The rights historically failed ideas proven failure

[Listening]

Boy !

You guys are a tough crowd.

 

[Immanuel]

Boy !

You guys are a tough crowd.

You are new. Wait until you have read a couple dozen threads brought to us by TruthDoesn'tMatter. Then you will understand.

Immie

 

[Charles_Main]

Cut government spending, tame the deficit, and unemployment will fall?

Actually no that is not what the right has been saying, You infantile idiot. We need to cut spending, because we spend to much. That simple. Nobody is saying taming the Deficit will create Jobs, were saying reducing regulations, and some taxes will Create Jobs.

But since when have you cared about getting your facts right. All you do is peddle lies, and twist what people say to fit your views of them. Like a typical Bigoted so called Compassionate Far Left fucking LOON.

 

[Charles_Main]

What you stupid fucking Liberal idiots, with your funny math do not understand is this.

It was called the Great Depression, Because it was deeper and Longer than anything before it. Why? Because FDR's Policies actually prolonged the pain. Yes they put some people to work, and eased the pain some, But they did nothing to spur on the Massive Private sector growth that was needed to really recover, that took a world war.

Same exact thing is happening right now, Obama's spending and Regulations, and mandates are prolonging the Recession and or hampering not helping a Recovery.

All Obama's Idea get you is short term easing of the pain, that's it. That is why were here just a couple years after spending nearly a trillion dollars on his last big plan. Because it does not last.

Now is not the time for more half measures, that will only buy us a short term blip in GDP, and Some Mostly Temporary Jobs. We can't just keep spending and hope the Economy will come back when we just had our Damn Credit Rating downgraded.

Last year 70% of all our debt, was not bought by other countries or People. It is simply owed to the Fed Res, Which means, we just printed it. Why? Because nobody want's to loan us that much money anymore. The world rightly thinks we have lost our fucking minds.

Clearly you guys have.

 

[DiamondDave]

B-L-O-G Spells truth in the bitch's world.... if it were not so sad that this bitch actually falls for this claptrap, it would be laughable

 

[syrenn]

 

[Intense]

IMF: Austerity boosts unemployment, lowers paychecks - The Washington Post


These past few years, the Republican line on job creation has been simple: Cut government spending, tame the deficit, and unemployment will fall. Maybe not tomorrow, maybe not the day after, but soon. “To put it simply,” House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R- Va.) said last spring, “less government spending means more private-sector jobs.” But that’s not exactly a rigorous study. So here’s a rigorous study.


In a new paper for the International Monetary Fund, Laurence Ball, Daniel Leigh and Prakash Loungani look at 173 episodes of fiscal austerity over the past 30 years—with the average deficit cut amounting to 1 percent of GDP. Their verdict? Austerity “lowers incomes in the short term, with wage-earners taking more of a hit than others; it also raises unemployment, particularly long-term unemployment.”

More specifically, an austerity program that curbs the deficit by 1 percent of GDP reduces real incomes by about 0.6 percent and raises unemployment by almost 0.5 percentage points. What’s more, the IMF notes, the losses are twice as big when the central bank can’t cut rates (a good description of the present.) Typically, income and employment don’t fully recover even five years after the austerity program is put in place.

4. The Education of the Organizer

"To the organizer, imagination... is the dynamism that starts and sustains him in his whole life of action as an organizer. It ignites and feeds the force that drives him to organize for change....
"The organizer knows that the real action is in the reaction of the opposition. To realistically appraise and anticipate the probable reactions of the enemy, he must be able to identify with them, too, in his imagination, and foresee their reactions to his actions....
"The organizers searching with a free and open mind void of certainty, hating dogma, finds laughter not just a way to maintain his sanity but also a key to understanding life."pp.74-75

"...the organizer must be able to split himself into two parts -- one part in the arena of action where he polarizes the issue to 100 to nothing, and helps to lead his forces into conflict, while the other part knows that when the time comes for negotiations that it really is only a 10 percent difference." p.78

"...the organizer is constantly creating new out of the old. He knows that all new ideas arise from conflict; [See Dialectic Process] that every time man as had a new idea it has been a challenge to the sacred ideas of the past and the present and inevitably a conflict has raged." p.79

5. Communication [Notice the emphasis on conflict, dialogue, relationships, etc. Team "service" is essential to building strong relationships through "common involvements"]



"And so the guided questioning goes on without anyone losing face or being left out of the decision-making. Every weakness of every proposed tactic is probed by questions.... Is this manipulation? Certainly...." p.88



"One of the factors that changes what you can and can't communicate is relationships. There are sensitive areas that one does not touch until there is a strong personal relationship based on common involvements. Otherwise the other party turns off and literally does not hear....

"Conversely, if you have a good relationship, he is very receptive.... For example, I have always believed that birth control and abortion are personal rights to be exercised by the individual. If, in my early days when I organized... neighborhood in Chicago, which was 95 per cent Roman Catholic, I had tried to communicate this, even through the experience of the residents, whose economic plight was aggravated by large families, that would have been the end of my relationship with the community. That instant I would have been stamped as an enemy of the church and all communication would have ceased.

"Some years later, after establishing solid relationships, I was free to talk about anything.... By then the argument was no longer limited to such questions as, 'How much longer do you think the Catholic Church can hang on to this archaic notion and still survive?' ...the subject and nature of the discussion would have been unthinkable without that solid relationship." pp.93-94

Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals

 

[Avatar4321]

History shows austerity is a mistake.

yet more facts you on the right will ignore to retain your histically failed ideas

It worked real well in the 1920 depression... Spending didn;t work so well for Hoover and FDR's Depression.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

go get hitorical proof of your little claim

Um the history is pretty well documented

1920 Depression: Deeper than the 1929. But also much shorter because the Harding/Coolidge administration cut taxes and government spending significantly throughout the period.

1929 Depression: not as deep but much longer and more painful for the American people. Hoover/FDR increased government spending and kept trying to engineer the economy. Ultimately ended because of World War II

 

[bripat9643]

173 episodes of fiscal austerity over the past 30 years


Now you claim your ideas work based on WHAT evidence?

The history of the United States is the evidence. Your "study" is propaganda. Studies never prove a thing in economics. Anyone who believes they do is a quack, not an economist.

 

[bripat9643]

I'd try to explain to you that simply wanting the federal government to reduce wasteful spending and reduce the deficit does not equal 'austerity measures', but I highly doubt you have the mental capacity to comprehend the explanation.

I'd like to see how this study defines "austerity."

 

[Truthmatters]

IMF: Austerity boosts unemployment, lowers paychecks - The Washington Post


These past few years, the Republican line on job creation has been simple: Cut government spending, tame the deficit, and unemployment will fall. Maybe not tomorrow, maybe not the day after, but soon. “To put it simply,” House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R- Va.) said last spring, “less government spending means more private-sector jobs.” But that’s not exactly a rigorous study. So here’s a rigorous study.


In a new paper for the International Monetary Fund, Laurence Ball, Daniel Leigh and Prakash Loungani look at 173 episodes of fiscal austerity over the past 30 years—with the average deficit cut amounting to 1 percent of GDP. Their verdict? Austerity “lowers incomes in the short term, with wage-earners taking more of a hit than others; it also raises unemployment, particularly long-term unemployment.”

More specifically, an austerity program that curbs the deficit by 1 percent of GDP reduces real incomes by about 0.6 percent and raises unemployment by almost 0.5 percentage points. What’s more, the IMF notes, the losses are twice as big when the central bank can’t cut rates (a good description of the present.) Typically, income and employment don’t fully recover even five years after the austerity program is put in place.

yet again you twist and flail to avoid accepting what history tells us abot the rights plan for fixing out economy which you broke last time you had more power

 

[editec]

Cutting spending at this time is an ill-advised policy.

It is equally ill-advised to raise taxes.

Of course if one is going to spend more money on a STUMILUS it might help to see to it that the help goes to those who actually need it, too.

This was NOT really what happened in the last stimulus.

38% of it came to Americans as tax cuts that don't really help the unemployed.

Much of it went to insiders who likely didn't spend it in a way that actually helps much either.

Consider the losss of capital (or unrealized potenital capital) that was lost as a result of the real estate meltdown.

I'm informed that the people of the USA lost $4 trillion in real estate value.

THAT is one hell of a hit to the economy.

A half trillion (which is about the cash value of the Stimulus) isn't really enough to offset that pain that so many Americans are feeling.

I feel like I lost about $50,000 in hme equity and the market agrees with that perception, too.

And I am not a wealthy man so that means that I lost a significant amount of my net worth.

Now multiply my modest loss times millions of American homeowners and you begin to see why we are in a depression right now.

Americans FEEL poorer, so they SPEND LESS.

A vicious economic cycle,

 

[Truthmatters]

You can raise the taxes on the wealthy without harming the economy.

They will still have money to spend and they sure as hell have not created the jobs we were promised by givig them tax cuts

 

[Intense]

You can raise the taxes on the wealthy without harming the economy.

They will still have money to spend and they sure as hell have not created the jobs we were promised by givig them tax cuts

Wow, I am so sorry that Free People have not lived up to your expectations of them. Personally I think they smell the trap, TM. Unlike you, they are not into your lock step games. How about you play with your own money. How many jobs have you created. You are a fail TM. Warped and embittered. Your Totalitarian Utopia ain't happening. Get over yourself.

 

[editec]

You can raise the taxes on the wealthy without harming the economy.

They will still have money to spend and they sure as hell have not created the jobs we were promised by givig them tax cuts

No I guess I'll have to disagree with that, TM.

The time to have raised taxes was BEFORE the meltdown.

Now is NOT the time to make money even more scarce than it is right now.

While I have absolutely no doubt that you and I agree that the tax structure is wildly in favor of the very VERY wealthy, increasing taxes on people making over a mere $250 K is, I think, a terrrible mistake.

Our problems are NOT stemming from the national debt.

Increasing taxes to help cring down the national debt now would be the same mistake that FDR made in 38.

This economy is SHORT OF CASH.

Yes the rich have plenty, but if you raise their taxes now, that won't put people back to work.

 

[Truthmatters]

You tax the wealthiest at the same rates clinton did and use that money to create jobs via infrastructure.

The rich have not created the jobs the right claimed they would with tax cuts so its time to take it back and USE the money to create jobs.

 

[Intense]

You can raise the taxes on the wealthy without harming the economy.

They will still have money to spend and they sure as hell have not created the jobs we were promised by givig them tax cuts

No I guess I'll have to disagree with that, TM.

The time to have raised taxes was BEFORE the meltdown.

Now is NOT the time to make money even more scarce than it is right now.

While I have absolutely no doubt that you and I agree that the tax structure is wildly in favor of the very VERY wealthy, increasing taxes on people making over a mere $250 K is, I think, a terrrible mistake.

Our problems are NOT stemming from the national debt.

Increasing taxes to help cring down the national debt now would be the same mistake that FDR made in 38.

This economy is SHORT OF CASH.

Yes the rich have plenty, but if you raise their taxes now, that won't put people back to work.

The Rich will always pay those to outsmart the system. We need to simplify the Tax Code. What that will bring to light, can be dealt with in it's own time. Government enabling and supporting Monopolies, infringe on our Freedom's. What a Surprise, Big Government and Big Business, hand in hand, bleeding us dry, and sticking us with the Bill, to boot. Acting like more Government control is going to fix matters.

When we think Structured Liberty, think more cause and effect, not Structured Entitlement mounted on the backs of those who have no protection against your appetite.

 

[Truthmatters]

Revenue Act of 1932 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hoovers tax increase helped rebuild the country

 

[OODA_Loop]

People wanted work. Not to suckle the teat of entitlement.

 

[editec]

You can raise the taxes on the wealthy without harming the economy.

YOu know I don't really think they can, TM.

Two reasons:

CAPITAL FLIGHT -- investors will invest outside of the USA.

Reduces the amount of money in circulation - Much of what is going on right now is that there isn't enough capital in circulation. While I totally understand that the wealthy don't typically spend enough to make a HUGE difference, they will spend even less and THAT will make a HUGE difference.

They will still have money to spend and they sure as hell have not created the jobs we were promised by givig them tax cuts

Yes they DO have enough money to spend, I agree.

Investors are not creating jobs because they understand that there's no good reason to do so, right now.

Macro-economically, it would be in everbody's best interests if they did, of course.

But they are NOT the macroeconomy. IN their MICRO economy, they'd be wasting money.

Really this is a sort of tragedy of the commons.

Lowering taxes won't encentivize the wealthy to invest in jobs.,

Raising taxes won't encentiize the weathy to create jobs, either.

PUNISHING the wealthy (which it seems you sincerely would like to do) isn't good p[olicy, either.

You want to TRULY encentivize big VAPITAL to start creating jobs in this nation?

STart putting tariffs on the chacha that we're currently importing.

Believe me, if there's a way to make money investing in putting Americans to work?

BIG CCAPITAL will capitalize on the opportunity.

It's just that right now, we (read our trade laws) disencentivize them from investing in the USA.