Republicans think handing corporations money creates jobs.

[The Derp]

SO tired of that term.....

If the shoe fits...

 

[The Derp]

When have the Republicans passed a lower minimum wage bill? You are speculating.

Conservatives have routinely expressed their desire not to lower the minimum wage, but to abolish it completely.

 

[task0778]

If you can't deal with what she said directly, then you got nothing. Thanks!

Don't really care what someone else said, snowflake. I'm providing much needed clarity.

What she said is what I directly responded to dumb ass, you provided no clarity as you never responded to what she posted, you are just dribbling spew, you bring in Walmart which had nothing to do with she or I posted.

The accusation is that minimum wages were cut. I want to know where and when in this country they were cut. I am not concerned about your third world country, that isn't the issue in this thread.

When the minimum wage does not rise for inflation, it is, in effect, a pay cut. And the minimum wage has not risen according to inflation since the 1960's.

It is not a cut in pay in effect or otherwise and no one cuts the pay. It may buy you less but that isn't a pay cut. You are playing semantics and it is a dishonest approach given they way she put forth the statement that you failed to quote for very obvious reasons.

Each dollar is worth less as inflation occurs.

That said, I know Republicans would love to lower the minimum wage. Otherwise, they would make it keep up with inflation.

When have the Republicans passed a lower minimum wage bill? You are speculating.

Did the GOP even try to lower the m-wage? Not talking about some nutjob who's out to make splash in the news, the party has never made that a goal.

 

[hortysir]

What she said is what I directly responded to dumb ass, you provided no clarity as you never responded to what she posted, you are just dribbling spew, you bring in Walmart which had nothing to do with she or I posted.

You cannot talk about the minimum wage and not talk about WalMart.

Which WalMart only pays minimum wage?

 

[The Derp]

Which WalMart only pays minimum wage?

Some of their workers make minimum wage, some make slightly above minimum wage. The point is that those 1,000,000+ WalMart workers cost taxpayers $5B in welfare because their wages are so low, they qualify for benefits. WalMart made about $14B in profit last year. So if they paid their workers a living wage, they'd only make $9B. I know, boo hoo.

 

[GoDemocratic]

I always see conservatives making the same mistake. There might be some jobs created from tax break, but there are also jobs created by government spending, like doubling the Defense Budget. Every GOP President from Reagan on doubled the DB. But they count all the jobs as the result of the tax break and that's the fallacy. If a 1%er gets a nice tax refund, he might invest it, or he might also buy a nifty condo on a tropical island. You don't get your money's worth out of tax breaks. But you do get it from government spending. It's intuitive.

 

[airplanemechanic]

No, you are just choosing not to accept them to your own detriment.

No, they are fake. They are derived because you're only looking at public debt. You're not looking at total debt.

I'm pulling my numbers from the US treasury:

Debt to the Penny (Daily History Search Application)

Your numbers are from the public debt line. Look at total national debt, it went up every year. Your so stupid you're taking a reduction in public debt as a surplus. Wow, that's some liberal math there. Intragovernmental debt went up substantially every year. It's really bad when you don't even know what comprises the national debt. Education, stay in school kids.

Game, set, match. Stay off liberal websites.

 

[PredFan]

Dude, you aren't smart enough to be in a discussion. Dismissed.

Dunning-Kruger alert!

SO tired of that term.....
Read:
Dunning-Kruger and other bogus memes

He's a moron.

 

[Papageorgio]

What she said is what I directly responded to dumb ass, you provided no clarity as you never responded to what she posted, you are just dribbling spew, you bring in Walmart which had nothing to do with she or I posted.

You cannot talk about the minimum wage and not talk about WalMart.

I can you can't.

 

[Papageorgio]

When have the Republicans passed a lower minimum wage bill? You are speculating.

Conservatives have routinely expressed their desire not to lower the minimum wage, but to abolish it completely.

When have the Republicans passed a no minimum wage bill?

 

[Papageorgio]

If you can't deal with what she said directly, then you got nothing. Thanks!

Don't really care what someone else said, snowflake. I'm providing much needed clarity.

What she said is what I directly responded to dumb ass, you provided no clarity as you never responded to what she posted, you are just dribbling spew, you bring in Walmart which had nothing to do with she or I posted.

The accusation is that minimum wages were cut. I want to know where and when in this country they were cut. I am not concerned about your third world country, that isn't the issue in this thread.

When the minimum wage does not rise for inflation, it is, in effect, a pay cut. And the minimum wage has not risen according to inflation since the 1960's.

It is not a cut in pay in effect or otherwise and no one cuts the pay. It may buy you less but that isn't a pay cut. You are playing semantics and it is a dishonest approach given they way she put forth the statement that you failed to quote for very obvious reasons.

Each dollar is worth less as inflation occurs.

That said, I know Republicans would love to lower the minimum wage. Otherwise, they would make it keep up with inflation.

When have the Republicans passed a lower minimum wage bill? You are speculating.

Did the GOP even try to lower the m-wage? Not talking about some nutjob who's out to make splash in the news, the party has never made that a goal.

Exactly, the guy is throwing up crap and doesn't think anyone will call him on his BS.

 

[Papageorgio]

Which WalMart only pays minimum wage?

Some of their workers make minimum wage, some make slightly above minimum wage. The point is that those 1,000,000+ WalMart workers cost taxpayers $5B in welfare because their wages are so low, they qualify for benefits. WalMart made about $14B in profit last year. So if they paid their workers a living wage, they'd only make $9B. I know, boo hoo.

Walmart raises pay well above minimum wage

 

[danielpalos]

Clinton handed Bush the dot-com bubble.

There Is No Santa Claus and Bill Clinton Was Not an Economic Savior | The Huffington Post

The S&P 500 was more than 10 percent below its 2000 peak and the NASDAQ was down by more than 40 percent on the day that Bush took office. This pretty much guaranteed the recession that began in March of 2001 just as the collapse of the housing bubble placed President Obama in the middle of terrible recession in January of 2009.

The republicans had nothing better. They never got serious about hard money, with our surplus economy.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

What is really interesting about derp here, is that he told another poster that he had me on his IGGY(ignore) list.

You must be confusing me with someone else. I never put people on ignore. Putting people on ignore is a sign of ignorance. Conservatives have put me on ignore, but only do so because they are emotional.

Now when more people have their own money in hand, how can household debt increase, unless that household is full of liberals

Here's how: tax cuts result in revenue cuts. Revenue cuts produce deficits. Conservatives then point to the deficits caused by their tax cuts as an excuse to cut spending. Spending cuts are almost always in education and health care, which forces the middle class to go into debt to afford things like college.

Plus, we have the empirical evidence of the Bush Tax Cuts which saw a massive spike in household debt. Notice how household debt shoots up in the mid-80s, plateaus through the 90's, and then spikes again in the early 00's. Those sharp spikes coincide with the tax cuts. Bush the Elder and Clinton raised taxes and household debt held steady.

Tax cuts don't result in deficits, it is the reckless spending that the liberals always do that causes deficits. Are you really as DERPY as you make out to be. The tax taken in by the government is over 3 trillion dollars, yet the liberals spend over 4 trillion. Doesn't that bother you at all? Don't answer that, as your name is all that is needed.

U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time

once again a math problem on what it takes for 1 person to spend 1 trillion dollars if they could spent it 1 dollar a second.
$1 x 60 seconds = $60 a minute.
$60 x 60 minutes = $360 an hour. You don't even come close to EARNING that livable wage.
$360 x 24 hours = $8,640 a day.
$8,640 x 365.25 days = $3,155,760 a year. Only the 1%'er like Buffet and Gates make over this in 1 year.
$3,155,760 x 10 years = $31,557,60 a decade. Not even close to a billion dollars yet.
$3,155,760 x 1,000 years = $3,155,760,000 a millennium. Still not even close to a trillion dollars but reached 3 billion.
$3,155,760 x 10,000 years = $31,557,600,000 , still not close to a trillion.
$3,155,760 x 100,000 years = $315,576,000,000 one third of a trillion met.
$3,155,760 x 300,000 years = $946,728,000,000 not quite 1 trillion dollars but close enough.

So it takes you at 1 dollar a second, 300,000 years, to spend 1 trillion , but this feckless, reckless, liberal government spend 4 times it in 1 year. This is why liberals are so stupid. It isn't what the government takes in(it is never enough) but what the government wastefully spends.. USSR, East Germany, Venezuela, N Korea, Cuba, and any other Socialist country if stays on course of spending too much, ends up bankrupt and everyone eats dog.

 

[RealDave]

No, you are just choosing not to accept them to your own detriment.

No, they are fake. They are derived because you're only looking at public debt. You're not looking at total debt.

I'm pulling my numbers from the US treasury:

Debt to the Penny (Daily History Search Application)

Your numbers are from the public debt line. Look at total national debt, it went up every year. Your so stupid you're taking a reduction in public debt as a surplus. Wow, that's some liberal math there. Intragovernmental debt went up substantially every year. It's really bad when you don't even know what comprises the national debt. Education, stay in school kids.

Game, set, match. Stay off liberal websites.

The Budget and Deficit Under Clinton - FactCheck.org

Dumbass.

 

[The Derp]

No, they are fake. They are derived because you're only looking at public debt. You're not looking at total debt.

Of course, since the government doesn't collect revenues all at once, some months the debt was paid down, other months it wasn't. That's because of the nature by which government collects revenues. You understand that, right?

And including "intra-government holdings" is a bit disingenuous since those holdings aren't subject to interest rates since it's borrowing from ourselves. We aren't paying interest to ourselves when the government borrows from, say, Social Security. So that's why they do it.

Your numbers are from the public debt line.

Right, which is debt held by the Public. Which is what we are talking about. Lumping in intra-government holdings is disingenuous because we don't pay interest to ourselves. That's why you have to look at Public Debt. But I never claimed Clinton paid down Public Debt. What I've said is that Clinton had a budget surplus, which he did. Just because there's a surplus doesn't mean that surplus goes to automatically pay down debt. Anyone who thinks that does not know or understand that government doesn't collect revenues all at once.

 

[The Derp]

I can you can't.

LOL! Well, nice that you've set yourself up to not have your views challenged.

 

[The Derp]

When have the Republicans passed a no minimum wage bill?

Never. But that doesn't mean they don't want to. Conservatives don't want to lower the minimum wage, they want to abolish it. I assume because they want American workers to work for the same wages and in the same conditions their Third World counterparts do, while also lowering the standard of living.

But lower standards is pretty Conservative. So it comes as no surprise that their strategy is to race to the bottom.

 

[The Derp]

Tax cuts don't result in deficits

When you reduce revenues, you are creating deficits. The promise of tax cuts was that they would provide so much revenue via consumer spending, that we'd have surpluses as far as the eye can see. Any revenue loss on the income tax side would be made up by an increase in revenue from the consumer spending side. If you're now telling me that spending has to be cut, the primary reason for tax cuts (that they create growth, and thus revenues) is a lie, and there is no economic benefit to them. Which means they serve another function...as a Trojan Horse for spending cuts to things you are ideologically opposed to because you lack the courage to wipe it away via legislation.

So the strategy shifted to manufacturing deficits, because the fundamentals are so tragically flawed, and then using those deficits (with some questionable economic theory) as an excuse to cut spending. Those spending cuts are almost always operational, causing programs to fail. Conservatives then point to the failing programs they caused as an excuse to sell those programs off to private interests who profit at taxpayer expense while not providing a superior service or outcomes (see: charter schools, private prisons).

And I'm not sure why you are screeching about the debt. It was during Bush the Dumber that the debt clock was turned back on (because we had surpluses). Reagan tripled the debt, Bush the Elder grew it 50% in 4 years, and Bush the Dumber doubled it. That's not a great track record and doesn't really put a lot of confidence in what you're saying.

The rest of your post seems like a garbled mess of Russian Active Measures and deliberate misinterpretation of facts.

 

[The Derp]

Walmart raises pay well above minimum wage

Ummm, they raised pay to $10/hr which still qualifies millions of their workers for welfare benefits. In 2016, WalMart workers cost about $5B in welfare. WalMart's 2016 profits were about $14B. So more than 1/3 of WalMart's profits were subsidized by taxpayers because WalMart pays their workers shitty wages.