Democrats: The Modern 'Know-Nothing' Party

[jillian]

That's 'cause you didn't understand the OP.

That's 'cause you didn't understand what the Know Nothing Party was

Of course I did....it's just that the play on 'Know Nothing' with reference to economics was too ...nuanced....for you.

no... the "play on words" is just too stupid,... even for you.

 

[starcraftzzz]

"...the party that ran UP the deficits..."
1. (Reuters) - Deficits for the next two fiscal years would be slightly higher than the White House envisions if President Barack Obama's budget plan were adopted, the Congressional Budget Office said on Friday.CBO sees higher near-term deficits under Obama plan | Reuters

2. Obama Deficits Bush Deficits
FY 2012: $1,327 billion FY 2009: $1,413 billion
FY 2011: $1,300 billion FY 2008: $459 billion
FY 2010: $1,293 billion FY 2007: $161 billion
US Federal Deficit by Year - Charts Analysis
Once again the definition of Liberal is an individual for whom data, facts, logic, nor experience have any bearing in decision making.
Brings to mind the historic term, 'yella' dog Democrat'....Someone (generally from the South) who would vote for a yellow dog if it was a Democrat.

You do realize that the budget in 2009 was passed by Bush? Oh wait you don't? Well that's ironic

 

[starcraftzzz]

2. Reaganomics gave the American citizen a golden (economic) age...
3. ....and more importantly, he purchased freedom for the entire world by ending the 'Evil Empire' without firing a single shot...
...Priceless!
Put Ron on the Rock!
Speaking of which, yesterday was Gutzon Borglum's birthday, March 25, 1867.

2) If by Golden age you mean declining wealth for the bottom 90% of Americans, stagnating income and the 2nd worst deaced of GDP growht since the 30's then you would be correct.
3) I see so Reagan and his time machine made Stalin implement in the 1920's a communist command style economic system that failed. Why didn't Reagan use his time machine more often?

 

[starcraftzzz]

Four federal economic policies transformed the Hoover recession into the Great Depression: higher tariffs, stronger unions, higher marginal tax rates, and a lower money supply. President Obama, unfortunately, has endorsed some variant of the first three of these policies, and he will face a critical choice on monetary policy in a year or so."
How to Turn a Recession into a Depression

1) Its odd that unionization could of caused/worsen the depression given that while the factors that caused the depression were going on and while the depression was occurring unions were on the decline. Also odd that when the country began recovering unions were on the rise
http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1176&context=key_workplace
Labor Unions in the United States | Economic History Services
2) So far Obama has cut taxes.

It is really obvious that pOliticalchic is really a liberal just trying to make conservatives look incredibly stupid

 

[starcraftzzz]

Lets try the 30's and today. Loads of nightmares there jack.

FDR's policies extened the GP. It was WWII that finally put a stop to it. His polices were an utter failure.

Odd because the depression ended a year after FDRs polcies took effect. But dont let hsitroy get your way

Hows the economy today under Barry Boy?? Its improving but now because of anything that dufus has done. Jesus. He wasted billions of taxdollars on his stimulus and "shovel ready" jobs and his green bs.

I see so Obamas to blame for job loses that occurred the month he became president but a few years afterwards job creation has nothing to do with him...
Also I'm not sure why you think creating 4million jobs is a waste probably because you are partisan hack

 

[Dick Tuck]

The Know Nothing Party were irrational nativists. I think you'll find the neo version on the other side of the aisle.

 

[Katiegrrl0]

1. In "Applied Economics: Thinking Beyond Stage One," Dr. Thomas Sowell points out that many politicians do not think beyond Stage One because they will be praised (and elected) for the short term benefits but will not be held accountable much later when the long term consequences appear.


The truth can be clearly seen in the economic policy that will be voted on in November.

2. The NYTimes verifies that the Obama economic plan is less beneficial than the Ryan Plan:

a. Deficit in 2016
Obama: $529 billion
Ryan Plan $241 billion

b. Added debt over the next ten years:
Obama $6.4 trillion
Ryan $3.1 trillion

c. Balances the budget:
Obama: never
Ryan: by 2040
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/21/us/politics/house-republicans-release-budget-blueprint.html


Not even close!
To vote for the Obama economic plan, one would have to subscribe to 'I know nothing...I vote Democrat.'


Obama: When you find yourself in a hole.....stop digging.

In 1835 Andrew Jackson was the last President to pay off the debt.
Clinton was the last President to leave a budget surplus and the debt was -9.0.
Truman between 1945 and 1949 actually lowered the debt by 8 billion dollars. So since Jackson no one has done anything with the debt to speak of.
What makes you think someone will turn this around now?

 

[PoliticalChic]

2. Reaganomics gave the American citizen a golden (economic) age...
3. ....and more importantly, he purchased freedom for the entire world by ending the 'Evil Empire' without firing a single shot...
...Priceless!
Put Ron on the Rock!
Speaking of which, yesterday was Gutzon Borglum's birthday, March 25, 1867.

2) If by Golden age you mean declining wealth for the bottom 90% of Americans, stagnating income and the 2nd worst deaced of GDP growht since the 30's then you would be correct.
3) I see so Reagan and his time machine made Stalin implement in the 1920's a communist command style economic system that failed. Why didn't Reagan use his time machine more often?

I’ve never found your posts either enlightening, nor particularly smart, but hesitate to call you the usual, you know, dumb, stupid or any of the other terms of opprobrium used so glibly by the left…

But in this series of posts you reveal that infliction so prominent in Liberals….’Blinded by Ideology.”

But, beyond the inability to accept proof, data, facts due to the blindness, you mouth the inanities of the Left because of an additional condition, the weak mind that produces a lap dog rather than a sentient human being.


“Between the early 1980s and 2007 we lived in an economic Golden Age. Never before have so many people advanced so far economically in so short a period of time as they have during the last 25 years. Until the credit crisis, 70 million people a year were joining the middle class. The U.S. kicked off this long boom with the economic reforms of Ronald Reagan, particularly his enormous income tax cuts. We burst from the economic stagnation of the 1970s into a dynamic, innovative, high-tech-oriented economy. Even in recent years the much-maligned U.S. did well. Between year-end 2002 and year-end 2007 U.S. growth exceeded the entire size of China's economy.”
How Capitalism Will Save Us - Forbes.com

 

[Decepticon]

I agree with the premise, but still find that Ryan's plan comes up really short on true cuts. A balanced budget by 2040?? That's like predicting 28 years into the future that all things remain equal in global and domestic economics of the country. Since that isn't going to happen and policies will shift within the next 4-6 years, I find the plan to simply be a blow hard.

If we're going to get serious about balancing the budget and paying down debt, the plan should be to cut far more and far deeper to achieve a balance within the next 3-4 years and begin paying down the debt. The plan does not move this fiscal conservative. It's better than democrats "no budget" policy, but it falls pretty far short of setting the country on a fiscally responsible course.

It is better to light one candle than to curse the darkness. – Chinese proverb.

So your argument is that doing something STUPID is better than doing NOTHING?

WRONG AGAIN!

The top chart shows what happens to the deficits if the Bush tax cuts are allowed to expire.
The bottom? The GOP plan.


Don't you ever get tired of me pointing out that you are factually incorrect about virtually EVERYTHING you apparently believe?

I mean....right here.....DOING NOTHING is better than Ryan's plan.
The budget will be balanced in less than 10 years if CONGRESS NOTHING!

 

[Decepticon]

2. Reaganomics gave the American citizen a golden (economic) age...
3. ....and more importantly, he purchased freedom for the entire world by ending the 'Evil Empire' without firing a single shot...
...Priceless!
Put Ron on the Rock!
Speaking of which, yesterday was Gutzon Borglum's birthday, March 25, 1867.

2) If by Golden age you mean declining wealth for the bottom 90% of Americans, stagnating income and the 2nd worst deaced of GDP growht since the 30's then you would be correct.
3) I see so Reagan and his time machine made Stalin implement in the 1920's a communist command style economic system that failed. Why didn't Reagan use his time machine more often?

I’ve never found your posts either enlightening, nor particularly smart, but hesitate to call you the usual, you know, dumb, stupid or any of the other terms of opprobrium used so glibly by the left…

But in this series of posts you reveal that infliction so prominent in Liberals….’Blinded by Ideology.”

But, beyond the inability to accept proof, data, facts due to the blindness, you mouth the inanities of the Left because of an additional condition, the weak mind that produces a lap dog rather than a sentient human being.


“Between the early 1980s and 2007 we lived in an economic Golden Age. Never before have so many people advanced so far economically in so short a period of time as they have during the last 25 years. Until the credit crisis, 70 million people a year were joining the middle class. The U.S. kicked off this long boom with the economic reforms of Ronald Reagan, particularly his enormous income tax cuts. We burst from the economic stagnation of the 1970s into a dynamic, innovative, high-tech-oriented economy. Even in recent years the much-maligned U.S. did well. Between year-end 2002 and year-end 2007 U.S. growth exceeded the entire size of China's economy.”
How Capitalism Will Save Us - Forbes.com

That Forbes article is from 2008.
Has capitalism saved us yet?

 

[PoliticalChic]

2. Reaganomics gave the American citizen a golden (economic) age...
3. ....and more importantly, he purchased freedom for the entire world by ending the 'Evil Empire' without firing a single shot...
...Priceless!
Put Ron on the Rock!
Speaking of which, yesterday was Gutzon Borglum's birthday, March 25, 1867.

2) If by Golden age you mean declining wealth for the bottom 90% of Americans, stagnating income and the 2nd worst deaced of GDP growht since the 30's then you would be correct.
3) I see so Reagan and his time machine made Stalin implement in the 1920's a communist command style economic system that failed. Why didn't Reagan use his time machine more often?

1. The tax cuts of the Economic Recovery Act of 1981 stimulated economic growth. “As a 1982 JEC study pointed out,[1] similar across-the-board tax cuts had been implemented in the 1920s as the Mellon tax cuts, and in the 1960s as the Kennedy tax cuts. In both cases the reduction of high marginal tax rates actually increased tax payments by "the rich," also increasing their share of total individual income taxes paid.” http://www.house.gov/jec/fiscal/tx-grwth/reagtxct/reagtxct.htm

“As inflation came down and as more and more of the tax cuts from the 1981 Act went into effect, the economic began a strong and sustained pattern of growth.” US Department of the Treasury

2. The benefits from Reaganomics:
a. The economy grew at a 3.4% average rate…compared with 2.9% for the previous eight years, and 2.7% for the next eight.(Table B-4)
b. Inflation rate dropped from 12.5% to 4.4%. (Table B-63)
c. Unemployment fell to 5.5% from 7.1% (Table B-35)
d. Prime interest rate fell by one-third.(Table B-73)
e. The S & P 500 jumped 124% (Table B-95) FDsys - Browse ERP

f. Charitable contributions rose 57% faster than inflation. Dinesh D’Souza, “Ronald Reagan: How an Ordinary May Became an Extraordinary Leader,” p. 116

 

[PoliticalChic]

2) If by Golden age you mean declining wealth for the bottom 90% of Americans, stagnating income and the 2nd worst deaced of GDP growht since the 30's then you would be correct.
3) I see so Reagan and his time machine made Stalin implement in the 1920's a communist command style economic system that failed. Why didn't Reagan use his time machine more often?

I’ve never found your posts either enlightening, nor particularly smart, but hesitate to call you the usual, you know, dumb, stupid or any of the other terms of opprobrium used so glibly by the left…

But in this series of posts you reveal that infliction so prominent in Liberals….’Blinded by Ideology.”

But, beyond the inability to accept proof, data, facts due to the blindness, you mouth the inanities of the Left because of an additional condition, the weak mind that produces a lap dog rather than a sentient human being.


“Between the early 1980s and 2007 we lived in an economic Golden Age. Never before have so many people advanced so far economically in so short a period of time as they have during the last 25 years. Until the credit crisis, 70 million people a year were joining the middle class. The U.S. kicked off this long boom with the economic reforms of Ronald Reagan, particularly his enormous income tax cuts. We burst from the economic stagnation of the 1970s into a dynamic, innovative, high-tech-oriented economy. Even in recent years the much-maligned U.S. did well. Between year-end 2002 and year-end 2007 U.S. growth exceeded the entire size of China's economy.”
How Capitalism Will Save Us - Forbes.com

That Forbes article is from 2008.
Has capitalism saved us yet?

There is little outside of reincarnation that would save you.

Let's be honest, for a Liberal not data, facts, proof, or even experience will matter not a bit in informing belief.
Even hearing your champion promise the Russian that he will betray America after the election, you will race to the polls to pull the Democrat lever.
Isn't that true?

 

[PoliticalChic]

I agree with the premise, but still find that Ryan's plan comes up really short on true cuts. A balanced budget by 2040?? That's like predicting 28 years into the future that all things remain equal in global and domestic economics of the country. Since that isn't going to happen and policies will shift within the next 4-6 years, I find the plan to simply be a blow hard.

If we're going to get serious about balancing the budget and paying down debt, the plan should be to cut far more and far deeper to achieve a balance within the next 3-4 years and begin paying down the debt. The plan does not move this fiscal conservative. It's better than democrats "no budget" policy, but it falls pretty far short of setting the country on a fiscally responsible course.

It is better to light one candle than to curse the darkness. – Chinese proverb.

So your argument is that doing something STUPID is better than doing NOTHING?

WRONG AGAIN!

The top chart shows what happens to the deficits if the Bush tax cuts are allowed to expire.
The bottom? The GOP plan.


Don't you ever get tired of me pointing out that you are factually incorrect about virtually EVERYTHING you apparently believe?

I mean....right here.....DOING NOTHING is better than Ryan's plan.
The budget will be balanced in less than 10 years if CONGRESS NOTHING!

The truth remains the truth, no matter whether you accept it or not.

 

[daveman]

So, we should trust the party that ran UP the deficits to stop doing so in only 28 years.


Are you serious or is this a joke?

Bush debt = bad.

Obama debt = good.

Is that what you're using instead of critical thought?

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. In "Applied Economics: Thinking Beyond Stage One," Dr. Thomas Sowell points out that many politicians do not think beyond Stage One because they will be praised (and elected) for the short term benefits but will not be held accountable much later when the long term consequences appear.


The truth can be clearly seen in the economic policy that will be voted on in November.

2. The NYTimes verifies that the Obama economic plan is less beneficial than the Ryan Plan:

a. Deficit in 2016
Obama: $529 billion
Ryan Plan $241 billion

b. Added debt over the next ten years:
Obama $6.4 trillion
Ryan $3.1 trillion

c. Balances the budget:
Obama: never
Ryan: by 2040
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/21/us/politics/house-republicans-release-budget-blueprint.html


Not even close!
To vote for the Obama economic plan, one would have to subscribe to 'I know nothing...I vote Democrat.'


Obama: When you find yourself in a hole.....stop digging.

In 1835 Andrew Jackson was the last President to pay off the debt.
Clinton was the last President to leave a budget surplus and the debt was -9.0.
Truman between 1945 and 1949 actually lowered the debt by 8 billion dollars. So since Jackson no one has done anything with the debt to speak of.
What makes you think someone will turn this around now?

"Clinton was the last President to leave a budget surplus..."
A myth.

The national debt increased 41% during the Clinton term...even with the 'peace dividend' that Reagan provided.

 

[daveman]

Know Nothing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sounds more Republican to me

The Know Nothing was a movement by the nativist American political faction of the 1850s, characterized by political xenophobia, anti-Catholic sentiment, and occasional bouts of violence against the groups the nativists targeted. It was empowered by popular fears that the country was being overwhelmed by German and Irish Catholic immigrants, who were often regarded as hostile to republican values and controlled by the Pope in Rome. Mainly active from 1854 to 1856, it strove to curb immigration and naturalization, though its efforts met with little success.Membership was limited to Protestant males of British American lineage.

The Know Nothing Democrats is a movement by the socialist American political faction of the mid-20th century onward, characterized by political xenophobia, anti-Christian sentiment, and occasional bouts of violence against the groups the socialists targeted. It was empowered by unpopular fears that the country was being overwhelmed by conservatives, who were often regarded as hostile to socialist values and controlled by God in Heaven. Mainly active from the turn of the century, it strove to curb conservative political thought, though its efforts met with little success.Membership was limited to ideological purists and useful idiots.

 

[daveman]

1. When you hear Ryan promise to balance the budget, just remember,

Reagan promised to balance the budget,

with essentially the same plan Ryan is proposing.

2. Keep in mind, Obama's deficits are all occurring under Republican tax plans; Obama's deficits are the result of Obama acting like a Republican on taxes.

You seem to be forgetting something: Obama's spending. You can't blame that on anyone but Obama -- but you'll try, just as programmed.

 

[daveman]

1. When you hear Ryan promise to balance the budget, just remember,

Reagan promised to balance the budget,

with essentially the same plan Ryan is proposing.

2. Keep in mind, Obama's deficits are all occurring under Republican tax plans; Obama's deficits are the result of Obama acting like a Republican on taxes.

Well, since you mention 'The Great Man,'.....

"By the end of the summer of Reagan's third year in office, the economy was soaring. The GDP growth rate was 5% and racing toward 7%, even 8% growth. In 1983 and '84 output was growing so fast the biggest worry was that the economy would "overheat." In the summer of 2011 we have an economy limping along at barely 1% growth and by some indications headed toward a "double-dip" recession. By the end of Reagan's first term, it was Morning in America. Today there is gloomy talk of America in its twilight.

The Reagan philosophy was to incentivize production—i.e., the "supply side" of the economy—by lowering restraints on business expansion and investment. This was done by slashing marginal income tax rates, eliminating regulatory high hurdles, and reining in inflation with a tighter monetary policy."
Stephen Moore: Obamanonics vs. Reaganomics - WSJ.com

REAL history for the win.

 

[Decepticon]

It is better to light one candle than to curse the darkness. – Chinese proverb.

So your argument is that doing something STUPID is better than doing NOTHING?

WRONG AGAIN!

The top chart shows what happens to the deficits if the Bush tax cuts are allowed to expire.
The bottom? The GOP plan.


Don't you ever get tired of me pointing out that you are factually incorrect about virtually EVERYTHING you apparently believe?

I mean....right here.....DOING NOTHING is better than Ryan's plan.
The budget will be balanced in less than 10 years if CONGRESS NOTHING!

The truth remains the truth, no matter whether you accept it or not.

I posted NUMBERS. It doesn't get any more TRUTHFUL than that.
What did you post?
Your OPINION and NOTHING more.

Guess who wins in a battle of truthfulness ?
Me.

Unless you can provide NUMBERS which back up YOUR contentions?
I'll wait while you don't. As USUAL.

 

[daveman]

1. In "Applied Economics: Thinking Beyond Stage One," Dr. Thomas Sowell points out that many politicians do not think beyond Stage One because they will be praised (and elected) for the short term benefits but will not be held accountable much later when the long term consequences appear.


The truth can be clearly seen in the economic policy that will be voted on in November.

2. The NYTimes verifies that the Obama economic plan is less beneficial than the Ryan Plan:

a. Deficit in 2016
Obama: $529 billion
Ryan Plan $241 billion

b. Added debt over the next ten years:
Obama $6.4 trillion
Ryan $3.1 trillion

c. Balances the budget:
Obama: never
Ryan: by 2040
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/21/us/politics/house-republicans-release-budget-blueprint.html


Not even close!
To vote for the Obama economic plan, one would have to subscribe to 'I know nothing...I vote Democrat.'


Obama: When you find yourself in a hole.....stop digging.

Good grief, one more ridiculous and fully partisan fishing exhibition by the resident troll.

There are two sides to 'central planning' and neither will prevail. A budget is a compromise and a budget is a plan. Since no compromise is on the horizon the plan is to point fingers at the other side.

Hopefully sane heads will prevail and the Congress will eventually send a budget to the White House which President Obama will sign. Congress has an approval rating of 12%; I can't imagine why it is so 'high'.

Why haven't the Dems proposed a budget in -- how long has it been?

Oh, yeah -- they're cowards. They don't want to risk their seats doing their damned job.