President Biden says that 3,500,000,000,000 equals 0.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

700,000 people have vanished in the US, & Americans are wondering where all the service staff went

Except that as of September 2021, 77% of covid fatalities have been for people aged 65+.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/...vid-by-age-us/

You will make up ANYTHING to sling arrows at the right.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

An Op-Ed from anyone is not evidence.

I guess you didn't bother to read my post. The op-ed discussed a statistical study. You can ignore every word of the columnist and focus on the data in the study. I encourage you to do that. You won't like the results.

The author of the study, Arthur Brooks, expected to conclude that liberals are more generous (after all, CNN says so). But he found the opposite (not that liberals aren't generous by the way, but conservatives were slightly more so). Brooks concluded, as a rational person might expect, that the role that religion plays on the two sides (important to the right, mocked by the left) is a main incentive for conservatives to dig a little deeper.

Despite what the left says, there's actually more to religion than bombing abortion clinics. Christianity has some pretty good qualities. You won't hear that on any mainstream news though, which is why you aren't aware of it.

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

700,000 people have vanished in the US, & Americans are wondering where all the service staff went

Crazy, huh, can't believe how hard it is to get service staff over the age of 65, these days, since this all started. That usually is the target hiring age of the service industry too
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

I guess you didn't bother to read my post. The op-ed discussed a statistical study. You can ignore every word of the columnist and focus on the data in the study. I encourage you to do that. You won't like the results.

The author of the study, Arthur Brooks, expected to conclude that liberals are more generous (after all, CNN says so). But he found the opposite (not that liberals aren't generous by the way, but conservatives were slightly more so). Brooks concluded, as a rational person might expect, that the role that religion plays on the two sides (important to the right, mocked by the left) is a main incentive for conservatives to dig a little deeper.

Despite what the left says, there's actually more to religion than bombing abortion clinics. Christianity has some pretty good qualities. You won't hear that on any mainstream news though, which is why you aren't aware of it.

Molesting children is spectacular

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

Crazy, huh, can't believe how hard it is to get service staff over the age of 65, these days, since this all started. That usually is the target hiring age of the service industry too
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

150K were not

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

Crazy, huh, can't believe how hard it is to get service staff over the age of 65, these days, since this all started. That usually is the target hiring age of the service industry too
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It's unbelievable what people will do, when the facts aren't on their side, but they can't admit it.

They claim to care about the deaths, but not one of them criticized Gov Cuomo for forcing nursing homes to admit residents who tested positive for a disease which we all knew was going to target the elderly. They were giving him emmys in the middle of that, calling him the "gold standard".

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Molesting children is spectacular

Yes, that's exactly what I've said, many times.

You can't just admit what has been proven to be true, unless it supports liberalism.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

I guess you didn't bother to read my post. The op-ed discussed a statistical study. You can ignore every word of the columnist and focus on the data in the study. I encourage you to do that. You won't like the results.

The author of the study, Arthur Brooks, expected to conclude that liberals are more generous (after all, CNN says so). But he found the opposite (not that liberals aren't generous by the way, but conservatives were slightly more so). Brooks concluded, as a rational person might expect, that the role that religion plays on the two sides (important to the right, mocked by the left) is a main incentive for conservatives to dig a little deeper.

Despite what the left says, there's actually more to religion than bombing abortion clinics. Christianity has some pretty good qualities. You won't hear that on any mainstream news though, which is why you aren't aware of it.

I read your post and the Op-Ed it referred to, nowhere did it link to a study, only inferred information that the author gave his opinion on.
If as you claim you have read that study perhaps you can link it.

By the way it's behind a paywall.

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

150K were not

Now take out the over 50's, because most of the service staff folks are usually younger than that. Then narrow it down to what percentage of the workforce that works as service staff

Number keeps getting smaller doesn't it?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

I read your post and the Op-Ed it referred to, nowhere did it link to a study, only inferred information that the author gave his opinion on.
If as you claim you have read that study perhaps you can link it.

By the way it's behind a paywall.

The study is called "Who Really Cares", done by Arthur Brooks, who has a lot of experience in public policy.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

Now take out the over 50's, because most of the service staff folks are usually younger than that. Then narrow it down to what percentage of the workforce that works as service staff

Number keeps getting smaller doesn't it?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

And here, according to the Bureau Of Labor Statistics, as of July there were over 9 million unfilled jobs in the private sector.

300,000 in construction
900,000 in manufacturing
1,400,000 in retail/wholesale
500,000 in transportation/warehousing/utilities
1,800,000 in leisure and hospitality
400,000 in other services

Somehow, according to Pete, the 150,000 people under 65 who died of covid, were filling all of those jobs.

In that case, maybe they worked themselves to death, maybe they didn't actually die of covid.

https://www.bls.gov/news.release/jolts.t01.htm

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

The study is called "Who Really Cares", done by Arthur Brooks, who has a lot of experience in public policy.

It's not a study, it's a book written by someone with an opinion.

But now I see where you get your rhetoric.

Brooks is a prototypical member of the modern Republican elite. His ideology is rooted centrally in the class war, a struggle between what he calls “the makers” and “the takers.” He inhabits an imaginary world in which the former are being hounded nearly to extinction by the latter. “At some point,” he sorrowfully predicts, “the rich (as defined by the 30 percent) will pay all the income taxes in America. For the 30 percent coalition, this is fair and just.”

Brooks’s portrait of a world in which the rich are ruthlessly exploited in the name of absolute equality is long on hysterical rhetoric and very short on data. What little data Brooks presents is almost invariably wrong. “In America,” he declares, “the top 5 percent of earners bring in 37 percent of the income but pay 60 percent of the taxes.” This is false. The top 5 percent of income earners pay 38.5 percent of all taxes. And a system where the richest 5 percent earn 37 percent of the income and pay 38.5 percent of the taxes is not, I would submit, a draconian left-wing imposition.


Where does Brooks get this wildly wrong figure? The number he cites describes the share of federal income taxes paid for by the richest 5 percent. But the American tax system is a mix of regressive and progressive taxes. State and local taxes, as well as federal payroll taxes, tend to levy higher rates on the poor and middle class than on the rich. The income tax, which is steeply progressive, helps to tilt the balance of the burden back in the other direction. When conservatives portray the tax code as unfair to the rich, they usually cite just the income-tax burden, calculating that their audience will fail to notice that “income taxes” do not mean taxes as a whole. Brooks uses the term “taxes” when he means “income taxes.” He has fallen for his own ruse.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

And here, according to the Bureau Of Labor Statistics, as of July there were over 9 million unfilled jobs in the private sector.

300,000 in construction
900,000 in manufacturing
1,400,000 in retail/wholesale
500,000 in transportation/warehousing/utilities
1,800,000 in leisure and hospitality
400,000 in other services

Somehow, according to Pete, the 150,000 people under 65 who died of covid, were filling all of those jobs.

In that case, maybe they worked themselves to death, maybe they didn't actually die of covid.

https://www.bls.gov/news.release/jolts.t01.htm

Maybe they were all illegal aliens

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"Jim why even mention migrants and Covid at all in the same sentence."

Because 200,000 of them were encountered on our side of the border, and one result showed that 1 in 5 had covid. That's 40,000 covid-positive migrants coming across in a month, and that's just the ones that BP encountered. Who knows how many more there are.

I answered your question. Can you answer mine? Why do you think it' snot even worth mentioning, that our open borders are essentially importing as many as 40,000 covid-positive people in a month? Why are you so intent on sweeping that under the rug?

"unless it’s to blame and deflect from actual happening.. in the US with Covid"

We can't talk about two things at once? Maybe you can't, most of us can. I'm not deflecting anything. There are multiple facets to this, I go where the truth (not where CNN) takes me.

"Only conservatives are trying to tie migrants to Covid"

SO you deny that tens of thousands of covid-positive migrants are likely coming across the southern border?

Wayne, when I brought this up, you immediately pivoted to the insignificantly low number of migrants who were granted asylum. You completely ignored the much, much larger number of illegal migrants. Then you claimed the illegals are never in the USA. So it appears to us that youre the one who is lying and deflecting.

You say you want to address covid, but you won't admit any issue with 40,000 covid-positive people crossing in a single month, in addition to god-knows-how-many others that were never encountered by BPS. We all know they don't catch all of them.

So one of two things is happening. Either you don't think that importing 40,000 sick people a month is worthy of discussing, or you refuse to discuss it because the underlying issue (open border) is a losing issue for your political agenda.

I have seen just about every conservatives here, criticize conservatives a few times. None of the liberals here except Rockhound, are capable of it. Never.

you still have no understand of how encounters do not equal entrance

you assume somehow 40,000 sick people a month are traveling around the US spreading Covid .. the open border lie runs deep in your mind

We have the same border we had under Trump nothing has changed people arrive and are returned stop being so obtuse ..

the Biden administration keeps Trump-era rule of turning away migrants during pandemic..., but seem you missed that memo
another example

https://www.statesman.com/

the vast majority of migrants encountered by Border Patrol are sent back to Mexico under Title 42 — a Trump-era policy designed to curb COVID-19 spread that the Biden administration has left in place.


.. And how would we know 1 in 5 have covid ? because the last republican lie was they weren't being tested..


the U.S. Department of Homeland Security told PolitiFact that it works with state authorities, local authorities and non-governmental organizations to ensure that “100% of noncitizens” are tested for COVID-19 "at some point during their immigration journey." The agency also has told PolitiFact that a negative coronavirus test is required by the federal government before entry to the U.S.


Jim no one on the left or middle have said no migrants don't have covid we just dont Blame them like republicans have done to avoid whos responsible for the explosion of Covid 19 in their base of support .. And we can talk about 2 things at once but once again these 2 things are not remotely the same

its Just republicans promoting fear of the other


Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick went on Fox News Thursday night to address the issue, further stoking political flames.

“The revolution has begun, a silent revolution by the Democrat Party and Joe Biden to take over this country," said Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, (R) Texas. "We need every state, every red state because the blue ones won't do it, to send and invoke Article four, section four, of the constitution, to tell the president that we are being invaded.”

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Maybe they were all illegal aliens

Maybe.

or maybe you’re a dishonest political hack.

which is more likely?


Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

We have the same border we had under Trump nothing has changed people arrive and are returned stop being so obtuse ..

.”

You're saying under Trump, we had 200,000 encounters a month? The number of people crossing illegally, hasn't skyrocketed under Biden, is that what you're saying?

"people arrive and are returned"

What's the process for returning these people? Where do they go, and how long are they there? My understanding is that many of them are let go in the US, after promising to show up to a future court date. Is that wrong? How are they processed?

I'm not saying they spend years traveling the country, kissing everyone they see to spread covid. But you seem to be saying they are all immediately returned in a way that doesn't expose Americans to their covid, and I'm sure that's not true either.

[Pete F.]

Under Trump there were more migrants than any year since 2005
Trump reduced aid to Central America, it didn’t make it better there.
Now once again we end up with more people seeking a chance and willing to risk their lives to do that.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Under Trump there were more migrants than any year since 2005
Trump reduced aid to Central America, it didn’t make it better there.
Now once again we end up with more people seeking a chance and willing to risk their lives to do that.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

are there more illegal crossings now than under trump? yes or no?

i give trump bad marks on the border, he campaigned on sealing it up but didn’t.

but crossings have skyrocketed under this administration. can you admit that? No you can’t.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

are there more illegal crossings now than under trump? yes or no?

i give trump bad marks on the border, he campaigned on sealing it up but didn’t.

but crossings have skyrocketed under this administration. can you admit that? No you can’t.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Did I deny that?

I gave the reason why, but you think that there is a magic thing that stops illegal immigration without doing anything about the things that push people to leave where they are.

Just think how bad things would have to be to take your family and go to an unknown place.

No immigration reform has been done since Reagan, who did it with a Democratic Congress.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Did I deny that?

I gave the reason why, but you think that there is a magic thing that stops illegal immigration without doing anything about the things that push people to leave where they are.

Just think how bad things would have to be to take your family and go to an unknown place.

No immigration reform has been done since Reagan, who did it with a Democratic Congress.

oh, so crossings are up, but it’s Trumps fault, of course.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

You say they said. You also said they didn't mention her by name, so...

The report didn't, you're citing an interview with a small school paper, not exactly widespread promotion.

Yahoo, among others, says otherwise. I dare say you might want to re-think where you get your "news".

https://news.yahoo.com/news/harsh-fo...ycsrp_catchall

This isn't Yahoo, it's a hit piece by a writer that works for Glenn Beck.

WaPo did a breakdown of every house she or her husband bought or sold. There were 4 foreclosures and all we're held for more than six months. Buying homes on the open market for her family to remodel isn't exactly a nefarious act and she was criticizing banks for ILLEGAL FORECLOSURES.

Which took place "months before she was visibly pregnant"? If she quit before she was visibly pregnant, how could they have fired her for being pregnant?

It looks like they offered to continue her contract before they knew she was pregnant.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

The report didn't, you're citing an interview with a small school paper, not exactly widespread promotion.


This isn't Yahoo, it's a hit piece by a writer that works for Glenn Beck.

WaPo did a breakdown of every house she or her husband bought or sold. There were 4 foreclosures and all we're held for more than six months. Buying homes on the open market for her family to remodel isn't exactly a nefarious act and not what she was criticizing banks for.


It looks like they offered to continue her contract before they knew she was pregnant.

oh, so it’s ok to profit on foreclosures, as long as you hold them for 6 months!!! Of course!

Spence, you are precious. She said it was predatory for banks to foreclose in search of improving their bottom line. But of course, it’s not hypocritical for her to profit from it. and it’s wrong for
banks to profit from student loans, but ok if those loans paid her $400,000 salary.

It all depends on whose ox is getting gored.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Got Stripers]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

are there more illegal crossings now than under trump? yes or no?

i give trump bad marks on the border, he campaigned on sealing it up but didn’t.

but crossings have skyrocketed under this administration. can you admit that? No you can’t.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Really and no cause and effect discussion, come on get real. You call Pete a political hack, yet you somehow are blaming this administration for an increase in crossings, that’s the pot calling the kettle black. Could it be natural disasters, political unrest and many other factors result in the increase.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

oh, so crossings are up, but it’s Trumps fault, of course.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Well, crossings consistently dropped from the Bush administration thru the Obama ultimately reaching lows of less than 50K until 2019 in the Trump administration when they exploded to over 130K.

Trump reduced immigration a little before the Covid-19 pandemic reduced it a lot.

Trump sharply reduced immigration flows that are easy for a president to control, refugees being the most obvious example, and struggled with the rest.

Trump couldn't even deport as many illegals as Obama.

Illegal immigration has always been a push pull and you can change it in two ways, have a great recession which historically cut illegal immigration significantly or improve things in the countries that people feel forced to leave.

The current Republican minority in Congress is obviously trying for the former.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

oh, so it’s ok to profit on foreclosures, as long as you hold them for 6 months!!! Of course!

That's not what I said but if you're holding onto property foreclosure or not it's not really flipping.

Spence, you are precious. She said it was predatory for banks to foreclose in search of improving their bottom line. But of course, it’s not hypocritical for her to profit from it. and it’s wrong for
banks to profit from student loans, but ok if those loans paid her $400,000 salary.

If you can't tell the difference between legal and illegal activity I'm not sure I can help you.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

That's not what I said but if you're holding onto property foreclosure or not it's not really flipping.


If you can't tell the difference between legal and illegal activity I'm not sure I can help you.

A lot of folks can't tell the difference between legal and illegal immigration.

[Pete F.]

A lot of folks can't tell the difference between Joseph Goebbels and Stephen Miller.

They bear an uncanny physical resemblance - and also share the ability to spread nationalistic hate.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

That's not what I said but if you're holding onto property foreclosure or not it's not really flipping.


If you can't tell the difference between legal and illegal activity I'm not sure I can help you.

the banks who foreclosed also didn’t break laws.

i never said what warred did was illegal. i said she’s a hypocrite, it a criminal.

If i clearly say hypocrite, and you hear criminal, I’m not sure I can help you.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Would hypocrisy be like this?

Brett Kavanaugh: ‘I’m a devout Catholic.’

Vatican: ‘Pope wants the execution of a man with mental acuity of a child to be stopped.’

Kavanaugh: ‘I’m not THAT kind of Catholic.’

or that the Catholic church hierarchy in this century and the last wanted to protect the unborn and molest the young?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Would hypocrisy be like this?

Brett Kavanaugh: ‘I’m a devout Catholic.’

Vatican: ‘Pope wants the execution of a man with mental acuity of a child to be stopped.’

Kavanaugh: ‘I’m not THAT kind of Catholic.’

or that the Catholic church hierarchy in this century and the last wanted to protect the unborn and molest the young?

no that’s not hypocritical, because he’s supposed to decide cases based on what the constitution says, not what the pope says. this is news to you?

if you want him deciding death penalty cases based on his faith? how about abortion cases?

all of the hierarchy wanted to molest the young? or a sick minority?

aren’t you tired of humiliating yourself in this thread? it’s embarrassing, and too easy to bitch slap you.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device