Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
For simple folks, maybe. Still, I just gave two examples where taxes were raised and unemployment dropped. So you can spout your "theories" all you want -- the real world proves your "theories" are pipe dreams.tax hikes did not cause more unemployment.
it is obvious that we have the highest corporate taxes in the world and it causes our corporations to move out. When they move out it causes unemployment!!
When you tax people they spend less or buy less. That means manufacturers need to produce less and employ less. When you employ less you cause unemployment?
Simple enough?
Oh geeeze, my favorite intellectual. Dear, you're brainwashed with Keynesian indoctrination. You don't know you don't know.
Study the Reagan years a little more and stop listening to the dumbasses in academia. I know from experience.
what are you ranting about and what does it have to do with my post that you responded to? Maybe you should go back to just posting your cartoons again....because you're making no sense....numbers don't lie....in the cases she cited with taxes being raised, unemployment went down..... facts are facts. Simple enough?tax hikes did not cause more unemployment.
it is obvious that we have the highest corporate taxes in the world and it causes our corporations to move out. When they move out it causes unemployment!!
When you tax people they spend less or buy less. That means manufacturers need to produce less and employ less. When you employ less you cause unemployment?
Simple enough?
Even a lying, such as yourself knows the unemployment rate doesn't take into consideration the RECORD HIGH LONG TERM UNEMPLOYED, you liberal pond scum think everyone is as dishonest as you?
Long-term unemployed still at record levels - LA Times
For simple folks, maybe. Still, I just gave two examples where taxes were raised and unemployment dropped. So you can spout your "theories" all you want -- the real world proves your "theories" are pipe dreams.tax hikes did not cause more unemployment.
it is obvious that we have the highest corporate taxes in the world and it causes our corporations to move out. When they move out it causes unemployment!!
When you tax people they spend less or buy less. That means manufacturers need to produce less and employ less. When you employ less you cause unemployment?
Simple enough?
Oh geeeze, my favorite intellectual. Dear, you're brainwashed with Keynesian indoctrination. You don't know you don't know.
Study the Reagan years a little more and stop listening to the dumbasses in academia. I know from experience.
GREAT idea...
"The debt explosion has resulted not from big spending by the Democrats, but instead the Republican Party's embrace, about three decades ago, of the insidious doctrine that deficits don't matter if they result from tax cuts."
David Stockman - Director of the Office of Management and Budget for U.S. President Ronald Reagan.
what are you ranting about and what does it have to do with my post that you responded to? Maybe you should go back to just posting your cartoons again....because you're making no sense....numbers don't lie....in the cases she cited with taxes being raised, unemployment went down..... facts are facts. Simple enough?tax hikes did not cause more unemployment.
it is obvious that we have the highest corporate taxes in the world and it causes our corporations to move out. When they move out it causes unemployment!!
When you tax people they spend less or buy less. That means manufacturers need to produce less and employ less. When you employ less you cause unemployment?
Simple enough?
Even a lying
Long-term unemployed still at record levels - LA Times
For simple folks, maybe. Still, I just gave two examples where taxes were raised and unemployment dropped. So you can spout your "theories" all you want -- the real world proves your "theories" are pipe dreams.tax hikes did not cause more unemployment.
it is obvious that we have the highest corporate taxes in the world and it causes our corporations to move out. When they move out it causes unemployment!!
When you tax people they spend less or buy less. That means manufacturers need to produce less and employ less. When you employ less you cause unemployment?
Simple enough?
Oh geeeze, my favorite intellectual. Dear, you're brainwashed with Keynesian indoctrination. You don't know you don't know.
Study the Reagan years a little more and stop listening to the dumbasses in academia. I know from experience.
GREAT idea...
"The debt explosion has resulted not from big spending by the Democrats, but instead the Republican Party's embrace, about three decades ago, of the insidious doctrine that deficits don't matter if they result from tax cuts."
David Stockman - Director of the Office of Management and Budget for U.S. President Ronald Reagan.
Stockman was a nut job. That's why Reagan fired him. Somebody indoctrinated with Keynesian theory just like Warren Buffet.
Except when they don't. You can say higher tax increase unemployment all you want, I can still cite examples where unemployment decreased following a tax increase.numbers don't lie....in the cases she cited with taxes being raised, unemployment went down..... facts are facts. Simple enough?tax hikes did not cause more unemployment.
it is obvious that we have the highest corporate taxes in the world and it causes our corporations to move out. When they move out it causes unemployment!!
When you tax people they spend less or buy less. That means manufacturers need to produce less and employ less. When you employ less you cause unemployment?
Simple enough?
dear, there are many variables involved in your example so its hardly a scientific experiment where all are held constant except the one or two in question. Do you understand that higher taxes will always cause more unemployment, not less??
do you want to raise taxes to combat unemployment?? See why we say liberalism is based in pure ignorance?
For simple folks, maybe. Still, I just gave two examples where taxes were raised and unemployment dropped. So you can spout your "theories" all you want -- the real world proves your "theories" are pipe dreams.tax hikes did not cause more unemployment.
it is obvious that we have the highest corporate taxes in the world and it causes our corporations to move out. When they move out it causes unemployment!!
When you tax people they spend less or buy less. That means manufacturers need to produce less and employ less. When you employ less you cause unemployment?
Simple enough?
Oh geeeze, my favorite intellectual. Dear, you're brainwashed with Keynesian indoctrination. You don't know you don't know.
Study the Reagan years a little more and stop listening to the dumbasses in academia. I know from experience.
GREAT idea...
"The debt explosion has resulted not from big spending by the Democrats, but instead the Republican Party's embrace, about three decades ago, of the insidious doctrine that deficits don't matter if they result from tax cuts."
David Stockman - Director of the Office of Management and Budget for U.S. President Ronald Reagan.
Stockman was a nut job. That's why Reagan fired him. Somebody indoctrinated with Keynesian theory just like Warren Buffet.
You mean like in 1993 when unemployment dropped from 6.8% to 5.7% following Clinton's tax hike and the labor force participation rate increased from 66.4% to 66.6%, employment was even better than the unemployment rate indicated?what are you ranting about and what does it have to do with my post that you responded to? Maybe you should go back to just posting your cartoons again....because you're making no sense....numbers don't lie....in the cases she cited with taxes being raised, unemployment went down..... facts are facts. Simple enough?tax hikes did not cause more unemployment.
it is obvious that we have the highest corporate taxes in the world and it causes our corporations to move out. When they move out it causes unemployment!!
When you tax people they spend less or buy less. That means manufacturers need to produce less and employ less. When you employ less you cause unemployment?
Simple enough?
Even a lying
Long-term unemployed still at record levels - LA Times
You idiots don't take into consideration that the supposed unemployment went down because LESS PEOPLE ARE COUNTED, nothing to do with taxes! Damn!
You mean like in 1993 when unemployment dropped from 6.8% to 5.7% following Clinton's tax hike and the labor force participation rate increased from 66.4% to 66.6%, employment was even better than the unemployment rate indicated?what are you ranting about and what does it have to do with my post that you responded to? Maybe you should go back to just posting your cartoons again....because you're making no sense....numbers don't lie....in the cases she cited with taxes being raised, unemployment went down..... facts are facts. Simple enough?it is obvious that we have the highest corporate taxes in the world and it causes our corporations to move out. When they move out it causes unemployment!!
When you tax people they spend less or buy less. That means manufacturers need to produce less and employ less. When you employ less you cause unemployment?
Simple enough?
Even a lying
Long-term unemployed still at record levels - LA Times
You idiots don't take into consideration that the supposed unemployment went down because LESS PEOPLE ARE COUNTED, nothing to do with taxes! Damn!
You will need more revenue if you are really committed to reducing the deficit.
Indeed. Our deficit and debt are the result of our wealth coddling tax policies. If we want to eliminate the deficit and reduce the debt, we have to raise taxes.
For simple folks, maybe. Still, I just gave two examples where taxes were raised and unemployment dropped. So you can spout your "theories" all you want -- the real world proves your "theories" are pipe dreams.it is obvious that we have the highest corporate taxes in the world and it causes our corporations to move out. When they move out it causes unemployment!!
When you tax people they spend less or buy less. That means manufacturers need to produce less and employ less. When you employ less you cause unemployment?
Simple enough?
Oh geeeze, my favorite intellectual. Dear, you're brainwashed with Keynesian indoctrination. You don't know you don't know.
Study the Reagan years a little more and stop listening to the dumbasses in academia. I know from experience.
GREAT idea...
"The debt explosion has resulted not from big spending by the Democrats, but instead the Republican Party's embrace, about three decades ago, of the insidious doctrine that deficits don't matter if they result from tax cuts."
David Stockman - Director of the Office of Management and Budget for U.S. President Ronald Reagan.
Stockman was a nut job. That's why Reagan fired him. Somebody indoctrinated with Keynesian theory just like Warren Buffet.
Was this guy a 'nut job' too?
The Myths of Reaganomics
Mises Daily: Wednesday, June 09, 2004 by Murray N. Rothbard
I come to bury Reaganomics, not to praise it.
Also, the excuse cannot be used that Congress massively increased Reagan's budget proposals. On the contrary, there was never much difference between Reagan's and Congress's budgets, and despite propaganda to the contrary, Reagan never proposed a cut in the total budget.
more
For simple folks, maybe. Still, I just gave two examples where taxes were raised and unemployment dropped. So you can spout your "theories" all you want -- the real world proves your "theories" are pipe dreams.it is obvious that we have the highest corporate taxes in the world and it causes our corporations to move out. When they move out it causes unemployment!!
When you tax people they spend less or buy less. That means manufacturers need to produce less and employ less. When you employ less you cause unemployment?
Simple enough?
Oh geeeze, my favorite intellectual. Dear, you're brainwashed with Keynesian indoctrination. You don't know you don't know.
Study the Reagan years a little more and stop listening to the dumbasses in academia. I know from experience.
GREAT idea...
"The debt explosion has resulted not from big spending by the Democrats, but instead the Republican Party's embrace, about three decades ago, of the insidious doctrine that deficits don't matter if they result from tax cuts."
David Stockman - Director of the Office of Management and Budget for U.S. President Ronald Reagan.
Stockman was a nut job. That's why Reagan fired him. Somebody indoctrinated with Keynesian theory just like Warren Buffet.
Stockman RESIGNED.
For simple folks, maybe. Still, I just gave two examples where taxes were raised and unemployment dropped. So you can spout your "theories" all you want -- the real world proves your "theories" are pipe dreams.it is obvious that we have the highest corporate taxes in the world and it causes our corporations to move out. When they move out it causes unemployment!!
When you tax people they spend less or buy less. That means manufacturers need to produce less and employ less. When you employ less you cause unemployment?
Simple enough?
Oh geeeze, my favorite intellectual. Dear, you're brainwashed with Keynesian indoctrination. You don't know you don't know.
Study the Reagan years a little more and stop listening to the dumbasses in academia. I know from experience.
GREAT idea...
"The debt explosion has resulted not from big spending by the Democrats, but instead the Republican Party's embrace, about three decades ago, of the insidious doctrine that deficits don't matter if they result from tax cuts."
David Stockman - Director of the Office of Management and Budget for U.S. President Ronald Reagan.
Stockman was a nut job. That's why Reagan fired him. Somebody indoctrinated with Keynesian theory just like Warren Buffet.
Stockman RESIGNED.
No, it wasn't. And looking that up took only seconds to bring up the BLS page on the LFPR. Don't think just because you're glued here means everyone is.You mean like in 1993 when unemployment dropped from 6.8% to 5.7% following Clinton's tax hike and the labor force participation rate increased from 66.4% to 66.6%, employment was even better than the unemployment rate indicated?what are you ranting about and what does it have to do with my post that you responded to? Maybe you should go back to just posting your cartoons again....because you're making no sense....numbers don't lie....in the cases she cited with taxes being raised, unemployment went down..... facts are facts. Simple enough?
Even a lying
Long-term unemployed still at record levels - LA Times
You idiots don't take into consideration that the supposed unemployment went down because LESS PEOPLE ARE COUNTED, nothing to do with taxes! Damn!
You actually spent YOUR TIME, over half an hour, looking this shit up to find ONE EXCEPTION?....
Wasn't that the start of the Dot Com bubble?
No, it wasn't. And looking that up took only seconds to bring up the BLS page on the LFPR. Don't think just because you're glued here means everyone is.You mean like in 1993 when unemployment dropped from 6.8% to 5.7% following Clinton's tax hike and the labor force participation rate increased from 66.4% to 66.6%, employment was even better than the unemployment rate indicated?what are you ranting about and what does it have to do with my post that you responded to? Maybe you should go back to just posting your cartoons again....because you're making no sense....Even a lying
Long-term unemployed still at record levels - LA Times
You idiots don't take into consideration that the supposed unemployment went down because LESS PEOPLE ARE COUNTED, nothing to do with taxes! Damn!
You actually spent YOUR TIME, over half an hour, looking this shit up to find ONE EXCEPTION?....
Wasn't that the start of the Dot Com bubble?
You probably are stupid enough to think you can pull off a bait and switch, but as usual, you fail. You didn't ask if 1993 was when the mosaic web browser started, you asked if that was the start of the dot com bubble. The dot com bubble started years later.No, it wasn't. And looking that up took only seconds to bring up the BLS page on the LFPR. Don't think just because you're glued here means everyone is.You mean like in 1993 when unemployment dropped from 6.8% to 5.7% following Clinton's tax hike and the labor force participation rate increased from 66.4% to 66.6%, employment was even better than the unemployment rate indicated?what are you ranting about and what does it have to do with my post that you responded to? Maybe you should go back to just posting your cartoons again....because you're making no sense....
You idiots don't take into consideration that the supposed unemployment went down because LESS PEOPLE ARE COUNTED, nothing to do with taxes! Damn!
You actually spent YOUR TIME, over half an hour, looking this shit up to find ONE EXCEPTION?....
Wasn't that the start of the Dot Com bubble?
1993 was the start with the mosaic web browser.... You probably weren't able to walk then!
Deficits eventually become debt.budget deficit is NOT the same as National Debt....it never has been and it never will have the same meaning...
Budget DEFICIT is not the equivalent of National DEBT...
Obama with Congress has reduced the yearly budget deficit by almost 2/3's of what it was running when the president took office, period.
