Consumers create jobs.

[Rshermr]

Well, me boy, that is because you are stupid. You believe, because you are stupid. you see, stupid people can take information that YOU WANT to believe and make it true in their mind. So, you believe completely, think you are very smart, and believe anyone who does not believe as you do is the stupid one. I am sure you have been to tea party gatherings. Look around.
I have studied the malady for years. It is why all studies say the dumbest people are cons. It is because you get the information you need easily. And then you feel really, really good, being so smart.
One might wonder about your english skills because I said taught, and you took it to mean that I was currently a teacher. Any other stupid questions?
So, again, I will keep your criticism in mind, dipshit. Because I have such respect for your opinion.
Oldtime, you remind me of a turd. You know, walk through a lawn and step on one, and it is hard to shake off.

You resort to insults because you can't validate your contentions. Why? Because you don't understand economics nor do you have a clue about the economic history of this country. For you to come here and say that the Reagan tax cuts made the US economy go "in the shitter" is laughable. The Reagan tax cuts touched off the longest period of economic growth without a recession that this country has ever seen. How does THAT fit the description of putting the economy "in the shitter"?

How can someone who "supposedly" taught economics at the college level not know that? If you really were a teacher of economics then you would know what Reagan did (whether you agreed with his policies or not...) but you are so totally off base with your descriptions of what Reagan did and when he did it that I can only assume that you gleaned all of your information from some progressive site.

You're a fraud, Rshermr...you're one of those pitiful little people who gets on the internet and tries to pass themselves off as something they're not.

Fraud, says oldstle. Who is a pitiful little man who is proud of having corrected text after leaving college. What a huge accomplishment. And, you took a whole econ class in college, and paid attention. Great, oldstyle, really, really impressive.
So, you somehow think that your criticism of me is of any import?? You are a fool if you do, as you are just a simple little person.
So, relative to reagan:

Working as a copy editor was my first job after finishing college. You must have been a very impressive student to find such a great job.It was an interesting (such a simple job could only be interesting to someone stupid, which helps prove my hypotheses about you) slightly boring job that I held for a year. I don't count it as a "huge accomplishment" but I do count it as a reference when someone like you accuses me of not having a grasp of the English language(yet you did not know that taught was past tense, did you now oldstyle.). And......

In college I took Macro Economics and Micro Economics...and YES, I did pay attention. Great, oldstyle, then maybe you can finaly answer why reagan increased taxes 11 times and increased the national debt to 3 times its size when he came into power, and increased spending and the size of the gov greatly. I asked you several times now, and if you were paying attention in your econ classes, as you say, you should have an answer. I can't wait to see your profound reasoning. I learned about John Maynard Keynes and his economic principles. My question for you is...what were you doing when you SHOULD have been paying attention? I'm assuming if you were allowed to instruct students at the college level that you were well versed in economics? Took many upper level classes and excelled? Yet you admit that you aren't an expert when it comes to the subject. What I said was that I do not claim to be an expert on anything. By the way, the last time I studied Keynes w......as over 40 years ago. And, yes indeed, compared to you I probably am an expert on Keynes. So...... The truth is...you've demonstrated an incredible ignorance of Keynesian economics and economic history in general. How you could have taught economics and be THAT ignorant is a wonder!!! So, a guy who took a couple econ classes is telling me that I do not know about keynsian econ. Again, your opinion has no worth, oldstyle. What seat of higher learning allowed "you" to teach paying students? They should be sued in court for "failure to deliver". So, dipshit, tell me where you are correct and I am wrong about Keynsian economics. I am sure it will be interesting. And the rest of your question is simple to answer, but I have not yet heard where the great economic expert oldstyle took his econ classes.
You are, very very obviously a con tool. Been educated yet by aei? Been talking to a local tea party guy who was. He sounds a lot like you.

 

[ccravens]

Rshermr,

I am convinced you are a troll, know little to nothing about economics or history, and an example of why a little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing.

After I corrected your lie about Kennedy's tax cuts, you had no reponse.

Typical of most trolls, you instead change the subject, make different accusations, and then name call and curse. Joe Mac would be proud.

Why people keep feeding you is beyond me.......

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Wow, ed. What a profound post. Again, you continue to prove that you have nothing to contribute except con dogma.

If its merely dogma it ought to have many flaws. Why be so afraid to point out the most serious one?? What does that tell you about your character and IQ??

 

[Rshermr]

Rshermr,

I am convinced you are a troll, know little to nothing about economics or history, and an example of why a little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing.

After I corrected your lie about Kennedy's tax cuts, you had no reponse.

Typical of most trolls, you instead change the subject, make different accusations, and then name call and curse. Joe Mac would be proud.

Why people keep feeding you is beyond me.......

Of course, you know better, cravens. Good name for you by the way.
I did answer your question on oldstyles post. But, for your information, there was no general tax increase in 62, just a simple point tax cuts, and a whole lot of stimulus. Nice try, but no cigar, craven one.

 

[Oldstyle]

You resort to insults because you can't validate your contentions. Why? Because you don't understand economics nor do you have a clue about the economic history of this country. For you to come here and say that the Reagan tax cuts made the US economy go "in the shitter" is laughable. The Reagan tax cuts touched off the longest period of economic growth without a recession that this country has ever seen. How does THAT fit the description of putting the economy "in the shitter"?

How can someone who "supposedly" taught economics at the college level not know that? If you really were a teacher of economics then you would know what Reagan did (whether you agreed with his policies or not...) but you are so totally off base with your descriptions of what Reagan did and when he did it that I can only assume that you gleaned all of your information from some progressive site.

You're a fraud, Rshermr...you're one of those pitiful little people who gets on the internet and tries to pass themselves off as something they're not.

Fraud, says oldstle. Who is a pitiful little man who is proud of having corrected text after leaving college. What a huge accomplishment. And, you took a whole econ class in college, and paid attention. Great, oldstyle, really, really impressive.
So, you somehow think that your criticism of me is of any import?? You are a fool if you do, as you are just a simple little person.
So, relative to reagan:

Working as a copy editor was my first job after finishing college. You must have been a very impressive student to find such a great job.It was an interesting (such a simple job could only be interesting to someone stupid, which helps prove my hypotheses about you) slightly boring job that I held for a year. I don't count it as a "huge accomplishment" but I do count it as a reference when someone like you accuses me of not having a grasp of the English language(yet you did not know that taught was past tense, did you now oldstyle.). And......

In college I took Macro Economics and Micro Economics...and YES, I did pay attention. Great, oldstyle, then maybe you can finaly answer why reagan increased taxes 11 times and increased the national debt to 3 times its size when he came into power, and increased spending and the size of the gov greatly. I asked you several times now, and if you were paying attention in your econ classes, as you say, you should have an answer. I can't wait to see your profound reasoning. I learned about John Maynard Keynes and his economic principles. My question for you is...what were you doing when you SHOULD have been paying attention? I'm assuming if you were allowed to instruct students at the college level that you were well versed in economics? Took many upper level classes and excelled? Yet you admit that you aren't an expert when it comes to the subject. What I said was that I do not claim to be an expert on anything. By the way, the last time I studied Keynes w......as over 40 years ago. And, yes indeed, compared to you I probably am an expert on Keynes. So...... The truth is...you've demonstrated an incredible ignorance of Keynesian economics and economic history in general. How you could have taught economics and be THAT ignorant is a wonder!!! So, a guy who took a couple econ classes is telling me that I do not know about keynsian econ. Again, your opinion has no worth, oldstyle. What seat of higher learning allowed "you" to teach paying students? They should be sued in court for "failure to deliver". So, dipshit, tell me where you are correct and I am wrong about Keynsian economics. I am sure it will be interesting. And the rest of your question is simple to answer, but I have not yet heard where the great economic expert oldstyle took his econ classes.
You are, very very obviously a con tool. Been educated yet by aei? Been talking to a local tea party guy who was. He sounds a lot like you.

The fact that 11 taxes were increased during Ronald Reagan's 8 years is rather unremarkable in that he was working with a Democratically controlled House for all of those eight years and a Democratically controlled Senate the last two. Unlike Barack Obama, Ronald Reagan built bipartisan support for parts of his agenda but he also had to horse trade with Tip O'Neal...giving in on some things in order to get things HE wanted passed.

As for why Reagan increased the debt three fold? It was because he never saw a defense appropriations bill he didn't like. After he'd retired from office, Reagan said that his greatest regret was that he hadn't dealt with the deficit. In a speech shortly before he left office he said that he was pleased by how much he'd increased the amount of revenues coming into the Federal government by his stimulation of the economy (during Reagan's Presidency real Federal revenue increased by 21%) but he was disappointed that government spending had increased even more.

I'd like to point out that even though Reagan's deficits did indeed increase the debt by three the amount of money that was being spent then is absolutely DWARFED by what we are spending now...and Reagan's deficits would be just a drop in the bucket of the trillion dollar plus deficits that Barack Obama is ringing up every year he's in office.

I attended the University of Massachusetts...graduating with a degree in history. Why is it that you're so reluctant to tell us where it is that you "taught" economics? Is it because in reputable schools, grad students and PhD candidates teach classes...not undergraduates like you claimed? The problem with people like you, Rshermr...is that you tend to hang yourself when you start telling lies about who you are and what you've done. The more you try to pump up your own self importance with falsehoods the more you leave yourself open to being shown for what you really are...a fraud.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Again, you continue to prove that you have nothing to contribute except con dogma.

If Jefferson and Friedman merely talked dogma it ought to have many flaws. Why are you so afraid to point out the most significant flaw.
What does that tell you about your IQ and character??

 

[ItsjustmeIthink]

Consumers create DEMAND.

OMG!!!!they don't create demand they are born demanding things like air, food, clothing, shelter, water as a necessity of survival. Giving them credit for breathing is a disgustingly low standard that only an deadly uber stupid liberal could imagine.

Life on the planet changed when Republicans invented or supplied a plow to till or bucket to carry water. Those rare geniuses supplied life on this planet and need to be encouraged in every conceivable way.

Consumer demand we can take for granted like the air we breath. Millions of people can look at a field and demand wheat for millions of years (and the did) but the Republican supply-sider who finally came along to make the field supply wheat literally saved milions and millions of lives from starvation and made millions and millions of more lives possible.

Now even a liberal can understand what Republican supply-side ecopnomics is.

Do you really think consumers ONLY consume what you listed? Because you didn't even mention communication devices...

Sure, CAPTAIN OBVIOUS, we need water, shelter, food, and clothing. But do Americans get the bare nessecites then call it quits? Hell no! The "American dream" can essentially be described as hoarding valued, material objects and gaining social status through those types things.

Consumers drive our economy because they are hard to satisfy, what i mean by this is that we always want something better or newer or just plain better-looking.

"consumers don't create deman"
Okay, mind explaining what does then?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Do you really think consumers ONLY consume what you listed? Because you didn't even mention communication devices...

too stupid!! I didn't say or imply the list was complete!!!!!

Sure, CAPTAIN OBVIOUS, we need water, shelter, food, and clothing. But do Americans get the bare nessecites then call it quits? Hell no! The "American dream" can essentially be described as hoarding valued, material objects and gaining social status through those types things.

too stupid!!! my list was not complete and adding to it does not change the argument one wit you idiot!!!!!

Consumers drive our economy because they are hard to satisfy, what i mean by this is that we always want something better or newer or just plain better-looking.

too stupid!!! so they deserve credit for having a preference for one kind of food clothing our shelter over another. THose who like McDonanls more than Burger King deserve some special credit or those who learn to understand human desires and satisfy those desires deserve some credit!!! OMG too stupid by 100

"consumers don't create deman"
Okay, mind explaining what does then?

consumers are born demanding air food clothing shelter etc., they don't create it. They deserve no credit for being born and breathing!!
Republicans deserve credit for stopping the en masse starvation after 1000's of years by learning how to satisfy natural demand or by learning how to "supply" what is need to sustain life.

Now you understand "supply side" economics.

 

[ItsjustmeIthink]

lol. I understand supply-side economics fine. It's pretty obvious you're the one who doesn't.

 

[Rshermr]

The fact that 11 taxes were increased during Ronald Reagan's 8 years is rather unremarkable in that he was working with a Democratically controlled House for all of those eight years and a Democratically controlled Senate the last two. Unlike Barack Obama, Ronald Reagan built bipartisan support for parts of his agenda but he also had to horse trade with Tip O'Neal...giving in on some things in order to get things HE wanted passed.Yes he did. But what you will never admit is that Obama tried, but could not with repub leaders that:
1. Stated that their number one goal was to make Obama a one term Pres.
2. Instituted a record number of filibusters.
3. Refused to put forward ANY of his requested legislation.
4. In almost complete lockstep signed a pledge with Grover Norquist to never increase taxes.
Any talk about non partisan efforts by this president with these republican congressmen does not pass the giggle test. And, of course, you know it.

As for why Reagan increased the debt three fold? It was because he never saw a defense appropriations bill he didn't like. After he'd retired from office, Reagan said that his greatest regret was that he hadn't dealt with the deficit. In a speech shortly before he left office he said that he was pleased by how much he'd increased the amount of revenues coming into the Federal government by his stimulation of the economy (during Reagan's Presidency real Federal revenue increased by 21%) but he was disappointed that government spending had increased even more.Of course, oldstyle, you missed the point entirely. Just an oversight, I am sure. The point is that he used the revenue to stimulate the economy. Really, oldstyle, how could you be so lax as to miss that???

I'd like to point out that even though Reagan's deficits did indeed increase the debt by three the amount of money that was being spent then is absolutely DWARFED by what we are spending now...and Reagan's deficits would be just a drop in the bucket of the trillion dollar plus deficits that Barack Obama is ringing up every year he's in office. Yea, but of course, a 1980 impala cost about $6K.

I attended the University of Massachusetts...graduating with a degree in history. Why is it that you're so reluctant to tell us where it is that you "taught" economics? Is it because in reputable schools, grad students and PhD candidates teach classes...not undergraduates like you claimed? The problem with people like you, Rshermr...is that you tend to hang yourself you start telling lies about who you are and what you've done. The more you try to pump up your own self importance with falsehoods the more you leave yourself open to being shown for what you really are...a fraud.Wow, oldstyle, look at you go. OK. You admit you have a degree at U of Mass. Good for you. And then you go on calling me a liar. Here is the thing, asshole (yes I do call people who say I lie assholes), I do not lie. Everything I have said about myself is true. If I were to want to pump myself up, it sure as hell would not be by saying I taught a class for an econ prof 45 years ago. If you actually believe that then you are a very small person. So, no, I will say no more. Because obviously you want to call me a liar, so why should I tell you ANYTHING about myself. And fraud, dipshit, is what a person does when he pushes con crap with no proof, and lies about what has happened in the past. I am sure that you learned in your history classes to use impartial sources and document what you say. Try it some time, and stop being a closed minded con

 

[Oldstyle]

The fact that 11 taxes were increased during Ronald Reagan's 8 years is rather unremarkable in that he was working with a Democratically controlled House for all of those eight years and a Democratically controlled Senate the last two. Unlike Barack Obama, Ronald Reagan built bipartisan support for parts of his agenda but he also had to horse trade with Tip O'Neal...giving in on some things in order to get things HE wanted passed.Yes he did. But what you will never admit is that Obama tried, but could not with repub leaders that:
1. Stated that their number one goal was to make Obama a one term Pres.
2. Instituted a record number of filibusters.
3. Refused to put forward ANY of his requested legislation.
4. In almost complete lockstep signed a pledge with Grover Norquist to never increase taxes.
Any talk about non partisan efforts by this president with these republican congressmen does not pass the giggle test. And, of course, you know it.

As for why Reagan increased the debt three fold? It was because he never saw a defense appropriations bill he didn't like. After he'd retired from office, Reagan said that his greatest regret was that he hadn't dealt with the deficit. In a speech shortly before he left office he said that he was pleased by how much he'd increased the amount of revenues coming into the Federal government by his stimulation of the economy (during Reagan's Presidency real Federal revenue increased by 21%) but he was disappointed that government spending had increased even more.Of course, oldstyle, you missed the point entirely. Just an oversight, I am sure. The point is that he used the revenue to stimulate the economy. Really, oldstyle, how could you be so lax as to miss that???

I'd like to point out that even though Reagan's deficits did indeed increase the debt by three the amount of money that was being spent then is absolutely DWARFED by what we are spending now...and Reagan's deficits would be just a drop in the bucket of the trillion dollar plus deficits that Barack Obama is ringing up every year he's in office. Yea, but of course, a 1980 impala cost about $6K.

I attended the University of Massachusetts...graduating with a degree in history. Why is it that you're so reluctant to tell us where it is that you "taught" economics? Is it because in reputable schools, grad students and PhD candidates teach classes...not undergraduates like you claimed? The problem with people like you, Rshermr...is that you tend to hang yourself you start telling lies about who you are and what you've done. The more you try to pump up your own self importance with falsehoods the more you leave yourself open to being shown for what you really are...a fraud.Wow, oldstyle, look at you go. OK. You admit you have a degree at U of Mass. Good for you. And then you go on calling me a liar. Here is the thing, asshole (yes I do call people who say I lie assholes), I do not lie. Everything I have said about myself is true. If I were to want to pump myself up, it sure as hell would not be by saying I taught a class for an econ prof 45 years ago. If you actually believe that then you are a very small person. So, no, I will say no more. Because obviously you want to call me a liar, so why should I tell you ANYTHING about myself. And fraud, dipshit, is what a person does when he pushes con crap with no proof, and lies about what has happened in the past. I am sure that you learned in your history classes to use impartial sources and document what you say. Try it some time, and stop being a closed minded con

When you claim to have taught a college class as an undergraduate...then YES, I'm calling you a liar. I've never seen that done, EVER! Teaching assistants in college are grad students or PhD candidates...they are not undergrads. You "pumped yourself up" with the obvious lie about teaching economics because you were trying to pass yourself off as an authority about the subject and mistakenly thought THAT would do it. My personal belief is that the closest you've come to a college campus is probably attending a sporting event that took place on one. I notice that you still won't divulge WHICH college it is that you attended. I'd like to know which one has undergrads teaching classes.

 

[Rshermr]

The fact that 11 taxes were increased during Ronald Reagan's 8 years is rather unremarkable in that he was working with a Democratically controlled House for all of those eight years and a Democratically controlled Senate the last two. Unlike Barack Obama, Ronald Reagan built bipartisan support for parts of his agenda but he also had to horse trade with Tip O'Neal...giving in on some things in order to get things HE wanted passed.Yes he did. But what you will never admit is that Obama tried, but could not with repub leaders that:
1. Stated that their number one goal was to make Obama a one term Pres.
2. Instituted a record number of filibusters.
3. Refused to put forward ANY of his requested legislation.
4. In almost complete lockstep signed a pledge with Grover Norquist to never increase taxes.
Any talk about non partisan efforts by this president with these republican congressmen does not pass the giggle test. And, of course, you know it.

As for why Reagan increased the debt three fold? It was because he never saw a defense appropriations bill he didn't like. After he'd retired from office, Reagan said that his greatest regret was that he hadn't dealt with the deficit. In a speech shortly before he left office he said that he was pleased by how much he'd increased the amount of revenues coming into the Federal government by his stimulation of the economy (during Reagan's Presidency real Federal revenue increased by 21%) but he was disappointed that government spending had increased even more.Of course, oldstyle, you missed the point entirely. Just an oversight, I am sure. The point is that he used the revenue to stimulate the economy. Really, oldstyle, how could you be so lax as to miss that???

I'd like to point out that even though Reagan's deficits did indeed increase the debt by three the amount of money that was being spent then is absolutely DWARFED by what we are spending now...and Reagan's deficits would be just a drop in the bucket of the trillion dollar plus deficits that Barack Obama is ringing up every year he's in office. Yea, but of course, a 1980 impala cost about $6K.

I attended the University of Massachusetts...graduating with a degree in history. Why is it that you're so reluctant to tell us where it is that you "taught" economics? Is it because in reputable schools, grad students and PhD candidates teach classes...not undergraduates like you claimed? The problem with people like you, Rshermr...is that you tend to hang yourself you start telling lies about who you are and what you've done. The more you try to pump up your own self importance with falsehoods the more you leave yourself open to being shown for what you really are...a fraud.Wow, oldstyle, look at you go. OK. You admit you have a degree at U of Mass. Good for you. And then you go on calling me a liar. Here is the thing, asshole (yes I do call people who say I lie assholes), I do not lie. Everything I have said about myself is true. If I were to want to pump myself up, it sure as hell would not be by saying I taught a class for an econ prof 45 years ago. If you actually believe that then you are a very small person. So, no, I will say no more. Because obviously you want to call me a liar, so why should I tell you ANYTHING about myself. And fraud, dipshit, is what a person does when he pushes con crap with no proof, and lies about what has happened in the past. I am sure that you learned in your history classes to use impartial sources and document what you say. Try it some time, and stop being a closed minded con

When you claim to have taught a college class as an undergraduate...then YES, I'm calling you a liar. I've never seen that done, EVER! Teaching assistants in college are grad students or PhD candidates...they are not undergrads. You "pumped yourself up" with the obvious lie about teaching economics because you were trying to pass yourself off as an authority about the subject and mistakenly thought THAT would do it. My personal belief is that the closest you've come to a college campus is probably attending a sporting event that took place on one. I notice that you still won't divulge WHICH college it is that you attended. I'd like to know which one has undergrads teaching classes.

Wow, I am so concerned about your statement, little man. You have such economic understanding and such academic understanding. And I so value your opinion.
But, of course, you are simply a con. doing your best to post con dogma. On this simple thread, you have posted 26 times in 9 days. Almost entirely in response to my posts. And entirely without evidence for your claims. No links, nothing. So, you see I am retired. So I have the time, And you respond almost always very quickly. So, I have wondered, how do you do it. Because, you see, for my past 45 years, I could not have been able to post more than once or twice in a day. And only in the evenings. Because, you see, like most people who have a responsible job, I work during the day and sleep in the evenings, until I got up and went to work again. You see how it works, oldstyle. Just a few hours every evening available for posting on a blog. So, lets look: 08-01-2012, 08:05 AM, WED 08-01-2 12, 01:51 PM, WED 08-03-2012, 12:54 AM, FRI 08-03-2012, 08:29 PM, FRI 08-04-2012, 10:03 AM, SAT 08-04-2012, 10:51 AM, SAT 08-04-2012, 06:34 PM, SAT 08-04-2012, 10:59 PM, SAT 08-05-2012, 12:56 AM, SUN 08-05-2012, 01:59 AM, SUN 08-05-2012, 10:17 AM, SUN 08-05-2012, 10:24 AM, SUN 08-05-2012, 02:22 PM, SUN 08-05-2012, 02:44 PM, SUN 08-05-2012, 11:34 PM, SUN 08-05-2012, 11:51 PM, SUN 08-06-2012, 08:46 AM, MON 08-06-2012, 08:49 AM, MON 08-06-2012, 11:18 AM, MON 08-06-2012, 07:02 PM, MON 08-06-2012, 07:09 PM, MON 08-07-2012, 12:38 AM, TUE 08-07-2012, 11:35 AM, TUE 08-08-2012, 02:22 PM, WED 08-08-2012, 11:40 PM, WED 8-10-2012, 10:46 AM, FRI
Those are YOUR posts. And those are west coast times. So, add three hous and it really gets interesting. When do you sleep. When do you work, oldstyle.
And this is just one thread you are active on. There are others. So, do you have no job. Or do you work for, say, Heritage?? Should we list the other threads you are posting on. Oldstyle, you are a con posting machine. You can not possibly have a real job.

 

[Oldstyle]

The fact that 11 taxes were increased during Ronald Reagan's 8 years is rather unremarkable in that he was working with a Democratically controlled House for all of those eight years and a Democratically controlled Senate the last two. Unlike Barack Obama, Ronald Reagan built bipartisan support for parts of his agenda but he also had to horse trade with Tip O'Neal...giving in on some things in order to get things HE wanted passed.Yes he did. But what you will never admit is that Obama tried, but could not with repub leaders that:
1. Stated that their number one goal was to make Obama a one term Pres.
2. Instituted a record number of filibusters.
3. Refused to put forward ANY of his requested legislation.
4. In almost complete lockstep signed a pledge with Grover Norquist to never increase taxes.
Any talk about non partisan efforts by this president with these republican congressmen does not pass the giggle test. And, of course, you know it.

As for why Reagan increased the debt three fold? It was because he never saw a defense appropriations bill he didn't like. After he'd retired from office, Reagan said that his greatest regret was that he hadn't dealt with the deficit. In a speech shortly before he left office he said that he was pleased by how much he'd increased the amount of revenues coming into the Federal government by his stimulation of the economy (during Reagan's Presidency real Federal revenue increased by 21%) but he was disappointed that government spending had increased even more.Of course, oldstyle, you missed the point entirely. Just an oversight, I am sure. The point is that he used the revenue to stimulate the economy. Really, oldstyle, how could you be so lax as to miss that???

I'd like to point out that even though Reagan's deficits did indeed increase the debt by three the amount of money that was being spent then is absolutely DWARFED by what we are spending now...and Reagan's deficits would be just a drop in the bucket of the trillion dollar plus deficits that Barack Obama is ringing up every year he's in office. Yea, but of course, a 1980 impala cost about $6K.

I attended the University of Massachusetts...graduating with a degree in history. Why is it that you're so reluctant to tell us where it is that you "taught" economics? Is it because in reputable schools, grad students and PhD candidates teach classes...not undergraduates like you claimed? The problem with people like you, Rshermr...is that you tend to hang yourself you start telling lies about who you are and what you've done. The more you try to pump up your own self importance with falsehoods the more you leave yourself open to being shown for what you really are...a fraud.Wow, oldstyle, look at you go. OK. You admit you have a degree at U of Mass. Good for you. And then you go on calling me a liar. Here is the thing, asshole (yes I do call people who say I lie assholes), I do not lie. Everything I have said about myself is true. If I were to want to pump myself up, it sure as hell would not be by saying I taught a class for an econ prof 45 years ago. If you actually believe that then you are a very small person. So, no, I will say no more. Because obviously you want to call me a liar, so why should I tell you ANYTHING about myself. And fraud, dipshit, is what a person does when he pushes con crap with no proof, and lies about what has happened in the past. I am sure that you learned in your history classes to use impartial sources and document what you say. Try it some time, and stop being a closed minded con

When you claim to have taught a college class as an undergraduate...then YES, I'm calling you a liar. I've never seen that done, EVER! Teaching assistants in college are grad students or PhD candidates...they are not undergrads. You "pumped yourself up" with the obvious lie about teaching economics because you were trying to pass yourself off as an authority about the subject and mistakenly thought THAT would do it. My personal belief is that the closest you've come to a college campus is probably attending a sporting event that took place on one. I notice that you still won't divulge WHICH college it is that you attended. I'd like to know which one has undergrads teaching classes.

Wow, I am so concerned about your statement, little man. You have such economic understanding and such academic understanding. And I so value your opinion.
But, of course, you are simply a con. doing your best to post con dogma. On this simple thread, you have posted 26 times in 9 days. Almost entirely in response to my posts. And entirely without evidence for your claims. No links, nothing. So, you see I am retired. So I have the time, And you respond almost always very quickly. So, I have wondered, how do you do it. Because, you see, for my past 45 years, I could not have been able to post more than once or twice in a day. And only in the evenings. Because, you see, like most people who have a responsible job, I work during the day and sleep in the evenings, until I got up and went to work again. You see how it works, oldstyle. Just a few hours every evening available for posting on a blog. So, lets look: 08-01-2012, 08:05 AM, WED 08-01-2 12, 01:51 PM, WED 08-03-2012, 12:54 AM, FRI 08-03-2012, 08:29 PM, FRI 08-04-2012, 10:03 AM, SAT 08-04-2012, 10:51 AM, SAT 08-04-2012, 06:34 PM, SAT 08-04-2012, 10:59 PM, SAT 08-05-2012, 12:56 AM, SUN 08-05-2012, 01:59 AM, SUN 08-05-2012, 10:17 AM, SUN 08-05-2012, 10:24 AM, SUN 08-05-2012, 02:22 PM, SUN 08-05-2012, 02:44 PM, SUN 08-05-2012, 11:34 PM, SUN 08-05-2012, 11:51 PM, SUN 08-06-2012, 08:46 AM, MON 08-06-2012, 08:49 AM, MON 08-06-2012, 11:18 AM, MON 08-06-2012, 07:02 PM, MON 08-06-2012, 07:09 PM, MON 08-07-2012, 12:38 AM, TUE 08-07-2012, 11:35 AM, TUE 08-08-2012, 02:22 PM, WED 08-08-2012, 11:40 PM, WED 8-10-2012, 10:46 AM, FRI
Those are YOUR posts. And those are west coast times. So, add three hous and it really gets interesting. When do you sleep. When do you work, oldstyle.
And this is just one thread you are active on. There are others. So, do you have no job. Or do you work for, say, Heritage?? Should we list the other threads you are posting on. Oldstyle, you are a con posting machine. You can not possibly have a real job.

I notice that you didn't address how it is that an undergraduate who was not an economics major (from your claims not to be an expert on economics, I can only assume you were not an economics major?) was non the less allowed to teach economics to other undergraduates. You're avoiding that topic like it's radioactive which I find quite amusing! Bet you wish you could take that whopper of a lie back...hmmm, Rshermr? My advice to you is not to make yourself out to be something you're not because quite frankly, you don't have the ability to pull it off. You obviously don't know enough about economics to carry on an informed discussion around the dinner table let alone TEACH the subject. Trying to pretend that you did is laughable.

As for when I work? I'm in the restaurant business. If you'll look at the times I post you'll see that I'm usually working nights during the dinner hour. I have Sun. and Wed. off. You'll seldom see me post between 3 and 10 PM because I'm way too busy to do so. When it slows down I quite often pop on to see what's been discussed. During off season...as it is now in Florida...it's slow quite often so you get the "pleasure" of my company more than during season. Any other questions? Now how often I post and when I post is about as blatant an attempt at diversion as I've seen on here in quite some time...but I guess when you've been caught telling fibs like you have it's pretty much "desperation time"...isn't it? You want to change the topic to ANYTHING other than your "teaching experience". Who can blame you?

So are you going to tell me what college let's undergraduates that aren't even majoring in a subject teach classes in that subject to other students? I won't hold my breath waiting for an answer from you in regards to that because I think we both know that you're going to have a hard time coming up with one.

 

[Rshermr]

When you claim to have taught a college class as an undergraduate...then YES, I'm calling you a liar. I've never seen that done, EVER! Teaching assistants in college are grad students or PhD candidates...they are not undergrads. You "pumped yourself up" with the obvious lie about teaching economics because you were trying to pass yourself off as an authority about the subject and mistakenly thought THAT would do it. My personal belief is that the closest you've come to a college campus is probably attending a sporting event that took place on one. I notice that you still won't divulge WHICH college it is that you attended. I'd like to know which one has undergrads teaching classes.

Wow, I am so concerned about your statement, little man. You have such economic understanding and such academic understanding. And I so value your opinion.
But, of course, you are simply a con. doing your best to post con dogma. On this simple thread, you have posted 26 times in 9 days. Almost entirely in response to my posts. And entirely without evidence for your claims. No links, nothing. So, you see I am retired. So I have the time, And you respond almost always very quickly. So, I have wondered, how do you do it. Because, you see, for my past 45 years, I could not have been able to post more than once or twice in a day. And only in the evenings. Because, you see, like most people who have a responsible job, I work during the day and sleep in the evenings, until I got up and went to work again. You see how it works, oldstyle. Just a few hours every evening available for posting on a blog. So, lets look: 08-01-2012, 08:05 AM, WED 08-01-2 12, 01:51 PM, WED 08-03-2012, 12:54 AM, FRI 08-03-2012, 08:29 PM, FRI 08-04-2012, 10:03 AM, SAT 08-04-2012, 10:51 AM, SAT 08-04-2012, 06:34 PM, SAT 08-04-2012, 10:59 PM, SAT 08-05-2012, 12:56 AM, SUN 08-05-2012, 01:59 AM, SUN 08-05-2012, 10:17 AM, SUN 08-05-2012, 10:24 AM, SUN 08-05-2012, 02:22 PM, SUN 08-05-2012, 02:44 PM, SUN 08-05-2012, 11:34 PM, SUN 08-05-2012, 11:51 PM, SUN 08-06-2012, 08:46 AM, MON 08-06-2012, 08:49 AM, MON 08-06-2012, 11:18 AM, MON 08-06-2012, 07:02 PM, MON 08-06-2012, 07:09 PM, MON 08-07-2012, 12:38 AM, TUE 08-07-2012, 11:35 AM, TUE 08-08-2012, 02:22 PM, WED 08-08-2012, 11:40 PM, WED 8-10-2012, 10:46 AM, FRI
Those are YOUR posts. And those are west coast times. So, add three hous and it really gets interesting. When do you sleep. When do you work, oldstyle.
And this is just one thread you are active on. There are others. So, do you have no job. Or do you work for, say, Heritage?? Should we list the other threads you are posting on. Oldstyle, you are a con posting machine. You can not possibly have a real job.

I notice that you didn't address how it is that an undergraduate who was not an economics major Bad assumption. I did not say anything of the kind. I was indeed an econ major. And, as I told you, I worked for a Professor of economics. But, beyond that, I will tell you no more. I prefer to not tell anything to clowns who call me a liar. I actually prefer to deal with people who have class.J(from your claims not to be an expert on economics, I can only assume you were not an economics major?) was non the less allowed to teach economics to other undergraduates. You're avoiding that topic like it's radioactive which I find quite amusing! Stupid people do find things that are simple to understand amuzing. Bet you wish you could take that whopper of a lie back...hmmm, Rshermr? My advice to you is not to make yourself out to be something you're not because quite frankly, you don't have the ability to pull it off.Really, and you seem to forget that you said I did not understand Keynsian economics. So, I challenged you to state what I said that would make you make that statement. And you seem to have avoided that like the plague. No guts, little man? You obviously don't know enough about economics to carry on an informed discussion around the dinner table let alone TEACH the subject. Trying to pretend that you did is laughable. Your opinion, again. Worth nothing, me poor ignorant history major who works in a restaurant. The "restaurant business". You are still ignoring what it is you do. Waiter, maybe Buss Boy? Now that is laughable.

So maybe you need to get a clue. Seniors teaching a class for a year within their major under stringent circumstances is done in many schools. . And, if you did not call me a liar, I would tell you those circumstances. But mostly, it shows that you are unable to discuss the point of this thread. You are totally out of your league. Maybe a simple thread about restaurant china would be a better subject for you.

As for when I work? I'm in the restaurant business. If you'll look at the times I post you'll see that I'm usually working nights during the dinner hour. I have Sun. and Wed. off. You'll seldom see me post between 3 and 10 PM because I'm way too busy to do so. When it slows down I quite often pop on to see what's been discussed. During off season...as it is now in Florida...it's slow quite often so you get the "pleasure" of my company more than during season. Ah, you are unemployed now. You went to college for this, me boy.Any other questions? Now how often I post and when I post is about as blatant an attempt at diversion as I've seen on here in quite some time...but I guess when you've been caught telling fibs like you have it's pretty much "desperation time"...isn't it? No, oldstyle, me boy. It is just inconceivable that anyone could be that unimportant that their manager allows them all the time to post to a blog. But even more, it is inconceivable to me that anyone would ignore their profession to the point that the hours spent at the time you spend it would be something that you would allow yourself to do. No, I do not believe your explanation, but then I really do not care that much.You want to change the topic to ANYTHING other than your "teaching experience". Who can blame you?You are determined to talk about the fact that I taught an econ class, aren't you. We have reached the end of that subject, me boy, because as you know, there is no way to prove something to someone in florida who does not want to believe it. Sorry it is so important in your little life.

So are you going to tell me what college let's undergraduates that aren't even majoring in a subject teach classes in that subject to other students? Again, trying to put words in others mouth is a symptom of someone with no class. I won't hold my breath waiting for an answer from yu inoregards to that because I think we both know that you're going to have a hard time coming up with one. So now oldstyle, me poor restaurant table waiter, we understand your problem. My having taught economics for a year seems to be really impressive to you, so you need to make it untrue if possible. What it shows me is how little you have accomplished with your life. To me, teaching that class was
a short period in my life a long time ago. Less important than hundreds of things that have happened since. But to you, a history major waiting tables (see how I have put words into YOUR mouth) it is a big deal. Now, prove me wrong, oldstyle. Or, more importantly, as it relates to this thread, try to respond to your accusation about my misunderstanding of Keynsian economics, and what you believe I said to give you the reason to state what you did. Or is it simply more of the same, a little man with nothing behind him. Just regurgitating dogma. Because you do not have the ability to argue economics, so you just try personal attacks. Lets see how you paid attention in your macro economics class, genius.

 

[Oldstyle]

"So maybe you need to get a clue. Seniors teaching a class for a year within their major under stringent circumstances is done in many schools. . And, if you did not call me a liar, I would tell you those circumstances. But mostly, it shows that you are unable to discuss the point of this thread. You are totally out of your league. Maybe a simple thread about restaurant china would be a better subject for you."

My calling you a liar is the REASON you would tell me the school, Rshermr...and the "stringent circumstances".

You're not going to do that though because we both know it never happened. You got caught telling a lie and you've been desperately trying to bluster your way out of it ever since.

" Bad assumption. I did not say anything of the kind. I was indeed an econ major. And, as I told you, I worked for a Professor of economics. But, beyond that, I will tell you no more. I prefer to not tell anything to clowns who call me a liar. I actually prefer to deal with people who have class."

So let me get this straight... You're an economics major...yet you described yourself in one of your posts as not being an expert in the field? Interesting concept! You've studied something for four years...taught it at the undergraduate level (eye-roll) and yet you're not an expert at it? Or that's the excuse you used when you couldn't prove a point you made about economics but then you turn around and make the claim that you ARE an expert because you taught the subject? You can't seem to get your story straight...something that liars ALWAYS have a problem with.

 

[whitehall]

It's common sense but the neo-socialists can't seem to understand the concept. The government doesn't make a dime and never has. It prints worthless money and confiscates revenue from producers. Paying workers with money confiscated from other workers does not grow the economy. It just looks good to the class warfare crowd and the ignorant supporters of Obama's failed policies.

 

[Rshermr]

"So maybe you need to get a clue. Seniors teaching a class for a year within their major under stringent circumstances is done in many schools. . And, if you did not call me a liar, I would tell you those circumstances. But mostly, it shows that you are unable to discuss the point of this thread. You are totally out of your league. Maybe a simple thread about restaurant china would be a better subject for you."

My calling you a liar is the REASON you would tell me the school, Rshermr...and the "stringent circumstances".

You're not going to do that though because we both know it never happened. You got caught telling a lie and you've been desperately trying to bluster your way out of it ever since.

" Bad assumption. I did not say anything of the kind. I was indeed an econ major. And, as I told you, I worked for a Professor of economics. But, beyond that, I will tell you no more. I prefer to not tell anything to clowns who call me a liar. I actually prefer to deal with people who have class."

So let me get this straight... You're an economics major...yet you described yourself in one of your posts as not being an expert in the field? That would be, oldstyle, that I do not consider anyone with just a bachelors degree in a subject as diverse as economics, an expert. So, yes, I do not consider myself an expert. there are a whole lot of very accomplished economists that I would consider experts. But I do not put myself in their class. Now, I guess I would consider expert a relative term. So, in comparison with you.........Interesting concept! You've studied something for four years...taught it at the undergraduate level (eye-roll) and yet you're not an expert at it? Or that's the excuse you used when you couldn't prove a point you made about economics but then you turn around and make the claim that you ARE an expert because you taught the subject? Actually, I made no such claim. You should stop the lying. Teaching econ for a year caused me to learn a lot, but no still not in the expert catagory.You can't seem to get your story straight...something that liars ALWAYS have a problem with.Yes, yes, little man. You know as well as I do that my story has not changed, as hard as you try to make it so. Go back to your table waiting.

 

[Oldstyle]

"So maybe you need to get a clue. Seniors teaching a class for a year within their major under stringent circumstances is done in many schools. . And, if you did not call me a liar, I would tell you those circumstances. But mostly, it shows that you are unable to discuss the point of this thread. You are totally out of your league. Maybe a simple thread about restaurant china would be a better subject for you."

My calling you a liar is the REASON you would tell me the school, Rshermr...and the "stringent circumstances".

You're not going to do that though because we both know it never happened. You got caught telling a lie and you've been desperately trying to bluster your way out of it ever since.

" Bad assumption. I did not say anything of the kind. I was indeed an econ major. And, as I told you, I worked for a Professor of economics. But, beyond that, I will tell you no more. I prefer to not tell anything to clowns who call me a liar. I actually prefer to deal with people who have class."

So let me get this straight... You're an economics major...yet you described yourself in one of your posts as not being an expert in the field? That would be, oldstyle, that I do not consider anyone with just a bachelors degree in a subject as diverse as economics, an expert. So, yes, I do not consider myself an expert. there are a whole lot of very accomplished economists that I would consider experts. But I do not put myself in their class. Now, I guess I would consider expert a relative term. So, in comparison with you.........Interesting concept! You've studied something for four years...taught it at the undergraduate level (eye-roll) and yet you're not an expert at it? Or that's the excuse you used when you couldn't prove a point you made about economics but then you turn around and make the claim that you ARE an expert because you taught the subject? Actually, I made no such claim. You should stop the lying. Teaching econ for a year caused me to learn a lot, but no still not in the expert catagory.You can't seem to get your story straight...something that liars ALWAYS have a problem with.Yes, yes, little man. You know as well as I do that my story has not changed, as hard as you try to make it so. Go back to your table waiting.

The sad thing is that I took two entry level econ courses in college yet I know more about the subject than someone who supposedly was an econ major. I'd still like to know what college let's undergrads teach other undergrads, especially one like yourself! Talk about getting screwed on receiving value for your tuition dollar!

Your "story" may not have changed...but that doesn't make it any more believable now than it did when you FIRST claimed to have taught economics in college. I'm amazed that someone could take economics as a major and be as uninformed about it as a topic as you are. It would be like me not knowing the causes of WWII after graduating with a degree in history with a concentration in European history.

 

[Rshermr]

"So maybe you need to get a clue. Seniors teaching a class for a year within their major under stringent circumstances is done in many schools. . And, if you did not call me a liar, I would tell you those circumstances. But mostly, it shows that you are unable to discuss the point of this thread. You are totally out of your league. Maybe a simple thread about restaurant china would be a better subject for you."

My calling you a liar is the REASON you would tell me the school, Rshermr...and the "stringent circumstances".

You're not going to do that though because we both know it never happened. You got caught telling a lie and you've been desperately trying to bluster your way out of it ever since.

" Bad assumption. I did not say anything of the kind. I was indeed an econ major. And, as I told you, I worked for a Professor of economics. But, beyond that, I will tell you no more. I prefer to not tell anything to clowns who call me a liar. I actually prefer to deal with people who have class."

So let me get this straight... You're an economics major...yet you described yourself in one of your posts as not being an expert in the field? That would be, oldstyle, that I do not consider anyone with just a bachelors degree in a subject as diverse as economics, an expert. So, yes, I do not consider myself an expert. there are a whole lot of very accomplished economists that I would consider experts. But I do not put myself in their class. Now, I guess I would consider expert a relative term. So, in comparison with you.........Interesting concept! You've studied something for four years...taught it at the undergraduate level (eye-roll) and yet you're not an expert at it? Or that's the excuse you used when you couldn't prove a point you made about economics but then you turn around and make the claim that you ARE an expert because you taught the subject? Actually, I made no such claim. You should stop the lying. Teaching econ for a year caused me to learn a lot, but no still not in the expert catagory.You can't seem to get your story straight...something that liars ALWAYS have a problem with.Yes, yes, little man. You know as well as I do that my story has not changed, as hard as you try to make it so. Go back to your table waiting.

The sad thing is that I took two entry level econ courses in college yet I know more about the subject than someone who supposedly was an econ major. I'd still like to know what college let's undergrads teach other undergrads, especially one like yourself! Talk about getting screwed on receiving value for your tuition dollar!

Your "story" may not have changed...but that doesn't make it any more believable now than it did when you FIRST claimed to have taught economics in college. I'm amazed that someone could take economics as a major and be as uninformed about it as a topic as you are. It would be like me not knowing the causes of WWII after graduating with a degree in history with a concentration in European history.

dipshit

 

[Oldstyle]

The sad thing is that I took two entry level econ courses in college yet I know more about the subject than someone who supposedly was an econ major. I'd still like to know what college let's undergrads teach other undergrads, especially one like yourself! Talk about getting screwed on receiving value for your tuition dollar!

Your "story" may not have changed...but that doesn't make it any more believable now than it did when you FIRST claimed to have taught economics in college. I'm amazed that someone could take economics as a major and be as uninformed about it as a topic as you are. It would be like me not knowing the causes of WWII after graduating with a degree in history with a concentration in European history.

dipshit

Gee, what a mature comeback.

Unless you're going to try to regain some credibility here by telling me what college it is that lets undergraduates teach other undergrads then why are you even wasting your time posting to me? I've made it quite clear that I think you're a liar and I've given the reasons WHY I think that. The smart thing to do at this point would be to cut your losses and move on...hopefully having learned that pretending to be something you're not will generally get you in hot water.