usmcstinger
Gold Member
- Dec 31, 2011
- 1,422
- 466
- 200
What is the name of his Economic Policy and how does it work?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Nova, of course, is lying. Always does. Makes you wonder why. But that is just Nova. He is a con tool who says whatever he wants others to believe, truth be damned.Obama's Economic Policy - There is none View attachment 21783
What is the name of his Economic Policy and how does it work?
There is but names are avoided. Economic policy has included government management, wealth redistribution, and winning the fight to defend the 'have-nots' from exploitation by the 'haves. The obvious category these themes fit into is 'Marxist Socialism', but our leaders don't even what to be called 'liberal'.Obama's Economic Policy - There is none...
What is the name of his Economic Policy and how does it work?
Nova, of course, is lying. Always does. Makes you wonder why. But that is just Nova. He is a con tool who says whatever he wants others to believe, truth be damned.Obama's Economic Policy - There is none View attachment 21783
The Obama economic policy is based on the idea of stimulating the economy, which has had a serious unemployment problem since he took office. So he has proposed a "jobs Program" that includes gov expenditures in infrastructure, education and other areas. It has not been implimented, however, as repubs in congress have filibustered it in the senate on every occasion. Until they took over the House two years ago, and since then they have refused to bring it to the senate. So, they have effectively blocked every effort at this president exercising his jobs program.
Here is an analysis that is NOT political:
Freakonomics » Obamas Jobs Bill: A Reasonable Plan
Answer: Keynesian Economics which has never had a long term positive out come. If you want to know how well it works, take a look at Greece, France, Italy and Spain.
it allegedly pumps up economic circulation of currency.
Nova, of course, is lying. Always does. Makes you wonder why. But that is just Nova. He is a con tool who says whatever he wants others to believe, truth be damned.Obama's Economic Policy - There is none View attachment 21783
The Obama economic policy is based on the idea of stimulating the economy, which has had a serious unemployment problem since he took office. So he has proposed a "jobs Program" that includes gov expenditures in infrastructure, education and other areas. It has not been implimented, however, as repubs in congress have filibustered it in the senate on every occasion. Until they took over the House two years ago, and since then they have refused to bring it to the senate. So, they have effectively blocked every effort at this president exercising his jobs program.
Here is an analysis that is NOT political:
Freakonomics » Obamas Jobs Bill: A Reasonable Plan
I said nothing of public education. Must be your imagination. I mentioned education. And the jobs bill could be passed, but will not by repubs because they, like most cons, want the unemployment numbers to be bad. So, history says that stimulus spending works. Perhaps you would like to take an effort at telling us all when tax cuts ever helped a bad economy. Be ready to find it impossible. But then, it is easier for cons to complain about the lack of a economic program rather than to suggest one. Got any great ideas, like ones that have actually worked???Nova, of course, is lying. Always does. Makes you wonder why. But that is just Nova. He is a con tool who says whatever he wants others to believe, truth be damned.Obama's Economic Policy - There is none View attachment 21783
The Obama economic policy is based on the idea of stimulating the economy, which has had a serious unemployment problem since he took office. So he has proposed a "jobs Program" that includes gov expenditures in infrastructure, education and other areas. It has not been implimented, however, as repubs in congress have filibustered it in the senate on every occasion. Until they took over the House two years ago, and since then they have refused to bring it to the senate. So, they have effectively blocked every effort at this president exercising his jobs program.
Here is an analysis that is NOT political:
Freakonomics » Obamas Jobs Bill: A Reasonable Plan
He's for an unknown "jobs program" that can't be passed and for public education? That's the best you have for an economic plan?
I said nothing of public education. Must be your imagination. I mentioned education. And the jobs bill could be passed, but will not by repubs because they, like most cons, want the unemployment numbers to be bad. So, history says that stimulus spending works. Perhaps you would like to take an effort at telling us all when tax cuts ever helped a bad economy. Be ready to find it impossible. But then, it is easier for cons to complain about the lack of a economic program rather than to suggest one. Got any great ideas, like ones that have actually worked???Nova, of course, is lying. Always does. Makes you wonder why. But that is just Nova. He is a con tool who says whatever he wants others to believe, truth be damned.
The Obama economic policy is based on the idea of stimulating the economy, which has had a serious unemployment problem since he took office. So he has proposed a "jobs Program" that includes gov expenditures in infrastructure, education and other areas. It has not been implimented, however, as repubs in congress have filibustered it in the senate on every occasion. Until they took over the House two years ago, and since then they have refused to bring it to the senate. So, they have effectively blocked every effort at this president exercising his jobs program.
Here is an analysis that is NOT political:
Freakonomics » Obamas Jobs Bill: A Reasonable Plan
He's for an unknown "jobs program" that can't be passed and for public education? That's the best you have for an economic plan?
I said nothing of public education. Must be your imagination. I mentioned education. And the jobs bill could be passed, but will not by repubs because they, like most cons, want the unemployment numbers to be bad. So, history says that stimulus spending works. Perhaps you would like to take an effort at telling us all when tax cuts ever helped a bad economy. Be ready to find it impossible. But then, it is easier for cons to complain about the lack of a economic program rather than to suggest one. Got any great ideas, like ones that have actually worked???He's for an unknown "jobs program" that can't be passed and for public education? That's the best you have for an economic plan?
Govt. expenditures in education is public education. And the truth of the matter is that Mitt has been explicit about his economic program while Obama has not been. Why is that? Could it be because he wants cart blanche to do whatever the hell he wants?
I said nothing of public education. Must be your imagination. I mentioned education. And the jobs bill could be passed, but will not by repubs because they, like most cons, want the unemployment numbers to be bad. So, history says that stimulus spending works. Perhaps you would like to take an effort at telling us all when tax cuts ever helped a bad economy. Be ready to find it impossible. But then, it is easier for cons to complain about the lack of a economic program rather than to suggest one. Got any great ideas, like ones that have actually worked???
Govt. expenditures in education is public education. And the truth of the matter is that Mitt has been explicit about his economic program while Obama has not been. Why is that? Could it be because he wants cart blanche to do whatever the hell he wants?
Explicit?
Oh this I gotta see!
Apart from de-funding PBS, what explicit policy has Romney proposed?
Govt. expenditures in education is public education. And the truth of the matter is that Mitt has been explicit about his economic program while Obama has not been. Why is that? Could it be because he wants cart blanche to do whatever the hell he wants?
Explicit?
Oh this I gotta see!
Apart from de-funding PBS, what explicit policy has Romney proposed?
Well, IDB, the point is, me poor ignorant con, that education of the population has always been a key in helping the economy of any country. I was avoiding your issue of private vs public education. Perhaps that discussion belongs elsewhere. But, in terms of economic growth and economic success, perhaps you can name a couple of countries who are doing as you apparently want, i.e., providing education to the majority of their youth via private education. And of course, perhaps you can let us all know why you would attack education at all. Seems to be a con malady. Cons hate education, unless it is being delivered by a private enterprise. Which is another way of saying, me con tool, that you do not value education.
Relative to economic plans, obama's intent as far as getting the unemployment rate under control is well spelled out. You could know it if you want to. Perhaps you would like to suggest what Romney's is. It seems to change daily. So, does he want to decrease taxes by 20%, which would amount to about a $5T decrease in gov. income, or does he not? He has said he did support it when talking to a strictly con audience. Now he disavows it, though he made the statement many, many times over the past two years.
Does he fully support Ryan's s plan, or has he his own. He has said both. So, what is it. And once you can define it, then how do you suggest it will help. Seriously, how do you believe the Romney plan (whatever it is) is going to help reduce unemployment? I would take book gladly on the bet that you have no earthly idea. So, there is the challenge, again. Show me how reducing taxes is going to help. You won't, I expect, because you can not. But then, you probably do not know that you can not. Just find a time when decreasing taxes has helped during a bad economy. But of course, you can not. You simply want to post dogma. Which is a total waste of time.
You seem to be challenged by the queens english. I said the following:Explicit?
Oh this I gotta see!
Apart from de-funding PBS, what explicit policy has Romney proposed?
Well, IDB, the point is, me poor ignorant con, that education of the population has always been a key in helping the economy of any country. I was avoiding your issue of private vs public education. Perhaps that discussion belongs elsewhere. But, in terms of economic growth and economic success, perhaps you can name a couple of countries who are doing as you apparently want, i.e., providing education to the majority of their youth via private education. And of course, perhaps you can let us all know why you would attack education at all. Seems to be a con malady. Cons hate education, unless it is being delivered by a private enterprise. Which is another way of saying, me con tool, that you do not value education.
Relative to economic plans, obama's intent as far as getting the unemployment rate under control is well spelled out. You could know it if you want to. Perhaps you would like to suggest what Romney's is. It seems to change daily. So, does he want to decrease taxes by 20%, which would amount to about a $5T decrease in gov. income, or does he not? He has said he did support it when talking to a strictly con audience. Now he disavows it, though he made the statement many, many times over the past two years.
Does he fully support Ryan's s plan, or has he his own. He has said both. So, what is it. And once you can define it, then how do you suggest it will help. Seriously, how do you believe the Romney plan (whatever it is) is going to help reduce unemployment? I would take book gladly on the bet that you have no earthly idea. So, there is the challenge, again. Show me how reducing taxes is going to help. You won't, I expect, because you can not. But then, you probably do not know that you can not. Just find a time when decreasing taxes has helped during a bad economy. But of course, you can not. You simply want to post dogma. Which is a total waste of time.
Are you agreeing with me now?
You first said that Romney has been explicit in spelling out his policy while Obama hasn't, and then you reverse that in your reply to me.
You're either a Romney acolyte or things have been lost in translation.
And then I said:Relative to economic plans, obama's intent as far as getting the unemployment rate under control is well spelled out.
Perhaps you would like to suggest what Romney's is. It seems to change daily. So, does he want to decrease taxes by 20%, which would amount to about a $5T decrease in gov. income, or does he not? He has said he did support it when talking to a strictly con audience. Now he disavows it, though he made the statement many, many times over the past two years.
Does he fully support Ryan's s plan, or has he his own. He has said both.
Answer: Keynesian Economics which has never had a long term positive out come. If you want to know how well it works, take a look at Greece, France, Italy and Spain.
This is a downright dumb comment. Even Reagan acknowledged Keynsian drivers in economics; why do you think he cut taxes? It has the same effect as spending increases; it allegedly pumps up economic circulation of currency.
Don't overthink this, usmcstinker. This is fundamental economics--and remember that the ONE THING that invariably tanks world powers is concentration of wealth.
That's would should concern you. It won't, but it should.