3rdnlng Posted January 22, 2012 Share Posted January 22, 2012 If really knew your history you would also know the current republican model for economy starts with the economy going into overdrive and ending with a giant crash. What I'm saying is we have the lowest taxes now than we've had for a long time, and yet, there don't seem to be any jobs. And also, if the rich are the job creators and they're as rich now as they've ever been where are all the jobs? Here's a homework assignment for you: Study up on the CRA and its affect on the housing market. Why was the bubble created and why did it burst? What affect does Obamacare have on the confidence of the job creators? What does the tax uncertainty do to the economy? This should be a good start. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted January 22, 2012 Share Posted January 22, 2012 If really knew your history you would also know the current republican model for economy starts with the economy going into overdrive and ending with a giant crash. Can you give me a brief summation of this history. Or maybe just a hint at an example you're thinking of? What I'm saying is we have the lowest taxes now than we've had for a long time, and yet, there don't seem to be any jobs. And also, if the rich are the job creators and they're as rich now as they've ever been where are all the jobs? Two words - Dodd Frank (look it up) Two more words - Obama care Throw in the stimulus bill and you have your answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted January 22, 2012 Share Posted January 22, 2012 What I'm saying is we have the lowest taxes now than we've had for a long time, and yet, there don't seem to be any jobs. And also, if the rich are the job creators and they're as rich now as they've ever been where are all the jobs? Brought to you by Big fat ass Ed Schultz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted January 22, 2012 Share Posted January 22, 2012 So...everyone would be better off if rich people weren't hoarding all the money? You're not the sharpest tool in the shed, are ya? Let me make it simple...how much is enough? And magox, someone who can answer this question has a much higher likelihood of contentment than someone who can't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted January 22, 2012 Share Posted January 22, 2012 You're not the sharpest tool in the shed, are ya? Let me make it simple...how much is enough? And magox, someone who can answer this question has a much higher likelihood of contentment than someone who can't. Just set taxes at 100% and everyone will be a ok. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 You're not the sharpest tool in the shed, are ya? Let me make it simple...how much is enough? And magox, someone who can answer this question has a much higher likelihood of contentment than someone who can't. Coming from you I'll take that both as a complement and an admission of defeat. The fact that you ask the question "how much is enough" demonstrates how far off base you are in your thinking. Your question is stupid because it presupposes that people trying to make more money hurts everyone else, yet you suggest nothing to support your case. Do you actually have an argument? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 This is why fewer and fewer people give any credence to lefties any more. It's always all or nothing. If someone says they want smaller government, lefties say something stupid like "Oh, so you want NO government, eh?" If someone wants reduced taxes, lefties say something stupid like "Oh, so you want NO taxes at all, eh?". And when someone suggests they want some regulations eased, lefties say something stupid stuff like "If you would like to go to a place that has 0 regulation there is always the option of moving to Somalia." Fortunately, lefties are like Juror#8. The more they talk, the less they're taken seriously. Looks like Adam is a disciple Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 Looks like Adam is a disciple A disciple of the apocalypse, perhaps? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 You're not the sharpest tool in the shed, are ya? Let me make it simple...how much is enough? And magox, someone who can answer this question has a much higher likelihood of contentment than someone who can't. I say live life and do what makes you happy as long as you don't hurt others while doing so. Also, don't concern yourself with the abilities and possessions of others simply because it shouldnt bare any role in your quest to happiness. Those who do, allow outside forces to dictate that outcome. I guess its just me, but I don't begrudge anyone elses success, and never would I ever feel entitled of another mans fruits of his labor. Thats an area where you and I differ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 Coming from you I'll take that both as a complement and an admission of defeat. The fact that you ask the question "how much is enough" demonstrates how far off base you are in your thinking. Your question is stupid because it presupposes that people trying to make more money hurts everyone else, yet you suggest nothing to support your case. Do you actually have an argument? No it presupposes that a society based on rampant materialism and thus unquenchable desire for more and more despite extravagant abundance is bound to fail...at least for the vast majority of the populace. And if the winners aren't ever satisfied, are they really winners? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 Looks like Adam is a disciple Says a member of Dave's posse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 The sound you just heard is the sound of BD's post going right over your head. Why didn't you just respond by saying the sky is blue. At least that would be a factual statement. Yeah, that post was so unbelievably intellectual. I know you liberals have a desperate need for validation of your incredibly dated ideology but take your jerk off session elsewhere. If really knew your history you would also know the current republican model for economy starts with the economy going into overdrive and ending with a giant crash. When did Bill Clinton become a Republican? What I'm saying is we have the lowest taxes now than we've had for a long time, and yet, there don't seem to be any jobs. And also, if the rich are the job creators and they're as rich now as they've ever been where are all the jobs? Your understanding of history and, well, virtually everything else you open your blowhole about is so pedestrian that it borders on childish. Fat and stupid is no way to go through life. RMPL. Let me make it simple...how much is enough? I don't know? Is the $.20 of every dollar produced in this country that the Federal Government touches enough? Apparently not for you liberals. You're so beholden to your broken ideology that you can't see your own overwhelming hypocrisy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 No it presupposes that a society based on rampant materialism and thus unquenchable desire for more and more despite extravagant abundance is bound to fail...at least for the vast majority of the populace. And if the winners aren't ever satisfied, are they really winners? I guess it's lucky for us we have self-annointed saviors, such as yourself, to cleanse us of our wicked ways, by hamstringing the economy to save us all from our "rampant materialism" that makes us who support it, but not you who seek to destroy it, so miserable. You're a real peach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 Yeah, that post was so unbelievably intellectual. I know you liberals have a desperate need for validation of your incredibly dated ideology but take your jerk off session elsewhere. When did Bill Clinton become a Republican? Your understanding of history and, well, virtually everything else you open your blowhole about is so pedestrian that it borders on childish. Fat and stupid is no way to go through life. RMPL. I don't know? Is the $.20 of every dollar produced in this country that the Federal Government touches enough? Apparently not for you liberals. You're so beholden to your broken ideology that you can't see your own overwhelming hypocrisy. Hypocrisy? Alaskans are dirty hippies without all the peace love and understanding. The US Census came out with its annual report, the "Consolidated Federal Funds Report for Fiscal Year 2009: State and Country Areas" on how much the federal government spends on the 307,006,550 citizens who lived in America at the end of 2009. The state that received the most money per person was Alaska-- $20,351. The state which received the least per person was Nevada-- only $7.148. must be nice Federal Spending in Each State Per Dollar of Federal Taxes, Alaska ranks third behind New Mexico and Mississippi. Alaska gets 1.84 in federal spending Per Dollar of Federal Taxes paid NY gets .79 in federal dollars per dollar of federal tax paid - you're welcome Alaska gets 90% of its General Fund – some $8 billion last year -- from oil and gas royalties. Alaskans pay no income or sales taxes, and get an annual cash rebate from the royalty fund. One of the reasons for Palin's popularity as governor was signing a law, Alaska's Clear and Equitable Share (ACES), that dramatically increased the state's share of oil profits just as oil prices began to take off. for guys who complain about corporate taxes you bend over your oil and gas companies pretty good. People in Nome didn't get their fuel in before the winter ice so instead of flying it in which would have been very expensive they had a Russian fuel tanker The Renda bring it in and had to have The USCG Icebreaker Healy; come up from Seattle to break ice for it effectly moving the cost of fuel from the people of Nome to the federal government. The proudly independent people of Alaska - until they need help. Alaska leads the nation in reported forcible rapes per capita, according to the FBI, with a rate two and a half times the national average – a ranking it has held for many years. Children are no safer: Public safety experts believe that the prevalence of rape and sexual assault of minors in Alaska makes the state's record one of the worst in the U.S. And while solid statistics on domestic violence are hard to come by, most – including Gov. Palin – agree it is an "epidemic." Well I guess your are right about one thing- dependency leads to moral decay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 Hypocrisy? Alaskans are dirty hippies without all the peace love and understanding. must be nice NY gets .79 in federal dollars per dollar of federal tax paid - you're welcome for guys who complain about corporate taxes you bend over your oil and gas companies pretty good. The proudly independent people of Alaska - until they need help. Well I guess your are right about one thing- dependency leads to moral decay. Yeah, because I live in a wealthy state that makes out like a bandit, I somehow deserve blame for a federal apparatus that you idiots created and continue to feed. Typical lack of intelligence. It's incredibly amusing to watch you liberals whine about the system you're so beholden to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigfatbillsfan Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 Yeah, because I live in a wealthy state that makes out like a bandit, I somehow deserve blame for a federal apparatus that you idiots created and continue to feed. Typical lack of intelligence. It's incredibly amusing to watch you liberals whine about the system you're so beholden to. But you live in a wealthy state that makes out like a bandit by taxing corporations that drill in your state. Seems like you don't have a problem "taking" other peoples money when it benefits you. Get rid of that tax and see how wealthy you state becomes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 But you live in a wealthy state that makes out like a bandit by taxing corporations that drill in your state. The choice of where I live has little to do with anything you clowns are whining about. Seems like you don't have a problem "taking" other peoples money when it benefits you. Actually, I have huge problems with both the amount of money that Alaska gets and how it's spent. Go ahead and give me some examples of things I've said to the contrary. You know, since it "Seems like I don't have a problem". Get rid of that tax and see how wealthy you state becomes. What tax? Alaska would still be ridiculously wealthy without federal largess. The indigenous population would suffer greatly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 Yes, everyone seems to forget- it is of the utmost importance that the government takes the money, so they can open the donut shop. The most important thing about this, is that since the conservatives dislike it, they will dub it socialism, whether it is or not. Pick a losing side, any losing side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 The most important thing about this, is that since the conservatives dislike it, they will dub it socialism, whether it is or not. Are there really just two losing sides, or is it easier for you to create them using generalizations like above so you can point at everyone and suggest you're above it all because you don't fit in with your own defined generalizations? And in casting such generalizations, aren't you, in fact, just like the two losing sides? When liberals say all conservatives are extreme islamophoic selfish gay haters who want grandma to die and children to starve, and conservatives say liberals are just socialists who want to take from the productive and give to the teet-suckers, and you simply find the comfortable middle road and call each of them the same thing...doesn't that just make you a part of a third losing side? The side that only extends the generalizations but offers no other options? There's no shortage of people willing to stand back and say the two-party system sucks, but there is a dire shortage of anyone offering real alternate answers, options or solutions. And please don't point to Ron Paul. Ron Paul is three parts conservative, one part batschitt looney. But hey...there are two losing sides, and you're not on either one of them, so you must be a winner! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UConn James Posted January 23, 2012 Share Posted January 23, 2012 Fat and stupid is no way to go through life. RMPL. RMPL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts