October Surprise?

[777 fixer]

Yeah, Barack is doing pretty good himself.

Wonder how things would have played out in Afghanistan if all the effort, manpower and money that the Bush Adminstration dumped into Iraq had gone into the before mentioned country. Probably would have made it a lot harder for the taliban to reconstitute itself.

 

[southwind]

Wonder how things would have played out in Afghanistan if all the effort, manpower and money that the Bush Adminstration dumped into Iraq had gone into the before mentioned country. Probably would have made it a lot harder for the taliban to reconstitute itself.

Condensed version of above: "Bush's fault!"

 

[777 fixer]

Condensed version of above: "Bush's fault!"

Are you going to try and make the argument that if the same amount of effort that was put into Iraq had been put into Afghanistan the Taliban still would have made the same comeback?

 

[Knotbuyinit]

Wonder how things would have played out in Afghanistan if all the effort, manpower and money that the Bush Obama Adminstration dumped into Iraq bad green energy investments had gone into the before mentioned country. Probably would have made it a lot harder for the taliban to reconstitute itself.

Since you're day dreaming . . . .

 

[delldude]

My point is that you and others are fine when the numbers are revised to make the unemployment percentage number higher. Yet when the revision makes the number lower, you cry foul saying that somehow the 2000 different people involved in the survey all of a sudden conspired to inflate the number.

Is there any conspiracy theory that you do not believe in or perpetuate?

http://www.bls.gov/n.../empsit.nr0.htm

WSJ

The good news is that the current debate has resulted in people giving the whole issue of unemployment data more thought. Moreover, it led to some of the campaign's biggest supporters admitting that the number merited a closer look—and even expressing skepticism.
The New York Times in a Sunday editorial, for instance, acknowledged the 7.8% figure is "partly due to a statistical fluke."

Funny, all the kids going back to school and college......isn't Sept traditionally a lower employment figure month?

 

[southwind]

Err..............

 

[eolesen]

WSJ


Funny, all the kids going back to school and college......isn't Sept traditionally a lower employment figure month?

Actually, it might be something else at play...

Darden Restaurants (Red Lobster, Olive Garden) has come out and said they are now going to schedule part time workers to no more than 28 hours per week -- anything over 30 hours per week *requires* healthcare coverage under Obamacare.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/09/darden-restaurants-obamacare-part-time_n_1951103.html

Up until now, Darden has provided a "mini-Med" program for all employees who want it, but those type of "capped maximum benefit" plans are being outlawed under Obamacare.

McDonalds, Denny's, and other food chains offer similar plans.

So.....

If what Darden is looking at gets rolled out further, which is capping total hours worked at 28, then the food service industry will be adding lots more part-timers.


The lion's share of growth in the September numbers was in the areas of part-time workers. That's likely to continue.

Good news -- more jobs. Bad news -- less opportunity for FT or near-FT work.


Some liberal pundits scoffed at the idea Obamacare would wind up discouraging full-time employment as suggested by conservatives.

Now, it could be happening for real.

 

[Dog Wonder]

But the youngsters below age 26 in those jobs can be included on their parents' health insurance.

 

[eolesen]

Yippee. They just need to find two part-time jobs to pay off their loans. Good luck with that.

 

[delldude]

But the youngsters below age 26 in those jobs can be included on their parents' health insurance.

Not if Mitt wins.

 

[eolesen]

Hmmm, not so sure about that, Dell. That might wind up being a temporary stopgap until they can move out of their parent's garage or basement.

 

[southwind]

But the youngsters below age 26 in those jobs can be included on their parents' health insurance.

That's great news, especially if their parents are covered by ObamaCareTM ! Wonder what happens to said kids, if the parents have no healthcare and get hit with fines come tax time ? Are they fined not only for not having coverage on themselves, but also for not providing coverage for their "TWENTY SIX" year old, who should have left the house 4 year's ago ?

These and more questions to be answered, concerning ObamaCareTM , next April, Tax-time, if the Anointed One is still in office !

CBO Confirms: Obamacare Raises Taxes on Middle Class !

"In 2008, Obama pledged “no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase -- not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes."
The Supreme Court, by a 5-4 vote, ruled Obamacare was constitutional because it was a tax and, in so doing, ensured one of Obama's central promises from 2008 was broken. "
http://www.breitbart...On-Middle-Class

Let me be clear, no new taxes, on the middle class !

 

[Dog Wonder]

Tell it to the House of Representatives.

If you can find them.

 

[southwind]

No, really..............enlighten us all ! What happens when parent's don't have insurance and thus cannot cover their "Twenty Six" year old child ?

 

[signals]

Hasn't anyone put it together, yet? All Obamacare, or as I call it OBAMAAID, is is a way to increase the cost of medicaid at the expense of the over-taxed shmuck, er ah, middle class taxpayer. It's like paying for those welfare phones, anybody with a cell phone pays for them in a tax or fee form.

Nothing is free and only a total idiot would believe it wouldn't hit your pockets. Remember they not only raise taxes to your face, but they also subtly create taxes that you might miss.

PS My medical insurance payment is about to quadrupel, and I haven't had a raise in 3 years.