Memeorandum


Powered by TypePad

« That Is A Lot Of ObamaCare Losers | Main | A Bit Of A Dis To Single Payer Advocates »

February 05, 2014

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451b2aa69e201a73d707f5a970d

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Left Unexplained...:

Comments

steve

Is this really a problem?

In an economy where there are more people who want jobs than jobs for them, if 2.5 million people with jobs decide to retire (for whatever reason, whether it be age, disability, Obamacare subsidies, etc.) and are replaced by 2.5 million people who wanted jobs, what is the net cost to society?

There are the same number of people working (presumably, every person who quits gets replaced by a boss who thinks the job needs filling, otherwise, the job would have been eliminated). There are the same number of people out of the workforce. If the public subsidies and support for the newly 'retired' are no higher than the public support for the newly employed while they were unemployed, the cost to the taxpayer isn't any higher. And if the newly employed are in the aggregate just as competent as those who retired, there's no loss of overall productivity.

So what's the real downside?

And save the allegation that I like Obamacare. I don't, but that doesn't mean everything one hears about it is a negative.

NK(withnewsoftware)

From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.

We can put steve in charge of calculating next month's chocolate ration.

NK(withnewsoftware)

Greg Sargent?... pffft. He'll be working on Ezra's blog plantation soon enough... without health benefits.

Beasts of England

I think Steve may be an editor at The Onion.

Captain Hate

To paraphrase what I said elsewhere, involuntarily losing your job is a problem and anybody who says otherwise is an idiot.

rich@gmu

TM a posting machine. He's going to fill all those lost hours by himself at this rate.

steve-

iirc and I may be wrong on this but the cbo scored it that output will decline to the equivalent of 2 million fte hours. That is potential production not produced...ie there wouldn't be jobs for those who want them to fill.

Beasts of England

Exactly, rich. It's not swapping people who fill certain jobs, it's the elimination of those jobs.

daddy

Good Morning!

I'm confused. Between the politicians and the stories TM keeps linking I'm uncertain if it's considered better to kill jobs in this country, or to create jobs in this country? If it's the former, than congrats to President Obama because he's doing a hell of a job killing employment.

NK(withnewsoftware)

That's correct Rich. The stat that CBO now figures is 3 times worse than they figured in 2010 is economic output decline as a result of ObummerCare, and the resulting job equivalent.

NK(withnewsoftware)

Rich-- based on the weather around town it's not a golf day for TM. So, post away.

rich@gmu

daddy-

it is both...yucky jobs (blue collar, dirty) are ok to eliminate. and isn't navigating Big Poverty a full time job in and of itself?

just think of the multipliers and creative output...cowboy poetry, where would we be without cowboy poetry!

hit and run

Golf day? TM loathes golf.

I say that too definitively. We know that TM thinks watching golf is worse than watching paint dry. I am assuming his enthusiasm to play the game isn't much higher.

Jack is Back! (But in Typhus Hell)

Greg Gutfeld is en fuego today.

And Beckel is still as stupid as he was 25 years ago. Who said intelligence or the lack of it doesn't age well.

Bori

Steve, don't forget that since the employer mandate has not kicked in that was not part of the the consideration. Its going to get worse.

daddy

More Climate fun from the West Coast.

In fight against souring seas (Ocean Acidification) West Coast states step up as Congress stalls.

U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska -- whose state drives the country's most bountiful fishing harvest, providing half the nation's catch -- spoke of the need for stable research funding and worried aloud about food-web changes.

"If the little pteropods that are out there that the salmon gobble on leave us because of what's going on with acidification ... think about what that means for our fisheries industry," Murkowski said during an oceans forum in D.C. last spring. "It is huge for the state of Alaska."

For many, the chief barrier is ignorance.

Steve

Rich: seriously, help me understand. If someone working for me quits, I replace them. No net change in the number of jobs. Why is it any different with workers who quit because Obamacare allows them to? They quit, and are replaced by someone who doesn't have but wants a job. Again, no net reduction in the number of jobs. It would be different if we were at full employment, but we're far from that. What am I missing?

Beasts of England

If you haven't seen it, daddy, WUWT has a hilarious article on a study claiming that global warming is creating stronger and more frequent waves - making it harder for fish to swim! It's getting very difficult to lampoon the loons...

NK(withnewsoftware)

Murkowski-- and yet, the temps they do not move.

NK(withnewsoftware)

After it's been explained, clearly, by our host and commenters, 5:31 is willful ignorance.

Bori

"A team of ocean scientists detailed the need: "Once the program is fully engaged, $50 million to $100 million per year is considered the minimum if scientists are to provide useful information regarding how the oceans are responding,"

So they don't know if there is a problem or how bad a problem it may be, but if you give them money maybe they will find out. For people that are constantly railing about the evils of money and the inequality it creates they are always with their hands out for more.

jimmyk

Steve: Maybe you don't replace the one who quits. Maybe you think it's a good time to shrink the workforce rather than compete with Obamacare subsidies. Maybe someone who was going to start a business decides not to--remember the population is growing over time, so no job growth means a lower employment/population ratio.

daddy

claiming that global warming is creating stronger and more frequent waves...

Quick, somebody tell Windandsea:)

Bori

Steve, don't you realize that if people are leaving the workforce to be on the dole, someone will have to pick up the tab, for starters. You are not only replacing that worker with another one, you are essentially also paying the one that quit.

clarice

Millbank must have been accidentally dropped from the Journolist.

David M

Workers not jobs.

And it's not 2 million workers, it's a much larger number of workers that are changing the amount of hours they want to work by a small amount.

Regardless of whether this is good or bad, it's a discussion of workers and the choices they now have. It's not a discussion about jobs.

Jack is Back! (But in Typhus Hell)

Jewish ELBOW

A Jewish grandmother is giving directions to her grown grandson who is coming to visit with his wife.

"You come to the front door of the apartment. I am in apartment 301 . There is a big panel at the front door. With your elbow, push button 301. I will buzz you in. Come inside, the elevator is on the right. Get in and with your elbow, push 3. When you get out, I'm on the left. With your elbow, hit my doorbell."

"Grandma, that sounds easy, but, why am I hitting all these buttons with my elbow?.......

"What?..... You're comin empty handed?

henry

Steve, if someone quits I look to automate the position out of existence. With Ocare on the horizon, I don't wait for someone to quit.

jimmyk

So if freeing all these wage slaves is such a whizbang terrific outcome of 404Care, and a feature not a bug, why are we only hearing about it now? Why wasn't it trumpeted back in 2010 as one of the great benefits of the ACA? And was "too many jobs" and "working too many hours" really a problem that people were talking about back then?

We're in the realm of comedy again, where someone's scheme goes horribly awry, and he says, "That's just how I planned it! It's what I wanted all along."

NK(withnewsoftware)

Close-- TomM in his earlier post cites CBO tex that clearly explains this. ObummerCare is a high marginal tax on low income workers. Obummercare taxes their work If you tax something you get less of it, in this case you get less work, because 2M people will be FORCED to go on dole rather than work, because of the perverse disincentives of ObummerCare. This is a good thing...how?

Steve

Bori: yes, you now have a newly unemployed person on the dole, but that's offset by the previously unemployed worker who's no longer on the dole

Jimmyk: sure, but given the economic climate today, are there really that many positions that don't need to be filled if the current occupant was to quit? If anything, I think we'd have jobs that should exist but aren't because businesses aren't wiling to take the risk.

daddy

Bori,

And if you read the next 2 lines of that story you see that the Scientists say that the $50 million to $100 million per year that they were asking for was in the Scientists view inadequate, but that they didn't ask for more because the nation was mired in recession and they thought that things would get better in the future for them to ask for more money.

Captain Hate

"If the little pteropods that are out there that the salmon gobble on leave us because of what's going on with acidification ... think about what that means for our fisheries industry," Murkowski said during an oceans forum in D.C. last spring. "It is huge for the state of Alaska."

For many, the chief barrier is ignorance.

Like the global warming hiding in the deep ocean? Some real sooper jeanyusses in that field...

rich@gmu

and my comment when poof.

and since the plural of anecdote is data...got my taxes finished and imagine my surprise that my income fell 17.8% yoy and hours working fell 12.9%.

that translates to real money and real purchasing.

NK(withnewsoftware)

exactly JimmyK. My analogy is the tony hendra Spinal tap character explaining to the reporter that playing 5000 seat venues is better than 50,000 seaters because of audience 'selectivity'. The Carney/NYT meme is complete BS,

Rob Crawford
Bori: yes, you now have a newly unemployed person on the dole, but that's offset by the previously unemployed worker who's no longer on the dole

Except there's no job for that previously unemployed worker. There are now two unemployed people.

Why is there no job? Because there's no demand for their labor. The spending that would have supported their job is being siphoned up into the Obamacare mess -- so we're all paying more for less insurance coverage than we had before.

Any time you screw up a market by forcing people to buy more than they want for a higher price than they would freely pay, you reduce the total wealth in the market. The reduction in wealth means fewer jobs.

rich@gmu

see if I can reconstruct it...

do you replace them?

you have a firm without of y produced by a workforce the size of x. after the ACA the firms production is now Cy where 0 < C < 1. is x going to be bigger or smaller than 1?

rich@gmu

of course of course...a firm with output of y...

Rob Crawford
Like the global warming hiding in the deep ocean? Some real sooper jeanyusses in that field...

Yep -- the heat's hiding in the deep ocean, and an alkaline body of water lined with calcium carbonate is "turning acid".

jimmyk

If anything, I think we'd have jobs that should exist but aren't because businesses aren't wiling to take the risk.

Did you read the second part I wrote about population growing and job growth not keeping pace? Do you see the connection?

You seem to be arguing that employment should be a constant like the speed of light.

Beasts of England

If anything, I think we'd have jobs that should exist but aren't because businesses aren't wiling to take the risk.

Would you expand on this theme a little bit, Steve?

Bori

Steve,

You are thinking as this is a zero-sum game. First, as David M. has pointed out it is not jobs per se so there is no swap. The 2.5 full-time hours could mean 5 million people that are not working full-time but all 5 are drawing a subsidy. That subsidy will fall on those that are working to pick-up and pay.

Second what sort of tax base will there be once this happens, as the subsidies will almost guaranty that the person will not pay income taxes or very little. Your are swapping one tax paying worker for 2 or 3 non tax paying worker receiving a federal subsidy

Danube on iPad

"If 2.5 million people with jobs decide to retire (for whatever reason, whether it be age, disability, Obamacare subsidies, etc.) and are replaced by 2.5 million people who wanted jobs, what is the net cost to society?"

False premise. The CBO model projects a NET loss of 2.5 million person-years of work. And that's the societal cost.

daddy

Wow.

Greg Gutfeld just said that his show Red Eye, which he sez airs at 3 AM, for the month of January 2014 beat the viewership of each individual CNN Show for the entire month. Ha!

rich@gmu

David M-

>>> it's a discussion of workers and the choices they now have. It's not a discussion about jobs.<<<

maybe I'll just repeat this until TM bumps it up as a sidebar in the main post: "imagine my surprise that my income fell 17.8% yoy and hours working fell 12.9%.

that translates to real money and real purchasing."

little did I know that it was a choice. thanks.

Beasts of England

The heat is hiding in the ocean with all the jobs...

clarice

Quit picing on steve, guys, he's giving us a lesson in Dem mat/economics. Sheesh. Do I have to 'splain everything?

clarice

*matH/economics*

Bori

Yes MOM! :}

David M

This isn't a new surprise either, it's an intentional feature of any health care reform plan or means tested benefit. This is an obvious outcome from ending job lock and de-linking health insurance from employment. It shouldn't be thought of as a negative by itself.

Phasing out the subsidies more gradually would fix some of the more negative scenarios where someone loses money by working a little more. This would keep the good part (people that want to work less still can) and get rid of the financial incentives to work less.

Jack is Back! (But in Typhus Hell)

Beside a UN exit platform how about a platform that includes eliminating public service employee's union's?

jimmyk

JiB, I'm stealing that elbow joke. There are never enough Jewish mother/grandma jokes.

Beasts of England

Look at the bright side: when those two and a half million people start collecting unemployment, their unemployment checks will create millions of new jobs!

Problem solved! And, you're welcome...

Threadkiller

"Must See TV: Race Pimp & Confirmed Liar Al Sharpton Goes Bonkers Over Birthers

Al pretending to be a newscaster airs to his 57 viewers some pretty good clips of Obama being hammered over his lawlessness and ineligibility. Including an interview with Sen. Ted Cruz from Beck's radio show yesterday where Sen. Cruz slammed Obama's imperial presidency. Al's manufactured outrage would be funny if this wasn't such a serious issue. It is outrageous this dirtbag is given such a platform. Notice how they never allow Birthers on?"

http://youtu.be/4wDTvOdL3d4

Loon?

Steve

I know what the CBO wrote, I'm just having trouble taking it from the abstract theoretical to real life.

For example, how does this selective cutting back of hours work when the boss insists that the worker not show up only part time? Does the CBO think workers get to dial up a job with the number of hours they want to work in a given week? (All you folks wanting 36.5 hours, Row 1, all you wanting between 32.5 and 36, Row2 and so on?)

I'm stuck in what I think is the real world, and when some guy making up numbers on a spreadsheet produces something that doesn't make sense, I'm not inclined to automatically assume he's right.

How many times have we scoffed at what the CBO has put out? And now, because it allegedly knocks Obamacare, we accept it as gospel?

Bori

David M,
you are right, in fact Pelosi said it in an interview. I believe she said that now people would be free to actors, artist, etc. but they also said it would only affect 800,000 people not millions.

daddy

If I was a Mooslim terrorist in Sochi, I would skip Plutonium into dirty pillows and give them away to the athletes:

Sochi Is Running Out of Pillows

It is amazing how many things are happening lately, (like "No Pillows at Sochi, or "Jerry Seinfeld's a Racist", or "Losing Jobs is a great thing for America", or "Not a smidgen of IRS corruption") all sound like stories from Mad Magazine or The Onion.

Baybakova posted a picture of a notice to volunteers, which translates as follows:

“ATTENTION, DEAR COLLEAGUES!

Due to an extreme shortage of pillows for athletes who unexpectedly arrived to Olympic Village in the mountains, there will be a transfer of pillows from all apartments to the storehouse on 2 February 2014. Please be understanding. We have to help the athletes out of this bind.”

narciso

Close, daddy, we have the 'toothpaste of terror,' this Sochi thing is going pear shaped'
and in the words of Admiral Painter follow on,

Danube on iPad

And all this time they were telling us about all the jobs saved or created, we thought they were bragging. Now we learn it's a bad thing.

Rob Crawford
This would keep the good part (people that want to work less still can) ...

Except people who don't want to work less have to pay for the free-loaders. So people who don't want to work less end up worse off.

Since no one in this world really gets what they want, why not favor the people who are doing useful things for other people by working, running businesses, etc, and not favoring the people who just don't want to be bothered?

Danube on iPad

"...would be funny if this wasn't such a serious issue."

What is "this?"

Rob Crawford
I know what the CBO wrote, I'm just having trouble taking it from the abstract theoretical to real life.

Really? Because it's not effing rocket surgery, or even brain science.

THERE WILL BE LESS WEALTH AVAILABLE TO EMPLOY PEOPLE, BECAUSE OBAMACARE HAS RAISED THE COST OF HEALTHCARE AND MANDATED THAT PEOPLE PAY THE HIGHER COST.

matt

ha! Jib! Great!

Well, I must say that fish swim, uh, underwater and so are not as affected by big waves as say, surfers.

Next they will be telling us about the dangers of giant ships.

Rob Crawford
you are right, in fact Pelosi said it in an interview. I believe she said that now people would be free to actors, artist, etc. but they also said it would only affect 800,000 people not millions.

Why should people who don't want any of the "art" produced by these freeloaders be forced to pay for it?

narciso

Steyn was pointing out, that OFA's pro minimum wage pitch couldn't find an American, they had to use a pic from the London underground, the Whitechapel to Surrey line,

Beasts of England

The bathroom signs at Sochi are rather amusing, as well. No toilet fishing allowed! And upper-deckers are out of the question...

http://t.co/EjDdocsbej

David M

Rob - decoupling health insurance from employment was always going to result in people choosing to work less, and is not a negative outcome for Obamacare or any health care reform. It's one of the desired results.

narciso

So, Fluke is taking the switch to lion taming in stages, through banking,

henry

David M, if the employer has to pay more for it or at least to pay for it even if they do not provide it (that little tax Justice Roberts found), it is not decoupled. It is simply raising the cost of employees to employers. That demand curve is not inelastic. Thus fewer hours will be bought -- at least 2 million fte's of fewer hours.

Rob Crawford
decoupling health insurance from employment

Obamacare doesn't do that. Never attempted to do that. Never was intended to do that. The people saying that was a goal TODAY are saying it because we've just heard what a clusterfuck it will truly turn out to be, and they think this makes them sound all sophisticated and informed and makes everything better.

But I guess some people need to tell themselves lies endlessly, or they wouldn't be able to live with what they've done to the country.

Jack is Back! (But in Typhus Hell)

For all especially my friends in the Bay Colony:

"The nature of the encroachment upon American constitution is such, as to grow every day more and more encroaching. Like a cancer; it eats faster and faster every hour. The revenue creates pensioners, and the pensioners urge for more revenue. The people grow less steady, spirited and virtuous, the seekers more numerous and more corrupt, and every day increases the circles of their dependents and expectants, until virtue, integrity, public spirit, simplicity and frugality become the objects of ridicule and scorn, and vanity, luxury, foppery, selfishness, meanness, and downright venality swallow up the whole of society."

--John Adams, to the Inhabitants of the Colony of Massachusetts Bay

This what a hundred of years or something ago?

Rob Crawford

If the people who threw Obamacare together intended to decouple employment and health insurance, they wouldn't have included the employer mandate.

life crisis

Jealously palpable wrt Slick's adventures. Not only is he the first Black POTUS, he's the only one so far.

David M

There's no question that Obamacare has resulted in health insurance being much less tightly tied to full time employment. It's not fully decoupled from employment (yet), but there has been a massive change.

The Medicaid expansion, subsidies and elimination of pre-existing conditions clearly accomplish that goal. It's not really a debatable fact.

Jack is Back! (But in Typhus Hell)

Is Ailes the smartest man in media or what?

He has pitted the worthless Ron Fournier against Dr. K. No contest and it finally makes public on TV to the unwashed what a partisan mouthpiece Ron is and how much he wants to apologize and welcome the new emporers.

Stephanie VIP shhhhh its fight club

"Choosing to work less?" Said no entrepreneur or go getter evar! Don't give me extra work boss but I deserve a promotion. :eyeroll:

Seriously? You really think people don't want to maximize earnings wherever possible? They don't want to move from 9 west to coach to Michael Kors to Gucci? Are you fing nuts?

daddy

Tatyana: I've got a great idea how to pull a terrorist attack in Sochi and embarrass Putin and humiliate Mother Russia.

Muhammed: I'm all ears.

Tatyana: We poison the water supply!

Muhammed: Sounds good, but the water supply is already poisoned---this is Sochi we're talking about.

Tatyana: Rats. Okay, how about we stick plutonium in the pillows of the athlete's?

Muhammed: You're close, but no balaklava. They don't have any pillows in the Olympic Village.

Tatyana: Damn. Okay, how about we put explosives in the TV's in the Hotel rooms? Kaboom!

Muhammed: Unfortunately Comrade, only one in a hundred rooms has a TV in it.

Tatyana: Crimea-mony! No TV's? What about Exploding Radios?

Muhammed: Same as the TV's. There ain't any.

Tatyana: Well what say we spray the toilet paper with a toxic chemical that'll have a chemical reaction and create deadly fumes when you flush it down the toilet?

Muhammed: Didn't you see the poster? No flushing of paper down the toilet.

Tatyana: How about we put explosives on dogs and...

Muhammed: They're already shooting all the dogs on sight.

Tatyana: We plug up the sewers?

Muhammed: The shit is already overflowing in the streets of the Olympic Village, and it's only going to get much, much worse.

Tatyana: Ai yi yi. Then this is terrible, Muhammed. So how do we use this golden opportunity to embarrass Putin and humiliate Russia on the World Stage?

Muhammed: How about we just sit back and let the Sochi Olympics happen as planned?

Tatyana: Muhammed, you're a genius. Allah be praised!

narciso

I wondered who that silly person was, JiB, that he seemed incapable of grasping the basic point,

NK(withnewsoftware)

Henry@6:41-- and to make it worse the perverse disincentives in ObummerCare make it a rational choice for the employee to not work those hours based on the tax imposed on working through the subsidy provided for not working. This is where French 75% marginal tax rates come from.

Rob Crawford
There's no question that Obamacare has resulted in health insurance being much less tightly tied to full time employment. It's not fully decoupled from employment (yet), but there has been a massive change.

The "massive change" has been in people losing their jobs. But you're cool with that, because apparently all those long-term unemployed people who have given up looking for work made that choice, right?

It's not really a debatable fact.

It's not a "debatable fact" because it's an unsupported assertion.

Danube on iPad

I have always supported decoupling health insurance from employment. They never would have been coupled in the first place were it not for IRS rulings during the era of wage and price controls. There are certainly less calamitous means of doing the decoupling than this monstrosity.

David M

The effect of the employer mandate is tiny when compared to overall effects of Obamacare, and encouraging employers to offer health insurance does not mean that the rest of the act doesn't do much more decouple health insurance from employment.

Stephanie VIP shhhhh its fight club

The Medicaid expansion, subsidies and elimination of pre-existing conditions clearly accomplish that goal. It's not really a debatable fact.

Riiiiight. Til that Medicaid person gets a job and BAM! They no longer qualify for Medicaid or til they get a raise and BAM! That subsidy goes away cause you make too much or BAM! You get married and that subsidy goes away.

As long as the thresholds are tied to earnings, there is no decoupling.

Next fact that isn't debatable?

narciso

Chronicles of tha absurd;

"I'm off the grid. I move about with my TV show so that the drones can't find me and you won't know exactly where I am," Ventura said, talking over the host's question as to whether it was a hoax.

Taranto ponders how he can be off the grid, with internet access;

Rob Crawford
There are certainly less calamitous means of doing the decoupling than this monstrosity.

Was Obamacare ever sold on this premise? I'm pretty sure I heard all the BS spewed by its proponents, but that wasn't one of them. IT was all about insuring the uninsured...

And now we have more people without insurance than before, some of those who are counted as "insured" aren't really (because the infrastructure was cronied instead of built), and it looks like the formerly solvent, expanding insurance companies are going to need to be kept alive at taxpayer's expense.

But, hey, there might be another Banksy out there who's now free to smoke pot and spray paint other people's businesses. NET GAIN!!!!

Rob Crawford
The effect of the employer mandate is tiny when compared to overall effects of Obamacare...

Because Obama illegally postponed its enforcement.

Once it kicks in, however...

narciso

Facepalm with a Ctluthu, lily white Buzzfeed,
derides Seinfeld's new web venture,

tweedledumb

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130417/16253022748/oh-look-rep-mike-rogers-wife-stands-to-benefit-greatly-cispa-passing.shtml


"It would appear that Rep. Mike Rogers, the main person in Congress pushing for CISPA, has kept rather quiet about a very direct conflict of interest that calls into serious question the entire bill. It would appear that Rogers' wife stands to benefit quite a lot from the passage of CISPA, and has helped in the push to get the bill passed. It's somewhat amazing that no one has really covered this part of the story, but it highlights, yet again, the kind of activities by folks in Congress that make the public trust Congress less and less. "

Threadkiller

What is "this?"

I can't understand it for you.

Bori

Steve,

The CBO's study is just one of the many that have arrived at the same conclusion. Cato, a study by Northwestern, another by the University of Chicago all said the same. The only difference was the projections of how many jobs and the economic effect. But all agreed that it would be costly.

Charlie Martin

Rich: seriously, help me understand. If someone working for me quits, I replace them.

Steve, that's the core issue here: the "I replace them" part. It appears that the CBO is saying that 2.5 million × 40 hours × 52 weeks of work would be eliminated. Somebody quits and you *don't* replace them.

daddy

decoupling health insurance from employment was always going to result in people choosing to work less, and is not a negative outcome for Obamacare or any health care reform. It's one of the desired results.

Fascinating. As I recall every time the "unexpectedly" lousy employment numbers come out, the Administration instantly and defiantly responds that the increase in part time employment and the decrease in full time jobs has nothing whatever to do with ObamaCare---yet now you tell us that that is exactly the desired result they were shooting for. Please let Jay Carney and Obama know that.

Charlie Martin

Bori: yes, you now have a newly unemployed person on the dole, but that's offset by the previously unemployed worker who's no longer on the dole

Uh, if O-care makes it economically unattractive to work in those jobs, why do you think it would be economically attractive to other people to take the jobs?

Threadkiller

"Third affidavit received from SSA in Taitz v Colvin, they de facto proved the case by the Plaintiff, Orly Taitz, as SSA  admits that they never even searched for the actual SS-5, Social Security application of Bounel..."

http://beforeitsnews.com/r2/?url=/obama-birthplace-controversy/2014/02/third-affidavit-received-from-ssa-they-de-facto-proved-my-case-as-they-admit-that-they-never-even-searched-for-the-actual-ss-5-social-security-2473716.html

Jack is Back! (But in Typhus Hell)

Welcom, DoT. Did you enjoy your martini?

matt

Salmon are one of the more mysterious species in the ocean. We don't know where they go between the time they egress into the ocean and the time they return.

I think they're down there under the Very Large Ships. I think Lisa's staffer must have gotten the spelling for pteropod from the NRDC hack who wrote the bulk of the release.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Amazon





Traffic

Wilson/Plame