Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
My country is more important than the government spending the earnings of people who are not even born yet in the name of "prosperity."
OH really, then why the fuck do you want tax cuts for the wealthy when it is proven that shit has very little economic return?
You are a cement block head who refuses facts and tries to rewrite history to fiut your poarty view.
IF you cared one fucking bit for this country you would DROP the partisan hackery line and start accepting the advice of the best minds in our country instead.
So Grasshopper, you presume to think that everyone must reason like you, and that your way is the only correct way. You presume too much grasshopper. I care about truth and Justice TM, I do not live my life looking through somebody else's eye's, just my own. Rather than convict people who think differently than myself, I try to convince through debate and argument, I both listen, see, and speak my piece rationally, at least that is the target, why don't you try doing a 180 and consider that.
Supply and demand are the only things that stimulate the economy. There is always demand for food and clothes. By supplying benefits to the unemployed, they are able to purchase those goods instead of being given a little charity at a "food bank".
We have been paying unemployment insurance for our entire working lives. When we are benefiting from that "insurance" program it helps get money moving in the economy.
If Republicans don't like Americans getting "insurance" they paid into for years, then why do they elect leaders who make it easy to move jobs to "China"? Seems kind of self defeating.
You know, if Republicans hadn't invaded Iraq and given out a 2.4 trillion dollar tax break and a 2 to 7 trillion dollar drugs for votes bill, and helped move millions of jobs to China, we wouldn't even be having this discussion.
My country is more important than the government spending the earnings of people who are not even born yet in the name of "prosperity."
OH really, then why the fuck do you want tax cuts for the wealthy when it is proven that shit has very little economic return?
You are a cement block head who refuses facts and tries to rewrite history to fiut your poarty view.
IF you cared one fucking bit for this country you would DROP the partisan hackery line and start accepting the advice of the best minds in our country instead.
Your Patriotism isn't what's driving you right now TM. If your saviors are so smart, so far above us in purpose and reason, as you claim, there would be no problem to repair. Why do their fixes perpetually depend on what other people have that they want? Why don't they just manifest their own fuel and momentum, apart from us, and show us what they mean, using only their own resources and talent? They are so superior, so much more intelligent, what the problem there TM? What's up with that?
What does it matter what the wealthy are taxed? Does Barack Obama stop spending when he can't tax the wealthy anymore?
Supply and demand are the only things that stimulate the economy. There is always demand for food and clothes. By supplying benefits to the unemployed, they are able to purchase those goods instead of being given a little charity at a "food bank".
We have been paying unemployment insurance for our entire working lives. When we are benefiting from that "insurance" program it helps get money moving in the economy.
If Republicans don't like Americans getting "insurance" they paid into for years, then why do they elect leaders who make it easy to move jobs to "China"? Seems kind of self defeating.
You know, if Republicans hadn't invaded Iraq and given out a 2.4 trillion dollar tax break and a 2 to 7 trillion dollar drugs for votes bill, and helped move millions of jobs to China, we wouldn't even be having this discussion.
YEP. Communicable diseases kill the wealthy as well as the poor. The cleanup of London in the 18th and 19th century was more about protecting the growing middle class and the upper class than it was about helping the poor.Starvation, malnuitrition and other aspects of poverty are a health and wealth hazard that impose a heavy implicit tax on everyone. For example North America has the largest reservoir of bubonic plague carrying rodents in the world but the rare human cases are still national news. Good sanitation and public health pretty much stops plague cold. So pest and microbe control pays huge dividends.
To go with one example plague purportedly entered the US from a boat landing in San Francisco in the late 1800s and it is spreading east. New Mexico is the last hotspot I recall with less than 10 total cases and most victims survived. What was not reported but undoubtedly happened is that public health and sanitation went mildly ape cleaning up rat infestations and rat attractants. No news of plague cases in years means that they really tightened up. The big bugaboo is what will happen when plague reaches the St. Louis-Chicago metropolis. My guess is fewer than 100 infections and less than 10 dead but a sanitation bill that will be eyepopping. The dead and dying are microbe breeding grounds, likewise the hungry. Keeping the poor in reasonably good health pays dividends.
Job growth under Bush was worst since WWII | Jacksonville Business Journal
President George W. Bush will leave office Tuesday with the worst employment-growth record of any president since World War II, according to a new analysis by Bizjournals.
The nations job base grew at an annual rate of 0.28 percent during Bushs eight years as president by far the slowest pace for any of the 11 presidents in the postwar era, according to Bizjournals.
George W. Bushs span ran from December 2000, when nonfarm employment totaled 132.5 million, to December 2008, when it reached 135.5 million. (that comes out to about three million. Remember, when Bush left office, we were still under his budget for 8 more months and the US was losing jobs at the rate of 750,000 a month. That job loss is unfairly counted as part of Obama's administration even though the budget and policies were all Bush).
The administration with the strongest growth rate since World War II was that of Lyndon Johnson, who served between November 1963 and January 1969. Employment increased at an annual pace of 3.74 percent during that period.
Total employment
1. Lyndon Johnson (1963-69), 3.74%
2. Jimmy Carter (1977-81), 3.11%
3. Bill Clinton (1993-2001), 2.42%
4. Harry Truman (1945-53), 2.38%
5. Richard Nixon (1969-74), 2.30%
6. John Kennedy (1961-63), 2.28%
7. Ronald Reagan (1981-89), 2.04%
8. Gerald Ford (1974-77), 0.95%
9. Dwight Eisenhower (1953-61), 0.87%
10. George H.W. Bush (1989-93), 0.59%
11. George W. Bush (2001-09), 0.28%
This comes from the Jacksonville Business Journal, hardly a "liberal rag".
OH really, then why the fuck do you want tax cuts for the wealthy when it is proven that shit has very little economic return?
You are a cement block head who refuses facts and tries to rewrite history to fiut your poarty view.
IF you cared one fucking bit for this country you would DROP the partisan hackery line and start accepting the advice of the best minds in our country instead.
Your Patriotism isn't what's driving you right now TM. If your saviors are so smart, so far above us in purpose and reason, as you claim, there would be no problem to repair. Why do their fixes perpetually depend on what other people have that they want? Why don't they just manifest their own fuel and momentum, apart from us, and show us what they mean, using only their own resources and talent? They are so superior, so much more intelligent, what the problem there TM? What's up with that?
This doesnt even make sense dude.
Tell me why you refuse the study of a harvard economics proff whos study reaffirms what many other studies have found?
YEP. Communicable diseases kill the wealthy as well as the poor. The cleanup of London in the 18th and 19th century was more about protecting the growing middle class and the upper class than it was about helping the poor.Starvation, malnuitrition and other aspects of poverty are a health and wealth hazard that impose a heavy implicit tax on everyone. For example North America has the largest reservoir of bubonic plague carrying rodents in the world but the rare human cases are still national news. Good sanitation and public health pretty much stops plague cold. So pest and microbe control pays huge dividends.
To go with one example plague purportedly entered the US from a boat landing in San Francisco in the late 1800s and it is spreading east. New Mexico is the last hotspot I recall with less than 10 total cases and most victims survived. What was not reported but undoubtedly happened is that public health and sanitation went mildly ape cleaning up rat infestations and rat attractants. No news of plague cases in years means that they really tightened up. The big bugaboo is what will happen when plague reaches the St. Louis-Chicago metropolis. My guess is fewer than 100 infections and less than 10 dead but a sanitation bill that will be eyepopping. The dead and dying are microbe breeding grounds, likewise the hungry. Keeping the poor in reasonably good health pays dividends.
Health conditions are not the only concern with the grow of poverty. While 14% of Americans live in poverty, the poor account for 53% of prison population. As poverty grows, so does crime.
The American middle class is the heart of our democracy. As the lower middle class slips into poverty and the upper middle class joints the rich, the extinction of the middle class is a real possibility. As the middle class shrinks so will our freedoms.
Hi all, I just have a quick question.
A lot of people have been saying that unemployment benefits help stimulate the economy. Mark Zandi, Chief Economist of Moody's, has gone on record as saying that $1.00 spent on food stamps actually adds $1.73 to GDP. As far as I can tell from what I've read, the claim that unemployment benefits and food stamps adds to the GDP is uncontroversial.
My question is where does that extra wealth come from? How does government spending, targeted toward the unemployed, actually create this extra $0.73?
Thanks in advance.
Only idiot hacks who care more about party and failed ideas than they do country and countrymen believe that somehow if you give rich people a tax cut they will ruszh out to creat jobs for which there is no demand and lose their asses in the process.
Here it is again. Looks like the middle class is being knifed for the sake of the dependency class.
These are all government programs.
Oh, look, after 9/11, uneployment went down untiil 2007.
You guys seem to think that you are more competant than harvard economists to determine economic reality.The jobs created by the need when these funds are spent ar not pretend jobs, they are real and the people doing them pay taxes and ALSO spend their incomes stimulating even more.
Jesus people quit being so fucking mind numbingly stupid and partisan.
YOUR COUNTRY IS FAR MORE IMPORTANT THAN YOUR FUCKING PARTY
How many of them have even created a product or service that someone else wanted to willingly purchase?How many of those Harvard economists are rich?