Cartoon by Parker, Florida Today
-
-
Copy & paste this:
Show Only: Democrats | Republicans | Media | Military
« Previous Neil deGrasse Tyson: AMAZING | Wonka Tightens Security At Chocolate Factory Next »
» 177 comments
Leave a Reply
-
Recent Comments
flodnak on Ballistic Marshmallows Vila Restal on Congressman Mistakes The Onion… Vila Restal on Keeping the Internet Hone… William Thompson on Vandals Cashing In keshet the adequate on Ballistic Marshmallows Dave on Must Be Blah History Mont… Kate on Keeping the Internet Hone… Kate on Keeping the Internet Hone… Kate on Keeping the Internet Hone… Deacon Blues on Spock Facepalm 
Cheezburger Company BlogPrint on Demand
More I CAN HAS CHEEZBURGER?
I Can Has Cheezburger? Home - Lolcats n Funny Pictures
Cyoot Kitteh of teh Day: My Special Snuggle Buddy
I Has A Hotdog - Loldogs n Cute Puppies
No gurls allowed
Just Capshunz - All of the Internet. Captioned
Maybe if I Stay Very Still I'll Be All Right
Animal Videos - Cute and Hilarious Animal Videos
Great Escape
Animal Gifs - Cute and Hilarious Animal Gifs
Nom Distraction
Daily Squee - So cute your brain might explode.
Two-by-Snores
Historic LOLs - Captioned Portraits of Yore
So Why Was It The Best I've Ever Had??
My Food Looks Funny - Funny Food Photos
Counteract That Yoga With Cookies
So Much Pun - Visual Puns and Jokes
SUCK IT, NOT TREBEK!
ROFLrazzi - Lol Celebs and All That's Fab Funny in Showbiz
Accurate Claim is ACCURATE
Totally Looks Like - Stuff That Looks Like Other Stuff
American Idol Kyle Crews Totally Looks Like The Big Green Patrick Reena
Must Have Cute - See. Want. Must Have!
Big Head Harry Potter Characters
If Style Could Kill - OMG Style!
Ring of the Day: I'm Batman
Lovely Listing - Strange Findings in Real Estate Listings
String Theory
Wedinator - Your special day... is hilarious.
Skyrim First Dance
Five Minute Getaway - Beautiful Travel and Vacation Photos
Gaudí-esque complex, Punta del Este, Uruguay
Set Phasers to LOL - Sci Fi and Fantasy LOLs
I Didn't Know
Animal Memes - A Meme-nagerie of Famous Internet Critters
Crazy Girlfriend Praying Mantis: It Was My Doctor. He Says I'm Dying. How Bad Do You Feel Now, Lady?
I see whining people!
I see a dumba$$ posting first.
What? I can’t hear you over the whining of rich Republicans determined to have more tax cuts.
So they can invest it in our economy instead of buying votes with it like rich Democrats do.
They CAN, but how many of them will?
(Note: many Republicans and conservatives are very nice and generous people and I would not want to generalize the entire bunch as being greedy or selfish. But some of them are, just like some Democrats are.)
Exactly. Couldn’t have said it better myself. And I probably would have said it worse.
Thanks.
I’m just happy there’s something that I actually agree with on here.
Actually, quite a number of american corporations ( and wealthy) are sitting on big piles of cash and not using that money to invest (create jobs / hire workers), because the demand is down. Why spend/invest that money to hire people to make things that no one is buying?
Trickle down economics is a big lie perputuated by the super-rich to make the lower classes believe that the wealthy should keep their money to invest and create jobs.
The economy is driven by demand from the masses, not by the supply of the elite. If someone “invests” in a shoebutton factory, the jobs for those workers will last only until the money runs out. Because nobody’s buying buttonhooks.
However, no one with enough money to set up a buttonhook factory will do so, because they know that there is no demand for that product.
Investors do not hire people out of the kindness of their hearts. They hire people only if and when money can be made off their labor; in other words, when there is a demand for the products.
If you really want to stimulate the economy, take some of that money by letting tax cuts on the wealthy expire, as was originally legislated, and transfer those cuts to lower income people, who will use it to go out and buy things, creating demand.
If they are just sitting on the money, then how can we tax it? It has to be income. If there is no income, no taxes. Obama tried the stimulus route and it failed. Maybe he didn’t do it right but he sure did spend a bunch of money on something.
The stimulus money is only about half-spent so far. We haven’t seen any major resurgence from it se yet, but that doesn’t mean it will never happen.
If it’s supposed to help, then what’s he waiting for?
why give them more money when they haven’t used what they’ve already been given the way they were supposed to use it (to hire people)?
I thought the government was supposed to create the jobs, like the New Deal and all that, build roads and infrastructure. A wall along the southern border, shovel ready projects. Why isn’t he doing that?
because the income tax rate was totally changed under Republicans so that most of the tax revenue now comes from lower income classes rather than upper income groups, as it used to.
and the lower income groups have very little income now, so don’t pay as much taxes.
and the wealthy, who do have the income, have a much lower tax rate than they used to, and lots of loopholes.
and conservatives keep crying for a smaller government; i.e., one that can’t start big “New Deal” projects.
and the money that went to corporations in the bailout, money that those corporations were supposed to use for creating jobs, wound up in CEO salary bonuses and sitting in bank accounts.
If you think the government should be big enough to have/fund those new-deal infrastructure-building projects… then guess what… you are a liberal!!
for god’s sake, write you congressman, senators, and president, and tell them that this is what you want!
Not the bailouts, the huge stimulus that Obama got passed. That didn’t go to businesses or CEO’s. Where is the Obama stimulus? He is asking for another one and they haven’t finished with the first one? Where are the shovel ready jobs? I wouldn’t mind it so much if it really did create the jobs.
yes, it did.
and the whole bailout thing was started by dubya, befre he left office. it was supposed to be a last effort to give money to his buddies before he was out of power.
what obama did was to tack on the condition that it was not a true bailout. it was a loan that had to be paid back, and the government would be part owner of the corporation until it was paid back.
all of a sudden, in very quick order, a lot of those companies that supposedly had been on the verge of collapse, suddenly found the money to pay back the loans, so they could get the government out of their business.
if you want $$$ spent on new deal projects, let your elected representatives know.
Well I plan on letting them know how I feel on election day.
dear lupita,
good for you!
but why wait til then?
let them know how you feel now.
let them know what you expect them to do in the meantime.
voicing your wishes/wants/demands to your reps is not just an every 2-year election thing. democracy is a responsibility that requires many types of participation.
I was speaking figuratively. I know any change in the tax code now would not affect the money already made. but it WILL affect money made in the future, so that they ae not sitting on an even bigger pile. changes in the tax laws CAN put more $$$ in the hands of the mass consumers who will create demand.
The main point I was making was that the concept of letting the rich keep the money so that they will invest it and create jobs, is just a big pile of meadow muffins.
Real job creation comes not from money above, but from demand below. Those with money will not invest unless they feel they wil get a return on their investment; i.e., customers will buy the products/services that the business produces.
“Real job creation comes not from money above, but from demand below. ” –
I believe it’s a little of both, it’s a delicate balancing act IMO.
no, it isn’t.
the demand always has to come first.
the demand fuels the production of supply.
businesses and investors produce a supply because they KNOW there is a demand for it.
Why haven’t jobs increased under the current tax law? If these taxes are so wonderful at creating jobs, then why don’t we see them now?
When Bush actually enacted them the job market grew double digit percentage. Until the housing bubble bust the economy was doing pretty good (not necesarily stable), but jobs were being created.
but since they’re not working an more, they should be rescinded
So we’ll take MORE money out of the economy, I’m sure that’ll work just fine.
how does that take money out of the economy? IT IS NOT IN THE ECONOMY NOW… it is sitting stagnant in bank accounts. the highest 5% are not putting money into the economy. they are not creating jobs or hiring people
the way to really get money into the economy is to put it into the hands of the consumers, who will spend it on goods and services.
so there should be higher taxes on the top 5%, and lower taxes on the lower 95%.
The government cant take money that is sitting in bank accounts, they could maybe take the interest, which is very very low right now. How can they take peoples savings and retirement and give it to other people?
RESCIND THE TAX CUTS!!!
Ok, yelling doesn’t make your point any clearer. I don’t see how that will help or get all the “money they are sitting on” into the hands of the government, who does nothing with it to help anyone anyway except get themselves elected over and over again.
Allow the estate tax cuts to expire, at least back to the levels during Ronald Reagan’s second term, with an exception for the inheritance of farmland that stays as farmland.
After all, it isn’t like most heirs have actually EARNED all of the money they inherit.
dear viking gal,
thank you! thank you! thank you!
VG: Sounds good and all. However when my Grandfather died, he had little in way of money, but had a ton of land (not farm land). When he passed my Mom and her siblings could not afford the taxes on the land, even after selling it. They ended up owing the Government more money than the inheritance. So now we should punish people for their relatives who leave them stuff. You know b/c the Government didn’t work for that money or nothing. Which is why my parents have my name and sister’s name on everything, so when they die I don’t inherit it, but I already own it. Why? B/C they don’t wnat the grubby government to take their hard earned savings, they want it to go to their children. Then there’s my co-worker’s father who plans to spend all his money and then die, so the governmetn get’s nothing as well. Why? B/c the government has no right taxing private property that’s already been taxed. Sounds pretty much like theivary to me.
Also, when does the government ever give money to the consumers? The last time I saw that happen was the Bush tax refunds or whatever that was. No one was happy with that. When the government takes money away it never gives it back, not that I know of.
the lower income classes are the mass consumers.
if their taxes are lower, they will have more money to spend.
if they have jobs through private or government funding, they will have more money to spend.
if the taxes on the wealthy are raised, and the taxes on the lower classes are lowered, the lower classes will have more money to spend on consumer items, while the government will still have the same amt of money.
if the government takes some of its money (tax income) and creates jobs that build roads, bridges, etc., people in the lower income classes will have money to spend on consumer items.
google WPA and PWA in the 30′s
If we raise taxes on the wealthy, they are not going to run out and start businesses, they wont. So raising taxes on them won’t get the government any new revenues because they won’t be making income. No income, no income tax. The government has the stimulus money, why aren’t they doing the New Deal thing? Or they could do what some of them are thinking about and take our savings. That would be a new tax.
The truly wealthy do not start new businesses. They invest that money in funds, bonds and the like. The folks who start new businesses are the working class and middle class, who usually do so with very small loans from family members (also not wealthy) or from local banks (because the large banks won’t even look at small business starting folk).
dear itsy bitsy,
I am sorry I yelled. I just get so damn frustrated. I posted something that nested above that might explain it.
please read my posts, wherever they are, so I don’t have to repeat stuff here.
I will try a different way.
1. the wealthy are not starting businesses now. so taxing them is not going to decrease their starting new businesses. and therefore will not reduce any income to them from businesses they wudda shudda cudda started.
2. taxing future income will keep that stagnant money pile from getting any bigger.
3. capital gains taxes and estate taxes are very, very low, and apply mostly to the wealthy. the ordinary guy who works his but off every day for his money is taxed at a much higher rate than the trustafarian who gets his money off interest, capital gains, and estates, without working one friggin minute.
4. the middle and lower classes are the mass consumers. so any money that winds up in their pockets winds up in the pockets of the mass consumers, whether it is from tax refunds, taxcuts, wages from a new deal job… whatever.
5. you said that the government does nothing to help anyone with the money that is put into their hands. but you have also indicated that you wlould like to see new-deal type construction projects that provide jobs.
who pays those workers? a government that taxes the wealthy and uses that money to fund government building projects.
so … do you want big government or small government? one that taxes and creates bridges, jobs, and paychecks; or one that leaves the $$$ in the hands of the wealthy, and the poor jobless and on the streets?
That’s ok oob, I don’t get offended by caps. I can undestand what you are saying. Get more money into the hands of the government. My worry is tht if the $$800 gabillion stimulus didn’t seem to help, how can getting even more money to them, to help us, actually help? I wouldn’t even mind big governmnet if it actually worked. I’m just not so sure it does and as it gets bigger and bigger, we have less and less power to do anything about it.
Oh, and this is me itsy on my work computer now…
dear lupita (?),
it is a 2-step process.
1. get the $$$ into the hands of the government.
conservative rep’s and senators do not like this; they want the $$$ to stay in the hands of their wealthy benefactors. and they are all very good at convincing the lower income classes that it is really for the lowers’ own good for the uppers to keep the $$$.
2. get the government to spend the $$$ on new deal type projects to create bridges, jobs paychecks.
again, there is resistance from conservatives.
they would rather have gov. $$$ spent on corporation bailouts and corporation tax cuts, etc.
they preach that the economy will improve if you have low taxes on the wealthy, so that they can create jobs. bunk.
they rail against “big government”, implying “big brother” and government control of our lives.
they terrify people with the specter of evil socialism (oohh). they warned that government funded health insurance would let the gov. deny medical treatment… even tho we all know that today it is the private corporations that deny medical treatment; etc.
so… write your congressman and senators and president. tell them what you want. tell them they aren’t fooling you anymore. tell them you would rather have big government than big corporate power. tell them you want new deal projects and jobs. tell them they can take their bill-killing filibuster and shove it where the sun don’t shine!
So let’s see I bash on someone making fun of people out of a job, yet still you turn around and try and insult me. You are the definition of an A$$HAT!!!!
I see this happening more and more often this coming school year.
Black comedy at it’s best.
“Bush’s Fault!”
Just thought I’d beat all the libs to it. It helps with their blood pressure.
*Obama is a Marxist-Socialist-Communist-Fascist-Muslim Extremist-Bin Laden operative that wants to eat babies, institute Sharia Law, let the messicans take over the southwest, and destroy a country he lives in*
Just thought I’d beat the hyperconservatards to it. It helps keep the delusions up.
Seem like you’re more than delusional in what you believe a conservative is.
Hi pot.
You haven’t met zipper, have you?
And you’re in a delusion of what a liberal is. Did sarcasm detector break or did you NOT read the “hyperconservatives” part? I never said conservatives.
Don’t forget, it’s Reagan’s fault, too.
…and the rich, don’t forget the evil greedy rich!
Oh that’s right! Thanks for helping out. Oh you’re being sarcastic? I’m not.
Add 23000 more such cases not because of the Obama economy but because Obama decided to shut down the oil rig operations in the Gulf just to appear to be doing something after his botched handling of the BP spill.
**sits back and awaits for Pulse to be be called a BP apologist**
Pulse is correct.
People were all over Bush over his Katrina Response in a situation where the federal governement is NOT the first responder, but give Obama a pass in a situation where, legally, the federal government IS.
But he, if they’d wanted Obama to pay attention to it, they should have built a Par 4 on the rig.
I didn’t agree or disagree wtih Pulse, I just made a prediction.
He can’t handle a par 4, he sucks at golf, and at being president.
you put golf ahead of being a president?
hmmm…
**puts on conservatroll hat** So does Obama!! Wakka wakka wakk…
(sorry had to do it)
so… you criticize him for his priorities, then say you have the same priorities.
hhmmm…
Uh, OOTB? He’s joking. Note “conservatroll hat”, ok?
thanks, didn’t notice the hat was a joke.
sometimes it’s really difficult for me to figure out peanut butter.
kind of slip-sliding and amorphous.
Conservative, but not trollish. Well, no more trollish than any of us could be on a really bad day! Pretty liberal on social issues. Tends to have a decent sense of humor. Loves boobie Friday.
Oh, and I forgot. REALLY can’t spell.
dear peanut butter,
guess my sense of humor took a short vacation..
it really was funny!
No problem. If I put on the conservatroll hat it means I’m joking. Also throw in Wakka wakka wakka (Fozzy Bear laugh).
VG sums it up right. I tend to try and not jump on people unless they piss me of or get all uppity.
Plus I make fun of all comers. If you can’t laugh at yourself, then you shouldn’t laugh at anyone else (would feel hypocritical).
Well he did send a bunch of lawyers. Didn’t that help?
Well, they tried stuffing a few hundred down the pipe, but they were so slippery they kept wouldn’t stay in.
And the quest goes on for at least ONE good use for lawyers. ( I say we use them to replace lab rats. Three very good reasons: 1) There’s many more lawyers than rats available. 2) The scientist wouldn’t get as attached to the lawyers as they do the rats & 3) there’s just some things you can’t get a rat to do.)
Holy sh1t! It’s an infestation! Get me my conservatroll spray! We’re gonna need lots of it!
FEMA is a first responder to hurricane disasters, when large numbers of people are in IMMEDIATE danger and need of help.
… and the “response” to Katrina was grossly inadequate and inexcusable.
the BP mess was not a natural disaster, however, but a case of extreme industrial negligence, at best; murder, at worst.
the coast guard rescued those persons in danger.
BP had the technology and equipment to clean up its own mess, without leaving taxpayers to foot the bill.
Eh, this is kind of dumb, actually. I’ve been on unemployment before, and my boyfriend is on/off every so many months because he works in construction. Neither of us has ever had to go down to an unemployment office. In fact, most times either the office is miles and miles away, or they don’t want you to actually go down. They tell you to do everything online.
Also, stop trying to dodge bill collectors. How many articles, radio, and tv programs have told people not to do this, and yet people still continue to make weird jokes about dodging bill collectors. Talk to them, but don’t expect them to understand. If they start to harrass, tell them to stop calling you and that notifications must now be done in writing. If you don’t do this, stop whining about them calling. It’s their job.
As for the last part, in all seriousness, how many people are actually living out of their car with their families do to foreclosure. I am not saying it doesn’t happen, but 90% of the time, people end up with other family members. I will be mean here and say Foreclosures are not entirely one-sided. I just bought a home, and I made certain I could still afford the mortgage on just my income, AND if I was surviving on unemployment. I would be genuinely living paycheck to paycheck, and I will have to ask family to help make some ends meet, but I make absolutely certain not to live above my means. However, oddly enough, I do manage to save a little, because I don’t blow my money on ridiculous things. You don’t need a $30,000 car, or even a $12,000 car. You also don’t need a $5000 bedroom set to match the $7000 living room set.
If we could stop sticking our noses into other people’s business (something Americans fail miserably at) and comparing our lives to others, we may actually pull ourselves up by our bootstraps and manage to survive.
Sorry, I know this will offend people, but really. I consider myself to be a Democrate, and even I realize there are times when people really need to stop whining and learn to take care of themselves!
Same. But sadly, in cases circumstances change.
Back when me and my family moved we made damn sure we could afford the new house, and we were able to. However GM pulled their contracts from the company my dad drove for and as a result they went under and he was out of work for a year.
He’s doing long haul trucking now so my family is doing well, but still, things can and do change.
Do you really think people are all the same? Stuff it up your bootstraps until you’ve walked a mile in all our boots.
Yes, never insult someone until you’ve walked a mile in their boots. Because then, you’ve got a mile headstart and, hey, you’ve got thier boots, too.
What? Pull ourselves up by our own bootstraps? Isn’t that the federal governments job?
The “bootstrap theory” is a load of horse sh1t pushed by people who have good luck and/or don’t want to help anyone in a bad spot. Many people work their asses off and still end up in bad situations. And you have no problem turning a blind eye to them and saying it’s their own fault.
So, to you, ‘success’ is all a matter of luck?
Explains alot.
I’ve known many, many people who worked their asses off and became successfull.
I’m known some who worked their asses off, succeeded, had bad things happens and kept on going. (I had 6′ of gulf in my house during Katrina, so I know a little about ‘bad situations’).
I’ve known many, many, many who do little, expect much and whine about how ‘lucky’ some are.
It’s called Hard Work.
And the people I help are in bad spots not of their choosing. I spent this weekend building a ramp for a nice lady in a wheelchair who just moved into her first apartment. What did YOU do?
All a matter of luck? No. I think hard work DOES have a role in success, but it’s not the whole ball of wax.
I know people, hell, I’m related to people who do actually expect the world to drop something good at their door while they sit on their asses and do nothing. They bring out that deep, dark, rotten area of my soul that almost became a Republican at one time. Yes, I know the people you conservatives despise, and I know they exist. I hate them too. These are not the people I want to help.
I know many other people who work their asses off but never get ahead. They do their best to provide for their families, but at the end of the week, still come up short. You seem to like looking down your nose at these people. If hard work determined success, we’d be a very different nation right now.
Success does have a fair amount to do with luck. Lucky timing, lucky connections. You can work your whole life for a jackass boss who doesn’t like you and won’t let you move up while some tool he goes drinking with after work gets promoted over you. It happens. A lot. People are assholes, and pretending that hard work will always result in success is delusional.
As for you building a ramp for the nice old lady, we’re very impressed by how much better than us you are. And you bounced back from Katrina. Again, very impressed. That doesn’t mean that other people are lazy or bad because they can’t do that same. Bootstrap is a load of crap.
And as for your implication that I don’t have a good work ethic, you’re way off. I work my butt off every day at work even though I know my job is completely dead end. I was hired to do a job, and I do that job to the best of my ability as is expected of me. I don’t believe in the “I don’t get paid enough to work hard.” I wasn’t hired at the special “lazy ass gets to stand around” rate. I was hired to work. So watch your assumptions, bud.
I never wade into the muck over here, but there’s a first time for everything. Rando, I agree with you. I think it boils down to hating what you may someday become. People would rather think homelessness or unemployment would never happen to them because they work hard and the other guy didn’t. They’d rather thing that the other guy was deficient somewhere and that’s why he is homeless or unemployed. It’s too scary and grim to think “but for the grace of God go I.” That makes it all too real.
When I bought my house, we made damn sure we could afford it. What we couldn’t afford was the major pluming issue we got along with the house. My then husband lost his job about a year after we closed and the pluming went bad shortly after. The pluming is something we can’t even think of fixing. Now, we are letting the bank take the house. People do live in their cars due to foreclosure. I’m about a month away from that right now and I have two kids. Do you think we can find any help? Nope. And I work my butt off every day. I work very hard and I work overtime when it is there. I’ve worked very hard, sometimes, three jobs. Yet people still judge me when they hear that we’re losing our house and that we’re having trouble getting by. They always look for that underlying reason. They assume we must drink or do drugs or gamble or whatever. None of that is true. We don’t live some lavish lifestyle. Life just bit us in the a$s. In around a month, I may have to send my kids to a youth shelter while I move into a women’s shelter. I have no family to take us in. I am not a sit on your butt and ask for a handout person, never have been. This is a nightmare and I wish we weren’t living it.
People need to realize that one lost job or one unforseen emergency can put anyone in a bad spot. It can put you out of your home and living in your car very quickly. Don’t look down your nose at other people, you may be the next one to take the hit.
But then there are those who are not responsible, and cause such misfortune upon themself. It’s the same debate over and over again. Not everyone is “innocent” victims in this, and not everyone is “at fault” for their circumstances. There is never an all or nothing really, it’s just that the conservatives tend to focus on those who “brought this on themselves” while the liberals ten to focus on “those who are stuck in unforseen ciircumstances”. I really have little sympathy for someone who over spent, bought too large a house, and over extended their spending, however to those who lost due to illness/ lay offs/ etc deserve sympathy and help as much as possible (though I’d prefer it not be from the government).
PS: I’m sorry for your case. My neighbor went through something similar (def did not extend beyond his means). We helped as much as we could (paid for odd jobs around our house), but we could only do so much.
But isn’t that our underlying problem? Each side focuses too much on one group, we end up mixing the two, then we have these type of debates.
It gives me a headache and sore throat. Perhaps we should stop arguing and pointing the finger at each other and just work together to fix the problem.
But each person’s way of “fixing” the problem is about 180 degrees out of sync. There in lies the dilema.
Where most conservatvies fell it’s charity’s job to help, most liberals feel it’s the government’s job (or if those rich people would just “share” their money with the rest of the world there would be no poverty, and we’d all get along).
Soooo….lets do both?
That whole “private property” y’all were touting about the mosque, or does money no longer count as private property?
I’m not sure, but this may be apples and cheeze again.
If you’re trying to carry out a development that’s within the current zoning for the lot you’re developing, then I’d suggest that government has no right to stop you.
OTOH the government also has no right to stop you giving money to charity, but it does have the right to raise taxes on your income.
Sidebar – Is anyone seriously suggesting that “the rich” have a literal or metaphorical pile (significant percentage of their capital, not a few grand) of bills sitting around idle, rather than in some form of interest-bearing vehicle?
I’m lost…
Paws: I think it’s convenient that a person’s physical private property never includes money (whether it be bills in a mattress or numbers in a bank). I understand about taxes, I agre that there needs to be some sembalnce of taxes paid, however it’s a convenient misconception by some liberals that the Government is entitled to more of someone’s private property (b/c they have more) rather than an equal share (which is actually what it says in the Constitution).
dear peanut butter,
1. please cite what you said about the Constitution and equal shares and taxes. It is my understanding that there wasn’t even an income tax at all in the Constitution, and that concept was added much later.
2. when the income tax was instituted, it was a graduated income tax. it has always been a graduated income tax. and those levels of graduations were much higher than in recent years.
3. the rich ARE sitting on piles of money. whether it is bearing interest or not is a very small point. it is not being invested in business growth that creates jobs. that is the point. the creation of jobs. that’s what the cartoon was all about. that’s what economic recovery is all about. the whole point of lowering taxes was that they would use the capital to create jobs. and… they. are. not.
OOB, the simple reason that business are not investing capital and are hanging on to it is because they are afraid of losing it and they are not at all happy about being taxed on any new profits. If Obama would lower taxes the jobs would be there. That’s what I think anyway. Sorry to butt in.. carry on.
If Obama lowered taxes, highly paid execs would scream “Hooray! Now we can afford to go on TWO trips to Cancun this summer AND that beach house! Oh, and make sure to get those layoffs taken care of, Bob.”
dear rando,
you ARE amazing!
And you did what you could. Rather than let the wolves have him, you at least enabled him to help himself. No one person can “fix”the problem, you are 100% correct in that.
The problem in relying solely on charity or government is that neither has an unending supply of funds. We have contacted every charity we can find, they don’t have any funds available. They are more than happy to refer us to a homeless shelter, but that’s all they can do. I will fight with my last breath to keep my children out of a homeless shelter. I know full well that once you get there, it’s very hard to get out. I don’t want that for my children.
I’m very big on enabling people to help themselves. I am not very big on simply enabling people. There is a very big difference. All we want is the ability to help ourselves. Charity won’t help, government won’t help. So where do we turn? We sure don’t know and neither does anybody else. That’s the problem. We see and hear so much about how everybody should just pull themselves up and fix the problem themselves, but that isn’t always possible. I’d love to think it is and in my grandfather’s day, it was. Now, not so much.
It’s nonsense that some people think that people get into your situation because they’re lazy or just don’t care. Who on earth WANTS to end up in a homeless shelter? Who WANTS to lose their house? Who wants to be broke? NOBODY! I don’t have the issue of losing my house because I rent, but since my wife had our baby she hasn’t worked and won’t work full time for a while so money has gotten horribly tight. We had been hoping to save some money for her maternity leave, but this summer was brutal on our finances, and we’re about 2 months behind on rent, which we have to use all of my wife’s school refund (which was supposed to be that maternity leave fund) to get the rent and other bills caught up. And we’re still behind for the month. What did we do wrong? We both work hard, but stuff out of our control happened and now we’re in a bind for next month.
Yes, it is nonsense. Who in their right mind would think “hey, I want to go live in a homeless shelter?” Nobody. Nobody wants to lose their house or their job or their only means of support. Nobody wants to be in a position where both Peter and Paul have been robbed so many times, there’s nothing left to take from either one to pay Jim.
I’ve been there with the school refund. We allocated it for that period of time when I left one job for another since pay periods are always rough at first. Then, my car blew up and we had to fix it and one of the kids needed medical treatment ASAP, so there that went. We scrounged for food for two weeks, but I’d rather eat cereal for a meal than have a deathly ill (or dead) kid. It sucks and nobody sits around thinking “Hey, why don’t we lose everything just sh*ts and giggles!” That is not reality.
That’s not the point I was going for, it’s the “I don’t care or think about my future.” People. The I’ll spend well beyond my means, have 0 savings, and then when I lose my job cry foul. If you can’t afford it, you don’t need be buying a BMW, a 5 bedroom house on the beach, etc….. have the best TV set, Blue Ray, all the cable channels and dish network,sports season tickets, etc… unless you can afford it. The other day at Super Walmart I watched a woman buy a $700 TV, and then proceed to pay for her groceries in Food Stamps. WTF? That pi$$ed me off. And hopfully it should pi$$ everyone off. Those people deserve 0% sympathy, it’s not that they want to be homeless, but if the government will provide, why should I “worry”?
Here’s the kicker: government handouts pay better than real life. That doesn’t mean the government is giving out great wages. It means that jobs these days don’t pay crap. I could make more money by losing my job, going on unemployment, and signing up for medicaid than I do at my actual job.
Rando: I unerstand. See what I wrote below. I’m for welfare (gasp I know socialism) to help those help themselves, and have it stop being the government leaching program that it is today.
so who should help?
charities are overwhelmed now.
donations are down, needs are up.
historically, the lower income groups donate to charities at a higher rate than do the wealthy.
now the lower income groups are just treading water, and have very little extra to help.
and the wealthy are not stepping up to the plate much at all. they prefer to spend the money on luxury items for themselves.
if not the government, then who?
in the Great depression, the government created jobs through a plethora of alphabet-soup agencies, paid the workers to build an infrastructure we still use today, and pumped money into the economy through the workers spending their wages on consumer goods.
that worked then, and it will work again now. trying to build the economy by letting wealthy people pay low taxes is a big pile of meadow muffins. those guys won’t hire anyone unless the need to, unless they can make a buck off the guy’s labor. and if no one is buying whatever the worker produces, there’s nothing in it for the “investor.”
“in the Great depression, the government created jobs through a plethora of alphabet-soup agencies, paid the workers to build an infrastructure we still use today, and pumped money into the economy through the workers spending their wages on consumer goods.” —
My question is why, if they believe this is the way to go, for the love of GOD is Obama not doing this now?
Because right-wing ideologues are yelling “Socialism!!!!” every time he tries anything even remotely similar.
That’s a very sad story. I’m sorry that’s happening to you. I seriously hope things work out for you somehow.
So we can both agree that people who wait for life to hand them things are living in a dream world. My problem is that now people are attempting to legislate it.
Luck can have something to do with success, but much more often it’s just hard work.
I didn’t say it was a nice old lady, you’re reading things that I’m not posting. In fact, this girl is 22 year old that just landed her first job as a first grade teacher. She’s been through more than you or I will ever dream of, and she’s not waiting for a hand-out.
Please point to the portion of my post that you missinterpreted to mean I was implying you had a bad work ethic? I don’t know your work ethic, so would be a fool to comment on it. The only thing I can comment on is the views you post.
I’ve had several jobs that were dead end, but I worked them with the understanding that they were just to pay the bills while I improved my outlook, be it putting myself through college or learning a new skill. I learned real quick I can’t work in any industry where I have to deal with the customer. I don’t have the patience for it and admire those that can do it. But I made allowances and found work where I don’t have to. I’ve delivered pizzas, I’ve filled drums with goop, I’ve dug wells and I’ve managed stores. And while I realized everyone of those were a dead-end job, I decided early that they were not the end for me. The result is I’ve never been without a job long enough to even apply for unemployment.
And you seem to be assuming alot in what I’m posting that is not there.
Ah, fair enough. You didn’t say nice old lady. However, you did make the following comment:
“So, to you, ‘success’ is all a matter of luck?
Explains alot.”
Sounded to me like you were making a not-so-subtle jab at my work ethic. If not, what were you implying?
Again, thank you for informing us of how much better than us you are. It’s appreciated. If you think you can apply your life to everyone else then you’re demented. If you’re just sharing your experience as a possibility of how life goes, then bully for you (Yes I said bully for you, what of it). Many of these jobs mentioned don’t pay the bills. What then? You make it sound like it’s okay that people live like that despite doing their best. It’s not okay, it’s awful. People work their butts off their whole lives, but one bad bump in the road and suddenly their house is gone. One bad accident and suddenly they can’t work. The economy goes bad and a job they’ve held for 10, 20 years is just gone. People are losing their jobs and their homes. People are going bankrupt on medical bills. The lower middle class and middle class are in shambles these days, and the upper middle class so often wants to say “glad it’s not me.” Not everyone does that, of course. But that’s the more general attitude, especially from those on the right who insist that hard work will always keep you out of trouble. It’s a delusional attitude.
And if it seems like I’m assuming, well I’m just commenting on the views you post.
I work as a lab assistant teaching young adults from the South Side of Chicago how to use the Microsoft Office suite. I assume, because they are there, that none of them wants to work for effing Dunkin Donuts for the rest of their lives. More than a few have poor typing and reading skills, because the CPS notoriously sucks unless you live in less-poor, less-black neighborhoods. More than a few don’t have computers at home (they’re still expensive and you can’t eat them). But they still come. We do our very best to keep them on track and make them ready for a world that may or may not hire them when they’re done. I assume most, if not all, are able to attend because they took out student loans, as I did to complete the very same program. I have a job now because school happened to be hiring at the time I graduated. The economy still sucks, and I would probably still be on unemployment and looking for work if I hadn’t gone after the obvious option.
My point: do you see all the variables in my above statement? Economy, hiring status, government loans, crap schools? Any one of those can make or break a person’s chances of living life the way they want, or staying afloat. I will not use the term “self-sufficient” because there is no such thing. Nobody exists in a vacuum. If you live in a house, someone had to build it. If you have a job, someone had to be willing to pay you. If you have enough to eat, someone had to grow and deliver your food plus your job has to give you enough to buy something other than cheap junk to eat. Everyone is interdependent whether we realize it or not.
Many many wealthy people have lost their fortunes several times and made it back. It’s not luck. Oh and I’m sure they give plenty to charity to help the less fortunate. Why do you hate rich people?
Lost their fortunes several times and made it back? Who? And how did they make it back? Through hard work? Or investing in the right places and letting the money do the work? There is PLENTY of luck involved. Especially if you lose all your money and then make it back.
I think lupita is thinking of Donald Trump who makes his fortune being a a legal con man. Takes out billion dollar loans with really no intent to repay all of it and when he goes bankrupt repays it for pitance, but Banks still lend to him b/c he’s Donald Trump.
Wow, that IS working hard! Thanks for the lesson on work ethic, lupita!
http://adage.com/columns/article?article_id=145485 Actually, here are one of the points I was making, about people not saving money.
COLUMN: With U.S. Consumers Tapped Out, Other Markets Must Float Our Economy – American consumers contribute 70% of our gross domestic product, so we are dependent on them to buy stuff they can’t afford or don’t really need. But that 70% of GDP is a pretty big load. To hit the mark, consumers must not only spend, they’ve got to stop saving. During the salad days of the economy consumers reduced their saving from 6% to 2%, and in the final stages of the boom, down to 0%. Now they’re restocking their larders and salting away money at historic highs. That kind of parsimonious behavior simply can’t sustain a robust economy revolving around consumer profligacy.
Just got layed off a week ago… Hope there is some unemployment $$ left.
Why aren’t I surprised that YOU got layed off? Layed off and unlaid.
Wow, there’s that liberal compasion I always here so much about.
Hey, guess what, we’re not gonna be nice to conservatrolls who constantly insult us all as a group. Where are all these conservative assholes coming from? Is Megasock back at it again?
Who and what is a conservatroll?
A conservative troll. Someone who fervently spouts conservative fringe viewpoints as if they were common knowledge while insulting everyone on the left.
Umm, excuse me? I’m the one that got insulted. What does that make Nailin what’s his face? (Who’s name alone is incredibly insulting to some)
A liberatroll, libtroll, or just liberal troll. Whichever you prefer, and most would agree that yes, he is one. I don’t like trolls of either side. Conservatrolls insult my people (my people? are liberals a race now, Rando?) while libtrolls make my people (you did it again, dude) look bad.
Oh, and you have been thoroughly unpleasant (which is a nice way of putting it) on many threads since you popped up here. Even your fellow conservatives (like ILPB) don’t like you.
What do you mean by unpleasant? I may not be very PC, but I have never insulted anyone on here, including him.
Well, according to some of the conservatrolls, it would be because you didn’t work hard enough or something. Pull yourself up by your bootstraps, blah blah blah. Getting any assistance now would make you look weak or lazy. blah blah blah.
Fortunately, those of us on the left recognize that bad things happen to good people, and understand what you’re going through. I’m sorry you got laid off. That’s never any fun. I hope you find something soon.
Thanks for that. I actually was pretty sure this was going to happen sooner or later. The company I work for was not doing well and lost big $$ last year. They have been laying off every year for the last 2 years and I was lucky to dodge the bullet until now. In the meantime I have been saving every penny I could for just this reason so I should be ok for awhile. I may even change careers.
Ugh. I know that feeling. Happened to me several years ago when I was manager of an underperforming store. I did EVERYTHING I could think of to get sales up, but we were a small fish in an overly filled pond and because the numbers weren’t high enough I got the axe. I knew it was coming. My wife and I decided I should stay home with the baby so she could go back to work (a little cabin fever for her being stay-at-home mom) until that was no longer financially feasible. That company just went out of business recently. Kinda sad. Despite getting fired from them, I liked the company. But I feel better about myself knowing that getting fired from there really wasn’t my fault as nobody else did any better with that store.
I’m hoping to go back to school after my wife finishes school. It’d just be too much with both of us in school right now. I have no idea what I want to be when I grow up. This time I hope I pick a career with more demand than my original degree from almost 10 years ago.
McD’s is hiring.
Bazinga.
Thanks.
When I was 23, I got laid off. It took 4 weeks to find a new job, so for two weeks I worked at McDs. I have a Dual degree from one of the Five Federal Academys. Do you think I wanted to work at McDs? Do you think at 23 with a dual degree (one being Engineering) that I didn’t feel a bit over qualified to work there? I did, but I also knew that there was a lull in the economy, especially on Long Island, so I took a job that could pay the bills at that time. (Which it really couldn’t but hey when you’re single with no life you can work 60 hours a week). Luckily it was for only two weeks and I got a job in DC.
My father in law has been out of work (Cable marketing) for almost 15 years, by his own choice. He refuses to “take a job beneath him”. Therefore my mother in law has to work her fingers to the bone to pay for him. Irritates my wife to no end. However my father was a CEO and got laid off in 2000. He tried to own his own business, failed outright, so instead became a security guard at a hospital. Whom should we all be more willing to support, my father, or my father in law?
Corrolary to this – Some years ago I worked for a company that had a temporary vacancy. We offered it informally to the BF of one of our office staff, who refused , not because he didn’t want to work, but because it meant that he’d lose the private loan insurance payment that were covering his mortgage and car loan. Does he deserve to lose his house and car because he can’t find a job that covers his loan repayments? When answering, bear in mind that losing the car would have meant he couldn’t get to work more than 4 miles from home, and he’d have been unlikely to be able to hold down a job if he had nowhere to live.
What happens if he doesn’t find a job and the insurance runs out?
I still think that mentality (someone else has me coverred, so why should I work) is what is wrong.
That’s the biggest problem with our Welfare system here in the US. I think if we’re going to have Welfare it should be a subsidy vice a hand out. If someone is looking or has a job that doesn’t quite cover everything, then it should be an assistance until “they’re back on their feet.”. Unfortunately as soon as you get a $200 a week job you lose the $300 a week check. Makes NO sense to me.
He’s at worst, put off the day when the mortgage defaults for several years, so should have had a deposit for somewhere smaller.
Car loans here are fixed term, and repayment insurance will cover the remaining term, but can only be activated once for any given loan.
I’d agree with you that welfare (here too) cuts off too quickly when you get work. Presently, when you earn above the base welfare payment, you lose 95% of every extra pound you earn as a reduction in your welfare.
Still better than here. As soon as you get a job you get 0%. Possibly food stamps, but nothing else. It’s really a system that makes people too dependent on the Government. (So now you should understand the conservative apprehension to having the Government run Health Care, b/c then people become too dependent on the Government at least the way the US runs things)
Depends on whether the new job has health insurance. I’ve a friend who has had to go on and off of Cobra while alternately under- and un-employed over a 3 year period. Unemployment doesn’t help much with those Cobra payments, which are VERY high.
If you can, while you are looking, try to get a job with Staples, Starbucks, or one of the other companies which offer health coverage to part-time employees. One of my friends managed to do this while underemployed, and it helped immensely. The other friend was not as lucky.
…And then fascist Glenn Beck declared that because they were unemployed, they weren’t real Americans.
I have two jobs, does this mean I’m doubly American?
Yes those are doubly American!!!! And GOD BLESS THEM!!
He was refering to one group of unemployed. Those that had been out of work for 99+ weeks and were yelling for more money.
Here’s a clue: If you can’t find a job in 99 weeks, the economy’s not the reason.
It’s easy to find a job. It’s a lot harder to find a job paying a living wage, especially if you have training in a more specialized area. My dad is a substance abuse counselor. He wanted to move to my city to be closer to my family. There are no jobs for that here. There are no jobs for that in his town either. So what do you think the problem is, Grendel?
I’m sure it’s easier to blame individuals rather than think of the serious structural problems in the economy. The property market and new job creation figures are the figures to look at. It’s amost certain the US is entering a double dip recession.
‘He was refering to one group of unemployed. Those that had been out of work for 99+ weeks and were yelling for more money.’
And so they’re not real Americans?
You think that, if there were any topic that people from all parties could rally around, it would be helping poor children. According to World Bank stats, we have a whole 6,109,430 people in this country living on less than $2 a day. I don’t really care how’s fault it is – it’s not like “well, we took a vote and decided to democrats did it, so they have to fix it.” This nation does not have a broke it, you buy it policy. We already own it, and we didn’t even hold out for a decent warranty, we’re pretty much stuck making the repairs.
More like “We decided it’s the dem’s fault, so they have to fix it while we try to block them every step of the way”
Zack Hill does it better:
http://comics.com/zack_hill/2010-08-23/
Jeff Parker? More like Debbie Downer!
‘Did I sit around waiting for the demand to come back? No. I found work in chemistry. Started as a lab tech, worked my way up to Research Chemist. Saw that coming to an end in my area so NOW I work in product and material steward ship.’
How many firms would be willing to hire Rando’s father and train him up in a new field when they can just as well get a younger and trained person.
My father is in his late 50′s and has also been going to school studying what he’s been doing, going for his masters. It’s a little late to switch gears and start over in school now.
He could do something else. He did “something else” for most of his life, and now your best suggestion is “tough sh1t, life sucks, go get a job at McDonald’s.” He’s finally doing something he cares about, something that helps people, and you’re ready to just blow off his entire profession.
The problem with people like you is, that if a guy with a masters in economics or someone who has been an accountant for 20 years gets a job as a greeter at Walmart, then as far as you’re concerned the unemployment issue is over, and people can stop “whining.” That’s an absolute crock of sh1t. It’s disgusting that people study a line of work they’re good at or really want to do but then can never find a job in it, meanwhile people like you sit there and say “who cares? Get a different job. Hey, Marshall’s is hiring cashiers!”
As for the different location, yeah, he could probably find a job in LA or New York or somewhere that has lots of addicts, but then he’d be even further away from his family. I’d like to actually see my father on occasion, thank you. But we’re not your problem, so you don’t give a flying fvck about us. And that’s where that famous liberal compassion comes in. Many of us DO care about these problems that people have. You think we’re looking for excuses to whine. We think you’re looking for excuses to not care.
Thank you. Who the hell wants a guy in his late 50′s for some field he’s never worked in or has no training? Nobody, that’s who. Hopefully when he finishes school he’ll have more luck. Oddly enough, Grendel should be praising my dad. He’s one of the kinds of people he’d like. After decades of not going anywhere in his careers, he took charge and started doing something important to him. Isn’t that the conservative way? Take charge of your life and make things happen? My dad hasn’t always been the best guy or the best dad, but I sure as hell am proud of him now.
And again, you are 100% correct. Employers in the psychology/human services field want Master’s level education but pay Bachelor’s level wages. I know, I have a Bachelor’s in Psychology and I’m studying for my Master’s if we can find a place to live. When I look at what is being offered for Master’s level education, I wonder why I’m bothering. I chose to stick with Psych for two reasons, I love it and I want to help other people. But, it is not an easy field to make a living in. Especially if you aren’t going private practice. Substance abuse was one of the areas I explored, but I changed my mind. I couldn’t find one job listing locally for a position where substance abuse training was required.
My hat is off to your dad. It’s a hard field and a very difficult road. I hope he can find something in his field soon so he can be close to his family. With the mess most of us are in now, you’d think the demand for mental health professionals would be higher than it is. But, people see us as pill pushers and that’s so sad and wrong.
TY! So nice to know there are some peeps out there in this big world that know the truth and see reality! Hats off to ye Dad for all his hard work!
I’m taking off now before I go on a rant here >.< Some posts here are just ticking me off and that not a good thing, get sick of peeps looking down at me and others that have the same disability I do, and trust me, it is just that, but I still try me hardest as well… Guess that means we all just lazy like some on here want to believe
Anyhow Ciao XD
Remember to hide from the scientologists!
I like you.
I’m pretty sure the mess was BP’s fault, not Obama’s.
So at what point did George Bush Sr. visit the Exxon Valdez crash site?
1) most of the individuals trapped there were too poor to have a way out. no free public transportation had been provided for thsm.
2) the city was wiped out
3) the parish was wiped out
the BP thing did not leave people dying while Obama took a few hours to decide the best course of action.
and I thought it was in international waters.
4) the state, and surrounding states, were overwhelmed.
this was a catastrophe of biblical proportions.
it should have been met earlier and better.
people were starving, dying without water an medical care.
food, water, and medicine could have been dropped from helicopters.
I leved in Houston for many years. I have also lived in New Orleans. I know about hurricanes. Katrina was far beyond anything this country had seen before.
and federal response had been much faster and greater in other, lesser, disasters. the federal government has even had better response to disasters in other countries than it had to Katrina.
Nah, I prefer to debate with them. It’s more fun that way.
Most of them could benefit from a bit of psychopharmacology.
I liked your previous post. And I’m not trying to be snarky, but it is a fact that modern psychologists tend to numb the symptoms with drugs instead of actually fixing any problems (substance-abuse counselors aside).
Sometimes that’s appropriate. Sometimes it’s not. For example, if you’re having panic attacks during regular every day events, then you may need medication. If you feel anxious and depressed after the loss of a loved one, that’s normal and shouldn’t require medication unless it gets dangerous.
No, it’s a fact that SOME modern psychiatrist try to do that. My psychopharmacology comment aside, I am not one of those psychologists. A psychologist, licensed or not, can’t prescribe medication. A psychiatrist can. There’s a distinction and I always try to make it because so many feel that psychologists push medication when, in fact,we can not. We can recommend it, but the shrink prescribes it. In fact, I know many psychologists who feel that people are given too much medication.
I won’t quibble with you over numbing the symptoms with drugs because I think you’re correct. We medicate instead of offering therapy. It is a fact that medication without therapy does not good. It does, as you said, numb the symptoms. I’m not one of those “pill for every disorder” psychologists. Just don’t let the “here have a pill” find out, we have a rep to uphold.
Much of that has to do with what is paid for — you can get almost any prescription covered by insurance while it’s very difficult to get therapy covered.
If that was directed at me, it’s nice to be liked.
I like you too.
It was. You seem like a good egg.
I remember after my baby died last year that the doc put me on Xanax. I liked it at first because I felt better. Then I realized that my baby had died and I’m not supposed to feel better. I wasn’t dealing with the situation at all. The Xanax just helped make it go away. I stopped taking it after that. It SUCKED, but it was far better to actually face the grief than just ignore it.
I just wish i’d see more Carl Jung being practiced and less Prozac being prescribed. I know there are exceptions like @Rando, he needs to be medicated.
PS. Step-mom’s a drug-rep & my father a physician. I’m very aware of the cozy relationship between the two industries.
speaking of, did you take your meds today?
i was just trying to make the general “off your meds” remark. I’m not completely heartless, i swear. I was too busy responding to Eire, and i didn’t read your response before I posted. sorry about your loss.
seems anti-productive to me.
It is anti-productive. Therapy is covered for only so long and only so many sessions. Even in-patient therapy isn’t covered past a certain number of days. Prozac, Zoloft and just about any other drug are covered forever. Insurance companies prefer drugging people to actually working on what is causing their problems in the first place.
So do drugs companies, amazingly enough!
I’ve never been in one of those places, but as Rando says so eloquently above, all the drugs do is make your problems out of focus.
I agree completely. For the really serious problems, it’s well documented that drugs alone are NOT effective. It’s quite frustrating for both practitioners and patients.
And, apparently, in your case….very cozy. Calls to mind the whole “doctors are in bed with the drug companies”. :lol”
oh yeah, my family is full of these funky, almost metaphorical relationships. My uncle is a prosecution lawyer and my dad, the physician, has had a handful of malpractice suits brought against him through-out his 30+ year career (never convicted either). One Thanksgiving we had to leave grandma’s house early because the two would not stop arguing over health care reform. It’s taught me to respect both sides of every argument…it’s also made me into a flaming liberal…go figure.
Exxon Valdez stopped leaking within two days, and didn’t continue to leak for say up to three months over a million barrels a day. To compare Valdez to Gulf Oil Spill is like comapring a bee sting to being impaled by a tree.
Unless you were an Alaskan fisherman. Many of whom died before the lawsuits against Exxon were settled.
I’m not totally disagreeing with you, ILPB. But the size of the spill doesn’t matter to the individual who has had their livelihood toasted by it.
Also, that “bee sting” still hasn’t healed, and it’s not known how long it will take to really go away.
Again from Wikipedia:
“Almost 20 years after the spill, a team of scientists at the University of North Carolina found that the effects are lasting far longer than expected.[27] The team estimates some shoreline Arctic habitats may take up to 30 years to recover.[8] Exxon Mobil denies any concerns over this, stating that they anticipated a remaining fraction that they assert will not cause any long-term ecological impacts, according to the conclusions of 350 peer-reviewed studies.[28] However, a study from scientists from the NOAA concluded that this contamination can produce chronic low-level exposure, discourage subsistence where the contamination is heavy, and decrease the “wilderness character” of the area.[23]”
I heard recently that if you go to the area where the spill occurred and just dig a few inches down into the sand and soil, there’s visible oil contamination.
It’s kind of like the statistical occurrence of the deadly disease of your choice: when it happens to you, it’s 100%.
I’m pretty sure OBama didn’t help any. If Obama were a Republican the left would have been screaming about being in bed with Big Oil, due to lack of response, and if you don’t think that then you are blinded by your “faith”.