WorldTraveller

Of course not, Soros' intentions are all virtuous by nature. Big difference, duhhh

It didn't hamper growth, and yes there were some jobs created as a result of it, and yes it did add demand to the economy. But you miss the point, the point is was it worth it? Did it create the jobs that a trillion dollar stimulus should have? Did it do anything to solve our structural labor problems? And the answer is a resounding no. You say that there should have been less tax cuts and more stimulus. Well, we know that the stimulus funds, which was in the hundreds of billions went towards ailing state/local budgets, so that there would be less public sector layoffs. We also know that it did save public sector jobs (which benefited public sector union employees, and to believe there wasn't a political payback would be naive) from being layed off that year. We also know that those very same public sector jobs that were bailed out, have and still are being axed today, because state/local tax collections are still down, forcing cuts. So this solution didn't and still doesn't make sense. Then they introduced a bunch of short-term gimmicky tax cuts, which is nothing but a keynesian tax cut. Why do I say that? Because it's short-term, it's not a permanent solution. We also know that adding more infrastructure projects is a good idea, but does nothing to solve our structural issues. So you ask what solutions do we have? Well, you look to solve the issue from a structural view point. Such as rehauling the US tax code. Lower corporate tax rates (which we are the highest in the world), decreasing burdensome regulations that impact small businesses (Gallup poll has two polls that have come out in which in both small business polls that were surveyed, both polls mentioned regulations as there number 1 impediment for job hiring), we could make more trade deals with growing foreign nations, we could open up for more energy drilling, we could invest more in trade/specialty school training. These are structural solutions, I'm not saying not to add any keynesian demand side solutions, sure giving a little jump start such as infrastructure spending is never a bad idea, but these demand side solutions are just meant to supplement a recovery program.

The stimulus plan was flawed to begin with, all it was, was a bunch of short-term tax breaks and spending that created temporary demand that did nothing to fundamentally solve our structural issues. So what did we get out of it? We got a temporary boost that was short-lived, a few happy public sector workers that were able to keep their jobs a little longer, and here we are 3 years later, with those same temporary public sector workers now losing those very same jobs due to stressed state/local budgets, with an economy heading back down, a lost AAA credit rating and over a trillion dollars of added debt to show for it. And we still didn't address our structural labor market woes.

Unfortunately, ABC news using their bullhorn, made this into a political issue to advance their agenda, and here we are in PPP, talking about politics. Go figure

The fact that ABC News was fishing for a specific connection, to make this into some sort of political football is disgusting.

You know I was thinking the same thing, and I would of never of posted it, but his observation I thought merited a reposting of this views on this topic. I thought it was articulated rather well.

I did, and my statement still stands ABC News and Brian Ross are apologizing for an "incorrect" report that James Holmes, the suspect in the Colorado theater shooting, may have had connections to the Tea Party. "An earlier ABC News broadcast report suggested that a Jim Holmes of a Colorado Tea Party organization might be the suspect, but that report was incorrect," ABC News said in a statement. "ABC News and Brian Ross apologize for the mistake, and for disseminating that information before it was properly vetted." In a similar statement released minutes earlier, ABC News said the report was "incorrect" but, rather than apologize, wrote: "Several other local residents with similar names were also contacted via social media by members of the public who mistook them for the suspect." The statement appeared at first to be an attempt byt the network to abdicate responsibility for the report. ABC's apology comes after Ross reported this morning that there is "a Jim Holmes of Aurora, Colorado, page on the Colorado Tea party site... talking about him joining the Tea Party last year." "Now, we don't know if this is the same Jim Holmes," Ross cautioned "but it's Jim Holmes of Aurora, Colorado." ABC News is the only network or cable news channel to suggest a possible Tea Party connection, which Ross based off a single Tea Party Patriots webpage that has the name "Jim Holmes." So now we see that ABC was incorrect with their reporting LOL great job ABC NEWS, you deserve the Shittiest reporting of the year. You decided to take a horrific attack and attempt to turn it into a political "lets bash the Tea Party" moment. !@#$ing idiots

“Wheel of Fortune” host Pat Sajak offers his two cents on President Obama’s “you didn’t build that” remark in an essay for Richochet.com: It's as if President Obama climbed into a tank, put on his helmet, talked about how his foray into Cambodia was seared in his memory, looked at his watch, misspelled "potato" and pardoned Richard Nixon all in the same day. It's fun to imagine the hand-wringing that must be going on within the White House as staffers try to figure out how to undo the damage their boss has done with his anti-entrepenurial riff. Defining moments in politics are strange beasts. Sometimes they're only recognized in hindsight, while sometimes they throw the train off the tracks before a sentence has been completed. Sometimes their effect can be contained and minimized, while sometimes their effect on the political narrative mestastasizes. This one is very bad for the White House. These defining moments take hold most devastatingly when they confirm what a large portion of the electorate already believes. Taken alone, it seems unfair that a single moment, an unguarded remark or a slip of the tongue can carry such weight. They're often dismissed as "gotcha" moments, but when voters are able to nod and say, "I knew it," these moments stick and do terrible damage. We have witnessed such a moment

Come on now, he was dealt a bad hand, the president possibly couldn't be to blame for our anemic "recovery"

Yet you make no mention of the media (ABC), who wields so much more influence than RK which elicited his over the top response. Okey Dokey lol

That's besides the point.

These sort of stories ideally shouldn't be in these political forums, next thing you know, someone with an agenda will want to blame the tea party for it.

Well, I guess when you say with that must conviction, it must be so.

Looks like you'll never know lol

We get it, you're for it, but you're not, but you are, but you're not, but you are, but ultimately you're not.

I've always been a believer of incentive based policies, and a huge detractor of punitive policies, specially those born through populism.

Gods plan huh What sort of !@#$ing plan was that? Dude should of never followed him, unfortunately the DA is an over zealous dumbass, and he will be found innocent of second degree murder. She should of pressed for manslaughter.

Despite how unbelievably shallow this campaign had been just up until the last couple days, off shoring and outsourcing is akin to gravity. Attempting to alter policy through punitive measure of taxation to impede how a business conducts business can only lead to one thing and that is a result through the laws of unintended consequences. Off shoring and outsourcing is a necessary evil for certain businesses to grow, specially businesses catering to foreign customers, where it's much more logical to set up manufacturing hubs abroad. That is what off shoring is about. If you want to make manufacturing more attractive at home, you simply the corporate tax code. Let's face it, cheap labor and increased technology, robotics and software has sharply increased productivity, which ultimately spells the demise of a vibrant manufacturing labor force. This bill had nothing to do with improving this economy and everything to do with the presidential elections, which by default, makes it a ****ty piece of legislation

It's not just a conservative galvanizing issue, but is yet another reminder for swing voters that Obama simply just doesn't connect with them from a business perspective. It simply reinforces the narrative that Obama is your typical old Skool tax and spend liberal. On steroids

It's a defining moment in this campaign, it crystallized the choices, Drew a clear line between the two candidates and helped galvanize the conservative base around Romney. You can see it, it put a pro in his step, and ever since then he's been on the attack, and not with these distorted personal attacks that voters don't care about, but about two competing visions. Big government vs smaller government.

Of course it's a ****ty bill, it's born out of faux populism, which is opposed by the chamber of commerce. If the chamber of commerce thought it was good for business they'd support it, let me be clear, legislation motivated and crafted through populism hardly ever makes for solid policy.

Referring to Julia: "The only time she's on her own, is at her gravesite" Fanfukingtastictic. LOL Not in the slightest and don't ask me how, because I've gone over it various times in depth and so have others, and so have some of the greatest conservative minds, such as kraut hammer and barone , but that's ok, you have your opinion, and I respect that.

Even if I were to concede your price control argument, which I don't, that still doesn't address all the other points that I brought up. Oh, and I'm sure people would be real happy with quality of care going down.

This is the issue, big government vs smaller government.

That's Chef's opinion, I can certainly respect his hard headed opinion, even though he's wrong.