay in the USA ????

One and the same!!!

[MDLNB]

Don you do realize that J.D. Vance, the author of Hillbilly Elegy is a man don't you? Companies in this day an age don't care who they are cutting only that those jobs are being cut to feed the ever present dragon. If your company doesn't make the expected growth projected by Wall Street then hell fire will rain down.

The last 10 years of my employment in corporate America brought a number of those cycles.

But as of 2011 women made up 47% of the workforce so were still in the minority. But the real reason women maybe employed more is that they are only paid 77 cents to every dollar a man makes.

That's a total distortion. The reason for that number is that many women work "spouse" jobs or part-time jobs. Many wish to stay home or spend more time at home raising their children. The point is that it is Federal law that women get paid the same pay for the same job. And it is no longer 77 cents on a buck today, even with those stats. It's in the 80's. A woman should not get paid for staying home with her kids. If they want to give them workman's comp or something like that, OK....temporarily. NO work, no pay...period. If they wish to accumulate sick leave and use it, fine. It is not fair to anyone else that works hard to position themselves in a company, only to have someone that takes off to have kids, come wandering back in and demanding equal consideration. Sorry, that's life. Most employers do not want to hire young women because they know they won't get their money's worth when they start taking off for their kids. Employers are not charities.

[justjim]

To live 10X better than the other countries requires being paid 10X more.

Companies can't afford it/won't pay it...so the jobs move.

They also don't have to put up with all the EEO and diversity bullsh!t...20% of the workforce is dead weight...women and minorities with quotas.

Our laws and unions have gone too far...and we're paying the price. It's just not worth it, it's not cost effective to keep manufacturing here when it's so much cheaper/easier to do it overseas. Shipping is cheap these days.

The country is lost. Liberals/progressives caused it with their insane policies. Policies that WOULD work in a small group of like minded people with equal ability. But don't with a population of 350 million and half of them incapable of taking care of themselves.

I wonder if things are so bad why all the foreign auto makers have built plants here in the United States in recent years. Ho hum, I guess they were looking for some of those "dead weight" workers to manufacture their vehicles.

[Don Baldwin]

That's a total distortion. The reason for that number is that many women work "spouse" jobs or part-time jobs. Many wish to stay home or spend more time at home raising their children. The point is that it is Federal law that women get paid the same pay for the same job. And it is no longer 77 cents on a buck today, even with those stats. It's in the 80's. A woman should not get paid for staying home with her kids. If they want to give them workman's comp or something like that, OK....temporarily. NO work, no pay...period. If they wish to accumulate sick leave and use it, fine. It is not fair to anyone else that works hard to position themselves in a company, only to have someone that takes off to have kids, come wandering back in and demanding equal consideration. Sorry, that's life. Most employers do not want to hire young women because they know they won't get their money's worth when they start taking off for their kids. Employers are not charities.

Because they're less versatile than men.

I wonder if things are so bad why all the foreign auto makers have built plants here in the United States in recent years. Ho hum, I guess they were looking for some of those "dead weight" workers to manufacture their vehicles.

Well Jim...I'll educate you today...

Because the US government said to the foreign auto makers..."if you want to sell here...you've also got to build here". So they put in a few factories but still make a profit. You ARE aware that the states trip all over themselves to GET these factories? They'll offer tax free EVERYTHING to get that factory...for 300 jobs.

[cologal]

That's a total distortion. The reason for that number is that many women work "spouse" jobs or part-time jobs. Many wish to stay home or spend more time at home raising their children. The point is that it is Federal law that women get paid the same pay for the same job. And it is no longer 77 cents on a buck today, even with those stats. It's in the 80's. A woman should not get paid for staying home with her kids. If they want to give them workman's comp or something like that, OK....temporarily. NO work, no pay...period. If they wish to accumulate sick leave and use it, fine. It is not fair to anyone else that works hard to position themselves in a company, only to have someone that takes off to have kids, come wandering back in and demanding equal consideration. Sorry, that's life. Most employers do not want to hire young women because they know they won't get their money's worth when they start taking off for their kids. Employers are not charities.

Not in this world....most women work full time because they have to. The pay gap between men and women is well documented.

As for your comments on women and pregnancy companies now offer maturity and paternity leave so both the mother and father can bond with the baby.

[Don Baldwin]

Not in this world....most women work full time because they have to. The pay gap between men and women is well documented.

As for your comments on women and pregnancy companies now offer maturity and paternity leave so both the mother and father can bond with the baby.

No they don't...they work to have STUFF. A bigger house, an extra car, for vacations...etc.

Really? A business is supposed to just GIVE people time off so they can "bond" with their new baby?

And you WONDER WHY the jobs leave the country.

Next time you need something I hope they tell you to come back in a few months...the person who does that is on "maternity leave".

[cologal]

No they don't...they work to have STUFF. A bigger house, an extra car, for vacations...etc.

Really? A business is supposed to just GIVE people time off so they can "bond" with their new baby?

And you WONDER WHY the jobs leave the country.

Next time you need something I hope they tell you to come back in a few months...the person who does that is on "maternity leave".

You really are out of touch with the modern workforce and the rules that govern it. But then again how could you know how hard it is to give birth...you are a MAN.

[ColdNoMore]

You really are out of touch with the modern workforce and the rules that govern it. But then again how could you know how hard it is to give birth...you are a MAN.

You're partially correct.

He's probably a 'male'...but certainly not a 'man.'

[cologal]

You're partially correct.

He's probably a 'male'...but certainly not a 'man.'

I will agree to that!!!

[cologal]

No they don't...they work to have STUFF. A bigger house, an extra car, for vacations...etc.

Really? A business is supposed to just GIVE people time off so they can "bond" with their new baby?

And you WONDER WHY the jobs leave the country.

Next time you need something I hope they tell you to come back in a few months...the person who does that is on "maternity leave".

No I don't wonder why jobs leave the country, I have worked for venture capitalists. I have watched a company be hollowed outed and then dressed up for a sale. I have watched every year as we waited for the Christmas massacre. In fact I took a package to retire just to save someone on my teams job. You didn't work for a company whose CEO who was listed a one of the worst CEO's in the country! And then watched him get a 17 million dollar package to leave!

Obviously you have no idea on what it is like to work in the modern workforce.

[MDLNB]

Not in this world....most women work full time because they have to. The pay gap between men and women is well documented.

As for your comments on women and pregnancy companies now offer maturity and paternity leave so both the mother and father can bond with the baby.


Women HAVE TO work because they can't keep a marriage going. The pay gap being well documented is an average, INCLUDING those that work part-time, spouse jobs. Are you going to tell me that there is no FEDERAL LAW that mandates equal pay for the same job?

Bonding with the baby? Why should I pay for you to "bond with the baby?" Your baby is not anyone's responsibility but yours. If you choose to have kids, then be responsible for them. Contrary to what Hillary says, the raising of a child is NOT the community's responsibility. If the employer wishes to pay you to stay home, that is his affair. It should NOT be mandated. If the gov wants to make that a policy, that is up to them. And they wonder why no one respects a gov employee.

If you want to have children and want to take off with pay, then accumulate some leave time and use it. Period.

Personally, I discriminated against hiring young women. You can't make a profit if you have to hire a replacement at an additional cost so that the woman can stay home and bond with her kids.

[cologal]

Women HAVE TO work because they can't keep a marriage going. The pay gap being well documented is an average, INCLUDING those that work part-time, spouse jobs. Are you going to tell me that there is no FEDERAL LAW that mandates equal pay for the same job?

Bonding with the baby? Why should I pay for you to "bond with the baby?" Your baby is not anyone's responsibility but yours. If you choose to have kids, then be responsible for them. Contrary to what Hillary says, the raising of a child is NOT the community's responsibility. If the employer wishes to pay you to stay home, that is his affair. It should NOT be mandated. If the gov wants to make that a policy, that is up to them. And they wonder why no one respects a gov employee.

If you want to have children and want to take off with pay, then accumulate some leave time and use it. Period.

Personally, I discriminated against hiring young women. You can't make a profit if you have to hire a replacement at an additional cost so that the woman can stay home and bond with her kids.

Then you broke the law....

[ColdNoMore]

Women HAVE TO work because they can't keep a marriage going. The pay gap being well documented is an average, INCLUDING those that work part-time, spouse jobs. Are you going to tell me that there is no FEDERAL LAW that mandates equal pay for the same job?

Bonding with the baby? Why should I pay for you to "bond with the baby?" Your baby is not anyone's responsibility but yours. If you choose to have kids, then be responsible for them. Contrary to what Hillary says, the raising of a child is NOT the community's responsibility. If the employer wishes to pay you to stay home, that is his affair. It should NOT be mandated. If the gov wants to make that a policy, that is up to them. And they wonder why no one respects a gov employee.

If you want to have children and want to take off with pay, then accumulate some leave time and use it. Period.

Personally, I discriminated against hiring young women. You can't make a profit if you have to hire a replacement at an additional cost so that the woman can stay home and bond with her kids.

Bull$hit. :1rotfl:


No one was stupid enough to give you any hiring/firing authority, which is why you come on here and expunge that frustration...for being so impotent in your professional life. :ho:



Deepest Sincere Wishes: :wave:

[MDLNB]

Bull$hit. :1rotfl:


No one was stupid enough to give you any hiring/firing authority, which is why you come on here and expunge that frustration...for being so impotent in your professional life. :ho:



Deepest Sincere Wishes: :wave:

Wow CNM, you have really lost it! I have to admit a certain bit of amusement at seeing you in the panic and hysterical mode. I bet you want to evict those culprits that are living free in your head........:a040:...:1rotfl:

[Chi-Town]

Women HAVE TO work because they can't keep a marriage going. The pay gap being well documented is an average, INCLUDING those that work part-time, spouse jobs. Are you going to tell me that there is no FEDERAL LAW that mandates equal pay for the same job?

Bonding with the baby? Why should I pay for you to "bond with the baby?" Your baby is not anyone's responsibility but yours. If you choose to have kids, then be responsible for them. Contrary to what Hillary says, the raising of a child is NOT the community's responsibility. If the employer wishes to pay you to stay home, that is his affair. It should NOT be mandated. If the gov wants to make that a policy, that is up to them. And they wonder why no one respects a gov employee.

If you want to have children and want to take off with pay, then accumulate some leave time and use it. Period.

Personally, I discriminated against hiring young women. You can't make a profit if you have to hire a replacement at an additional cost so that the woman can stay home and bond with her kids.

MDCPD, you are one selfish prick.but thanks for the laugh. First, working Hillary into your garble. and second, claiming that you had the authority to discriminate in the hiring of women.


Sent from my VS995 using Tapatalk

[cologal]

MDCPD, you are one selfish prick.but thanks for the laugh. First, working Hillary into your garble. and second, claiming that you had the authority to discriminate in the hiring of women.


Sent from my VS995 using Tapatalk

:bigbow::bigbow:

[ColdNoMore]

MDCPD, you are one selfish prick.but thanks for the laugh. First, working Hillary into your garble. and second, claiming that you had the authority to discriminate in the hiring of women.

I know....right? :1rotfl: :1rotfl: :1rotfl:

[MDLNB]

MDCPD, you are one selfish prick.but thanks for the laugh. First, working Hillary into your garble. and second, claiming that you had the authority to discriminate in the hiring of women.


Sent from my VS995 using Tapatalk

Hey Chi, if you are going to misspell someones moniker, then you might want to hold back on your derision for Trump's mistake on Twitter.

You are getting kind of nasty with the language little girl. Does Connie know you speak like that? I bet you don't allow her to read your trash, right?
I guess as a salesman, you never had to hire or fire anyone, so what would you know, right?

[MDLNB]

I know....right? :1rotfl: :1rotfl: :1rotfl:

Ha, ha, ha.....look at the clown. CNM has lost it and must have lost her little signature too. RIGHT......:1rotfl:..:1rotfl:

[Chi-Town]

Hey Chi, if you are going to misspell someones moniker, then you might want to hold back on your derision for Trump's mistake on Twitter.

You are getting kind of nasty with the language little girl. Does Connie know you speak like that? I bet you don't allow her to read your trash, right?
I guess as a salesman, you never had to hire or fire anyone, so what would you know, right?

MDCPD, CPD is Compusive Posting Disorder. Just a name for your addiction. You have gone from building a castle in the sky to moving into it. Delusion is a symptom.

Sent from my VS995 using Tapatalk

[ColdNoMore]

MDCPD, CPD is Compulsive Posting Disorder. Just a name for your addiction. You have gone from building a castle in the sky to moving into it. Delusion is a symptom.


Nailed it! :thumbup:


My version is...MassiveObsessiveCumpulsivePostingDisorder. :D

[maureenod]

Women HAVE TO work because they can't keep a marriage going. The pay gap being well documented is an average, INCLUDING those that work part-time, spouse jobs. Are you going to tell me that there is no FEDERAL LAW that mandates equal pay for the same job?

Bonding with the baby? Why should I pay for you to "bond with the baby?" Your baby is not anyone's responsibility but yours. If you choose to have kids, then be responsible for them. Contrary to what Hillary says, the raising of a child is NOT the community's responsibility. If the employer wishes to pay you to stay home, that is his affair. It should NOT be mandated. If the gov wants to make that a policy, that is up to them. And they wonder why no one respects a gov employee.

If you want to have children and want to take off with pay, then accumulate some leave time and use it. Period.

Personally, I discriminated against hiring young women. You can't make a profit if you have to hire a replacement at an additional cost so that the woman can stay home and bond with her kids.



Hey MDXYZ, your boy Trump wants to make it law 6 WEEKS PAID MATERNITY LEAVE ....whata ya think of that!! BOND WITH THAT

[MDLNB]

MDCPD, CPD is Compusive Posting Disorder. Just a name for your addiction. You have gone from building a castle in the sky to moving into it. Delusion is a symptom.

Sent from my VS995 using Tapatalk

Whatever David, whatever. I have to admit that I had no salesmen working for me. SO, you were safe. Once again, you libtards or in your case, a wannabe libtard since you are a registered Republican, take a minute part of a statement and run amok with it. But, that is to be expected. Can't have a civil discussion so you jump on the first syllable of a comment to see if you can distort it. No big deal. I expected nothing less of you. A follower of Ms. CNM. I would explain to you where you went wrong by jumping to conclusions but you would just jump in some more. Suffice it to say "I got cha!" I would suggest that you read more carefully and ask questions if you do not understand, but I know you better than that. Your ego would preclude ASKING.
Have a great Trump filled day.

[MDLNB]

Hey MDXYZ, your boy Trump wants to make it law 6 WEEKS PAID MATERNITY LEAVE ....whata ya think of that!! BOND WITH THAT

That's great. According to the libtards, Trump is not doing anything and has accomplished nothing, so this is obviously not going to happen, right? Besides, how should this effect me? I'm retired and what someone else does is up to them. I do not believe that the government should interfere with private business and how it is run when it is such a business failure, but if they wish to make a law that does not effect me, that is for others to worry about. It all comes out in the elections, doesn't it?

By the way, I had women working for me, lots of them. But, the law did not preclude me from hiring women that had already had their children and were interested in working, rather than making a hobby of a job. A private business should not have to be mandated by the gov to provide a salary for those that wished to take time off, regardless of the reason. It should be entirely left up to the owner of the business. Some small businesses cannot afford to hire someone to work while a woman is off for several months. Leave without pay or accumulated or advanced vacation and sick leave is an option. If the gov wants to make that a gov employee benefit, that is up to the gov. They give our money away in welfare anyway.

[ColdNoMore]

Whatever David, whatever. I have to admit that I had no salesmen working for me. SO, you were safe. Once again, you libtards or in your case, a wannabe libtard since you are a registered Republican, take a minute part of a statement and run amok with it. But, that is to be expected. Can't have a civil discussion so you jump on the first syllable of a comment to see if you can distort it. No big deal. I expected nothing less of you. A follower of Ms. CNM. I would explain to you where you went wrong by jumping to conclusions but you would just jump in some more. Suffice it to say "I got cha!" I would suggest that you read more carefully and ask questions if you do not understand, but I know you better than that. Your ego would preclude ASKING.
Have a great Trump filled day.

Oh puhleeze, it only takes a modicum of reading your trolling to easily and quickly surmise that you never made it past some low level worker bee position...and were never given any authority to speak of (not counting being required to make coffee every morning of course). :1rotfl:

Much less, the ability to hire or terminate workers. :oops:

So please, save your impotent, pathetic and passive-aggressive attacks on your superiors like Chi-Town in trying to intimidate him...by stating first names (most likely totally false news) of him and his spouse. :ohdear:

Your desperation of constantly being outed as an insignificant pizzant, little man of no consequence in your professional life, comes across like a screeching headline of... "'I've always been a nobody and I've never gotten over it." :ho:



Deepest Sincere Wishes: :wave:

[MDLNB]

Oh puhleeze, it only takes a modicum of reading your trolling to easily and quickly surmise that you never made it past some low level worker bee position...and were never given any authority to speak of (not counting being required to make coffee every morning of course). :1rotfl:

Much less, the ability to hire or terminate workers. :oops:

So please, save your impotent, pathetic and passive-aggressive attacks on your superiors like Chi-Town in trying to intimidate him...by stating first names (most likely totally false news) of him and his spouse. :ohdear:

Your desperation of constantly being outed as an insignificant pizzant, little man of no consequence in your professional life, comes across like a screeching headline of... "'I've always been a nobody and I've never gotten over it." :ho:



Deepest Sincere Wishes: :wave:

Wow lil's sister, don't blow a gasket. You take this much too seriously. You may believe whatever you wish. I am not going to attempt to pacify you by giving you my life story. Even though, I know you would find it interesting. Trouble is, then you would realize how useless and unproductive you have been all your wasted life and might do something horribly drastic. Then, it would be on my conscience for at least ......a day, maybe. Just kidding.

If you all wish to troll for bites and disparage the president, why would you not expect someone to take the hook? I consider myself to be patriotic and you to be despicable and UN-American, but then again I am a patriot. You? You wish to destroy America by making it part of Europe or whatever socialist Utopia you dream of every night. ;
But, that's not why you are here, right? You are not here to convince anyone of your stand. You are here to make more conservatives and to make them stronger in their ideology. Otherwise, you would have to be incredibly stupid. Hmmmm

[Warren Kiefer]

Carrier announces timeline for eliminating Indianapolis jobs (http://www.wndu.com/content/news/Carrier-announces-timeline-for-eliminating-Indianapolis-jobs-423809014.html)

Fact Checking Donald Trump’s Job Creation Claims
Fact Checking Donald Trump'''s Job Creation Claims - NBC News (http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/fact-check-how-many-jobs-has-trump-created-n730236)

President Trump Likes Taking Credit for Jobs. Here Are the Facts
Trump Jobs: How Many the President Actually Created | Fortune.com (http://fortune.com/2017/03/29/president-trump-job-claims-fact-check/)

No, Trump Has Not Created 600,000 Jobs Since Becoming President (http://www.newsweek.com/trump-600000-jobs-582704)

It hasn't been long ago that Trump was bragging about saving hundreds of Carrier jobs.

[Buffalo Jim]

Carrier announces timeline for eliminating Indianapolis jobs (http://www.wndu.com/content/news/Carrier-announces-timeline-for-eliminating-Indianapolis-jobs-423809014.html)

Fact Checking Donald Trump’s Job Creation Claims
Fact Checking Donald Trump'''s Job Creation Claims - NBC News (http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/fact-check-how-many-jobs-has-trump-created-n730236)

President Trump Likes Taking Credit for Jobs. Here Are the Facts
Trump Jobs: How Many the President Actually Created | Fortune.com (http://fortune.com/2017/03/29/president-trump-job-claims-fact-check/)

No, Trump Has Not Created 600,000 Jobs Since Becoming President (http://www.newsweek.com/trump-600000-jobs-582704)

You seem jubilant . Why ? Do you like watching jobs disappear ? Do you hold so much venom over Trump that you would like to see the economy tank . See people lose their jobs to prove a point ? Very American of you !

[wjboyer1]

You seem jubilant . Why ? Do you like watching jobs disappear ? Do you hold so much venom over Trump that you would like to see the economy tank . See people lose their jobs to prove a point ? Very American of you !

TRUMP complained that Obama wasn't doing a good job in creation of jobs....now he owns what has happened. No jubilation here, just the fact that you were gullible enough to vote for a liar, con-man, sexist, adulterer, racist, and a moron.....so what kind of person would vote for that?
69080

69081

69082

69083

[Don Baldwin]

Wow lil's sister, don't blow a gasket. You take this much too seriously. You may believe whatever you wish. I am not going to attempt to pacify you by giving you my life story. Even though, I know you would find it interesting. Trouble is, then you would realize how useless and unproductive you have been all your wasted life and might do something horribly drastic. Then, it would be on my conscience for at least ......a day, maybe. Just kidding.

If you all wish to troll for bites and disparage the president, why would you not expect someone to take the hook? I consider myself to be patriotic and you to be despicable and UN-American, but then again I am a patriot. You? You wish to destroy America by making it part of Europe or whatever socialist Utopia you dream of every night. ;
But, that's not why you are here, right? You are not here to convince anyone of your stand. You are here to make more conservatives and to make them stronger in their ideology. Otherwise, you would have to be incredibly stupid. Hmmmm

They ARE destroying the country by allowing America to become Mexico II by NOT doing anything about the Hispanic invasion.

We ARE being overrun...they ARE the majority below age 7...within 30 years they ARE the absolute majority. They're not here to be Americans...they're here to take back THEIR land.

[Rockyrd]

"The United States and Europe appear to be hurtling toward a messy breakup. China, meanwhile, is ready to pounce.
Beijing is in prime position to capitalize on major policy fissures that have emerged between Europe and the Trump administration on climate, trade and defense.
The new dynamic will be on full display on Thursday in Brussels, when Chinese Premier Li Keqiang meets with EU counterparts at the annual EU-China Summit. Hours later, President Trump is expected to announce the withdrawal of the U.S. from the Paris climate agreement.
"If peace and prosperity are the object of the global economic order, the Trump administration offers neither to Europeans," wrote analysts at High Frequency Economics, a research firm. "A new axis of power, based on economic power, will form between Europe and China if the U.S. continues to shirk its role as global leader."

China and Europe are moving forward without Trump - May. 31, 2017 (http://money.cnn.com/2017/05/31/news/economy/china-europe-eu-trump-us-trade/)

Amazing how quickly we are losing allies everywhere...of course we are maintaining close ties to Russia.

"The Trump administration is moving toward handing back to Russia two diplomatic compounds, near New York City and on Maryland’s Eastern Shore, that its officials were ejected from in late December as punishment for Moscow’s interference in the 2016 presidential election.

President Barack Obama said Dec. 29 that the compounds were being “used by Russian personnel for intelligence-related purposes” and gave Russia 24 hours to vacate them. Separately, Obama expelled from the United States what he said were 35 Russian “intelligence operatives.”

Trump administration moves to return Russian compounds in Maryland and New York - The Washington Post (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-administration-moves-to-return-russian-compounds-in-maryland-and-new-york/2017/05/31/3c4778d2-4616-11e7-98cd-af64b4fe2dfc_story.html?utm_term=.75bb10732fca)

I never believed in the collusion theory, especially by the President personally, but it is really getting weird about Russia. Why, for example, when we hear of "back channels" or "bankers" or "diplomats" met in secret, it is always Russia, nobody else ?

[MDLNB]

You seem jubilant . Why ? Do you like watching jobs disappear ? Do you hold so much venom over Trump that you would like to see the economy tank . See people lose their jobs to prove a point ? Very American of you !

I don't have to be a mind reader to know that you have hit the nail on the head with their intent.

[MDLNB]

"The United States and Europe appear to be hurtling toward a messy breakup. China, meanwhile, is ready to pounce.
Beijing is in prime position to capitalize on major policy fissures that have emerged between Europe and the Trump administration on climate, trade and defense.
The new dynamic will be on full display on Thursday in Brussels, when Chinese Premier Li Keqiang meets with EU counterparts at the annual EU-China Summit. Hours later, President Trump is expected to announce the withdrawal of the U.S. from the Paris climate agreement.
"If peace and prosperity are the object of the global economic order, the Trump administration offers neither to Europeans," wrote analysts at High Frequency Economics, a research firm. "A new axis of power, based on economic power, will form between Europe and China if the U.S. continues to shirk its role as global leader."

China and Europe are moving forward without Trump - May. 31, 2017 (http://money.cnn.com/2017/05/31/news/economy/china-europe-eu-trump-us-trade/)

Amazing how quickly we are losing allies everywhere...of course we are maintaining close ties to Russia.

"The Trump administration is moving toward handing back to Russia two diplomatic compounds, near New York City and on Maryland’s Eastern Shore, that its officials were ejected from in late December as punishment for Moscow’s interference in the 2016 presidential election.

President Barack Obama said Dec. 29 that the compounds were being “used by Russian personnel for intelligence-related purposes” and gave Russia 24 hours to vacate them. Separately, Obama expelled from the United States what he said were 35 Russian “intelligence operatives.”

Trump administration moves to return Russian compounds in Maryland and New York - The Washington Post (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-administration-moves-to-return-russian-compounds-in-maryland-and-new-york/2017/05/31/3c4778d2-4616-11e7-98cd-af64b4fe2dfc_story.html?utm_term=.75bb10732fca)

I never believed in the collusion theory, especially by the President personally, but it is really getting weird about Russia. Why, for example, when we hear of "back channels" or "bankers" or "diplomats" met in secret, it is always Russia, nobody else ?

Like this is a new practice? Where have you been all your life? Or, did your parents protect you from current events?

[Buffalo Jim]

You're partially correct.

He's probably a 'male'...but certainly not a 'man.'

So benevolent when posting above the Political Talk border and so consistently acerbic below .

Why is that ?

[wjboyer1]

Trump says he created 600,000 jobs. Not true - Apr. 11, 2017 (http://money.cnn.com/2017/04/11/news/economy/donald-trump-jobs/index.html)

[cologal]

Now the jobs reports for May: 138,000

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/02/nonfarm-payrolls-may-2017.html

[ColdNoMore]

So benevolent when posting above the Political Talk border and so consistently acerbic below .

Why is that ?

I thought that with your little vacation, you would have figured a way to evict me from living rent free...in your empty head. :D


Apparently not. :1rotfl:



Deepest Sincere Wishes: :wave:

[MDLNB]

I thought that with your little vacation, you would have figured a way to evict me from living rent free...in your empty head. :D


Apparently not. :1rotfl:



Deepest Sincere Wishes: :wave:

You seem to be better now. You feel better after having that breakdown the other day? Hope so. Did you shake your head around a lot to get rid of those that live rent free in YOUR head? :pepper2:

[MDLNB]

Trump says he created 600,000 jobs. Not true - Apr. 11, 2017 (http://money.cnn.com/2017/04/11/news/economy/donald-trump-jobs/index.html)

I seem to remember when Obama first took office and shut down hundreds of car dealerships during the auto industry bail out, causing tens of thousands to lose their jobs. Trump has been adding jobs, thousands of jobs, hundreds of thousands of future jobs, maybe even millions. Private industry jobs, not like the gov jobs and part-time jobs that Obama claims to have created. By the way, there were more Americans in the work force in 2000 than there is now. There are more at the poverty level now than when Obama took office. More on food stamps. Other than hinder economic growth, what did Obama do that was helpful to America?
I plan to give Trump a chance and so far he is doing a pretty good job.

[cologal]

I seem to remember when Obama first took office and shut down hundreds of car dealerships during the auto industry bail out, causing tens of thousands to lose their jobs. Trump has been adding jobs, thousands of jobs, hundreds of thousands of future jobs, maybe even millions. Private industry jobs, not like the gov jobs and part-time jobs that Obama claims to have created. By the way, there were more Americans in the work force in 2000 than there is now. There are more at the poverty level now than when Obama took office. More on food stamps. Other than hinder economic growth, what did Obama do that was helpful to America?
I plan to give Trump a chance and so far he is doing a pretty good job.

How many jobs has he created so far?

[MDLNB]

How many jobs has he created so far?

Do we include the hundreds of thousands that he created before he was elected? How many did Obama ever create, other than at Solyndra?

[wjboyer1]

i seem to remember when obama first took office and shut down hundreds of car dealerships during the auto industry bail out, causing tens of thousands to lose their jobs. Trump has been adding jobs, thousands of jobs, hundreds of thousands of future jobs, maybe even millions. Private industry jobs, not like the gov jobs and part-time jobs that obama claims to have created. By the way, there were more americans in the work force in 2000 than there is now. There are more at the poverty level now than when obama took office. More on food stamps. Other than hinder economic growth, what did obama do that was helpful to america?
I plan to give trump a chance and so far he is doing a pretty good job.

69125

[cologal]

Do we include the hundreds of thousands that he created before he was elected? How many did Obama ever create, other than at Solyndra?

in other words

YOU GOT NOTHING!!!

[Rockyrd]

in other words

YOU GOT NOTHING!!!

If we are speaking of Trump, he has created ZERO jobs..nada/

That is not meant I do not fervently hope he creates a zillion new jobs, but there are very few jobs open now or just created that came from anything he has done or said. Keeping up with his claims is like.,,,,,well...keeping up with his claims.

A real job producing president would tell you that it cannot be done as a quick fix. It just cannot be done. I dont know if anyone else posted this but......from last Friday.....

"During the transition period between Election Day and Inauguration Day, Donald Trump claimed one notable achievement. The Republican, following through on a promise he made on the campaign trail, announced in late November that he’d reached an agreement with Carrier that would keep hundreds of jobs in Indiana.

It sounded great, but even at the time, the boasts came with fine print. Trump exaggerated the number of jobs saved, rewarded a company with taxpayer money that was closing a plant and shipping jobs to Mexico, and fudged the facts about how many of the saved jobs will be eliminated anyway.

The Washington Post reported this week that, six months after the president’s most important economic accomplishment, Trump’s victory is starting to look like a failure.
Carrier, the company President Trump pledged to keep on American soil, informed the state of Indiana this week that it will soon begin cutting 632 workers from an Indianapolis factory. The manufacturing jobs will move to Monterrey, Mexico, where the minimum wage is $3.90 per day.

That was never supposed to happen, according to Trump’s campaign promises. He told Indiana residents at a rally last year there was a “100 percent chance” he would save the jobs at the heating and air-conditioning manufacturer.

Trump's boasts about jobs saved at Carrier start to evaporate | MSNBC (http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/trumps-boasts-about-jobs-saved-carrier-start-evaporate)

This is not a criticism except of his big mouth but he should take his own advice and work at it.....it takes time, sometimes a long time but again.....he is a real estate developer period.

And I hope he can create jobs, but at least give us some credit for knowing you cannot wave a wand. He has not passed any legislation to make it better to create jobs and he has no political capital to spend.

[MDLNB]

Whatever you say, libtards. You can live in your make believe world of socialist Utopia, but you will just continue to lose. Stats for the last 8 years are availible to prove what I said about Obummer's failure. Lets see you prove anything regarding Trump. Even when you make up your conspiracies and investigate, you can't even come up with a crime that he violated. Have fun playing wack a mole with yourselves, while Trump saves us money and creates jobs. Sorry if he is not interested in creating more poverty and welfare like Obama was so successful doing.

[cologal]

Whatever you say, libtards. You can live in your make believe world of socialist Utopia, but you will just continue to lose. Stats for the last 8 years are availible to prove what I said about Obummer's failure. Lets see you prove anything regarding Trump. Even when you make up your conspiracies and investigate, you can't even come up with a crime that he violated. Have fun playing wack a mole with yourselves, while Trump saves us money and creates jobs. Sorry if he is not interested in creating more poverty and welfare like Obama was so successful doing.

Name calling is for losers, I come direct from the corporate world, no socialist here.

Did you forget what happened in fall when Obama was elected....

It was the Great Economic Collapse:

The Impact of the September 2008 Economic Collapse (http://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/reports/2010/04/28/the-impact-of-the-september-2008-economic-collapse)

Bush was the President at that time and had been for nearly 8 years.

So what has Trump done so far?

You say he has saved us money.. How? His new Healthcare plan hasn't seen the light of day in the Senate and is in the hands of the Republican Senators.

How many jobs has he created. The jobs report out today was 138,000. Do you have a different number?

[autumnspring]

Carrier announces timeline for eliminating Indianapolis jobs (http://www.wndu.com/content/news/Carrier-announces-timeline-for-eliminating-Indianapolis-jobs-423809014.html)

Fact Checking Donald Trump’s Job Creation Claims
Fact Checking Donald Trump'''s Job Creation Claims - NBC News (http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/fact-check-how-many-jobs-has-trump-created-n730236)

President Trump Likes Taking Credit for Jobs. Here Are the Facts
Trump Jobs: How Many the President Actually Created | Fortune.com (http://fortune.com/2017/03/29/president-trump-job-claims-fact-check/)

No, Trump Has Not Created 600,000 Jobs Since Becoming President (http://www.newsweek.com/trump-600000-jobs-582704)

When, you need a replacement buy TRANE. Your AC only lasts an average of ten years.

[Rockyrd]

Name calling is for losers, I come direct from the corporate world, no socialist here.

Did you forget what happened in fall when Obama was elected....

It was the Great Economic Collapse:

The Impact of the September 2008 Economic Collapse (http://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/reports/2010/04/28/the-impact-of-the-september-2008-economic-collapse)

Bush was the President at that time and had been for nearly 8 years.

So what has Trump done so far?

You say he has saved us money.. How? His new Healthcare plan hasn't seen the light of day in the Senate and is in the hands of the Republican Senators.

How many jobs has he created. The jobs report out today was 138,000. Do you have a different number?

You are correct on all points.

As you probably know, I am not a Trump guy.

I said on this forum more than once, however that his only chance at success in in the economic realm, i.e. Jobs and the economy.

It is much to early to judge him good or bad, but he has this investigation hanging over the White House (of his own making so he cannot point fingers,..well, he's Trump so he will) and any legislation he needs is just sitting still. I am afraid he isn't going to get anything going until the investigation is over, and that could take months.

Not only that, but his personal actions are not ever going to get support from anywhere but the right, and that is weakened. The reaction from corporate America on the climate accord is stunning, and could cost him some cooperation on that front. I think the mayor of Pittsburgh's reaction should alarm the GOP.

But, to your point, I strongly supported Bush but the economy was really a mess at the end, and admittedly Obama inherited a mess of massive proportions. People do forget that fact, but it is a fact and is under appreciated.

[Sandtrap328]

It is so hilarious. When President Obama was in office and the unemployment rate went down, the Republicans would always say that is because so many job seekers just gave up looking for jobs or took meaningless jobs.

Now, So-Called President Trump is in office. The unemployment rate ticks down and it is because Trump created more jobs and is making America great.

In the words of the Korean War hero, Colonel Sherman T. Potter, "Meadow Muffins!"

[Buffalo Jim]

No I don't wonder why jobs leave the country, I have worked for venture capitalists. I have watched a company be hollowed outed and then dressed up for a sale. I have watched every year as we waited for the Christmas massacre. In fact I took a package to retire just to save someone on my teams job. You didn't work for a company whose CEO who was listed a one of the worst CEO's in the country! And then watched him get a 17 million dollar package to leave!

Obviously you have no idea on what it is like to work in the modern workforce.

WoW ! Your experience sounds Horrible ! How many years were you forced to work for this evil company ? And on top of it you had to accept the salary , bonuses and benefits they forced onto you .
But finally you were able to escape their clutches and thru your benevolence you were able to save someone`s job !
You should be put up for Saint-hood !!

[cologal]

WoW ! Your experience sounds Horrible ! How many years were you forced to work for this evil company ? And on top of it you had to accept the salary , bonuses and benefits they forced onto you .
But finally you were able to escape their clutches and thru your benevolence you were able to save someone`s job !
You should be put up for Saint-hood !!

Hey Thanks sounds just about right! Except for 1 thing it was the last 4-5 years that was bad. Once all the Beckman trained managers were gone. And Scott Garrett was the guy in charge at the time.

Here is an article about Scott Garrett.

Beckman Coulter's CEO Resigns - WSJ (https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748704358904575477372655582894)

[Rockyrd]

You have to admit this is at least smile inducing.

"President Donald Trump on Thursday praised a Republican tax-reform bill that "is moving along in Congress," though Congress is not yet considering a tax plan.

"Our tax bill is moving along in Congress, and I believe it's doing very well. I think a lot of people will be very pleasantly surprised," the president said as he announced his plan to take the United States out of the Paris climate agreement."

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/01/trump-cites-nonexistent-tax-bill-that-is-moving-along-in-congress.html

[MDLNB]

You have to admit this is at least smile inducing.

"President Donald Trump on Thursday praised a Republican tax-reform bill that "is moving along in Congress," though Congress is not yet considering a tax plan.

"Our tax bill is moving along in Congress, and I believe it's doing very well. I think a lot of people will be very pleasantly surprised," the president said as he announced his plan to take the United States out of the Paris climate agreement."

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/01/trump-cites-nonexistent-tax-bill-that-is-moving-along-in-congress.html

Wow, cnbc is quite the authority! Before posting, try Google. You know, the liberal search engine that even has facts if you dig enough?

[Chi-Town]

Wow, cnbc is quite the authority! Before posting, try Google. You know, the liberal search engine that even has facts if you dig enough?
Well, there's always the go to source ......Fox Business.[emoji3]

Sent from my SM-T310 using Tapatalk

[MDLNB]

Name calling is for losers, I come direct from the corporate world, no socialist here.

Did you forget what happened in fall when Obama was elected....

It was the Great Economic Collapse:

The Impact of the September 2008 Economic Collapse (http://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/reports/2010/04/28/the-impact-of-the-september-2008-economic-collapse)

Bush was the President at that time and had been for nearly 8 years.

So what has Trump done so far?

You say he has saved us money.. How? His new Healthcare plan hasn't seen the light of day in the Senate and is in the hands of the Republican Senators.

How many jobs has he created. The jobs report out today was 138,000. Do you have a different number?

Libard is a descriptor, a correctly defined label. If I called someone a Democrat, that would be generalizing, so I accurately segregate the Democrats into smaller defined groups, such as Leftard, Libtard, socialist, commies and when showing my respect, I use the label Democrat. I consider Joe Manchin a Democrat.

But, to the point. Bush was president for 8 years, correct. The last two years he had a democrat majority congress. Right? Until that point, Bush had such a low unemployment rate, that economists said it qualified as total employment. Two years before the liberal takeover of congress.

Now, Obama bragged about creating jobs, but the fact is that Bush had a glass full and Obama started with a glass half full. Bush did not NEED to create jobs, and all the jobs that supposedly gained during Obama was still NEVER enough to create a glass FULL. In other words, there were more folks out of the work force during Obama's whole tenure than anytime during Bush's. Obama left office with a record high poverty rate, record high food stamps, and still more folks not working than during Bush. So, if anyone wants to dispute those general numbers they can look them up on government websites such as CBO, TreasuryDirect, or BOL.

SO, to get back to Trump. Trump has created private sector jobs by his negotiations. Of course, he has experience that Obama never had, so Trump was used to creating jobs. After all, Trump had tens of thousands working for him.

Whether or not you wish to acknowledge the truth is totally up to you. I have backed up my statements regarding stats plenty times in the past and I do not see the point in the effort if you are too lazy to look at past posts.

By the way, the only private sector jobs Obama created were at a now bankrupt solar panel company.. And even those do not out number all the thousands he eliminated when he immediately closed auto dealerships, up his entering office.

Once you libtards get over attacking Trump for imaginary crimes, he will be able to do even more than he is currently getting done.

[Rockyrd]

Well, there's always the go to source ......Fox Business.[emoji3]

Sent from my SM-T310 using Tapatalk

"Congress has yet to unveil a plan to overhaul the U.S. tax code -- another Trump campaign promise -- even though the president recently tweeted that the plan is ahead of schedule."

Spending bills, debt ceiling complicate Hill Republicans efforts on taxes, ObamaCare | Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/06/03/spending-bills-debt-ceiling-complicate-hill-republicans-efforts-on-taxes-obamacare.html)

[wjboyer1]

Libard is a descriptor, a correctly defined label. If I called someone a Democrat, that would be generalizing, so I accurately segregate the Democrats into smaller defined groups, such as Leftard, Libtard, socialist, commies and when showing my respect, I use the label Democrat. I consider Joe Manchin a Democrat.

But, to the point. Bush was president for 8 years, correct. The last two years he had a democrat majority congress. Right? Until that point, Bush had such a low unemployment rate, that economists said it qualified as total employment. Two years before the liberal takeover of congress.

The economic instability after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks helped fuel a rise in the unemployment rate. It declined in June 2003 through the summer and fall of 2007 before rising sharply in 2008, peaking at 7.8 percent at the time Bush left office. Congress had nothing to do with the economic collapse, Wall Street was the culprit. US economy was floating on the tech bubble, which happened to pop while Bush was in office. And near the end of Bush's second term, deep structural problems in the economy and global fears fueled the recession.President George W. Bush inherited 4.2 percent unemployment in January 2001. That rate had grown to 7.8 percent when he left office eight years later and hit 8.3 percent in the first full month of Obama's presidency.

Now, Obama bragged about creating jobs, but the fact is that Bush had a glass full and Obama started with a glass half full. Bush did not NEED to create jobs, and all the jobs that supposedly gained during Obama was still NEVER enough to create a glass FULL. In other words, there were more folks out of the work force during Obama's whole tenure than anytime during Bush's. Obama left office with a record high poverty rate, record high food stamps, and still more folks not working than during Bush. So, if anyone wants to dispute those general numbers they can look them up on government websites such as CBO, TreasuryDirect, or BOL.

When Obama assumed office, the unemployment rate was still rising sharply. It topped out at 10 percent in October 2009, hovering just below that level for the next year, before beginning a steady decline at the end of 2010 that has persisted into early-2016 and breaking through the 5 percent mark at the beginning of 2016.


SO, to get back to Trump. Trump has created private sector jobs by his negotiations. Of course, he has experience that Obama never had, so Trump was used to creating jobs. After all, Trump had tens of thousands working for him.

Whether or not you wish to acknowledge the truth is totally up to you. I have backed up my statements regarding stats plenty times in the past and I do not see the point in the effort if you are too lazy to look at past posts.

By the way, the only private sector jobs Obama created were at a now bankrupt solar panel company.. And even those do not out number all the thousands he eliminated when he immediately closed auto dealerships, up his entering office.

Once you libtards get over attacking Trump for imaginary crimes, he will be able to do even more than he is currently getting done.

President Trump Likes Taking Credit for Jobs. Here Are the Facts: fortune.com/2017/03/29/president-trump-job-claims-fact-check/

The facts: Trump offered no further details or evidence for his claim that "millions of jobs" were created, and nothing happened during his trip that could come close to backing up such an assertion.

Trump signed a $110 billion arms deal with Saudi Arabia last week. As part of the deal, which still needs approval from Congress, Saudi Arabia "expressed its intent" to spend $28 billion on defense technologies and programs by Lockheed Martin, which estimated the deal would support 18,000 jobs in the U.S. over 30 years — a figure that falls dramatically below Trump's estimate.
"Once fully realized, the programs in this announcement will support more than 18,000 highly skilled jobs in the U.S. and thousands of jobs in Saudi Arabia as part of maintaining and modernizing these platforms over the next 30 years," Lockheed Martin said in a statement on May 20.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 533,000 jobs were added to the U.S. economy during the months of January, February and March in 2017. While that number is lower than Trump's estimation, it's also important to note that Trump's term did not begin until noon on Jan. 20, which means he can't accurately claim credit for all 216,000 jobs created in January. In February and March, alone, 317,000 jobs were created — a more accurate measure of Trump's influence.

Toyota said April 10 that it would invest $1.3 billion in its plant in Georgetown, Kentucky. But the move is part of a previously announced plan to invest $10 billion in the U.S. The investment also will not create new jobs, though Toyota highlighted the previously announced addition of 700 jobs at the plant. When asked if the Trump administration's policies affected Toyota's decision, a company spokesperson told the New York Times they had not. "No, but we do share his goal of growing the economy and jobs in the U.S.," company spokesperson Scott Vazin said. The company's update on April 10 came after Trump criticized Toyota and threatened the automaker with a "big border tax" if it followed through on plans to build a plant in Mexico.

Ford said it will invest $1.2 billion in three manufacturing facilities in Michigan — a plan that will create or retain 130 jobs at one of the plants. But as Reuters reported, the project is part of a 2015 negotiation with the United Auto Workers union — not a direct result of Trump's recent meeting with auto executives. Tuesday's announcement introduced new details about the previously planned investment. "These Michigan Assembly Plant and Romeo Engine plant announcements are consistent with what we agreed to and talked about with the UAW in 2015 negotiations," Joe Hinrichs, Ford's president of the Americas, told the Detroit Free Press.

While Charter CEO Tom Rutledge credited the "right regulatory climate and right tax climate" for the investment, the company had already announced its intention to add 20,000 jobs in May 2016. The recent announcement at the White House included more specific details about the commitment. "In connection with our transactions with Time Warner Cable and Bright House Networks last year, we reaffirmed this resolve, stating that we expected to hire 20,000 new employees at Charter, many in customer service," the company said in a statement on March 24. "Today at the White House we announced the next steps in advancing our efforts to grow our in-house and insourced workforce."

General Motors did, in fact, announce the addition or retention of 900 jobs. As the Detroit Free Press noted, many of those jobs might go to 1,000 people who were recently laid off from the company’s Lansing Delta Township plant. GM did not give direct credit to Trump, but in a statement, CEO Mary Barra said the announcement is, in part, a reflection of the company’s confidence in the future of the U.S. economy. “The job commitments announced today demonstrate the confidence we have in our products, our people and an overall positive outlook for the auto industry and the U.S. economy,” she said in a statement.

This 10-year investment by Exxon, which focuses on 11 natural gas projects, began in 2013 and is expected to continue through 2022, the company said. That means it was in the works long before Trump was elected president. Still, in a statement released by the White House, Exxon CEO Darren Woods thanked Trump for his commitment to growing business. “Investments of this scale require a pro-growth approach and a stable regulatory environment and we appreciate the President’s commitment to both,” Woods said.

It’s true that on Jan. 17, General Motors announced it would invest $1 billion in U.S. factories in 2017, creating or retaining 1,500 jobs. But General Motors spokeswoman Joanne Krell told Reuters the investment "had been in the works for some time,” so Trump’s claim that the initiative was entirely dependent on his election is inaccurate.

While Trump took credit for Walmart’s announcement — and thanked the retailer "for starting the big jobs push back into the U.S." — Walmart had already announced in October a plan that would create 10,000 U.S. jobs, Reuters reported.

Trump’s details about Fiat’s investment in Ohio and Michigan plants — announced on Jan. 8 — are correct. But Fiat said the investment was the next phase of a previously announced plan, describing it as a “continuation of the efforts already underway to increase production capacity in the U.S. on trucks and SUVs to match demand.” The company downplayed the President’s influence on the deal. “We don’t make investment decisions based on risk of a tweet,” CEO Sergio Marchionne said, according to Bloomberg, while still thanking Trump. “We owed the country this investment,” he said.

Standing beside Trump in the Oval Office on Feb. 8, Intel CEO Brian Krzanich announced a $7 billion investment to complete the company’s new Arizona factory, which will “employ approximately 3,000 direct high-paying, high-wage, high-tech jobs at its peak, and over 10,000 people in the Arizona area in support of the factory.” Asked at the time how long he had been planning the investment, Krzanich said, “We've been working on this factory for several years. We held off actually doing this investment until now.” He gave credit to the Trump Administration’s tax and regulatory policies. But in 2011, Intel made a $5 billion investment to begin building the same Arizona factory, announcing the plans during a visit from then-President Barack Obama. The company later halted construction due to lack of demand for the product, an Intel spokesman told CNN Money. The spokesman said the more recent investment comes as the company expects demand to increase again.

A spokeswoman for Amgen confirmed to the Los Angeles Times that the company plans to hire 1,600 people across the U.S. in 2017 — some of which will be new positions and some of which will make up for attrition. This comes after the company announced in 2014 that it would cut 2,900 jobs, Bloomberg reported.

Most of these investment initiatives were in the works before Trump was elected. As Factcheck.org has pointed out, there are no Lockheed Martin jobs “coming back” to the United States, but there are new jobs being created as part of a contract for more F-35 planes. As for General Motors and Ford, their plans were set in motion before Trump was elected, and the companies said the decisions were not influenced by politics but by market forces.

Trump's tweet followed Ford’s announcement that it would cancel plans to build a $1.6 billion plant in Mexico, saying it would invest $4.5 billion in building electric cars in the U.S. — which will add 700 new jobs. Ford’s CEO explained the move by pointing to decreasing demand for small cars, which the Mexico plant would have built. He noted that he expects there to be a “more positive U.S. manufacturing business environment under President-elect Trump,” but he said he “absolutely” would have done the same thing if Trump had not been elected. Notably, this is a different Ford plant in Mexico than the two plants that Trump repeatedly criticized on the campaign trail. The $2.6 billion plan for those plants remains intact.

This was the result of a previous announcement. Sprint initially said that these jobs were part of the previously announced 50,000-job commitment by Japan’s SoftBank — which owns about 80% of Sprint. While Sprint’s CEO said it had “nothing to do with previously announced Sprint initiatives," it appears that only the details of the initiative were new in December. The 5,000 Sprint jobs were still part of the total 50,000 pledge, as were the 3,000 OneWeb jobs.

Son told the Wall Street Journal that this money will come from a $100 billion technology investment fund that he announced in October 2016, before Trump's election. His specific pledge to create 50,000 American jobs came in December, but plans for the investment preceded Trump’s involvement, even though he claimed full credit.

[cologal]

Libard is a descriptor, a correctly defined label. If I called someone a Democrat, that would be generalizing, so I accurately segregate the Democrats into smaller defined groups, such as Leftard, Libtard, socialist, commies and when showing my respect, I use the label Democrat. I consider Joe Manchin a Democrat.

But, to the point. Bush was president for 8 years, correct. The last two years he had a democrat majority congress. Right? Until that point, Bush had such a low unemployment rate, that economists said it qualified as total employment. Two years before the liberal takeover of congress.

Now, Obama bragged about creating jobs, but the fact is that Bush had a glass full and Obama started with a glass half full. Bush did not NEED to create jobs, and all the jobs that supposedly gained during Obama was still NEVER enough to create a glass FULL. In other words, there were more folks out of the work force during Obama's whole tenure than anytime during Bush's. Obama left office with a record high poverty rate, record high food stamps, and still more folks not working than during Bush. So, if anyone wants to dispute those general numbers they can look them up on government websites such as CBO, TreasuryDirect, or BOL.

SO, to get back to Trump. Trump has created private sector jobs by his negotiations. Of course, he has experience that Obama never had, so Trump was used to creating jobs. After all, Trump had tens of thousands working for him.

Whether or not you wish to acknowledge the truth is totally up to you. I have backed up my statements regarding stats plenty times in the past and I do not see the point in the effort if you are too lazy to look at past posts.

By the way, the only private sector jobs Obama created were at a now bankrupt solar panel company.. And even those do not out number all the thousands he eliminated when he immediately closed auto dealerships, up his entering office.

Once you libtards get over attacking Trump for imaginary crimes, he will be able to do even more than he is currently getting done.

GW Bush plunged this country into economic ruin by:

1. Getting us into 2 wars with countries who did not attack us. And one is still ongoing, my nephew is in country now.
2. Went back into the well to use trickle down economics which is the ridiculous notion that if you cut taxes for the rich and corporations it will trickle down the poor. It didn't work for Reagan and it didn't work for Bush either.
3. Mortgage crisis that hit in the fall most of the mortgages were not worth the paper they were written on.

When Bush left office the economy was in free fall and it wasn't because the Democrats.

Obama created 10.8 million jobs during his 8 years.

When Bush took office the unemployment rate was 4.2, when he left office it was 7.8, when Obama left office 4.7

Bush vs. Obama on the Economy, In 3 Simple Charts [UPDATED] (https://ourfuture.org/20141208/bush-vs-obama-on-the-economy-in-3-simple-charts)

[ColdNoMore]

The economic instability after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks helped fuel a rise in the unemployment rate. It declined in June 2003 through the summer and fall of 2007 before rising sharply in 2008, peaking at 7.8 percent at the time Bush left office. Congress had nothing to do with the economic collapse, Wall Street was the culprit. US economy was floating on the tech bubble, which happened to pop while Bush was in office. And near the end of Bush's second term, deep structural problems in the economy and global fears fueled the recession.President George W. Bush inherited 4.2 percent unemployment in January 2001. That rate had grown to 7.8 percent when he left office eight years later and hit 8.3 percent in the first full month of Obama's presidency.



When Obama assumed office, the unemployment rate was still rising sharply. It topped out at 10 percent in October 2009, hovering just below that level for the next year, before beginning a steady decline at the end of 2010 that has persisted into early-2016 and breaking through the 5 percent mark at the beginning of 2016.




President Trump Likes Taking Credit for Jobs. Here Are the Facts: fortune.com/2017/03/29/president-trump-job-claims-fact-check/

The facts: Trump offered no further details or evidence for his claim that "millions of jobs" were created, and nothing happened during his trip that could come close to backing up such an assertion.

Trump signed a $110 billion arms deal with Saudi Arabia last week. As part of the deal, which still needs approval from Congress, Saudi Arabia "expressed its intent" to spend $28 billion on defense technologies and programs by Lockheed Martin, which estimated the deal would support 18,000 jobs in the U.S. over 30 years — a figure that falls dramatically below Trump's estimate.
"Once fully realized, the programs in this announcement will support more than 18,000 highly skilled jobs in the U.S. and thousands of jobs in Saudi Arabia as part of maintaining and modernizing these platforms over the next 30 years," Lockheed Martin said in a statement on May 20.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 533,000 jobs were added to the U.S. economy during the months of January, February and March in 2017. While that number is lower than Trump's estimation, it's also important to note that Trump's term did not begin until noon on Jan. 20, which means he can't accurately claim credit for all 216,000 jobs created in January. In February and March, alone, 317,000 jobs were created — a more accurate measure of Trump's influence.

Toyota said April 10 that it would invest $1.3 billion in its plant in Georgetown, Kentucky. But the move is part of a previously announced plan to invest $10 billion in the U.S. The investment also will not create new jobs, though Toyota highlighted the previously announced addition of 700 jobs at the plant. When asked if the Trump administration's policies affected Toyota's decision, a company spokesperson told the New York Times they had not. "No, but we do share his goal of growing the economy and jobs in the U.S.," company spokesperson Scott Vazin said. The company's update on April 10 came after Trump criticized Toyota and threatened the automaker with a "big border tax" if it followed through on plans to build a plant in Mexico.

Ford said it will invest $1.2 billion in three manufacturing facilities in Michigan — a plan that will create or retain 130 jobs at one of the plants. But as Reuters reported, the project is part of a 2015 negotiation with the United Auto Workers union — not a direct result of Trump's recent meeting with auto executives. Tuesday's announcement introduced new details about the previously planned investment. "These Michigan Assembly Plant and Romeo Engine plant announcements are consistent with what we agreed to and talked about with the UAW in 2015 negotiations," Joe Hinrichs, Ford's president of the Americas, told the Detroit Free Press.

While Charter CEO Tom Rutledge credited the "right regulatory climate and right tax climate" for the investment, the company had already announced its intention to add 20,000 jobs in May 2016. The recent announcement at the White House included more specific details about the commitment. "In connection with our transactions with Time Warner Cable and Bright House Networks last year, we reaffirmed this resolve, stating that we expected to hire 20,000 new employees at Charter, many in customer service," the company said in a statement on March 24. "Today at the White House we announced the next steps in advancing our efforts to grow our in-house and insourced workforce."

General Motors did, in fact, announce the addition or retention of 900 jobs. As the Detroit Free Press noted, many of those jobs might go to 1,000 people who were recently laid off from the company’s Lansing Delta Township plant. GM did not give direct credit to Trump, but in a statement, CEO Mary Barra said the announcement is, in part, a reflection of the company’s confidence in the future of the U.S. economy. “The job commitments announced today demonstrate the confidence we have in our products, our people and an overall positive outlook for the auto industry and the U.S. economy,” she said in a statement.

This 10-year investment by Exxon, which focuses on 11 natural gas projects, began in 2013 and is expected to continue through 2022, the company said. That means it was in the works long before Trump was elected president. Still, in a statement released by the White House, Exxon CEO Darren Woods thanked Trump for his commitment to growing business. “Investments of this scale require a pro-growth approach and a stable regulatory environment and we appreciate the President’s commitment to both,” Woods said.

It’s true that on Jan. 17, General Motors announced it would invest $1 billion in U.S. factories in 2017, creating or retaining 1,500 jobs. But General Motors spokeswoman Joanne Krell told Reuters the investment "had been in the works for some time,” so Trump’s claim that the initiative was entirely dependent on his election is inaccurate.

While Trump took credit for Walmart’s announcement — and thanked the retailer "for starting the big jobs push back into the U.S." — Walmart had already announced in October a plan that would create 10,000 U.S. jobs, Reuters reported.

Trump’s details about Fiat’s investment in Ohio and Michigan plants — announced on Jan. 8 — are correct. But Fiat said the investment was the next phase of a previously announced plan, describing it as a “continuation of the efforts already underway to increase production capacity in the U.S. on trucks and SUVs to match demand.” The company downplayed the President’s influence on the deal. “We don’t make investment decisions based on risk of a tweet,” CEO Sergio Marchionne said, according to Bloomberg, while still thanking Trump. “We owed the country this investment,” he said.

Standing beside Trump in the Oval Office on Feb. 8, Intel CEO Brian Krzanich announced a $7 billion investment to complete the company’s new Arizona factory, which will “employ approximately 3,000 direct high-paying, high-wage, high-tech jobs at its peak, and over 10,000 people in the Arizona area in support of the factory.” Asked at the time how long he had been planning the investment, Krzanich said, “We've been working on this factory for several years. We held off actually doing this investment until now.” He gave credit to the Trump Administration’s tax and regulatory policies. But in 2011, Intel made a $5 billion investment to begin building the same Arizona factory, announcing the plans during a visit from then-President Barack Obama. The company later halted construction due to lack of demand for the product, an Intel spokesman told CNN Money. The spokesman said the more recent investment comes as the company expects demand to increase again.

A spokeswoman for Amgen confirmed to the Los Angeles Times that the company plans to hire 1,600 people across the U.S. in 2017 — some of which will be new positions and some of which will make up for attrition. This comes after the company announced in 2014 that it would cut 2,900 jobs, Bloomberg reported.

Most of these investment initiatives were in the works before Trump was elected. As Factcheck.org has pointed out, there are no Lockheed Martin jobs “coming back” to the United States, but there are new jobs being created as part of a contract for more F-35 planes. As for General Motors and Ford, their plans were set in motion before Trump was elected, and the companies said the decisions were not influenced by politics but by market forces.

Trump's tweet followed Ford’s announcement that it would cancel plans to build a $1.6 billion plant in Mexico, saying it would invest $4.5 billion in building electric cars in the U.S. — which will add 700 new jobs. Ford’s CEO explained the move by pointing to decreasing demand for small cars, which the Mexico plant would have built. He noted that he expects there to be a “more positive U.S. manufacturing business environment under President-elect Trump,” but he said he “absolutely” would have done the same thing if Trump had not been elected. Notably, this is a different Ford plant in Mexico than the two plants that Trump repeatedly criticized on the campaign trail. The $2.6 billion plan for those plants remains intact.

This was the result of a previous announcement. Sprint initially said that these jobs were part of the previously announced 50,000-job commitment by Japan’s SoftBank — which owns about 80% of Sprint. While Sprint’s CEO said it had “nothing to do with previously announced Sprint initiatives," it appears that only the details of the initiative were new in December. The 5,000 Sprint jobs were still part of the total 50,000 pledge, as were the 3,000 OneWeb jobs.

Son told the Wall Street Journal that this money will come from a $100 billion technology investment fund that he announced in October 2016, before Trump's election. His specific pledge to create 50,000 American jobs came in December, but plans for the investment preceded Trump’s involvement, even though he claimed full credit.

:BigApplause:

Way too many facts for the ignorant right to comprehend, so while I applaud your attempt at educating them, I'm not holding much hope that the majority of them will understand/comprehend what actual facts are...so get ready for the personal attacks from their anger at being embarrassed. :oops:

Good try though. :thumbup:

[MDLNB]

GW Bush plunged this country into economic ruin by:

1. Getting us into 2 wars with countries who did not attack us. And one is still ongoing, my nephew is in country now.
2. Went back into the well to use trickle down economics which is the ridiculous notion that if you cut taxes for the rich and corporations it will trickle down the poor. It didn't work for Reagan and it didn't work for Bush either.
3. Mortgage crisis that hit in the fall most of the mortgages were not worth the paper they were written on.

When Bush left office the economy was in free fall and it wasn't because the Democrats.

Obama created 10.8 million jobs during his 8 years.

When Bush took office the unemployment rate was 4.2, when he left office it was 7.8, when Obama left office 4.7

Bush vs. Obama on the Economy, In 3 Simple Charts [UPDATED] (https://ourfuture.org/20141208/bush-vs-obama-on-the-economy-in-3-simple-charts)

Polishing a turd is working good for you.

Tell you what, I'll make it easy for you. IF Bush had what is considered FULL employment, at least until the Dems took control of congress, why would he NEED to create more jobs? I'm sure that a glass full is better than a glass half full. SO, Obama supposedly created jobs, which is over exaggerated because if he created so many jobs the out of work force number would not be so high. Tell me why there are more folks on poverty, food stamps, etc than when he took office?

Out of work force 2008= 79 million
Out of work force 2017 = 94.4 million

Living in poverty 2008 = 38.3 million
Living in poverty 2017 = 42.3 million

Food stamps 2008 = 30.4 million
Food stamps 2017 = 41.7 million

Tell me again how great Obama was? He was an amateur that was way over his head during a bad time, and wouldn't take any good advice from the experts. But, you go ahead blame Bush, because turn about is fair play. I blame Obama for such a SLOW recovery.

[ColdNoMore]

GW Bush plunged this country into economic ruin by:

1. Getting us into 2 wars with countries who did not attack us. And one is still ongoing, my nephew is in country now.
2. Went back into the well to use trickle down economics which is the ridiculous notion that if you cut taxes for the rich and corporations it will trickle down the poor. It didn't work for Reagan and it didn't work for Bush either.
3. Mortgage crisis that hit in the fall most of the mortgages were not worth the paper they were written on.

When Bush left office the economy was in free fall and it wasn't because the Democrats.

Obama created 10.8 million jobs during his 8 years.

When Bush took office the unemployment rate was 4.2, when he left office it was 7.8, when Obama left office 4.7

Bush vs. Obama on the Economy, In 3 Simple Charts [UPDATED] (https://ourfuture.org/20141208/bush-vs-obama-on-the-economy-in-3-simple-charts)

Now you've went and done it. :oops:

Throwing actual facts at so many on the right, has the same effect...of waving a red cape at a charging bull.

They will put their heads down, charge out of pure emotion/anger and become more and more frustrated...at their lack of an effective result. :1rotfl:

Good job. :thumbup:

[ColdNoMore]

Now you've went and done it. :oops:

Throwing actual facts at so many on the right, has the same effect...of waving a red cape at a charging bull.

They will put their heads down, charge out of pure emotion/anger and become more and more frustrated...at their lack of an effective result. :1rotfl:

Good job. :thumbup:

Polishing a turd is working good for you.

Tell you what, I'll make it easy for you. IF Bush had what is considered FULL employment, at least until the Dems took control of congress, why would he NEED to create more jobs? I'm sure that a glass full is better than a glass half full. SO, Obama supposedly created jobs, which is over exaggerated because if he created so many jobs the out of work force number would not be so high. Tell me why there are more folks on poverty, food stamps, etc than when he took office?

Out of work force 2008= 79 million
Out of work force 2017 = 94.4 million

Living in poverty 2008 = 38.3 million
Living in poverty 2017 = 42.3 million

Food stamps 2008 = 30.4 million
Food stamps 2017 = 41.7 million

Tell me again how great Obama was? He was an amateur that was way over his head during a bad time, and wouldn't take any good advice from the experts. But, you go ahead blame Bush, because turn about is fair play. I blame Obama for such a SLOW recovery.


Wow, that happened even quicker than I imagined. :1rotfl:

[cologal]

Polishing a turd is working good for you.

Tell you what, I'll make it easy for you. IF Bush had what is considered FULL employment, at least until the Dems took control of congress, why would he NEED to create more jobs? I'm sure that a glass full is better than a glass half full. SO, Obama supposedly created jobs, which is over exaggerated because if he created so many jobs the out of work force number would not be so high. Tell me why there are more folks on poverty, food stamps, etc than when he took office?

Out of work force 2008= 79 million
Out of work force 2017 = 94.4 million

Living in poverty 2008 = 38.3 million
Living in poverty 2017 = 42.3 million

Food stamps 2008 = 30.4 million
Food stamps 2017 = 41.7 million

Tell me again how great Obama was? He was an amateur that was way over his head during a bad time, and wouldn't take any good advice from the experts. But, you go ahead blame Bush, because turn about is fair play. I blame Obama for such a SLOW recovery.

You haven't posted anything to backup your claims.

Let's start with just one..... Post a link a Forbes or something that Bush obtained FULL EMPLOYMENT!

[wjboyer1]

you haven't posted anything to backup your claims.

Let's start with just one..... Post a link a forbes or something that bush obtained full employment!

he didn't

[Don Baldwin]

he didn't

Neither did Obama...in fact Obama made it worse...replacing full time with part time.

There has never been more "out of the workforce" than there is now.

[cologal]

Neither did Obama...in fact Obama made it worse...replacing full time with part time.

There has never been more "out of the workforce" than there is now.

Ok so you agree that Bush didn't get to full employment.

Can you provide a link to that?

[cologal]

This will make Rockyard's head explode but I found this little nugget:

Jobs report: Has the U.S. finally reached full employment? | Fortune.com (http://fortune.com/2015/03/05/jobs-report-full-employment/)

Read it and weep!

[wjboyer1]

This nugget will make Rockyard's head explode but I found this little nugget:

Jobs report: Has the U.S. finally reached full employment? | Fortune.com (http://fortune.com/2015/03/05/jobs-report-full-employment/)

Read it and weep!

QUOTE FROM THAT ARTICLE: Determining the natural rate of unemployment is a tough task. The current official unemployment rate sits at 5.7%, versus an average of 6.1% over the past 25 years. In its most recent estimate, the Federal Reserve has placed full employment at somewhere between 5.2% and 5.5%, which means that it's possible, though unlikely, that the economy will officially hit that mark