If tax cuts create jobs, what happened with GW?

[grunt11b]

It does create jobs, it did create jobs...

But how can you really cut taxes when libfucks do absolutely NOTHING but SPEND MONEY ON THEIR VOTING BASE???

Every fucking time libs get power they spend and spend and spend... Republicans fix it then democrats destroy the republican progress...

Of course Bush pretty much destroyed all his progress when he started signing progressive spending bills....

You know what the reaction to libfuck congress' is??? layoff employees because these motherfuckers are going to spend us into oblivion - we're going to need to pay some hefty taxes...

Don't you fucking get it??? you tax businesses they lay employees off to pay those taxes..

Are democrats fucking retarded????

I swear the concept isn't that fucking hard to understand...

I blame this economy almost entirely on libfucks based on that notion alone. If you don't understand that businesses lay employees off when libfucks start spending money, then that means in your personal lives when you don't have any money, you just borrow some and don't pay it back. Because you obviously have no concept of money or how to manage it whatsoever...

Its very simple - the more money you have the more you have to spend or invest, the less money you have the less you have to spend or invest...

Its not that fucking difficult to understand..

If it isn't that difficult to understand then why don't you understand that despite 2 huge tax cuts the Bush administration created less jobs then any president going back to Harry S. Truman, 1939? You can rant and rave all you want and tell us how stupid we are, but I am posting real numbers from the WSJ and CNNMoney, not just pulling them out of my ass.

It's amazing how you throw the retard name around, when you are the one that is so obviously wrong.

Because under Bush for a point (when liberals weren't in congress) unemployment was at like 4%...

At that point in time the only people who didn't have a job were on welfare and were satisfied with that...

You know the assholes in the projects that don't want to work because dickheads like you, Weiner, Pelosi, Frank and Obama refer to them victims, when in reality they're just drains on society....

You mean the dickheads that cant work because they got 15 kids, by 14 different fathers to look after and have the emotional capacity as a 3rd grader and the education of one to boot...

The democrats reward bad behavior with welfare for votes...

If I had it my way welfare recipients wouldn't be allowed to vote - that would solve that problem.

Thats why the Fourteenth Amendment needs to be abolished....

Little assclown retards living in projects should NOT have a say in who we elect. A) 95% of them are too fucking dumb to understand and B) their vote can be bought with a few bucks.....

Of course democrats exploit these people, and have been doing so since LBJ said: "I'll have every ****** voting democrat for the next century."

Well said, and so true, but you'll not convince the koolaid drinkers that it is true.

 

[Mr.Nick]

tax.com: So How Did the Bush Tax Cuts Work Out for the Economy?

The Republicans use this stick to beat away any hint of buying down the deficit. Why?

It does create jobs, it did create jobs...

But how can you really cut taxes when libfucks do absolutely NOTHING but SPEND MONEY ON THEIR VOTING BASE???

Every fucking time libs get power they spend and spend and spend... Republicans fix it then democrats destroy the republican progress...

Of course Bush pretty much destroyed all his progress when he started signing progressive spending bills....

You know what the reaction to libfuck congress' is??? layoff employees because these motherfuckers are going to spend us into oblivion - we're going to need to pay some hefty taxes...

Don't you fucking get it??? you tax businesses they lay employees off to pay those taxes..

Are democrats fucking retarded????

I swear the concept isn't that fucking hard to understand...

I blame this economy almost entirely on libfucks based on that notion alone. If you don't understand that businesses lay employees off when libfucks start spending money, then that means in your personal lives when you don't have any money, you just borrow some and don't pay it back. Because you obviously have no concept of money or how to manage it whatsoever...

Its very simple - the more money you have the more you have to spend or invest, the less money you have the less you have to spend or invest...

Its not that fucking difficult to understand..

The professional progressives in office understand this quite well, which is why they are purposely undermining our economy, they wish to see it destroyed so that we wont have to feel guilty about being the greatest nation ever, and by destroying it they will claim that capitalism failed, and that socialism is the right way to go, and while all this is being done and noone is paying attention, our school text books will be re-written by progressives so that our children will never know the true history of America, they will only know America for the worst of things that has happened here, not the best of things. If you think this is a joke, just look at our school systems, I am 38 years old and have kids in school, and they are not learning nowhere near what we where taught in school. They are being dumbed down purposefully. They are not being taught about our founding fathers, and the struggles for liberty, they are being taught our founding fathers where evil racists and shit like that. And dont get me started on the constitution, kids dont even know what the fuck that is these days.
If they destroy our economy they will in fact destroy our military might and everything that makes America great, and if all nations are equal then there is no reason why we could not be under a one world government for the "Good of everyone", this is their objective, and assholes like Soros and the bilderbergs is behind it. Special interest groups need to go.

They have been trying to rewrite the school books... Libfucks are stupid people and have jumped the gun...

They believe they're more prominent than they actually are.

They're going to get extinct in 2012 because even blue dogs are sick of their shit.... There are not enough coma patients this time to save Obama.

 

[grunt11b]

The right has certain faith based myths that do not work but they support them anyway.

kinda like that faith in all that "hope and change"? Are you still supporting that myth?

It's changed alright...the downward spiral has increased speed. Will we have to wait until a second term to "hope" for "change".

Bottom line is, Obama promised to ride in on a white horse (no racial pun intended) and bring this country out of the troubled waters. It didn't happen. The waters are more troubled than any other time in history.

Face it...Obama wasn't prepared for this.

Yes he was, I think everyone is looking at it different then what it really is, he was groomed and bought and paid for to come into office and destroy this economy even further. He knows exactly what he is doing and why he is doing it. He is not a good guy like some claim, he is a ruthless socialist who was groomed by marxists to bring this nation down. Could there possibly be any other explanation for what he is doing? When history shows how to create a booming economy and he ignores every ounce of proof how to create jobs but still refuses to do it, is there any doubt on where he is leading this country or his loyalty to this country? I think not.

 

[grunt11b]

Sorry? There were massive shifts of IT jobs from America, offshore. IT stands for Information Technology.

The "Job Creation Act of 2004" moved a great number of those jobs overseas.

So republicans are responsible for this???

I don't understand how you could draw such a conclusion...

Got any evidence to back your bullshit??

You do realize that in the real world its about what you can prove and not what you can claim???

Why so angry?

Yes..of course they are responsible. They put up laws that crumble labor protection, give favorable tax breaks to corporate entities that have off-shored profits, and encourage business to operate without any ethics what so ever by weakening regulation and defunding regulators.

It's something you and your ilk support. That's fine. Corporatism is a valid..if unwanted, economic theory.

But don't piss on people's backs and tell it's raining.

There is no need for labor protections these days, Unions served their purpose years ago, and then where hijacked by marxists. Bottom line is, if you do your job and you do it good, your employer will keep you around, if you're a lazy turd, they should be able to can your ass. It has always worked out better for employees when they can bargain themselves with the employer, Unions coupled with ridiculous over regulation and taxation brings corporations down as history has shown. Check out how the textile capital of the world "New York City" was destroyed back in the day for an example.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

tax.com: So How Did the Bush Tax Cuts Work Out for the Economy?

The Republicans use this stick to beat away any hint of buying down the deficit. Why?

We had 6 percent unemployment under Bush, that is considered full employment. Right up until the democrats crashed the housing market that is.

 

[Mr.Nick]

If it isn't that difficult to understand then why don't you understand that despite 2 huge tax cuts the Bush administration created less jobs then any president going back to Harry S. Truman, 1939? You can rant and rave all you want and tell us how stupid we are, but I am posting real numbers from the WSJ and CNNMoney, not just pulling them out of my ass.

It's amazing how you throw the retard name around, when you are the one that is so obviously wrong.

Because under Bush for a point (when liberals weren't in congress) unemployment was at like 4%...

At that point in time the only people who didn't have a job were on welfare and were satisfied with that...

You know the assholes in the projects that don't want to work because dickheads like you, Weiner, Pelosi, Frank and Obama refer to them victims, when in reality they're just drains on society....

You mean the dickheads that cant work because they got 15 kids, by 14 different fathers to look after and have the emotional capacity as a 3rd grader and the education of one to boot...

The democrats reward bad behavior with welfare for votes...

If I had it my way welfare recipients wouldn't be allowed to vote - that would solve that problem.

Thats why the Fourteenth Amendment needs to be abolished....

Little assclown retards living in projects should NOT have a say in who we elect. A) 95% of them are too fucking dumb to understand and B) their vote can be bought with a few bucks.....

Of course democrats exploit these people, and have been doing so since LBJ said: "I'll have every ****** voting democrat for the next century."

Well said, and so true, but you'll not convince the koolaid drinkers that it is true.

I'd be lucky to convince 10% of the not progressive base thats true.....

We'll see how long it takes them to figure this shit out tho....

 

[grunt11b]

2001-2009: Great fraudulent bubble, worst job creation ever...and a huge worldwide Pop!

2001 to 2006 we where fighting two wars, the Democrats took over the house and senate in 2006 and held it until 2010, most of the damage was done from 2006-2010, you gonna blame Bush for that shit also?

That's incorrect. And the President basically writes the budget..the Congress offers their own suggestions but the President can veto anything he pleases.

So then you are admitting this whole budget crisis we are in right now lies directly on Obama and the Democrats? Because this budget should have passed before November 2010, it laid directly on the Democrats to pass and they "Kicked the can down the road as Obama would say". Congress has a mandate to pass a budget, so why didn't they? I'll tell you why, because they knew with all of their reckless spending from 2008 to 2010 that hard decisions would need to be made on a budget, so they "Kicked the can down the road" onto the Republicans and forced them to make the hard decisions and then fear mongered off of such decisions to cater to their base.
Democrats who held office from 2008 to 2010 are a bunch of pussies with no fucken morals or values whatsoever.

 

[grunt11b]

Bedtime for this old kook, taker easy everyone. And remember before going to bed tonight, pray for our country, pray for our troops, and pray for our president, as much as I don't like him, he needs it.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

2001 to 2006 we where fighting two wars, the Democrats took over the house and senate in 2006 and held it until 2010, most of the damage was done from 2006-2010, you gonna blame Bush for that shit also?

That's incorrect. And the President basically writes the budget..the Congress offers their own suggestions but the President can veto anything he pleases.

So then you are admitting this whole budget crisis we are in right now lies directly on Obama and the Democrats? Because this budget should have passed before November 2010, it laid directly on the Democrats to pass and they "Kicked the can down the road as Obama would say". Congress has a mandate to pass a budget, so why didn't they? I'll tell you why, because they knew with all of their reckless spending from 2008 to 2010 that hard decisions would need to be made on a budget, so they "Kicked the can down the road" onto the Republicans and forced them to make the hard decisions and then fear mongered off of such decisions to cater to their base.
Democrats who held office from 2008 to 2010 are a bunch of pussies with no fucken morals or values whatsoever.

You don't get it. When Democrats are President and the Congress is Republican then Republicans control the budget ( even when only one house is Republican or as the case may be the Senate does not have 60 democrats), when the President is Republican no matter who runs Congress the President is to blame.

 

[Sallow]

So republicans are responsible for this???

I don't understand how you could draw such a conclusion...

Got any evidence to back your bullshit??

You do realize that in the real world its about what you can prove and not what you can claim???

Why so angry?

Yes..of course they are responsible. They put up laws that crumble labor protection, give favorable tax breaks to corporate entities that have off-shored profits, and encourage business to operate without any ethics what so ever by weakening regulation and defunding regulators.

It's something you and your ilk support. That's fine. Corporatism is a valid..if unwanted, economic theory.

But don't piss on people's backs and tell it's raining.

There is no need for labor protections these days, Unions served their purpose years ago, and then where hijacked by marxists. Bottom line is, if you do your job and you do it good, your employer will keep you around, if you're a lazy turd, they should be able to can your ass. It has always worked out better for employees when they can bargain themselves with the employer, Unions coupled with ridiculous over regulation and taxation brings corporations down as history has shown. Check out how the textile capital of the world "New York City" was destroyed back in the day for an example.

That's the most ridiculous post ever...

You say that after massive layoffs, 11 deaths on the BP oil rigs, Multiple coal miner deaths, Cranes collapsing in NYC and killing workers...

Oh gosh.

And the Textile industry was squashed in NYC because of the crack down on illegal immigration. I live in NYC.

 

[Sallow]

2001 to 2006 we where fighting two wars, the Democrats took over the house and senate in 2006 and held it until 2010, most of the damage was done from 2006-2010, you gonna blame Bush for that shit also?

That's incorrect. And the President basically writes the budget..the Congress offers their own suggestions but the President can veto anything he pleases.

So then you are admitting this whole budget crisis we are in right now lies directly on Obama and the Democrats? Because this budget should have passed before November 2010, it laid directly on the Democrats to pass and they "Kicked the can down the road as Obama would say". Congress has a mandate to pass a budget, so why didn't they? I'll tell you why, because they knew with all of their reckless spending from 2008 to 2010 that hard decisions would need to be made on a budget, so they "Kicked the can down the road" onto the Republicans and forced them to make the hard decisions and then fear mongered off of such decisions to cater to their base.
Democrats who held office from 2008 to 2010 are a bunch of pussies with no fucken morals or values whatsoever.

Republicans are far more obstructionist then Democrats were..they have a record number of filibusters. Conservatives are looking for capitulation from a party that has the senate and the executive branch. And compromises have been offered. Conservatives aren't interested. They want the whole banana or they won't pass anything.

 

[Breadsticks14]

Pretty sure tax cuts is more logical than spending trillions of dollars in printed stimulus funds, which the obama administration called 'economic recovery summer'. It did not lower unemployment levels, it created a majority of federal jobs, very little to none for the private sector. Where I live, they are using federal funds to replace roads that were absolutely fine in the first place. Most of the people employed for the construction crews here are illegal immigrants.

Obama is throwing money around that we simply do not have. To me, that seems to be less logical than lowing taxes to encourage spending and growth here at home. I'm not saying either one of these plans worked, just which one is more logical.

 

[editec]

Tax cuts can not create jobs UNLESS there is demand that cannot be satisfied because SUPPLY is lacking money to invest in new production.

Partisans attempting to pin all the blame on this economy entirely on one side of the aisle or the other are either very misinformed about macro-economics or out and out liars.

 

[Vanquish]

1

Because under Bush for a point (when liberals weren't in congress) unemployment was at like 4%...

At that point in time the only people who didn't have a job were on welfare and were satisfied with that...

You know the assholes in the projects that don't want to work because dickheads like you, Weiner, Pelosi, Frank and Obama refer to them victims, when in reality they're just drains on society....

You mean the dickheads that cant work because they got 15 kids, by 14 different fathers to look after and have the emotional capacity as a 3rd grader and the education of one to boot...

The democrats reward bad behavior with welfare for votes...

If I had it my way welfare recipients wouldn't be allowed to vote - that would solve that problem.

Thats why the Fourteenth Amendment needs to be abolished....

Little assclown retards living in projects should NOT have a say in who we elect. A) 95% of them are too fucking dumb to understand and B) their vote can be bought with a few bucks.....

Of course democrats exploit these people, and have been doing so since LBJ said: "I'll have every ****** voting democrat for the next century."

It's amazing how someone can just foist all the country's problems on some lazy welfare class and really believe it.

Oh wait...now I see why. You wanted an excuse to use the N-word. That's the key to understanding your post. Hell your entire way of thinking.

You think lazy black people drain the country and there was some magical time in the past when they were in their place and the good ol' USA was safe for white people.

Are there people who cheat the welfare system and don't work. Sure. Of course. No brainer. But the statistics show that people on welfare eventually get off of it and move up.

Living in Alabama, one of the amazing bits of rhetoric I get to hear over and over is "I'm payin' for all these laze abouts to just sit there and not work." The corollary is often "If people really wanted a job, they can find one." Really? Seriously? Wow.

With certain legislators axing the extension of unemployment benefits - one of the defenses I've heard has been a retreat to that "lazy bum" drivel.

Let me hit you with something that might seem counter-intuitive: increasing unemployment benefits actually creates jobs.

That's the exact rationale for having automatic stabilizers like unemployment insurance that kick in during these kinds of fiscal downturns. From that CBO report:

Extending additional unemployment benefits would directly help those who would otherwise exhaust their unemployment benefits between March and December of this year. Households receiving unemployment benefits tend to spend the additional benefits quickly, making this option both timely and cost-effective in spurring economic activity and employment. A variant of this option would extend assistance with paying health insurance premiums, which would allow some recipients to maintain health insurance coverage they would otherwise have dropped. This variant would result in increased demand for health care services, and it would increase the income available to purchase other goods and services for recipients who would have purchased insurance even without this special assistance. Both policy options could dampen people’s efforts to look for work, although that concern is less of a factor when employment opportunities are expected to be limited for some time.

CBO estimates that the policies would raise output cumulatively between 2010 and 2015 by $0.70 to $1.90 per dollar of total budgetary cost. CBO also estimates that the policies would add 8 to 19 cumulative years of full-time-equivalent employment in 2010 and 2011 per million dollars of total budgetary cost.

Economies are based on people buying good and services. For example, that's why deficit spending on food stamps during downturns has similar effects to unemployment compensation and for a similar reason. Empirical data shows that every additional $5 spent on them--through emergency spending--spurs up to $9.20 in economic activity. Moreover, as Hanson and Golan conclude in that brief:

Ultimately, whether growth in the Food Stamp Program stimulates economic activity depends on the funding mechanism—emergency financing stimulates economic activity in a recession, while budget-neutral financing does not. However, in either scenario, the increase in FSP expenditures raises the budgets of food stamp recipient households, stabilizing recipients’ food consumption and their well-being during economic downturns. Both scenarios also result in increased demand and production in the agriculture and food sectors, stabilizing economic activities in these key rural sectors during downturns in the economy.

Exactly the reason why stimulus (emergency funding) contained a large amount of money for food stamps:


Today, USDA Under Secretary Kevin Concannon marked the one year anniversary of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (AARA) of 2009, also known as the stimulus or recovery package, by announcing that ARRA invested more than $8 billion in local economies to feed the hungry through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), formerly the Food Stamp Program with approximately $830 million more invested each month. In addition, through the Emergency Food Assistance program, States received an additional $150 million to support local food banks, food pantries and soup kitchens.



So extending programs like this during a recession has VALUE.

Here's more evidence in chart form. Red staters...pardon the use of the color Blue.

The attempts to play on stereotypes is class warfare that serves NO ONE. That goes for both sides. Trying to paint a group as lazy and unwilling to work? That's bull. Trying to paint the rich as evil and uncaring. That's bull too.

Come on people. We can be better critical thinkers than these stereotypes.

 

[The Rabbi]

I see you know as much about economics and sociology as you do about law. To wit: nothing.

First off, Mr Nick said nothing about race. That was you. You must be the racist here, "councilor."
Second, if you hadn't noticed we have a tremendous obesity problem here. This is more so among the lower classes, even more so in the South. So giving free food isn't exactly a solution to anything.
Finally, Mr Nick is right that people who get the majority of their income from the gov't with no effort on their part don't need to have a right to vote, as they have no incentive to do anything but vote themselves more benefits.
Oh, and you smell funny too.

 

[rightwinger]

tax.com: So How Did the Bush Tax Cuts Work Out for the Economy?

The Republicans use this stick to beat away any hint of buying down the deficit. Why?

Notice the Republicans immediately changed the thread to 'prove' it must be Obama's fault. Unemployment is a direct result of the Bush tax cuts, the Bush Adminsitrations failure to regulate both congress and industry and spend billions of dollars every month on a war of choice.

The RW echol chamber can lie - and do - over and over and over but the facts do not change. The first decade of the 21st C is known as the lost decade for a reason and history books in the distant future will refere to the Bush years in that way.

The only way out of this mess brought on my the total incomptence of Boooooooosh&Co. is too put Americans to work. And since American business seems content to sit on over 2 trillion dollars and not invest in America, it's up to the government to do so.

WOW!

This is the first time I have ever actually heard someone say, "My government knows better how to spend my money than I do"


What a fucking loser.
Are you TruthMatters' wife or husband?



I say again; Bam-Bam has thrown $4T at it hasn't managed to get below his magic 8%. Throwing even more money at it won't help either.

I can tell you when the UE rate will drop.
The very first quarter after Barry is voted out.
People aren't hiring because they can't guage what this fuck-stick is going to do to the economy next.

When was the last time you built a major bridge or highway? How many schools have you built? How many hospitals? How is that army you bought doing

Government uses our money to do things we can't

 

[rightwinger]

The jobs will come. the wealthy is just holding the money for now waiting for a good opportunity to trickle it down

Might take thirty or forty years...just be patient

With interest rates at near zero why would "the wealthy" (whoever they are) hold on to money that loses value every day instead of investing it in enterprises that can make them much more?

Hmm. You'll need to ponder that one, eh Nutwinger?

Show me where the $2.5 trillion in tax cuts was invested in US manufacturing infrastructure or in creating jobs.

The reason they "hold on" to the money is because they take it as profit instead of putting it into the company

 

[Vanquish]

You are so simplistic. Your meathead view of the world has no shade of gray, because you have zero finesse or sophistication.

Can getting something free be de-motivating? Yes. Is it always, no?

You don't believe that there are honest, hard-working people who need help and who don't want handouts? You have to answer that you don't based on your last response...and of course, that doesn't mesh with reality.

There are people, down on their luck who need temporary help...and who are proud enough to get off welfare.

You can fight the facts and figures all you want. You lose here too, Rabid.

 

[The Rabbi]

You are so simplistic. Your meathead view of the world has no shade of gray, because you have zero finesse or sophistication.

Can getting something free be de-motivating? Yes. Is it always, no?

You don't believe that there are honest, hard-working people who need help and who don't want handouts? You have to answer that you don't based on your last response...and of course, that doesn't mesh with reality.

There are people, down on their luck who need temporary help...and who are proud enough to get off welfare.

You can fight the facts and figures all you want. You lose here too, Rabid.

Thats the best you can do? Insults and ad homs. No surprise, "counselor."

The number of people temporarily down on their luck is a drop in the bucket compared to the inter-generational welfare dependency we see in most inner cities and rural areas. The tendency is once someone is on public assistence they stay there, because the incentive to do so (by all parties, not just the recipient) is enormous. Check the figures for length of time on unemployment insurance. They are at the highest level in history.
You have yet to post a single fact or figure.

 

[The Rabbi]

The jobs will come. the wealthy is just holding the money for now waiting for a good opportunity to trickle it down

Might take thirty or forty years...just be patient

With interest rates at near zero why would "the wealthy" (whoever they are) hold on to money that loses value every day instead of investing it in enterprises that can make them much more?

Hmm. You'll need to ponder that one, eh Nutwinger?

Show me where the $2.5 trillion in tax cuts was invested in US manufacturing infrastructure or in creating jobs.

The reason they "hold on" to the money is because they take it as profit instead of putting it into the company

And do what with it? That was my question, Nutwinger.