My point was never it's not better now than then. My point is it's not as good as it should be. Yes Wall Street has been making out like a bandit because the Fed is creating trillions out of thin air and pumping up the banks and Brokerage Houses. Joe and Betty six-pack are not benefiting from that. We are adding jobs but not enough to keep up with the rate of population growth. We need 250K jobs a month just to break even. The only reason the U3 number is below 7% is the Labor Participation Rate is as low has its ever been. We are adding government jobs and part time service jobs.

Economies are cyclical. Had we done absolutely nothing in 2008 the economy would have recovered eventually on its own because of millions of people making free choices driving the market. Had we followed the blueprint provided us in 1982 we would have grown out of the recession much sooner than now. By following the polices of the 30s we have exacerbated the situation and we are still dragging an anchor.

And yes you can bring Stella, that girl from St. Paulie, and if you can find it, some Badonk-A-Dunkel. Oh, and if Carl shows I'll be sure to have some of this on hand.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-nL4lfS_V4L...antBastard.jpg :D:D

Yeah listening to fixed news I can see your point... During this time frame the connected expanded the gap between the workers and Wall Street more than at any other time in history. That 3% benefitted who? Wall Street bought the politicians, the Biah Supreme Court (today) is rewarding Koch brothers and their ilk all the way to the bank, bending the rules and laws and politicians to expand the gap even further. This is not left or right. It is about what is right for our kids.... Careful of the data you use it is just that data. Look at the reality of your earning power as a pilot versus that of RA and the rest... And we cannot afford politicians in office with their separate health care, protected retirements for life with COLA. My vote will go to those that look out for all of us long term. Yes it is slim pickings at the moment for a non corrupt politicians and that needs to change...

If you know how to do that I am all ears!

She's hot & I think so. :D

With this government, nothing is as good as it should be. We get it, because we allow for it to be paid for.


Drink order -- noted. :D

To show this is a neutral equal opportunity beer summit they'll be this for Johnson, PG, Slow, et al.

http://aleheads.files.wordpress.com/...laboration.jpg

For Bar there will be this.

http://s3.amazonaws.com/foodspotting...jpg?1376768466

And for all the guys based in SLC we will have plenty of

http://aleheads.files.wordpress.com/...amy-porter.jpg

Ok, Gunship. We will have to discuss that at the beer summit. :D

That's great that you know how to cherry pick the list. Here's the link for the list donations to the incumbents. It surely doesn't look as skewed as the non-incumbents. I guess being TOTALLY forthcoming doesn't fit with your argument?

http://www.alpa.org/portals/alpa/dep...useInc2014.pdf

http://cdn.hark.com/images/000/448/4...2/original.jpg



Carl

It's not a cherry pick. The non-incumbents list is the important one because it shows everyone what you want for the future of the House and Senate. It's very clear what the ALPA PAC wants the House and Senate to look like:

Yes, it shows ALPA PAC paid money to 135 Democrat incumbents versus 92 Republican incumbents. But again, giving money to incumbents is just hedging your bets which doesn't show what your political leanings are. That's determined by who you support to unseat incumbents. In the case of ALPA PAC, it's almost total support for new Democrats and almost no support for new Republicans.

I'll leave it to others to decide which one of us is trying to deceive the membership. They can look at the lists and decide for themselves.

Carl

We need to plan the summit asap. I think FTB's basement is perfect. I'll bring the Sierra Nevada!

Let's debate new! Or we can wait until you get bumped down to the 73 in LA and we can chat on the red eye to RDU.:D;)