Guess what the Republican plan is to fix our economic woes?

[Steelplate]

Fuck you. You really don't get the fact that we pay into those funds, do you?

Don't give me the God speech unless you are going to live by the "judge not lest ye be judged, Obey every other "abomination" in Leviticus besides the homosexuality thing, Take the log out of your own eye before pointing out the speck in your brother's, and Most importantly...stop casting stones unless you are without sin".

When you start listening to Jesus' message for real.. don't preach to me.

You don't get the fact that your "payments" are going for other people and not you do you?

I don't live by out of context statements. I try to do as the Lord has commanded and make righteous judgments. Any way you look at it you are looking to live off the backs of others because for some reason you think that after a certain age you have no responsibility to work any more.

You have signed on to a ponzi scheme for your future security. You have believed lies that politicians cannot deliver on because of pride.

You don't have to though. That's the beauty of life. You can start today this very hour to eliminate the lies in your life. You can make the truth your anchor and experience freedom and security beyond your wildest imaginations.

I'm not responsible for your future security. And you aren't responsible for mine. How about we stop burdening one another and instead free ourselves?

Wow... Beck... much?

 

[Avatar4321]

Your "position" is always "protect and enable my marxist leader at all costs"......

Sad isn't it?

 

[Avatar4321]

Tax cuts don't cause economic downturns. Sorry.

Are you suggesting that when people get to keep more of their money instead of having it confiscated by force, that they actually benefit????

 

[Avatar4321]

I'll keep it simple for you, the simple fact that you're complaining about how much of THEIR OWN money a company is keeping, to do what they see fit with it is pretty damning evidence that you're full of Marxist BS. You think the government should be able to tell these companies what to do with their profits because, of course, idiots like Obama and the democratic congress know what's best......

ah your projecting again. I am not complaining about them making money. I am stating that tax cuts dont equal more jobs and my evidence is that they have 2 trillion on cash and we have cut their taxes and have seen no jobs. ( thats not even getting into the bubbles)

No i dont think governments should be able to tell companies what to do with their cash, but they can always give tax breaks etc for people who spend it properly. ( which every business takes advantage of)

Do you have anything else but baseless assumptions? this is getting boring because you have been dead wrong about everything i said. You are trying to make my argument for me so you have something to argue against.

so i can keep on schooling you on my real opinions on the matter, or you can shut up and stop looking like an ass.

Wow. And who defines what "spending it properly" is?

Why the totalitarians he supports. They are the "good" ones.

 

[Avatar4321]

Oh hell, I can answer that... If it benefits this COUNTRY and its general Population? It's proper. If it benefits Communist countries? It's Treason.

Read for context.. I did not ask WHAT defines.. I asked WHO. Try again.

It doesn't matter who.. if the parameters are set, does it?

Yeah actually it does.

 

[driveby]

ah your projecting again. I am not complaining about them making money. I am stating that tax cuts dont equal more jobs and my evidence is that they have 2 trillion on cash and we have cut their taxes and have seen no jobs. ( thats not even getting into the bubbles)

No i dont think governments should be able to tell companies what to do with their cash, but they can always give tax breaks etc for people who spend it properly. ( which every business takes advantage of)

Do you have anything else but baseless assumptions? this is getting boring because you have been dead wrong about everything i said. You are trying to make my argument for me so you have something to argue against.

so i can keep on schooling you on my real opinions on the matter, or you can shut up and stop looking like an ass.

See bolded print, I rest my case......

And if you were "schooling" me, you'd have me convinced you aren't a marxist moonbat, but i see right through your tired act. Just be a man and admit what you are instead of trying to hide it, like your messiah.....

yes so what? thats not a marxist viewpoint. Thats a blend of capitalism and socialism mixed together. Find the correct balance and you can have a wonderful market. Have one of too much and you are doomed to go off a cliff.

okie dokie, now you are just boring me. You want to see a marxist because you have nothing of substance to give.

sure thing comrade....

 

[American Horse]

You got it. Tax cuts, baby!

Obama says credit downgrade means 'renewed sense of urgency' - USATODAY.com

As far as eliminating loopholes, the Republicans are willing to do that, to the extent they actually are loopholes, and in doing that lower rates for everyone in the process. The president said those who aren't, should pay their fair share . . . does he mean all those, the 46% who pay not taxes at all, who get a free ride from the rest of us?

 

[Avatar4321]

Idealogues (as in zealots) are almost always dangerous if and when they get into power.

You certainly are.

 

[Steelplate]

Read for context.. I did not ask WHAT defines.. I asked WHO. Try again.

It doesn't matter who.. if the parameters are set, does it?

Yeah actually it does.

OK.. who do you want to set the parameters?

 

[Avatar4321]

Wow... Beck... much?

Not enough clearly.

So really why do you want others to support you? Wouldn't it be much better to support yourself? Do you really think that the government can spend your money better than you can?

And why do you feel entitled to the money of others? Why do you think government should take care of your responsibilities?

I don't understand this mindset.

Why would you think relying on anything other than yourself and God would provide you with a secure future? How on earth does Social Security and Medicare give anyone a secure future? Those living off those programs alone barely get by.

You've made indications that you recieve a good income along with your spouse. Why would you rely on government for your future when you can take care of it yourself? If I made half of what you made I'd be set for life.

 

[Avatar4321]

Ew your a god freak. That explains a lot.

I'm not sure your position on God effects your ability to use common sense and intelligence. Nor am I arrogant enough to believe that athiests or agnostics can't use reason just as well as some believers can ignore it.

I do think that perhaps if you sought there Spirit of the Lord you would come to a greater understanding and see through the lies the politicians have spun to enslave you.

yeah as i say, keep your religion in your pants. I dont need any of it to see our government is corrupt and full of liars.

And yet you want to empower those corrupt liars. That isn't logical.

If you know the government is corrupt and full of liars, then wouldn't the logical response is to give them less power in our lives and assume more power ourselves?

 

[Avatar4321]

It doesn't matter who.. if the parameters are set, does it?

Yeah actually it does.

OK.. who do you want to set the parameters?

No one. I don't want people determining whether I spend my money properly. That's between me, my family, and God.

 

[Steelplate]

Wow... Beck... much?

Not enough clearly.

So really why do you want others to support you? Wouldn't it be much better to support yourself? Do you really think that the government can spend your money better than you can?

And why do you feel entitled to the money of others? Why do you think government should take care of your responsibilities?

I don't understand this mindset.

Why would you think relying on anything other than yourself and God would provide you with a secure future? How on earth does Social Security and Medicare give anyone a secure future? Those living off those programs alone barely get by.

You've made indications that you recieve a good income along with your spouse. Why would you rely on government for your future when you can take care of it yourself? If I made half of what you made I'd be set for life.

Why are you so opposed to a sense of Community where we all work and give together for a common goal?

If you made half of what I make? So... let's see, half of what I make is $50k.... so you make less than that? What do you make? You make $30k or under? You have a family? If so, you are probably one of those 50%ers that don't pay federal income taxes... and you want to lecture me because I like SS? Fuck off.

EDIT: I've explained that If you are one of those 50%ers, that you pay plenty of other taxes... so I am not blaming the ills of our society on you or people like you... but I certainly don't need lectured from someone who may be benefiting from government and talking down to one who is paying in good faith into a program I believe in.

 

[Vel]

Who do you want to set the parameters?

I don't know.. You're the one that says as long as they're set that someone can tell someone else the proper way to spend their money. I guessed you'd know as you were cheerleading their position.

Fuck it, I'll set the parameters. BTW... who buys their shit? Oh yeah... that's right, Mostly us. So if we are plunking our money down for their goods, then that money isn't reinvested for us to buy the next round of shit, or the round after that, It's really doing THIS COUNTRY no good, is it?

It comes down to the basic ideology that THIS CAPITALIST country allows them their wealth, right? Yet they are turning their back on it.... which goes totally against Reagan's Trickle down philosophy. They have ruined Supply side economics and made our country weaker, our people poorer and them richer. Supply side has failed and has been sold out for huge profits. All hail the Conglomerate.

Wow.. That pretty much tells your ideology. Allows. Wow.

 

[Steelplate]

I don't know.. You're the one that says as long as they're set that someone can tell someone else the proper way to spend their money. I guessed you'd know as you were cheerleading their position.

Fuck it, I'll set the parameters. BTW... who buys their shit? Oh yeah... that's right, Mostly us. So if we are plunking our money down for their goods, then that money isn't reinvested for us to buy the next round of shit, or the round after that, It's really doing THIS COUNTRY no good, is it?

It comes down to the basic ideology that THIS CAPITALIST country allows them their wealth, right? Yet they are turning their back on it.... which goes totally against Reagan's Trickle down philosophy. They have ruined Supply side economics and made our country weaker, our people poorer and them richer. Supply side has failed and has been sold out for huge profits. All hail the Conglomerate.

Wow.. That pretty much tells your ideology. Allows. Wow.

You're damned right ALLOWS. In Socialistic Countries they'd be taxed 2-3X as much in their personal income and have ZERO loopholes(and they'd still be rich). Heck, In China...they'd be part of the State. Wake up and smell the coffee, man. This country allows them to attain wealth.

 

[Vel]

Fuck it, I'll set the parameters. BTW... who buys their shit? Oh yeah... that's right, Mostly us. So if we are plunking our money down for their goods, then that money isn't reinvested for us to buy the next round of shit, or the round after that, It's really doing THIS COUNTRY no good, is it?

It comes down to the basic ideology that THIS CAPITALIST country allows them their wealth, right? Yet they are turning their back on it.... which goes totally against Reagan's Trickle down philosophy. They have ruined Supply side economics and made our country weaker, our people poorer and them richer. Supply side has failed and has been sold out for huge profits. All hail the Conglomerate.

Wow.. That pretty much tells your ideology. Allows. Wow.

You're damned right ALLOWS. In Socialistic Countries they'd be taxed 2-3X as much in their personal income and have ZERO loopholes(and they'd still be rich). Heck, In China...they'd be part of the State. Wake up and smell the coffee, man. This country allows them to attain wealth.

You know, what differentiated the U.S. from other countries was always that people had the RIGHT to pursue their dreams and goals and that your personal property rights were protected. Allows..stone the crows.

 

[driveby]

Fuck it, I'll set the parameters. BTW... who buys their shit? Oh yeah... that's right, Mostly us. So if we are plunking our money down for their goods, then that money isn't reinvested for us to buy the next round of shit, or the round after that, It's really doing THIS COUNTRY no good, is it?

It comes down to the basic ideology that THIS CAPITALIST country allows them their wealth, right? Yet they are turning their back on it.... which goes totally against Reagan's Trickle down philosophy. They have ruined Supply side economics and made our country weaker, our people poorer and them richer. Supply side has failed and has been sold out for huge profits. All hail the Conglomerate.

Wow.. That pretty much tells your ideology. Allows. Wow.

You're damned right ALLOWS. In Socialistic Countries they'd be taxed 2-3X as much in their personal income and have ZERO loopholes(and they'd still be rich). Heck, In China...they'd be part of the State. Wake up and smell the coffee, man. This country allows them to attain wealth.

And it pisses you off! ....

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

You got it. Tax cuts, baby!

Obama says credit downgrade means 'renewed sense of urgency' - USATODAY.com

No our plan is simple................

WE PLAN TO VOTE IDIOTS LIKE YOU OUT OF OFFICE

 

[NYcarbineer]

You got it. Tax cuts, baby!

Obama says credit downgrade means 'renewed sense of urgency' - USATODAY.com

No our plan is simple................

WE PLAN TO VOTE IDIOTS LIKE YOU OUT OF OFFICE

Thus reminding us that the Right can campaign, they just can't govern.

 

[Sheldon]

S&P is calling for spending cuts. Gee, people that understand money agree with the GOP and imply that the left is wrong.

Standard & Poor's | Americas

United States of America Long-Term
Rating Lowered To 'AA+' On
Political Risks And Rising Debt
Burden; Outlook Negative


Rationale

We lowered our long-term rating on the U.S. because we believe that the
prolonged controversy over raising the statutory debt ceiling and the related
fiscal policy debate indicate that further near-term progress containing the
growth in public spending, especially on entitlements, or on reaching an
agreement on raising revenues is less likely than we previously assumed and
will remain a contentious and fitful process. We also believe that the fiscal
consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration agreed to this week
falls short of the amount that we believe is necessary to stabilize the
general government debt burden by the middle of the decade.

...

The political brinksmanship of recent months highlights what we see as
America's governance and policymaking becoming less stable, less effective,
and less predictable than what we previously believed. The statutory debt
ceiling and the threat of default have become political bargaining chips in
the debate over fiscal policy. Despite this year's wide-ranging debate, in our
view, the differences between political parties have proven to be
extraordinarily difficult to bridge, and, as we see it, the resulting
agreement fell well short of the comprehensive fiscal consolidation program
that some proponents had envisaged until quite recently. Republicans and
Democrats have only been able to agree to relatively modest savings on
discretionary spending while delegating to the Select Committee decisions on
more comprehensive measures. It appears that for now, new revenues have
dropped down on the menu of policy options. In addition, the plan envisions
only minor policy changes on Medicare and little change in other entitlements...

...

Standard & Poor's takes no position on the mix of spending and revenue
measures that Congress and the Administration might conclude is appropriate
for putting the U.S.'s finances on a sustainable footing.

​

S&P's downgraded because of Congress' and the Administration's inability to find a compromise on their positions that would create a comprehensive medium and long-term plan to reduce the debt trajectory.