Brown: Stimulus Did Not Create One Job

[NYcarbineer]

It's pretty simple. Taking money out of the sector where wealth is created destroys wealth. The private sector is where wealth is created, and the government takes money out of the private sector. It doesn't matter how you phrase the question or what example you give.

Refute my examples. Stop hiding behind ludicrous infantile generalities.

I don't need to refute your individual examples as they all fall under the same category, government spending. Government takes resources out of the private sector and puts it somewhere where there is little or no demand, otherwise the private sector would have taken care of that demand in the first place. Secondly, without a proper profit and loss mechanism the government is going to inevitably waste resources which is, of course, destruction of wealth.

There is no demand for law enforcement in this country? Education? Roads?

 

[NYcarbineer]

[Why dont you try raw numbers instead of ones using statistics to create opinions.

US*National*Debt:*by*Presidential*Term,*per*Capita,*and*as*Percentage*of*GDP

Reagan added 1.75 trillion (218 billion a year)
Bush 1 added 1.2 trillion (300 billion a year
Clinton added 1.1 tillion (138 billion a year)
Bush 2 added 4.7 trillion (587 billion a year)
Obama added 1.5 trilliion (1,400 billion a year)

looks like obama is tripling bush's defecit spending.

Now adjust those numbers for the fact that the Iraq war wasn't on-budget during Bush, and that Bush let PAYGO die so he could pass the unfunded Medicare part D, and add back the amount of revenue lost from the Bush tax cuts, and then calculate how much additional interest on the debt Obama's budget has to cover from past presidents...

...then get back to us.

Ok then we should figure in the tech bubble burst and clinton's mini recession into bush's numbers and figure in carter's economic disaster into regean's numbers

My above statement was my attempt to show the counter-hackery statement to your politically biased statement.

The numbers are what they are.

Your failed attempt.

Answer one direct question, why shouldn't we put the cost of the Iraq war back into Bush's deficit numbers?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Refute my examples. Stop hiding behind ludicrous infantile generalities.

I don't need to refute your individual examples as they all fall under the same category, government spending. Government takes resources out of the private sector and puts it somewhere where there is little or no demand, otherwise the private sector would have taken care of that demand in the first place. Secondly, without a proper profit and loss mechanism the government is going to inevitably waste resources which is, of course, destruction of wealth.

There is no demand for law enforcement in this country? Education? Roads?

There certainly would be. But the state gives itself a monopoly on all three.

 

[elvis]

Now adjust those numbers for the fact that the Iraq war wasn't on-budget during Bush, and that Bush let PAYGO die so he could pass the unfunded Medicare part D, and add back the amount of revenue lost from the Bush tax cuts, and then calculate how much additional interest on the debt Obama's budget has to cover from past presidents...

...then get back to us.

Ok then we should figure in the tech bubble burst and clinton's mini recession into bush's numbers and figure in carter's economic disaster into regean's numbers

My above statement was my attempt to show the counter-hackery statement to your politically biased statement.

The numbers are what they are.

Your failed attempt.

Answer one direct question, why shouldn't we put the cost of the Iraq war back into Bush's deficit numbers?

as soon as you take obama's dick out of your mouth, we will. Deal?

 

[NYcarbineer]

It's pretty simple. Taking money out of the sector where wealth is created destroys wealth. The private sector is where wealth is created, and the government takes money out of the private sector. It doesn't matter how you phrase the question or what example you give.

Refute my examples. Stop hiding behind ludicrous infantile generalities.

I don't need to refute your individual examples as they all fall under the same category, government spending. Government takes resources out of the private sector and puts it somewhere where there is little or no demand, otherwise the private sector would have taken care of that demand in the first place. Secondly, without a proper profit and loss mechanism the government is going to inevitably waste resources which is, of course, destruction of wealth.

If the entire military was privatized, would taking your tax dollars to pay for it represent a destruction of wealth?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Refute my examples. Stop hiding behind ludicrous infantile generalities.

I don't need to refute your individual examples as they all fall under the same category, government spending. Government takes resources out of the private sector and puts it somewhere where there is little or no demand, otherwise the private sector would have taken care of that demand in the first place. Secondly, without a proper profit and loss mechanism the government is going to inevitably waste resources which is, of course, destruction of wealth.

If the entire military was privatized, would taking your tax dollars to pay for it represent a destruction of wealth?

If the military were privatized, how that could possibly happen I don't know, why would I be taxed to fund it? That would be the opposite of privatization.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Ok then we should figure in the tech bubble burst and clinton's mini recession into bush's numbers and figure in carter's economic disaster into regean's numbers

My above statement was my attempt to show the counter-hackery statement to your politically biased statement.

The numbers are what they are.

Your failed attempt.

Answer one direct question, why shouldn't we put the cost of the Iraq war back into Bush's deficit numbers?

as soon as you take obama's dick out of your mouth, we will. Deal?

Nobody on this forum spends more time talking about dicks and mouths than you do. I have no doubt why.

 

[elvis]

Your failed attempt.

Answer one direct question, why shouldn't we put the cost of the Iraq war back into Bush's deficit numbers?

as soon as you take obama's dick out of your mouth, we will. Deal?

Nobody on this forum spends more time talking about dicks and mouths than you do. I have no doubt why.

so in other words, you're going to continue to worship your ossiah and make excuses for him, come what may. good to know.

 

[Wicked Jester]

Not a single job?

Come on Scott, you need to get your facts from places other than Glenn Beck

Economic stimulus has created or saved nearly 2 million jobs, White House says - washingtonpost.com

Trusting anything that comes out of the mouth of this fraudulent president and administration is just too rich!

Christ, 2 weeks ago we had 3 seperate members of this administration, in three seperate interviews, who couldn't come anywhere near the same ballpark as far as jobs saved/created is concerned.

I mean seriously, this president and administration is counting those who received "raises" in the "jobs saved" category.

It's ******* ludicrous!

They honestly believe that the citizens of this great country are friggin' stupid.

Well, as we've seen in three seperate elections recently, the american people are on to their incompetent bullshit!

Christ, liberals are ******* idiots!

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Now adjust those numbers for the fact that the Iraq war wasn't on-budget during Bush, and that Bush let PAYGO die so he could pass the unfunded Medicare part D, and add back the amount of revenue lost from the Bush tax cuts, and then calculate how much additional interest on the debt Obama's budget has to cover from past presidents...

...then get back to us.

Ok then we should figure in the tech bubble burst and clinton's mini recession into bush's numbers and figure in carter's economic disaster into regean's numbers

My above statement was my attempt to show the counter-hackery statement to your politically biased statement.

The numbers are what they are.

Your failed attempt.

Answer one direct question, why shouldn't we put the cost of the Iraq war back into Bush's deficit numbers?

I will answer you after you clarify your claim that I failed. How does my logic, the very same logic that you are using with the Iraq war costs, differ from yours?

 

[Titanic Sailor]

Did it create one job????



NOPE!!!!

 

[☭proletarian☭]

Not a single job?

Come on Scott, you need to get your facts from places other than Glenn Beck

Economic stimulus has created or saved nearly 2 million jobs, White House says - washingtonpost.com

Jesus Christ ..........

Why hast thou used my name, my child? What ails you?

 

[NYcarbineer]

I don't need to refute your individual examples as they all fall under the same category, government spending. Government takes resources out of the private sector and puts it somewhere where there is little or no demand, otherwise the private sector would have taken care of that demand in the first place. Secondly, without a proper profit and loss mechanism the government is going to inevitably waste resources which is, of course, destruction of wealth.

If the entire military was privatized, would taking your tax dollars to pay for it represent a destruction of wealth?

If the military were privatized, how that could possibly happen I don't know, why would I be taxed to fund it? That would be the opposite of privatization.

Privatization includes using private companies to perform work previously performed by government employees, which means that tax dollars are still used. Example: my school districts uses a private company for bus transportation as opposed to a district run bus system.

 

[NYcarbineer]

as soon as you take obama's dick out of your mouth, we will. Deal?

Nobody on this forum spends more time talking about dicks and mouths than you do. I have no doubt why.

so in other words, you're going to continue to worship your ossiah and make excuses for him, come what may. good to know.

Answer one direct question, why shouldn't we put the cost of the Iraq war back into Bush's deficit numbers?

 

[☭proletarian☭]

I know some of you don't trust or understand who this guy Brown is yet. He is one of us. He is the real deal, so get ready. This guy is aimed squarely at Obama.

Does the real deal only appear when a democrat wins the presidency? Where were all the real dealers when Bush Jr squandered a surplus with gifts to his rich benefactors? Seems the real deal ain't too real or maybe in their pea brains this sort of partisan idiocy is real?


The Reagan-Bush Debt is how much of the national debt of the United States is attributable to the presidencies of Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush, George W. Bush, and the Republican fiscal policy of Borrow-And-Spend.

As of Wednesday, June 17, 2009 at 10:06:01AM CT,

The Current ReaganBush Debt is: $10,474,285,104,979.40 which means that in a total of 20 years, these three presidents have led to the creation of 91.80% of the entire national debt in only 8.5837% of the 233 years of the existence of the United States of America.

ReaganBushDebt.org

ReaganBushDebt.org Calculation Details

Why dont you try raw numbers instead of ones using statistics to create opinions.

US*National*Debt:*by*Presidential*Term,*per*Capita,*and*as*Percentage*of*GDP

Reagan added 1.75 trillion (218 billion a year)
Bush 1 added 1.2 trillion (300 billion a year
Clinton added 1.1 tillion (138 billion a year)
Bush 2 added 4.7 trillion (587 billion a year)
Obama added 1.5 trilliion (1,400 billion a year)

looks like obama is tripling bush's defecit spending.

1[SIZE=-2] [/SIZE]400 / 587 = 2.38500852



That's more like doubling, not tripling, thus far.


Where'd you get the Obama number? All I see for Obama at your link is PENDING

 

[☭proletarian☭]

Exchanging resources in the private sector is the market at work. The government taking money out of the private sector is wealth destruction.

The government is just another player in the market. When the government builds roads, the private sector benefits. That is not a destruction of wealth.

The government operates outside of the market.

....



merely repeating your assertion after it's been refuted is not a rebuttal

 

[☭proletarian☭]

I don't need to refute your individual examples as they all fall under the same category, government spending. Government takes resources out of the private sector and puts it somewhere where there is little or no demand, otherwise the private sector would have taken care of that demand in the first place. Secondly, without a proper profit and loss mechanism the government is going to inevitably waste resources which is, of course, destruction of wealth.

There is no demand for law enforcement in this country? Education? Roads?

There certainly would be. But the state gives itself a monopoly on all three.

Are you retarded?

 

[☭proletarian☭]

Ok then we should figure in the tech bubble burst and clinton's mini recession into bush's numbers and figure in carter's economic disaster into regean's numbers

My above statement was my attempt to show the counter-hackery statement to your politically biased statement.

The numbers are what they are.

Your failed attempt.

Answer one direct question, why shouldn't we put the cost of the Iraq war back into Bush's deficit numbers?

as soon as you take obama's dick out of your mouth, we will. Deal?

Why do you keep evading?

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Does the real deal only appear when a democrat wins the presidency? Where were all the real dealers when Bush Jr squandered a surplus with gifts to his rich benefactors? Seems the real deal ain't too real or maybe in their pea brains this sort of partisan idiocy is real?


The Reagan-Bush Debt is how much of the national debt of the United States is attributable to the presidencies of Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush, George W. Bush, and the Republican fiscal policy of Borrow-And-Spend.

As of Wednesday, June 17, 2009 at 10:06:01AM CT,

The Current ReaganBush Debt is: $10,474,285,104,979.40 which means that in a total of 20 years, these three presidents have led to the creation of 91.80% of the entire national debt in only 8.5837% of the 233 years of the existence of the United States of America.

ReaganBushDebt.org

ReaganBushDebt.org Calculation Details

Why dont you try raw numbers instead of ones using statistics to create opinions.

US*National*Debt:*by*Presidential*Term,*per*Capita,*and*as*Percentage*of*GDP

Reagan added 1.75 trillion (218 billion a year)
Bush 1 added 1.2 trillion (300 billion a year
Clinton added 1.1 tillion (138 billion a year)
Bush 2 added 4.7 trillion (587 billion a year)
Obama added 1.5 trilliion (1,400 billion a year)

looks like obama is tripling bush's defecit spending.

1[SIZE=-2] [/SIZE]400 / 587 = 2.38500852



That's more like doubling, not tripling, thus far.


Where'd you get the Obama number? All I see for Obama at your link is PENDING

I got the 1.5 trillion from obama's own estimate....i actually rounded down from his first year estimate of a 1.8 trillion dollar defecit. I think this article mentions it $1 Trillion More in Debt Since Obama Took Office - Political Hotsheet - CBS News

If I used obama's number of 1.8 trillion it would triple...sorry i tried to make Obama's numbers look a litlte better and I shouldn't have...i should have put up the 1.8 trillion he projected.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

The government is just another player in the market. When the government builds roads, the private sector benefits. That is not a destruction of wealth.

The government operates outside of the market.

....



merely repeating your assertion after it's been refuted is not a rebuttal

Merely repeating your assertion that I've been refuted is not evidence that I've been refuted.