In Your Opinion, What Would Create the Most Jobs?

[Samson]

I'd look it up, but I'm exausted from deflecting other ridiculous allegations.

How about you put something up that has some factual basis, instead of frothy partisan sputterings?

GWB only vetoed 5 bills

So, on the rare occasion that the Dem Congress could get a bill past the GOP filibusters, Bush vetoed it.

So again what bill did the Dem Congress get past the record number of GOP filibusters that was not vetoed by Bush that caused the 2007 crash?

Did I say that the economy depended on ANY bill being passed or failing to pass?

 

[edthecynic]

I'd look it up, but I'm exausted from deflecting other ridiculous allegations.

How about you put something up that has some factual basis, instead of frothy partisan sputterings?

So, you can't show anything passed by the Dem Congress and signed by Bush that caused the 2007 crash.
Thank you.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/03/01/opinion/main6254354.shtml

The frequency of filibusters - plus threats to use them - are measured by the number of times the upper chamber votes on cloture. Such votes test the majority's ability to hold together 60 members to break a filibuster.

In the 110th Congress of 2007-2008, with Republicans in the minority, there were a record 112 cloture votes. In the current session of Congress - the 111th - for all of 2009 and the first two months of 2010 the number already exceeds 40. The most the filibuster has been used when Democrats were in the minority was 58 times in the 106th Congress of 1999-2000.

First, this is what I get from your linky:

The page cannot be found
The page you requested cannot be found on the CBS News website.

But, thanks for playing.

Second, you seem to believe you are making a point: That the entire economy in 2007 depended upon the passage a Democratic Authored Bills.

What were they?

Frankly, all you've proven is that Democrats author more ridiculous legislation than Republicans.

The link works perfectly for me.

What Dem bills were they that crashed the economy in 2007 was exactly the question I asked you, which obviously you can't answer because there are none.
The fiscal year didn't begin until Oct 1, 2007, so my point is the 2007 economy had nothing to do with Dem bills.

What I've proved is you CON$ can show nothing that Dems did in 2007 to cause the crash, so the crash was the inertia of the failed GOP policies that existed before the Dems took over.

 

[edthecynic]

GWB only vetoed 5 bills

So, on the rare occasion that the Dem Congress could get a bill past the GOP filibusters, Bush vetoed it.

So again what bill did the Dem Congress get past the record number of GOP filibusters that was not vetoed by Bush that caused the 2007 crash?

Did I say that the economy depended on ANY bill being passed or failing to pass?

Then why bring up the fact that the Dems took control of Congress in 2007???????

 

[Samson]

So, you can't show anything passed by the Dem Congress and signed by Bush that caused the 2007 crash.
Thank you.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/03/01/opinion/main6254354.shtml

The frequency of filibusters - plus threats to use them - are measured by the number of times the upper chamber votes on cloture. Such votes test the majority's ability to hold together 60 members to break a filibuster.

In the 110th Congress of 2007-2008, with Republicans in the minority, there were a record 112 cloture votes. In the current session of Congress - the 111th - for all of 2009 and the first two months of 2010 the number already exceeds 40. The most the filibuster has been used when Democrats were in the minority was 58 times in the 106th Congress of 1999-2000.

First, this is what I get from your linky:

The page cannot be found
The page you requested cannot be found on the CBS News website.

But, thanks for playing.

Second, you seem to believe you are making a point: That the entire economy in 2007 depended upon the passage a Democratic Authored Bills.

What were they?

Frankly, all you've proven is that Democrats author more ridiculous legislation than Republicans.

The link works perfectly for me.

What Dem bills were they that crashed the economy in 2007 was exactly the question I asked you, which obviously you can't answer because there are none.
The fiscal year didn't begin until Oct 1, 2007, so my point is the 2007 economy had nothing to do with Dem bills.

What I've proved is you CON$ can show nothing that Dems did in 2007 to cause the crash, so the crash was the inertia of the failed GOP policies that existed before the Dems took over.

No you've "proven" nothing.

But let's, for agrument's sake say you did prove that Congress did nothing in 2007.

And "the crash" happened in October 2008.

How do you conclude that Dems TRIED to do anything to prevent it?

Or, for that matter, Republicans did anything to allow it?

You're going to need to do better than say, "Well, they all had a heartbeat, therefore, they were alive, in office, and responsible for whatever I think they should have been responsible for doing or not doing."

You're postulating is only slighly less absurd than blaming Obama for the Haitian Earthquake. Did he do ayhthing to prevent it???? NOOOO????

Well, it must be his fault.

 

[Samson]

So, on the rare occasion that the Dem Congress could get a bill past the GOP filibusters, Bush vetoed it.

So again what bill did the Dem Congress get past the record number of GOP filibusters that was not vetoed by Bush that caused the 2007 crash?

Did I say that the economy depended on ANY bill being passed or failing to pass?

Then why bring up the fact that the Dems took control of Congress in 2007???????

Because Care4all believes that all Economics Result as a consequent of whoever "Controls" congress.

It is Absurd

 

[edthecynic]

First, this is what I get from your linky:

But, thanks for playing.

Second, you seem to believe you are making a point: That the entire economy in 2007 depended upon the passage a Democratic Authored Bills.

What were they?

Frankly, all you've proven is that Democrats author more ridiculous legislation than Republicans.

The link works perfectly for me.

What Dem bills were they that crashed the economy in 2007 was exactly the question I asked you, which obviously you can't answer because there are none.
The fiscal year didn't begin until Oct 1, 2007, so my point is the 2007 economy had nothing to do with Dem bills.

What I've proved is you CON$ can show nothing that Dems did in 2007 to cause the crash, so the crash was the inertia of the failed GOP policies that existed before the Dems took over.

No you've "proven" nothing.

But let's, for agrument's sake say you did prove that Congress did nothing in 2007.

And "the crash" happened in October 2008.

How do you conclude that Dems TRIED to do anything to prevent it?

Or, for that matter, Republicans did anything to allow it?

You're going to need to do better than say, "Well, they all had a heartbeat, therefore, they were alive, in office, and responsible for whatever I think they should have been responsible for doing or not doing."

You're postulating is only slighly less absurd than blaming Obama for the Haitian Earthquake. Did he do ayhthing to prevent it???? NOOOO????

Well, it must be his fault.

The recession began Dec 2007. Obviously you wouldn't have to revise history if you really believe I'm wrong!!!

It's official: U.S. in a recession since December 2007 - Dec. 1, 2008

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- The National Bureau of Economic Research said Monday that the U.S. has been in a recession since December 2007, making official what most Americans have already believed about the state of the economy .
The NBER is a private group of leading economists charged with dating the start and end of economic downturns. It typically takes a long time after the start of a recession to declare its start because of the need to look at final readings of various economic measures.
The NBER said that the deterioration in the labor market throughout 2008 was one key reason why it decided to state that the recession began last year.

 

[Samson]

The link works perfectly for me.

What Dem bills were they that crashed the economy in 2007 was exactly the question I asked you, which obviously you can't answer because there are none.
The fiscal year didn't begin until Oct 1, 2007, so my point is the 2007 economy had nothing to do with Dem bills.

What I've proved is you CON$ can show nothing that Dems did in 2007 to cause the crash, so the crash was the inertia of the failed GOP policies that existed before the Dems took over.

No you've "proven" nothing.

But let's, for agrument's sake say you did prove that Congress did nothing in 2007.

And "the crash" happened in October 2008.

How do you conclude that Dems TRIED to do anything to prevent it?

Or, for that matter, Republicans did anything to allow it?

You're going to need to do better than say, "Well, they all had a heartbeat, therefore, they were alive, in office, and responsible for whatever I think they should have been responsible for doing or not doing."

You're postulating is only slighly less absurd than blaming Obama for the Haitian Earthquake. Did he do ayhthing to prevent it???? NOOOO????

Well, it must be his fault.

The recession began Dec 2007. Obviously you wouldn't have to revise history if you really believe I'm wrong!!!.

Red Herring.

Ok, so the Recession began in December 2007. Lemme repeat the saliant points:

How do you conclude that Dems TRIED to do anything to prevent it?

Or, for that matter, Republicans did anything to allow it?

 

[edthecynic]

No you've "proven" nothing.

But let's, for agrument's sake say you did prove that Congress did nothing in 2007.

And "the crash" happened in October 2008.

How do you conclude that Dems TRIED to do anything to prevent it?

Or, for that matter, Republicans did anything to allow it?

You're going to need to do better than say, "Well, they all had a heartbeat, therefore, they were alive, in office, and responsible for whatever I think they should have been responsible for doing or not doing."

You're postulating is only slighly less absurd than blaming Obama for the Haitian Earthquake. Did he do ayhthing to prevent it???? NOOOO????

Well, it must be his fault.

The recession began Dec 2007. Obviously you wouldn't have to revise history if you really believe I'm wrong!!!.

Red Herring.

Ok, so the Recession began in December 2007. Lemme repeat the saliant points:

How do you conclude that Dems TRIED to do anything to prevent it?

Or, for that matter, Republicans did anything to allow it?

Red Herring.

The Dems had no power to cause or prevent anything.

I'm merely pointing out the flaw in the CON$ervative argument that the economy was great until the Dems took over in 2007 as if the Dems caused the recession.

 

[Samson]

The recession began Dec 2007. Obviously you wouldn't have to revise history if you really believe I'm wrong!!!.

Red Herring.

Ok, so the Recession began in December 2007. Lemme repeat the saliant points:

How do you conclude that Dems TRIED to do anything to prevent it?

Or, for that matter, Republicans did anything to allow it?

Red Herring.

The Dems had no power to cause or prevent anything.

I'm merely pointing out the flaw in the CON$ervative argument that the economy was great until the Dems took over in 2007 as if the Dems caused the recession.

LMAO...The Dems "had no power???"

Jeeze, they just sat on their hands. Great point.

I suppose, next time there's Impending Doom, dems in Congress may as well stay home!

 

[Care4all]

"His" congress? Clinton's Congress?????

Congrees controls fiscal responsibility.

Do you know how long democrats controlled congress between 1993 and 2001?

Party In Power - Congress and Presidency - A Visual Guide To The Balance of Power In Congress, 1945-2008

Only ONE of the EIGHT years, 1993, did Democrats control Congress.


heh...Democrats have controlled congress since 2007.

Great job they're doing, huh?

yes, i know perfectly how long the dems controlled congress under clinton....long enough to put the clinton fiscal measures in place that began us on that road without a single republican's vote and their faux cries of his plan being the end of America as we know it...

well God bless those dems, they may have lost their seats over it, but they did put America FIRST....and yes, the republicans followed suit, and did i better job than i could have imagined.

yes, congress legislates and spends but the President has veto power (and sets/develops the budget)....clinton used it.

What were "Clinton fiscal measures?"

Please, enlighten me.

hint: The Balanced Budget Act was signed in 1997, when Republicans controlled congress.

oops...

Deficit reduction act- 1993 budget Reconciliation...

read up on it dear.....The success of the 1993 budget reconciliation bill at reducing the federal budget deficit. | Goliath Business News

convenient that you want to leave out a major part of history....

 

[Care4all]

Did I say that the economy depended on ANY bill being passed or failing to pass?

Then why bring up the fact that the Dems took control of Congress in 2007???????

Because Care4all believes that all Economics Result as a consequent of whoever "Controls" congress.

It is Absurd

yeah, that would be absurd, IF I SAID SUCH A THING....

but you lie, like a rug on that.....

 

[Samson]

yes, i know perfectly how long the dems controlled congress under clinton....long enough to put the clinton fiscal measures in place that began us on that road without a single republican's vote and their faux cries of his plan being the end of America as we know it...

well God bless those dems, they may have lost their seats over it, but they did put America FIRST....and yes, the republicans followed suit, and did i better job than i could have imagined.

yes, congress legislates and spends but the President has veto power (and sets/develops the budget)....clinton used it.

What were "Clinton fiscal measures?"

Please, enlighten me.

hint: The Balanced Budget Act was signed in 1997, when Republicans controlled congress.

oops...

Deficit reduction act- 1993 budget Reconciliation...

read up on it dear.....The success of the 1993 budget reconciliation bill at reducing the federal budget deficit. | Goliath Business News

convenient that you want to leave out a major part of history....

Yes, My goal in life is to use smoke and mirrors to make you believe that Clinton did NOT CONTROL Congress for 8 years.

And, as part of my Grand Strategy, I do agree with you that passage of this bill was a "major part of history."

I applaud Clinton's plan, despite its Republican Origins:

Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Pub.L. 99-177, title II, December 12, 1985, 99 Stat. 1038, 2 U.S.C. § 900) and

Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Reaffirmation Act of 1987 (Pub.L. 100-119, title I, Sept. 29, 1987, 101 Stat. 754, 2 U.S.C. § 900)

 

[Samson]

Then why bring up the fact that the Dems took control of Congress in 2007???????

Because Care4all believes that all Economics Result as a consequent of whoever "Controls" congress.

It is Absurd

yeah, that would be absurd, IF I SAID SUCH A THING....

but you lie, like a rug on that.....

You're right: I apologise for getting it mixed up with you other absurdities, e.g.:

i think most can say yes to all of those presidents, but one....clinton and his congress...has been the only fiscally responsible presidency.

 

[edthecynic]

What were "Clinton fiscal measures?"

Please, enlighten me.

hint: The Balanced Budget Act was signed in 1997, when Republicans controlled congress.

oops...

Deficit reduction act- 1993 budget Reconciliation...

read up on it dear.....The success of the 1993 budget reconciliation bill at reducing the federal budget deficit. | Goliath Business News

convenient that you want to leave out a major part of history....

Yes, My goal in life is to use smoke and mirrors to make you believe that Clinton did NOT CONTROL Congress for 8 years.

And, as part of my Grand Strategy, I do agree with you that passage of this bill was a "major part of history."

I applaud Clinton's plan, despite its Republican Origins:

Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Pub.L. 99-177, title II, December 12, 1985, 99 Stat. 1038, 2 U.S.C. § 900) and

Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Reaffirmation Act of 1987 (Pub.L. 100-119, title I, Sept. 29, 1987, 101 Stat. 754, 2 U.S.C. § 900)

Ahhhh yes, two of tax, borrow, and spend Reagan's 8 tax increases in 6 years.

But don't CON$ blame those tax increases on St Ronnie's Dem Congress, or are tax increases suddenly a good thing???

 

[Samson]

oops...

Deficit reduction act- 1993 budget Reconciliation...

read up on it dear.....The success of the 1993 budget reconciliation bill at reducing the federal budget deficit. | Goliath Business News

convenient that you want to leave out a major part of history....

Yes, My goal in life is to use smoke and mirrors to make you believe that Clinton did NOT CONTROL Congress for 8 years.

And, as part of my Grand Strategy, I do agree with you that passage of this bill was a "major part of history."

I applaud Clinton's plan, despite its Republican Origins:

Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Pub.L. 99-177, title II, December 12, 1985, 99 Stat. 1038, 2 U.S.C. § 900) and

Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Reaffirmation Act of 1987 (Pub.L. 100-119, title I, Sept. 29, 1987, 101 Stat. 754, 2 U.S.C. § 900)

Ahhhh yes, two of tax, borrow, and spend Reagan's 8 tax increases in 6 years.

But don't CON$ blame those tax increases on St Ronnie's Dem Congress, or are tax increases suddenly a good thing???

 

[RadiomanATL]

So no support for the "send Radio $5 a month" plan?

 

[Maple]

Anyone?

1. Shrink the size and scope of the federal government.
2. Cut the budget dramatically, get to a balanced budget.
3. Reduce taxes on Corporations and small business.
4. Across the board permanent tax cuts.
5. Zero out taxes on capital gains.


It's always worked before, it will work again, but we need conservatives in power to to make that happen.

 

[edthecynic]

Yes, My goal in life is to use smoke and mirrors to make you believe that Clinton did NOT CONTROL Congress for 8 years.

And, as part of my Grand Strategy, I do agree with you that passage of this bill was a "major part of history."

I applaud Clinton's plan, despite its Republican Origins:

Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Pub.L. 99-177, title II, December 12, 1985, 99 Stat. 1038, 2 U.S.C. § 900) and

Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Reaffirmation Act of 1987 (Pub.L. 100-119, title I, Sept. 29, 1987, 101 Stat. 754, 2 U.S.C. § 900)

Ahhhh yes, two of tax, borrow, and spend Reagan's 8 tax increases in 6 years.

But don't CON$ blame those tax increases on St Ronnie's Dem Congress, or are tax increases suddenly a good thing???

What exactly don't you understand?
Those 2 bills raised taxes or St Ronnie/Congress raised taxes 8 times in 6 years.

 

[Samson]

Ahhhh yes, two of tax, borrow, and spend Reagan's 8 tax increases in 6 years.

But don't CON$ blame those tax increases on St Ronnie's Dem Congress, or are tax increases suddenly a good thing???

What exactly don't you understand?
Those 2 bills raised taxes or St Ronnie/Congress raised taxes 8 times in 6 years.

This is probably relevant to some thread on the internet.

Why don't you find which one?

 

[edthecynic]

Anyone?

1. Shrink the size and scope of the federal government.
2. Cut the budget dramatically, get to a balanced budget.
3. Reduce taxes on Corporations and small business.
4. Across the board permanent tax cuts.
5. Zero out taxes on capital gains.


It's always worked before, it will work again, but we need conservatives in power to to make that happen.

It never worked before.

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
- Albert Einstein

Gov never shrank.
The budget has never been cut.
Corps don't pay taxes, they pass them onto their customers, a de facto consumption tax.
Across the board tax cuts are inefficient at producing jobs. The most efficient tax cut for producing jobs is a payroll tax cut.
The worst tax to cut is cap gains!!! Every cap gains cut in the past led to a "boom and bust" economy. A high cap gains tax encourages investing and holding assets for the LONG term. Low or no cap gains tax encourages short term SPECULATION and causes wild market fluctuations.

Even when CON$ are right about cutting taxes, they always cut the wrong taxes.

What I would do to stimulate the economy and create AMERICAN jobs is to REPLACE each of Bush's American job killing tax cuts when they expire, DOLLAR FOR DOLLAR, with a cut in the job killing payroll taxes.

This would give the American wage earner an immediate increase in take home pay to spend on a regular basis without costing the employer a single penny stimulating demand, and the businesses that employ Americans would have an immediate cut in the cost of labor without downsizing or outsourcing a single American job as well as saving the cost of compliance. The businesses that employ the most AMERICANS will get the most benefit from the tax cuts, exactly the group of people you would want to benefit most from tax cuts.

Bush's redistribution of wealth tax cuts took the Social Security Tax SURPLUS he inherited, collected at SS Payroll Tax Rates, 100% from wage earners making less than $100,000 and businesses that employ Americans, and redistributed most of it to incomes over $100,000 and Capital Gains Tycoons who are exempt from SS Payroll Taxes by using Income Tax Rates for the redistribution of the payroll tax surplus.
By simply saying his tax cuts were "across the board" Bush was able to deceive the gullible into believing it was fair to use the Income Tax rates to redistribute money collected at Payroll Tax rates.

As a result Tycoons who increased profits by outsourcing American jobs for cheaper foreign labor, were rewarded by Bush with a tax cut on that profit gained at the expense of American jobs. Not only that, but to further this redistribution of wealth and outsourcing of American jobs, Bush and the GOP congress raised the threshold on paying SS payroll taxes, making the cost of employing American wage earners even higher to those businesses that employ Americans.