Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

[Ernie S.]

Becuase he believed he can create a demand.

If he believed that, he was a fool, which he certainly was not. No, he believed that the demand already existed.

Ever worked in sales, Ernie? I did for years, and one of the first rules I was ever taught was: sell benefits, not features. So Walton wasn't offering people a mega-store with everything (that's a feature), he was offering people convenience and low prices (those are benefits). The demand for convenience and low prices already existed. Walton just found a way to meet that demand. He didn't create it.

In other words you've got nothing.

"The public-sector jobs you admire so much" (or whatever your exact words were) was YOUR assertion, not mine. I'm talking strictly about the private sector here.

I have...

Sure the demand existed but... it, kind of wasn't there until he filled it Like Ipads. Walton realized that if he built it, people would come.

Hey care to beat up on Steve Jobs for a while?

 

[Ernie S.]

Don't be absurd.

OK, just enough to pay Grayson's salary and feed the leeches.

You're still being absurd. You don't even believe that's what I want. I think you've just run out of arguments without running out of bile.

Not at all, although your partisan stupidity is causing a burning in my gut.

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

This is quite a twist on the facts. You assume that the rich won't spend, they will. Not only will they spend, if you cut corporate taxes they will invest in their corporation and hire.

Nice deflection though, we are talking about Grayson touting the benefits of reducing taxes.

Ahh, I wondered why there were so many jobs available and the economy was so stellar, it's those tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy at work, is it?

What tax cuts for corporations? The US has the 2nd or first highest corporate tax rate in the world.

Yep. What is needed in this country is a significant reduction in the corporate tax rate, a further reduction in marginal rates, the elimination of the capital gains tax and a drastic reduction in the size of government. Problem solved.

 

[PredFan]

If Alan Grayson (D) Fl, had two working brain cells to rub together, he'd realize that he had just said what conservatives have been saying for decades:

"With the payroll tax break, workers get more in their paychecks each week. That money goes to the waitress, who gives it to the hair stylist, who gives it to the landlord. And the money goes round and round. Demand goes up, and with it, employment."


Alan Grayson stop protecting rich: GOP must stop protecting the rich - OrlandoSentinel.com

Too bad morons like him when he were in Congress fought the conservatives to keep tax rates high and keep more people unemployed. Do I think he's seen the light? Not a chance. It's simply a political hack democrat trying to sieze an opportunity to regain a seat that he was thrown out of with vigor. What an idiot.

Sounds like trickle down

What heresy

It is trickle down. Just funny hearing it from a raving liberal democrat.

 

[PredFan]

No, you offer spin. Good luck with getting anyone to believe it. I'll no longer entertain it.

Spin is what you offer, misrepresenting Alan Grayson's statement as being identical to what Republicans say when it is not. I offer logic, evidence, and history.

And you have just confessed that you have no way to respond to this. As usual.

How is it spin?

Grayson said "give a person more money, they will spend it"

This is true with a consumer and it is true with a person with an idea to start or grow a business.

Of course it isn't spin.

 

[PredFan]

If Alan Grayson (D) Fl, had two working brain cells to rub together, he'd realize that he had just said what conservatives have been saying for decades:

"With the payroll tax break, workers get more in their paychecks each week. That money goes to the waitress, who gives it to the hair stylist, who gives it to the landlord. And the money goes round and round. Demand goes up, and with it, employment."


Alan Grayson stop protecting rich: GOP must stop protecting the rich - OrlandoSentinel.com

Too bad morons like him when he were in Congress fought the conservatives to keep tax rates high and keep more people unemployed. Do I think he's seen the light? Not a chance. It's simply a political hack democrat trying to sieze an opportunity to regain a seat that he was thrown out of with vigor. What an idiot.

Grayson is a lunatic. He had his shot and he blew it with all the flatulence that poured out of his mouth. He's not going back to Congress.

He's pure liberal democrat, just without the filter.

 

[PredFan]

If Alan Grayson (D) Fl, had two working brain cells to rub together, he'd realize that he had just said what conservatives have been saying for decades:

"With the payroll tax break, workers get more in their paychecks each week. That money goes to the waitress, who gives it to the hair stylist, who gives it to the landlord. And the money goes round and round. Demand goes up, and with it, employment."


Alan Grayson stop protecting rich: GOP must stop protecting the rich - OrlandoSentinel.com

Too bad morons like him when he were in Congress fought the conservatives to keep tax rates high and keep more people unemployed. Do I think he's seen the light? Not a chance. It's simply a political hack democrat trying to sieze an opportunity to regain a seat that he was thrown out of with vigor. What an idiot.

wow... if even a stopped clock is right twice a day, i'm hopefuly that you might even be correct about something at some point.

i doubt it... but i'm rooting for you.

What's incorrect about my post? Grayson did say that (he wrote the article), and it has been the conservative mantra for reducing taxes, what's wrong about that? Or are you just ignoring all logic simply to insult me?

 

[Dragon]

People were not out there saying "I want a one stop shop place with very low prices"

But when it came to be?

They found they wanted it.

Waldon did not cater to the demand.

Did you see my post above about selling to benefits rather than features?

 

[Dragon]

I'm beginning to think that maybe the confusion here on the part of PredFan and his fans is honest rather than duplicitous. Maybe it comes down to this.

When Republicans assert that tax cuts for the rich boost the economy, progressives read this as:

"Tax cuts for the rich boost the economy."

Conservatives, on the other hand, see it as:

"Tax cuts for the rich boost the economy."

Thus, when Grayson advocates a tax cut -- but NOT for the rich -- as a way to boost the economy, it looks like the same thing to them.

It's not, though.

 

[PredFan]

I'm beginning to think that maybe the confusion here on the part of PredFan and his fans is honest rather than duplicitous. Maybe it comes down to this.

When Republicans assert that tax cuts for the rich boost the economy, progressives read this as:

"Tax cuts for the rich boost the economy."

Conservatives, on the other hand, see it as:

"Tax cuts for the rich boost the economy."

Thus, when Grayson advocates a tax cut -- but NOT for the rich -- as a way to boost the economy, it looks like the same thing to them.

It's not, though.

Again you ignore what I posted and cherry pick the rest of the article to fit your view.

 

[Dragon]

Again you ignore what I posted and cherry pick the rest of the article to fit your view.

All of what you said comes down to claiming that Grayson was saying the same thing that Republicans have been saying. But the only similarity AT ALL is that both are talking about the stimulative effect of SOMETHING that, in both cases, fits into the category of a tax cut.

A tax cut on the middle class and working class stimulates the economy. That's what Grayson said. What Republicans have been saying, though, is that a tax cut for the rich stimulates the economy. That is NOT the same thing.

EDIT: And even though a tax cut for the middle class and working class will stimulate the economy, that doesn't make it automatically a good idea. At present I think it is -- but we have to acknowledge that it also increases the deficit, which may not be a good idea, and definitely isn't a good idea in a non-emergency situation.