Jump to content

Obamanomics


Recommended Posts

It's largely responsible for workers leaving the workforce forever. It's the new extended long-term unemployment. Can't get a job? Exhaust your 99 weeks of unemployment checks and then file for disability under Social Security and get a pay stipend increase.

 

Obamanomics has been so good for the country. We're in what - the 5th Summer of Recovery? Yes sir, with him focused like a laser on Jobs, Jobs, Jobs, we'll be out of the woods pretty damn soon now. Probably. Maybe. Could be. Here's hopin'.

 

Raise taxes and create government jobs, thats what should be done

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

You can and should spay or neuter it, however.

 

Well, that's gotta be a typo. I'm sure they meant the headline to read "U.S. disability rolls swell in a recovery."

Yes! It's boom times at the Department of Disability Handouts For Out-of-Work Americans.

Business has NEVER been better, and they're looking to add staff to help them cope with the unprecedented demand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is what I'm talking about: we have to stop supporting stupid in this country as if it is some sort of physical/mental disability or disease.

 

No. Stupid must be punished severly. I'm not talking about wounded vets, or orphans, or children of any kind.

 

I am talking about vets, orphans, children, and anyone else who makes stupid choices, repeatedly, and expects the rest of us to clean up their mess.

 

Compassion is one thing, saying we should raise taxes and create more government jobs? That is quite another.

 

That, is stupid. And, gatorman deserves to be scoffed at here, and anywhere else he espouses that stupidity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How is it stupid? Having more jobs lowers poverty and improves the country. Wow, that's so terrible!

 

No doubt, we should tax and make jobs, so many things that can be done to make the country better

Nothing like doubling down on stupid.

 

Your plan creates poverty, because it creates inflation. Period. I can explain that whole thing, but, when I am done, that will be the conclusion.

 

Your inflation prices those, like the elderly, and those on your precious assistance programs, out of the market for things like milk. That is because while the prices increases, the income you provide them is: fixed.

 

In that alone, you are being woefully stupid. The poor need private sector jobs, period. The middle class need better jobs that they can work hard, and earn. Whatever we can do stimulate private sector jobs, at all levels, do it. The Stimulus of 2009, wasn't. That merely kept state/local governments afloat, or blew money on green, or "shovel ready" jobs, which either failed, never existed, or were removed in favor of union/Democratic political bosses back pockets. That's why it had no effect on private sector jobs.

 

You aren't even getting Keynesian economics right: Keysian is about spending ON THE PRIVATE SECTOR, by buying stuff, not taxes. But, it's also supposed to be SHORT TERM! Keynes himself said: "In the long run, we are all dead".

 

Unfortunately, none of you morons have realized that: they ARE all dead, and we are alive, right now, dealing with their 70 years of short term solutions.

Edited by OCinBuffalo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing like doubling down on stupid.

 

Your plan creates poverty, because it creates inflation. Period. I can explain that whole thing, but, when I am done, that will be the conclusion.

 

Your inflation prices those, like the elderly, and those on your precious assistance programs, out of the market for things like milk. That is because while the prices increases, the income you provide them is: fixed.

 

In that alone, you are being woefully stupid. The poor need private sector jobs, period. The middle class need better jobs that they can work hard, and earn. Whatever we can do stimulate private sector jobs, at all levels, do it. The Stimulus of 2009, wasn't. That merely kept state/local governments afloat, or blew money on green, or "shovel ready" jobs, which either failed, never existed, or were removed in favor of union/Democratic political bosses back pockets. That's why it had no effect on private sector jobs.

 

You aren't even getting Keynesian economics right: Keysian is about spending ON THE PRIVATE SECTOR, by buying stuff, not taxes. But, it's also supposed to be SHORT TERM! Keynes himself said: "In the long run, we are all dead".

 

Unfortunately, none of you morons have realized that: they ARE all dead, and we are alive, right now, dealing with their 70 years of short term solutions.

Interesting. Nonsense, but interesting
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh really?

 

Point out the flaws. That will be interesting. For all of us.

 

Ok, how do public jobs create inflation while private sector jobs don't. And I can't resist noticing that you simply tossed in Keynes quote wildly out of context and made it seem as if it proved your point. Now what does that remind me of???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Answer your own question. Go ahead, give it a try.

 

I assure you, I know the answer. I'm giving you the opportunity to prove you have command of basic macro economics.

 

Here's the extra credit question: when people have non-government related income, because they now have a private sector job, and are no longer on assistance, and/or they get a better job, which means more private income, what does that do to tax revenues?

 

If you think Keynes is out of context, when the context quite literally is: taxes, spending, and the role of government vs private sector jobs?

 

Man, you are stupid, and I refuse to support you at all.

 

Try again. Something isn't out of context, just because you say it is, and you know how to repeat a cliche.

Edited by OCinBuffalo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Answer your own question. Go ahead, give it a try.

 

I assure you, I know the answer. I'm giving you the opportunity to prove you have command of basic macro economics.

 

Here's the extra credit question: when people have non-government related income, because they now have a private sector job, and are no longer on assistance, and/or they get a better job, which means more private income, what does that do to tax revenues?

 

If you think Keynes is out of context, when the context quite literally is: taxes, spending, and the role of government vs private sector jobs?

 

Man, you are stupid, and I refuse to support you at all.

 

Try again. Something isn't out of context, just because you say it is, and you know how to repeat a cliche.

Dodge! You don't know dick
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dodge! You don't know dick

Yeah, that's the answer I was looking for. It exposes you for what you are.

 

It's hilarious that you actually think this "I'll accuse him of not knowing something I don't know, that way everybody will focus on that" tactic is working. You don't seem to realize that while I am toying with you, I'm also offering you the way out.

 

Everybody on this board knows I know econ. I've demonstrated that countless times.

 

However, we are rapidly approaching, if we haven't passed it, the point where everybody on this board knows you are uneducated, ignorant, and/or stupid: take your pick.

 

The way out is obvious for most poster's here. Let's see if it is as obvious for you.

Edited by OCinBuffalo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You, on the other hand, know it all too well.

 

ha! good one!

 

Yeah, that's the answer I was looking for. It exposes you for what you are.

 

It's hilarious that you actually think this "I'll accuse him of not knowing something I don't know, that way everybody will focus on that" tactic is working. You don't seem to realize that while I am toying with you, I'm also offering you the way out.

 

Everybody on this board knows I know econ. I've demonstrated that countless times.

 

However, we are rapidly approaching, if we haven't passed it, the point where everybody on this board knows you are uneducated, ignorant, and/or stupid: take your pick.

 

The way out is obvious for most poster's here. Let's see if it is as obvious for you.

Hey, you are the one that said government jobs cause inflation while private sector jobs don't. Sounds pretty silly, if you want to explain, go ahead
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about lower taxes and create private sector jobs?

no, the obvious solution is to take even more money out of a struggling economy via taxation in order to create even more paper-pushing bureaucrats. you can apparently never have too many bureaucrats. just ask any democrat....they'll tell you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll be more than happy to explain it to you, but first you'll need to do two things:

 

1) Admit, publicly, that you don't understand what causes inflation, or what it's effects on the economy are.

 

2) Tell me what you believe inflation is, so that we can begin to agree on defined terms for the purposes of the conversation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll be more than happy to explain it to you, but first you'll need to do two things:

 

1) Admit, publicly, that you don't understand what causes inflation, or what it's effects on the economy are.

 

2) Tell me what you believe inflation is, so that we can begin to agree on defined terms for the purposes of the conversation.

 

Good luck with that. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...