GOP runs Kansas into ground, another red welfare state.

[occupied]

Kansas may furlough 7,000 state workers as tax-starved coffers run dry

Red states, just say thanks to us blue staters who float you through the hard times.

You're welcome.




Republicans can't do math.

Maybe not, but Republicans know more about math than Democrats do about economics

Then why are most red states welfare states?

They aren't, you pulled it out of your ass.

Why is most deficit spending done in Blue States?

Um.... it's not.

Um...it is.

California, New York, Illinois and New England alone are over half of the $4 trillion in State debt.

Dude, you said Republicans don't know math, seems you're numerically challenged yourself

Kansas is now in a deficit situation as well, and their economy is stuck in the mud. According to conservative dogma they should be nearing full employment and getting more revenue than ever.

 

[kaz]

Maybe not, but Republicans know more about math than Democrats do about economics

Then why are most red states welfare states?

They aren't, you pulled it out of your ass.

Why is most deficit spending done in Blue States?

Um.... it's not.

Um...it is.

California, New York, Illinois and New England alone are over half of the $4 trillion in State debt.

Dude, you said Republicans don't know math, seems you're numerically challenged yourself

Kansas is now in a deficit situation as well, and their economy is stuck in the mud. According to conservative dogma they should be nearing full employment and getting more revenue than ever.

DC taxes and spending dwarfs Kansas spending and taxes

 

[rightwinger]

The trailer house manufactures will be happy as more people lose their houses and jobs the trailer parks will be filling up in Kansas

Working people are never included in their calculations, the wealthy get a tax cut, mission accomplished.

The irony that most jobs come from "the wealthy." So, what happens to "working people" when you take more of the "the wealthy" bastard's money? Do you know when I have less money, I hire fewer people? Boggles the mind, doesn't it? How the heck did that happen?

As for the phrase "working people," why am I going to be the one in the office today? What is it I'm going to be doing while the working people aren't working?

Don't try to sell trickle down to me, quit buying that bullshit years ago. The wealthy do not create jobs out of thin air out of the goodness of their heart. They capitalize on demand for goods and services no matter the tax structure.

If the market is there to sell more product, they will sell more product

Putting more money in the pockets of the wealthy in a satiated market will not create jobs. They will also not increase wages on those who do work for them

You still haven't explained how you know more about economics than the field of economics

I have no idea what that sentence means

 

[kaz]

Working people are never included in their calculations, the wealthy get a tax cut, mission accomplished.

The irony that most jobs come from "the wealthy." So, what happens to "working people" when you take more of the "the wealthy" bastard's money? Do you know when I have less money, I hire fewer people? Boggles the mind, doesn't it? How the heck did that happen?

As for the phrase "working people," why am I going to be the one in the office today? What is it I'm going to be doing while the working people aren't working?

Don't try to sell trickle down to me, quit buying that bullshit years ago. The wealthy do not create jobs out of thin air out of the goodness of their heart. They capitalize on demand for goods and services no matter the tax structure.

If the market is there to sell more product, they will sell more product

Putting more money in the pockets of the wealthy in a satiated market will not create jobs. They will also not increase wages on those who do work for them

You still haven't explained how you know more about economics than the field of economics

I have no idea what that sentence means

I know you don't, big guy. Don't worry about it

 

[rightwinger]

Then why are most red states welfare states?

They aren't, you pulled it out of your ass.

Why is most deficit spending done in Blue States?

Um.... it's not.

Um...it is.

California, New York, Illinois and New England alone are over half of the $4 trillion in State debt.

Dude, you said Republicans don't know math, seems you're numerically challenged yourself

Kansas is now in a deficit situation as well, and their economy is stuck in the mud. According to conservative dogma they should be nearing full employment and getting more revenue than ever.

DC taxes and spending dwarfs Kansas spending and taxes

Are you talking DC the city?

 

[kaz]

They aren't, you pulled it out of your ass.

Why is most deficit spending done in Blue States?

Um.... it's not.

Um...it is.

California, New York, Illinois and New England alone are over half of the $4 trillion in State debt.

Dude, you said Republicans don't know math, seems you're numerically challenged yourself

Kansas is now in a deficit situation as well, and their economy is stuck in the mud. According to conservative dogma they should be nearing full employment and getting more revenue than ever.

DC taxes and spending dwarfs Kansas spending and taxes

Are you talking DC the city?

Life must be very confusing for you, big guy

 

[rightwinger]

The irony that most jobs come from "the wealthy." So, what happens to "working people" when you take more of the "the wealthy" bastard's money? Do you know when I have less money, I hire fewer people? Boggles the mind, doesn't it? How the heck did that happen?

As for the phrase "working people," why am I going to be the one in the office today? What is it I'm going to be doing while the working people aren't working?

Don't try to sell trickle down to me, quit buying that bullshit years ago. The wealthy do not create jobs out of thin air out of the goodness of their heart. They capitalize on demand for goods and services no matter the tax structure.

If the market is there to sell more product, they will sell more product

Putting more money in the pockets of the wealthy in a satiated market will not create jobs. They will also not increase wages on those who do work for them

You still haven't explained how you know more about economics than the field of economics

I have no idea what that sentence means

I know you don't, big guy. Don't worry about it

No, seriously

Do you have any idea of what you are posting? Try to read your post before you hit reply

 

[Nyvin]

The trailer house manufactures will be happy as more people lose their houses and jobs the trailer parks will be filling up in Kansas

Working people are never included in their calculations, the wealthy get a tax cut, mission accomplished.

The irony that most jobs come from "the wealthy." So, what happens to "working people" when you take more of the "the wealthy" bastard's money? Do you know when I have less money, I hire fewer people? Boggles the mind, doesn't it? How the heck did that happen?

As for the phrase "working people," why am I going to be the one in the office today? What is it I'm going to be doing while the working people aren't working?

Don't try to sell trickle down to me, quit buying that bullshit years ago. The wealthy do not create jobs out of thin air out of the goodness of their heart. They capitalize on demand for goods and services no matter the tax structure.

More importantly, allowing more wealth to flow into the hands of the wealthy does not guarantee they will invest it into the local state economy....more likely in our globalized world they will find some foreign country to make money in and they'll invest their new found wealth into Asia or something. The state probably will never see the money they lose from those tax cuts for the rich.

Republicans need to stop thinking it's still the 1950's.

Yet you're wrong, who saw that coming? Anyway, you are a clown

Well that's a rather weak comeback.....no, I'm right. Your turn.

 

[occupied]

Then why are most red states welfare states?

They aren't, you pulled it out of your ass.

Why is most deficit spending done in Blue States?

Um.... it's not.

Um...it is.

California, New York, Illinois and New England alone are over half of the $4 trillion in State debt.

Dude, you said Republicans don't know math, seems you're numerically challenged yourself

Kansas is now in a deficit situation as well, and their economy is stuck in the mud. According to conservative dogma they should be nearing full employment and getting more revenue than ever.

DC taxes and spending dwarfs Kansas spending and taxes

What does that have to do with anything? Kansas as a conservative experiment in trickle down economics is an abject failure. None of the expected benefits to cutting taxes on the "job creators" has resulted in appreciable economic growth or good paying jobs. Now the wages of 7000 state workers is about to be sucked out the economy as well. What happened? Did they not cut taxes enough?

 

[kaz]

The trailer house manufactures will be happy as more people lose their houses and jobs the trailer parks will be filling up in Kansas

Working people are never included in their calculations, the wealthy get a tax cut, mission accomplished.

The irony that most jobs come from "the wealthy." So, what happens to "working people" when you take more of the "the wealthy" bastard's money? Do you know when I have less money, I hire fewer people? Boggles the mind, doesn't it? How the heck did that happen?

As for the phrase "working people," why am I going to be the one in the office today? What is it I'm going to be doing while the working people aren't working?

Don't try to sell trickle down to me, quit buying that bullshit years ago. The wealthy do not create jobs out of thin air out of the goodness of their heart. They capitalize on demand for goods and services no matter the tax structure.

I'm not selling "trickle down," I am selling the field of economics. The fact is more wealth in my greedy big hands means less money in your greedy little hands. Sucks, doesn't it? The bigger problem for you is that taking a big chunk more of my money doesn't really impact my life. You earning less or getting axed has a big effect on yours. The problem is I won't work unless I'm paid. And the field of economics says that as a whole, I am like all the rest of the greedy bastards you hate. But you're shooting me with a bb gun and it's ricocheting back at you as a canon

 

[kaz]

Working people are never included in their calculations, the wealthy get a tax cut, mission accomplished.

The irony that most jobs come from "the wealthy." So, what happens to "working people" when you take more of the "the wealthy" bastard's money? Do you know when I have less money, I hire fewer people? Boggles the mind, doesn't it? How the heck did that happen?

As for the phrase "working people," why am I going to be the one in the office today? What is it I'm going to be doing while the working people aren't working?

Don't try to sell trickle down to me, quit buying that bullshit years ago. The wealthy do not create jobs out of thin air out of the goodness of their heart. They capitalize on demand for goods and services no matter the tax structure.

More importantly, allowing more wealth to flow into the hands of the wealthy does not guarantee they will invest it into the local state economy....more likely in our globalized world they will find some foreign country to make money in and they'll invest their new found wealth into Asia or something. The state probably will never see the money they lose from those tax cuts for the rich.

Republicans need to stop thinking it's still the 1950's.

Yet you're wrong, who saw that coming? Anyway, you are a clown

Well that's a rather weak comeback.....no, I'm right. Your turn.

You could read my other posts too, dim wit

 

[kaz]

They aren't, you pulled it out of your ass.

Why is most deficit spending done in Blue States?

Um.... it's not.

Um...it is.

California, New York, Illinois and New England alone are over half of the $4 trillion in State debt.

Dude, you said Republicans don't know math, seems you're numerically challenged yourself

Kansas is now in a deficit situation as well, and their economy is stuck in the mud. According to conservative dogma they should be nearing full employment and getting more revenue than ever.

DC taxes and spending dwarfs Kansas spending and taxes

What does that have to do with anything? Kansas as a conservative experiment in trickle down economics is an abject failure. None of the expected benefits to cutting taxes on the "job creators" has resulted in appreciable economic growth or good paying jobs. Now the wages of 7000 state workers is about to be sucked out the economy as well. What happened? Did they not cut taxes enough?

What do Federal taxes have to do with the economy in States? You're seriously asking that? Why don't you have a clown avatar like your buds?

As for your economic, let's say "analysis." Let's start with how you know more than the field of economics about economics. I'm not gong to argue that pi is not actually 4 either

 

[occupied]

Um.... it's not.

Um...it is.

California, New York, Illinois and New England alone are over half of the $4 trillion in State debt.

Dude, you said Republicans don't know math, seems you're numerically challenged yourself

Kansas is now in a deficit situation as well, and their economy is stuck in the mud. According to conservative dogma they should be nearing full employment and getting more revenue than ever.

DC taxes and spending dwarfs Kansas spending and taxes

What does that have to do with anything? Kansas as a conservative experiment in trickle down economics is an abject failure. None of the expected benefits to cutting taxes on the "job creators" has resulted in appreciable economic growth or good paying jobs. Now the wages of 7000 state workers is about to be sucked out the economy as well. What happened? Did they not cut taxes enough?

What do Federal taxes have to do with the economy in States? You're seriously asking that? Why don't you have a clown avatar like your buds?

As for your economic, let's say "analysis." Let's start with how you know more than the field of economics about economics. I'm not gong to argue that pi is not actually 4 either

Quit with the smoke screen, Kansas is in deep financial trouble, if conservative economic dogma was correct they would not be in trouble, explain.

 

[Freewill]

Another example of where the GOP represents the poor and a smug democrat using the poor are political fodder. All because they don't like their poor, and minorities, leaving the plantation.

Where is the GOP representing the poor in Kansas?

Cutting benefits, healthcare and education funding while protecting tax cuts on the wealthy

Pay attention, the OP subject line "another welfare red state." Pretty clear the implication. And your brand of helping the poor has proved to be more a detriment then help.

 

[Nyvin]

The irony that most jobs come from "the wealthy." So, what happens to "working people" when you take more of the "the wealthy" bastard's money? Do you know when I have less money, I hire fewer people? Boggles the mind, doesn't it? How the heck did that happen?

As for the phrase "working people," why am I going to be the one in the office today? What is it I'm going to be doing while the working people aren't working?

Don't try to sell trickle down to me, quit buying that bullshit years ago. The wealthy do not create jobs out of thin air out of the goodness of their heart. They capitalize on demand for goods and services no matter the tax structure.

More importantly, allowing more wealth to flow into the hands of the wealthy does not guarantee they will invest it into the local state economy....more likely in our globalized world they will find some foreign country to make money in and they'll invest their new found wealth into Asia or something. The state probably will never see the money they lose from those tax cuts for the rich.

Republicans need to stop thinking it's still the 1950's.

Yet you're wrong, who saw that coming? Anyway, you are a clown

Well that's a rather weak comeback.....no, I'm right. Your turn.

You could read my other posts too, dim wit

You could actually say a few words to debate my point - tax cuts do not guarantee wealthy people will invest their money into the state economy.

 

[kaz]

Um...it is.

California, New York, Illinois and New England alone are over half of the $4 trillion in State debt.

Dude, you said Republicans don't know math, seems you're numerically challenged yourself

Kansas is now in a deficit situation as well, and their economy is stuck in the mud. According to conservative dogma they should be nearing full employment and getting more revenue than ever.

DC taxes and spending dwarfs Kansas spending and taxes

What does that have to do with anything? Kansas as a conservative experiment in trickle down economics is an abject failure. None of the expected benefits to cutting taxes on the "job creators" has resulted in appreciable economic growth or good paying jobs. Now the wages of 7000 state workers is about to be sucked out the economy as well. What happened? Did they not cut taxes enough?

What do Federal taxes have to do with the economy in States? You're seriously asking that? Why don't you have a clown avatar like your buds?

As for your economic, let's say "analysis." Let's start with how you know more than the field of economics about economics. I'm not gong to argue that pi is not actually 4 either

Quit with the smoke screen, Kansas is in deep financial trouble, if conservative economic dogma was correct they would not be in trouble, explain.

Quit with the smoke screen, California is in deep financial trouble, if liberal economic dogma was correct they would not be in trouble, explain.

 

[kaz]

Don't try to sell trickle down to me, quit buying that bullshit years ago. The wealthy do not create jobs out of thin air out of the goodness of their heart. They capitalize on demand for goods and services no matter the tax structure.

More importantly, allowing more wealth to flow into the hands of the wealthy does not guarantee they will invest it into the local state economy....more likely in our globalized world they will find some foreign country to make money in and they'll invest their new found wealth into Asia or something. The state probably will never see the money they lose from those tax cuts for the rich.

Republicans need to stop thinking it's still the 1950's.

Yet you're wrong, who saw that coming? Anyway, you are a clown

Well that's a rather weak comeback.....no, I'm right. Your turn.

You could read my other posts too, dim wit

You could actually say a few words to debate my point - tax cuts do not guarantee wealthy people will invest their money into the state economy.

What happens to every dollar is not relevant, it's what happens on average. The facts are that tax cuts on the rich spur hiring and increases spur cuts far more than increases and cuts across the board do. And what's more pathetic in your approach is that cuts reduce deficits and increases grow them.

Explain how when I have less money that does not in your mind affect hiring and pay in my business. You're supporting the fag Muslim's stupid OP. All you are showing is you clearly don't know math

 

[Nyvin]

More importantly, allowing more wealth to flow into the hands of the wealthy does not guarantee they will invest it into the local state economy....more likely in our globalized world they will find some foreign country to make money in and they'll invest their new found wealth into Asia or something. The state probably will never see the money they lose from those tax cuts for the rich.

Republicans need to stop thinking it's still the 1950's.

Yet you're wrong, who saw that coming? Anyway, you are a clown

Well that's a rather weak comeback.....no, I'm right. Your turn.

You could read my other posts too, dim wit

You could actually say a few words to debate my point - tax cuts do not guarantee wealthy people will invest their money into the state economy.

What happens to every dollar is not relevant, it's what happens on average. The facts are that tax cuts on the rich spur hiring and increases spur cuts far more than increases and cuts across the board do. And what's more pathetic in your approach is that cuts reduce deficits and increases grow them.

Explain how when I have less money that does not in your mind affect hiring and pay in my business. You're supporting the fag Muslim's stupid OP. All you are showing is you clearly don't know math

Your "business" is located in China (mostly at least). The money from the tax cuts mostly ends up being invested there. In this case, Kansas, sees nothing. In today's world that is extremely easy.

Increased revenue does not always lead to more hiring either. A lot of the times the market is already saturated in an area so more hiring won't produce anything, because there's no extra demand to satisfy....so it's a waste.

You seem so utterly certain of your philosophy when it's quite apparent that it really isn't working out so well in Kansas, or Wisconsin for that matter.

 

[rightwinger]

Another example of where the GOP represents the poor and a smug democrat using the poor are political fodder. All because they don't like their poor, and minorities, leaving the plantation.

Where is the GOP representing the poor in Kansas?

Cutting benefits, healthcare and education funding while protecting tax cuts on the wealthy

Pay attention, the OP subject line "another welfare red state." Pretty clear the implication. And your brand of helping the poor has proved to be more a detriment then help.

How is helping people who need it a detriment?

 

[rightwinger]

More importantly, allowing more wealth to flow into the hands of the wealthy does not guarantee they will invest it into the local state economy....more likely in our globalized world they will find some foreign country to make money in and they'll invest their new found wealth into Asia or something. The state probably will never see the money they lose from those tax cuts for the rich.

Republicans need to stop thinking it's still the 1950's.

Yet you're wrong, who saw that coming? Anyway, you are a clown

Well that's a rather weak comeback.....no, I'm right. Your turn.

You could read my other posts too, dim wit

You could actually say a few words to debate my point - tax cuts do not guarantee wealthy people will invest their money into the state economy.

What happens to every dollar is not relevant, it's what happens on average. The facts are that tax cuts on the rich spur hiring and increases spur cuts far more than increases and cuts across the board do. And what's more pathetic in your approach is that cuts reduce deficits and increases grow them.

Explain how when I have less money that does not in your mind affect hiring and pay in my business. You're supporting the fag Muslim's stupid OP. All you are showing is you clearly don't know math

Repeat the myth

Tax cuts on the rich do not spur hiring. Cut taxes on the rich and they just keep the money