Puncturing Another Progressive Myth

[PoliticalChic]

I get such a kick out of Donald J. Boudreaux, professor of economics at George Mason University!

He regularly writes a letter to the editor of a major American publication in response to an absurdity, or an incorrect statement, offered up by a columnist or politician, and the following, totally skewers one of our Liberal White House hacks.




Here is one of Boudreaux's missives:

Editor, Washington Post
1150 15th St., NW
Washington, DC 20071

Dear Editor:

You report that Jason Furman, Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors, recently “displayed a chart showing how food stamps and other social programs had lowered poverty dramatically over the past half century.... But the graph also showed that the economy itself had done nothing for the poor: Only government dollars had” (“Economist Jason Furman is the wonkiest wonk in the White House,” Feb. 13).



.... Mr. Furman is mistaken to assert that, over the past half century, “the economy itself had done nothing for the poor.”

Here’s a link to a 2008 article with its own charts.... shows that the percentage of poor American households in 2005 to have refrigerators, stoves, color televisions, air conditioning, and automatic dishwashers is higher than was the percentage of all American households in 1971 to have these amenities. And my own research suggests an important reason for this happy fact: the amount of time that ordinary (“non-supervisory”) workers must work in order to earn enough income to buy these (and many other) products is today is much lower than it was decades ago.

[link here: http://www.american.com/archive/2008/july-august-magazine-contents/how-are-we-doing/]




For example, to buy a 22 cubic feet refrigerator-freezer, such a worker in 1975 had to toil for 140 hours. To buy the same size refrigerator-freezer today, the typical American worker must work only 52 hours. To buy a 30” electric range and oven cost the typical American worker in 1975 125 hours of work; today such a range and oven costs the typical American worker only 21 hours of work.



Similar reductions in work-time costs have occurred for food, clothing, and countless other goods and services — a trend that is strong evidence that “the economy itself” continues to improve the living standards of middle-income and poor Americans.

Sincerely,
Donald J. Boudreaux
Professor of Economics
and
Martha and Nelson Getchell Chair for the Study of Free Market Capitalism at the Mercatus Center
George Mason University
Fairfax, VA 22030
Nothing? Nothing At All?






"....strong evidence that “the economy itself” continues to improve the living standards of middle-income and poor Americans."


So much for the 'poor are getting poorer' trope.

I know that the above won't convince our Liberal pals......facts never do.

 

[Spoonman]

so now according to liberals , all these people on entitlements are no longer considered poor? this is what they call a success story?

 

[PoliticalChic]

so now according to liberals , all these people on entitlements are no longer considered poor? this is what they call a success story?

As you know, the 'poverty' definition is a fabricated and wholly owned copyright of Leftist pols, useful as long as simpleminded voters buy it like it was on sale.

 

[Iceweasel]

Accuracy is not the goal of the progressive. Bigger government is, no matter what. Any faults will be blamed on something else because the bigger the government is the better things are supposed to be.

 

[editec]

The economy itself helps the poor if it is targeted at the poor.

The economy can grow healthier while the poor grow poorer.

As some of us are just now realizing.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

The economy itself helps the poor if it is targeted at the poor.

The economy can grow healthier while the poor grow poorer.

As some of us are just now realizing.

Sounds like they need to get a job.

 

[Howey]

I get such a kick out of Donald J. Boudreaux, professor of economics at George Mason University!

He regularly writes a letter to the editor of a major American publication in response to an absurdity, or an incorrect statement, offered up by a columnist or politician, and the following, totally skewers one of our Liberal White House hacks.




Here is one of Boudreaux's missives:

Editor, Washington Post
1150 15th St., NW
Washington, DC 20071

Dear Editor:

You report that Jason Furman, Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors, recently “displayed a chart showing how food stamps and other social programs had lowered poverty dramatically over the past half century.... But the graph also showed that the economy itself had done nothing for the poor: Only government dollars had” (“Economist Jason Furman is the wonkiest wonk in the White House,” Feb. 13).



.... Mr. Furman is mistaken to assert that, over the past half century, “the economy itself had done nothing for the poor.”

Here’s a link to a 2008 article with its own charts.... shows that the percentage of poor American households in 2005 to have refrigerators, stoves, color televisions, air conditioning, and automatic dishwashers is higher than was the percentage of all American households in 1971 to have these amenities. And my own research suggests an important reason for this happy fact: the amount of time that ordinary (“non-supervisory”) workers must work in order to earn enough income to buy these (and many other) products is today is much lower than it was decades ago.

[link here: http://www.american.com/archive/2008/july-august-magazine-contents/how-are-we-doing/]




For example, to buy a 22 cubic feet refrigerator-freezer, such a worker in 1975 had to toil for 140 hours. To buy the same size refrigerator-freezer today, the typical American worker must work only 52 hours. To buy a 30” electric range and oven cost the typical American worker in 1975 125 hours of work; today such a range and oven costs the typical American worker only 21 hours of work.



Similar reductions in work-time costs have occurred for food, clothing, and countless other goods and services — a trend that is strong evidence that “the economy itself” continues to improve the living standards of middle-income and poor Americans.

Sincerely,
Donald J. Boudreaux
Professor of Economics
and
Martha and Nelson Getchell Chair for the Study of Free Market Capitalism at the Mercatus Center
George Mason University
Fairfax, VA 22030
Nothing? Nothing At All?






"....strong evidence that “the economy itself” continues to improve the living standards of middle-income and poor Americans."


So much for the 'poor are getting poorer' trope.

I know that the above won't convince our Liberal pals......facts never do.

How very libertarian of him!

HOW DARE THOSE POOR PEOPLE ENJOY A BETTER LIFER THAN THEY DID IN 1970! SHAME ON THEM!

AND HOW DARE THEY HAVE FANCY NICETIES LIFER REFRIGERATORS AND STOVES!!!

HOW DARE THEY!

 

[usmcstinger]

The economy itself helps the poor if it is targeted at the poor.

The economy can grow healthier while the poor grow poorer.

As some of us are just now realizing.

Obviously, you have no understanding of basic economics.
No viable sources are listed. The stupid statement comes from your lack of intelligence
and living in a delusional world.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

I get such a kick out of Donald J. Boudreaux, professor of economics at George Mason University!

He regularly writes a letter to the editor of a major American publication in response to an absurdity, or an incorrect statement, offered up by a columnist or politician, and the following, totally skewers one of our Liberal White House hacks.




Here is one of Boudreaux's missives:

Editor, Washington Post
1150 15th St., NW
Washington, DC 20071

Dear Editor:

You report that Jason Furman, Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors, recently “displayed a chart showing how food stamps and other social programs had lowered poverty dramatically over the past half century.... But the graph also showed that the economy itself had done nothing for the poor: Only government dollars had” (“Economist Jason Furman is the wonkiest wonk in the White House,” Feb. 13).



.... Mr. Furman is mistaken to assert that, over the past half century, “the economy itself had done nothing for the poor.”

Here’s a link to a 2008 article with its own charts.... shows that the percentage of poor American households in 2005 to have refrigerators, stoves, color televisions, air conditioning, and automatic dishwashers is higher than was the percentage of all American households in 1971 to have these amenities. And my own research suggests an important reason for this happy fact: the amount of time that ordinary (“non-supervisory”) workers must work in order to earn enough income to buy these (and many other) products is today is much lower than it was decades ago.

[link here: http://www.american.com/archive/2008/july-august-magazine-contents/how-are-we-doing/]




For example, to buy a 22 cubic feet refrigerator-freezer, such a worker in 1975 had to toil for 140 hours. To buy the same size refrigerator-freezer today, the typical American worker must work only 52 hours. To buy a 30” electric range and oven cost the typical American worker in 1975 125 hours of work; today such a range and oven costs the typical American worker only 21 hours of work.



Similar reductions in work-time costs have occurred for food, clothing, and countless other goods and services — a trend that is strong evidence that “the economy itself” continues to improve the living standards of middle-income and poor Americans.

Sincerely,
Donald J. Boudreaux
Professor of Economics
and
Martha and Nelson Getchell Chair for the Study of Free Market Capitalism at the Mercatus Center
George Mason University
Fairfax, VA 22030
Nothing? Nothing At All?






"....strong evidence that “the economy itself” continues to improve the living standards of middle-income and poor Americans."


So much for the 'poor are getting poorer' trope.

I know that the above won't convince our Liberal pals......facts never do.

How very libertarian of him!

HOW DARE THOSE POOR PEOPLE ENJOY A BETTER LIFER THAN THEY DID IN 1970! SHAME ON THEM!

AND HOW DARE THEY HAVE FANCY NICETIES LIFER REFRIGERATORS AND STOVES!!!

HOW DARE THEY!

I know right! But why do they complain so much?

 

[Impenitent]

I get such a kick out of Donald J. Boudreaux, professor of economics at George Mason University!

He regularly writes a letter to the editor of a major American publication in response to an absurdity, or an incorrect statement, offered up by a columnist or politician, and the following, totally skewers one of our Liberal White House hacks.




Here is one of Boudreaux's missives:

Editor, Washington Post
1150 15th St., NW
Washington, DC 20071

Dear Editor:

You report that Jason Furman, Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors, recently “displayed a chart showing how food stamps and other social programs had lowered poverty dramatically over the past half century.... But the graph also showed that the economy itself had done nothing for the poor: Only government dollars had” (“Economist Jason Furman is the wonkiest wonk in the White House,” Feb. 13).



.... Mr. Furman is mistaken to assert that, over the past half century, “the economy itself had done nothing for the poor.”

Here’s a link to a 2008 article with its own charts.... shows that the percentage of poor American households in 2005 to have refrigerators, stoves, color televisions, air conditioning, and automatic dishwashers is higher than was the percentage of all American households in 1971 to have these amenities. And my own research suggests an important reason for this happy fact: the amount of time that ordinary (“non-supervisory&#8221 workers must work in order to earn enough income to buy these (and many other) products is today is much lower than it was decades ago.

[link here: http://www.american.com/archive/2008/july-august-magazine-contents/how-are-we-doing/]




For example, to buy a 22 cubic feet refrigerator-freezer, such a worker in 1975 had to toil for 140 hours. To buy the same size refrigerator-freezer today, the typical American worker must work only 52 hours. To buy a 30” electric range and oven cost the typical American worker in 1975 125 hours of work; today such a range and oven costs the typical American worker only 21 hours of work.



Similar reductions in work-time costs have occurred for food, clothing, and countless other goods and services — a trend that is strong evidence that “the economy itself” continues to improve the living standards of middle-income and poor Americans.

Sincerely,
Donald J. Boudreaux
Professor of Economics
and
Martha and Nelson Getchell Chair for the Study of Free Market Capitalism at the Mercatus Center
George Mason University
Fairfax, VA 22030P
Nothing? Nothing At All?






"....strong evidence that “the economy itself” continues to improve the living standards of middle-income and poor Americans."


So much for the 'poor are getting poorer' trope.

I know that the above won't convince our Liberal pals......facts never do.

By clipping Mr. Furman's quote, Mr Boudreaux (and yourself) miss the point of Furman's statement, which is, that the economy has not produced enough JOBS for working class Americans.

True, household appliances have gone down in net cost, yet that isn't an achievement of the American economy, but a by-product of production shift to impoverished, cheap labor pools over seas, and improvements in technologies.

But this has been at a great expense to the American worker, who now finds himself under-employed, if employed at all.

And I'm sure that the reductions in costs for the appliances have been eaten up by the increased energy costs of powering them.

And you say nothing of the other costs of living! Man cannot live on bread toaster ovens alone! What about food, shelter, transportation, communication, and, of course, health care! All of these things combine to overwhelm the poor.

We have a national political party that ignores the poor, (except when they vote!), and the only concern they seem to have, is how they can expediciously reduce their voting numbers.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I get such a kick out of Donald J. Boudreaux, professor of economics at George Mason University!

He regularly writes a letter to the editor of a major American publication in response to an absurdity, or an incorrect statement, offered up by a columnist or politician, and the following, totally skewers one of our Liberal White House hacks.




Here is one of Boudreaux's missives:

Editor, Washington Post
1150 15th St., NW
Washington, DC 20071

Dear Editor:

You report that Jason Furman, Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors, recently “displayed a chart showing how food stamps and other social programs had lowered poverty dramatically over the past half century.... But the graph also showed that the economy itself had done nothing for the poor: Only government dollars had” (“Economist Jason Furman is the wonkiest wonk in the White House,” Feb. 13).



.... Mr. Furman is mistaken to assert that, over the past half century, “the economy itself had done nothing for the poor.”

Here’s a link to a 2008 article with its own charts.... shows that the percentage of poor American households in 2005 to have refrigerators, stoves, color televisions, air conditioning, and automatic dishwashers is higher than was the percentage of all American households in 1971 to have these amenities. And my own research suggests an important reason for this happy fact: the amount of time that ordinary (“non-supervisory”) workers must work in order to earn enough income to buy these (and many other) products is today is much lower than it was decades ago.

[link here: http://www.american.com/archive/2008/july-august-magazine-contents/how-are-we-doing/]




For example, to buy a 22 cubic feet refrigerator-freezer, such a worker in 1975 had to toil for 140 hours. To buy the same size refrigerator-freezer today, the typical American worker must work only 52 hours. To buy a 30” electric range and oven cost the typical American worker in 1975 125 hours of work; today such a range and oven costs the typical American worker only 21 hours of work.



Similar reductions in work-time costs have occurred for food, clothing, and countless other goods and services — a trend that is strong evidence that “the economy itself” continues to improve the living standards of middle-income and poor Americans.

Sincerely,
Donald J. Boudreaux
Professor of Economics
and
Martha and Nelson Getchell Chair for the Study of Free Market Capitalism at the Mercatus Center
George Mason University
Fairfax, VA 22030P
Nothing? Nothing At All?






"....strong evidence that “the economy itself” continues to improve the living standards of middle-income and poor Americans."


So much for the 'poor are getting poorer' trope.

I know that the above won't convince our Liberal pals......facts never do.

By clipping Mr. Furman's quote, Mr Boudreaux (and yourself) miss the point of Furman's statement, which is, that the economy has not produced enough JOBS for working class Americans.

True, household appliances have gone down in net cost, yet that isn't an achievement of the American economy, but a by-product of production shift to impoverished, cheap labor pools over seas, and improvements in technologies.

But this has been at a great expense to the American worker, who now finds himself under-employed, if employed at all.

And I'm sure that the reductions in costs for the appliances have been eaten up by the increased energy costs of powering them.

And you say nothing of the other costs of living! Man cannot live on bread toaster ovens alone! What about food, shelter, transportation, communication, and, of course, health care! All of these things combine to overwhelm the poor.

We have a national political party that ignores the poor, (except when they vote!), and the only concern they seem to have, is how they can expediciously reduce their voting numbers.

So....you've found that you had to step over poor folks lying in the street, starving?



You're a moron.

 

[Moonglow]

darn progressives like Jesus said that if you are rich you need to sell everything and give it away to the needy....how,,,communistic.....

 

[Impenitent]

I get such a kick out of Donald J. Boudreaux, professor of economics at George Mason University!

He regularly writes a letter to the editor of a major American publication in response to an absurdity, or an incorrect statement, offered up by a columnist or politician, and the following, totally skewers one of our Liberal White House hacks.




Here is one of Boudreaux's missives:

Editor, Washington Post
1150 15th St., NW
Washington, DC 20071

Dear Editor:

You report that Jason Furman, Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors, recently “displayed a chart showing how food stamps and other social programs had lowered poverty dramatically over the past half century.... But the graph also showed that the economy itself had done nothing for the poor: Only government dollars had” (“Economist Jason Furman is the wonkiest wonk in the White House,” Feb. 13).



.... Mr. Furman is mistaken to assert that, over the past half century, “the economy itself had done nothing for the poor.”

Here’s a link to a 2008 article with its own charts.... shows that the percentage of poor American households in 2005 to have refrigerators, stoves, color televisions, air conditioning, and automatic dishwashers is higher than was the percentage of all American households in 1971 to have these amenities. And my own research suggests an important reason for this happy fact: the amount of time that ordinary (“non-supervisory”) workers must work in order to earn enough income to buy these (and many other) products is today is much lower than it was decades ago.

[link here: http://www.american.com/archive/2008/july-august-magazine-contents/how-are-we-doing/]



For example, to buy a 22 cubic feet refrigerator-freezer, such a worker in 1975 had to toil for 140 hours. To buy the same size refrigerator-freezer today, the typical American worker must work only 52 hours. To buy a 30” electric range and oven cost the typical American worker in 1975 125 hours of work; today such a range and oven costs the typical American worker only 21 hours of work.



Similar reductions in work-time costs have occurred for food, clothing, and countless other goods and services — a trend that is strong evidence that “the economy itself” continues to improve the living standards of middle-income and poor Americans.

Sincerely,
Donald J. Boudreaux
Professor of Economics
and
Martha and Nelson Getchell Chair for the Study of Free Market Capitalism at the Mercatus Center
George Mason University
Fairfax, VA 22030P
Nothing? Nothing At All?






"....strong evidence that “the economy itself” continues to improve the living standards of middle-income and poor Americans."


So much for the 'poor are getting poorer' trope.

I know that the above won't convince our Liberal pals......facts never do.

By clipping Mr. Furman's quote, Mr Boudreaux (and yourself) miss the point of Furman's statement, which is, that the economy has not produced enough JOBS for working class Americans.

True, household appliances have gone down in net cost, yet that isn't an achievement of the American economy, but a by-product of production shift to impoverished, cheap labor pools over seas, and improvements in technologies.

But this has been at a great expense to the American worker, who now finds himself under-employed, if employed at all.

And I'm sure that the reductions in costs for the appliances have been eaten up by the increased energy costs of powering them.

And you say nothing of the other costs of living! Man cannot live on bread toaster ovens alone! What about food, shelter, transportation, communication, and, of course, health care! All of these things combine to overwhelm the poor.

We have a national political party that ignores the poor, (except when they vote!), and the only concern they seem to have, is how they can expediciously reduce their voting numbers.

So....you've found that you had to step over poor folks lying in the street, starving?



You're a moron.

That 's all you got?

After the cut and paste work; losing the original link and replacing it with a dead one; and;finally, clipping Furman's quote and taking him out of context; you don't have a rebuttal?

You're so spoiled to the sycophant gushings of ignorant redneck conservatives, that you never anticipated being challenged!

You're a fraud - and now exposed!

And yes, had it not been for food stamps, you would be stepping over bodies when you ventured out. Funny that is your first vision. Remember Mitt's 47 % speech? ...not the part of the 47% of Americans, but the part where he was in awe of the Chinese factory dormitory bunks stacked 3 high, and the locked gates where there was no way out or in? ... Well, the people outside that factory were eating tree bark and dying on the ground!

That's your vision of America, if you believe what you write!

But I think you just cut and paste...and collect rep. Yeah, that your game.

 

[Rshermr]

By clipping Mr. Furman's quote, Mr Boudreaux (and yourself) miss the point of Furman's statement, which is, that the economy has not produced enough JOBS for working class Americans.

True, household appliances have gone down in net cost, yet that isn't an achievement of the American economy, but a by-product of production shift to impoverished, cheap labor pools over seas, and improvements in technologies.

But this has been at a great expense to the American worker, who now finds himself under-employed, if employed at all.

And I'm sure that the reductions in costs for the appliances have been eaten up by the increased energy costs of powering them.

And you say nothing of the other costs of living! Man cannot live on bread toaster ovens alone! What about food, shelter, transportation, communication, and, of course, health care! All of these things combine to overwhelm the poor.

We have a national political party that ignores the poor, (except when they vote!), and the only concern they seem to have, is how they can expediciously reduce their voting numbers.

So....you've found that you had to step over poor folks lying in the street, starving?



You're a moron.

That 's all you got?

After the cut and paste work; losing the original link and replacing it with a dead one; and;finally, clipping Furman's quote and taking him out of context; you don't have a rebuttal?

You're so spoiled to the sycophant gushings of ignorant redneck conservatives, that you never anticipated being challenged!

You're a fraud - and now exposed!

And yes, had it not been for food stamps, you would be stepping over bodies when you ventured out. Funny that is your first vision. Remember Mitt's 47 % speech? ...not the part of the 47% of Americans, but the part where he was in awe of the Chinese factory dormitory bunks stacked 3 high, and the locked gates where there was no way out or in? ... Well, the people outside that factory were eating tree bark and dying on the ground!

That's your vision of America, if you believe what you write!

But I think you just cut and paste...and collect rep. Yeah, that your game.

PC is just a paid political hack. All she does is attack anything that the bat shit crazy con sites tell her to. She has no independent mind. Just, as you noted, has the ability to cut and paste what is provided her. One time she warned me she was about to destroy me. Intellectually, I assumed. Was the most pathetic effort at an intellectual effort on anyone's part I ever experienced. She is a true light weight. No ability to make an actual economic argument. She simply has, as noted, the ability to cut and post conservative dogma. And you have to love most of her sources. I mean, George Washington University???? Really??? Anything the Koch brothers say, they agree with. Bought and paid for education, the dream of the con mind.

 

[PoliticalChic]

By clipping Mr. Furman's quote, Mr Boudreaux (and yourself) miss the point of Furman's statement, which is, that the economy has not produced enough JOBS for working class Americans.

True, household appliances have gone down in net cost, yet that isn't an achievement of the American economy, but a by-product of production shift to impoverished, cheap labor pools over seas, and improvements in technologies.

But this has been at a great expense to the American worker, who now finds himself under-employed, if employed at all.

And I'm sure that the reductions in costs for the appliances have been eaten up by the increased energy costs of powering them.

And you say nothing of the other costs of living! Man cannot live on bread toaster ovens alone! What about food, shelter, transportation, communication, and, of course, health care! All of these things combine to overwhelm the poor.

We have a national political party that ignores the poor, (except when they vote!), and the only concern they seem to have, is how they can expediciously reduce their voting numbers.

So....you've found that you had to step over poor folks lying in the street, starving?



You're a moron.

That 's all you got?

After the cut and paste work; losing the original link and replacing it with a dead one; and;finally, clipping Furman's quote and taking him out of context; you don't have a rebuttal?

You're so spoiled to the sycophant gushings of ignorant redneck conservatives, that you never anticipated being challenged!

You're a fraud - and now exposed!

And yes, had it not been for food stamps, you would be stepping over bodies when you ventured out. Funny that is your first vision. Remember Mitt's 47 % speech? ...not the part of the 47% of Americans, but the part where he was in awe of the Chinese factory dormitory bunks stacked 3 high, and the locked gates where there was no way out or in? ... Well, the people outside that factory were eating tree bark and dying on the ground!

That's your vision of America, if you believe what you write!

But I think you just cut and paste...and collect rep. Yeah, that your game.

You're still a moron.

Glad you didn't deny it.

 

[PoliticalChic]

So....you've found that you had to step over poor folks lying in the street, starving?



You're a moron.

That 's all you got?

After the cut and paste work; losing the original link and replacing it with a dead one; and;finally, clipping Furman's quote and taking him out of context; you don't have a rebuttal?

You're so spoiled to the sycophant gushings of ignorant redneck conservatives, that you never anticipated being challenged!

You're a fraud - and now exposed!

And yes, had it not been for food stamps, you would be stepping over bodies when you ventured out. Funny that is your first vision. Remember Mitt's 47 % speech? ...not the part of the 47% of Americans, but the part where he was in awe of the Chinese factory dormitory bunks stacked 3 high, and the locked gates where there was no way out or in? ... Well, the people outside that factory were eating tree bark and dying on the ground!

That's your vision of America, if you believe what you write!

But I think you just cut and paste...and collect rep. Yeah, that your game.

PC is just a paid political hack. All she does is attack anything that the bat shit crazy con sites tell her to. She has no independent mind. Just, as you noted, has the ability to cut and paste what is provided her. One time she warned me she was about to destroy me. Intellectually, I assumed. Was the most pathetic effort at an intellectual effort on anyone's part I ever experienced. She is a true light weight. No ability to make an actual economic argument. She simply has, as noted, the ability to cut and post conservative dogma. And you have to love most of her sources. I mean, George Washington University???? Really??? Anything the Koch brothers say, they agree with. Bought and paid for education, the dream of the con mind.

Worm!


You're back!...Ooops....that really doesn't apply to an invertebrate like you, does it.


Well, spring is here...and the worm squirms out of the mud.


Watch out for the Robin, slimy.

 

[Iceweasel]

And yes, had it not been for food stamps, you would be stepping over bodies when you ventured out.

Had it not been for the progressives there would be little need for food stamps. As government grows, the private sector shrinks and the private sector pays the bills.

We aren't living in the 1950s anymore. Germany and Japan rebuilt and many other countries are all now part of the global marketplace we have to compete in. Jobs aren't going to happen the way we've been going and blaming overseas markets misses the point.

If American made appliances cost twice as much fewer people would buy them and even fewer overseas. Your analysis completely ignores the fact that Americans vote with their pocketbooks. I personally will and do spend more for a quality item. I want fewer well made things but most people are far more materialistic and short sighted and will opt for the cheaper alternative every time.

 

[PoliticalChic]

And yes, had it not been for food stamps, you would be stepping over bodies when you ventured out.

Had it not been for the progressives there would be little need for food stamps. As government grows, the private sector shrinks and the private sector pays the bills.

We aren't living in the 1950s anymore. Germany and Japan rebuilt and many other countries are all now part of the global marketplace we have to compete in. Jobs aren't going to happen the way we've been going and blaming overseas markets misses the point.

If American made appliances cost twice as much fewer people would buy them and even fewer overseas. Your analysis completely ignores the fact that Americans vote with their pocketbooks. I personally will and do spend more for a quality item. I want fewer well made things but most people are far more materialistic and short sighted and will opt for the cheaper alternative every time.

The annelid is as stupid as they come....

...notice that he didn't provide any stats about all the starving folks before food stamps.....

 

[Rshermr]

Funny. Cons seem to often use the tactic of making up a quote and attributing it to someone else so that they can argue it. That would be a lie, of course. Very dishonest. Totally lacking in integrity. So, want to tell us all where you found the quote you attributed to me?? This one, me boy:

And yes, had it not been for food stamps, you would be stepping over bodies when you ventured out.

Not my belief. Not my quote. Just you lying.
Now it is up to you to show us all the thread name, and post number. Or, simply ignore me and admit you are a liar.
The rest of your economic analysis is drivel. But that is typical of liars.

 

[Rshermr]

And yes, had it not been for food stamps, you would be stepping over bodies when you ventured out.

Had it not been for the progressives there would be little need for food stamps. As government grows, the private sector shrinks and the private sector pays the bills.

We aren't living in the 1950s anymore. Germany and Japan rebuilt and many other countries are all now part of the global marketplace we have to compete in. Jobs aren't going to happen the way we've been going and blaming overseas markets misses the point.

If American made appliances cost twice as much fewer people would buy them and even fewer overseas. Your analysis completely ignores the fact that Americans vote with their pocketbooks. I personally will and do spend more for a quality item. I want fewer well made things but most people are far more materialistic and short sighted and will opt for the cheaper alternative every time.

The annelid is as stupid as they come....

...notice that he didn't provide any stats about all the starving folks before food stamps.....

Uh, that would be because I did not make the quote, PC. You are soooooo slow. Attributing quotes to the wrong person makes your argument so much easier, eh, me poor ignorant con. That, following a couple of really childish posts made up of insults. Followed by a couple of posts made up of quotes provided you by your right wing heroes, in the bat shit crazy con web sites you love to troll. Imagine how much harder it would be if you ever had to actually make an economic argument in this economic forum. What WOULD you do.