Graphs for you to ignore

I think the GOP running up $12 trillion in debt, including interest, since St Ronnie is the wrong way to reduce welfare.

See that.....all those hours spent at the feet of Rush is pushing you in the right direction!

"...to reduce welfare."

There you go!

Uh oh! Ms. Truthie just ripped up the Christmas card she was going to send you!
I'm glad you agree that the Right direction is away from the Reagan/CON$ervative/GOP solutions!

There you go!

Uh oh! Your MessiahRushie just ripped up the Christmas card he was going to send you!

Ed you are simply full of shit if you think the debt is one sided. And you do..............
 
Gini coefficient - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


The Gini coefficient is a measure of statistical dispersion developed by the Italian statistician and sociologist Corrado Gini and published in his 1912 paper "Variability and Mutability" (Italian: Variabilità e mutabilità).[1][2]

The Gini coefficient is a measure of the inequality of a distribution, a value of 0 expressing total equality and a value of 1 maximal inequality. It has found application in the study of inequalities in disciplines as diverse as sociology, economics, health science, ecology, chemistry, engineering and agriculture.[3]
 
I think the GOP running up $12 trillion in debt, including interest, since St Ronnie is the wrong way to reduce welfare.

See that.....all those hours spent at the feet of Rush is pushing you in the right direction!

"...to reduce welfare."

There you go!

Uh oh! Ms. Truthie just ripped up the Christmas card she was going to send you!
I'm glad you agree that the Right direction is away from the Reagan/CON$ervative/GOP solutions!

There you go!

Uh oh! Your MessiahRushie just ripped up the Christmas card he was going to send you!

Well, other than a 'conservative solution,' what is the best way to reduce the welfare state?
See what happens when you try to use concepts you don't understand?

BTW...
Imitation is the sincerest of flattery.
Charles Caleb Colton, Lacon, volume I, no. 183
(1780 - 1832)
 
How anyone in this world can run arround crying crockadile tears for the wealthy like they are some battered minority is just beyond the pale.


How can anyone be so foolish?



I don't see and never have seen why the amount of cash that a rich guy has affects the amount of cash that i have. What do you see as the link?

Take a look at the lot of the "aveage man" before the end of pardise in the Industrial Revolution. Was there a thriving Middle Class? How many folks attended Universities? How many Universities were there?

How many people were there? There were about a tenth of the crowd we currently navigate through. Famines routinely thinned the herd. Who owned everything? How much ownership was there among the folks, who were just about all of the folks, called slaves, serfs, indentured servants, or just plain servants?

You seem to recall a time that never existed.

People abandoned everything: Home, family, country and religion, to move to the Americas and literally dig a hole in the sod of the Great plains of America, cover it with other sod, burn buffalo dung to avoid freezing to death and live like that for years.

Seriously! This is as good as it gets, people. If we can't make it right here, right now in the most accomodating times for the masses that has ever occurred on this planet, we, as individuals, are simply doing it wrong.

It's time to look in the mirror if you're not making it. You will find the cause within the person you see therein.

Pareto index - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


In economics the Pareto index, named after the Italian economist and sociologist Vilfredo Pareto, is a measure of the breadth of income or wealth distribution. It is one of the parameters specifying a Pareto distribution and embodies the Pareto principle. As applied to income, the Pareto principle is sometimes stated in popular expositions by saying 20% of the population has 80% of the income. In fact, Pareto's data on British income taxes in his Cours d'économie politique indicates that about 30% of the population had about 70% of the income.

Of course, the above has no application to the US economy....where, as productivity and skills increase, workers earn more. Productivity of workers in competitive markets is what determines the earnings of most workers; and it is not an accident that labor earns about 70% of the total output of the American economy, and capital earns about 30%.

Covered in depth in Ferrara's book, "America's Ticking Bankruptcy Bomb," chapter nine.
 
The best way to reduce welfare is to not allow wealth to concentrate into too few hands
 
See that.....all those hours spent at the feet of Rush is pushing you in the right direction!

"...to reduce welfare."

There you go!

Uh oh! Ms. Truthie just ripped up the Christmas card she was going to send you!
I'm glad you agree that the Right direction is away from the Reagan/CON$ervative/GOP solutions!

There you go!

Uh oh! Your MessiahRushie just ripped up the Christmas card he was going to send you!

Well, other than a 'conservative solution,' what is the best way to reduce the welfare state?
See what happens when you try to use concepts you don't understand?

BTW...
Imitation is the sincerest of flattery.
Charles Caleb Colton, Lacon, volume I, no. 183
(1780 - 1832)
Job training.
 
Part they played?


They orchastrated it for poltical gain.

It was just like Boehner said about his own fellow Rs in congress, they wanted chaos so they could get the policy that they wanted.

This whole mess is part of the Rove permenant majority.


Bankrupt the country so they can tell people the country has to cut all government to shreds and then the peoples power is greatly reduced so it can be overwhelmed by the moneied insterests.

it was their plan
I thought Obama and Democrat super majorities from 2008 to 2010 changed everything, reversed the course of the economy and saved everyone?

Did I miss something? :confused:
 
The moral is that we can either is to study wealth, emulate rich people, and live a happy and prosperous life, or be a bitter, lazy, vicious loser who wants to pull everyone down to our level of misery
 
Part they played?


They orchastrated it for poltical gain.

It was just like Boehner said about his own fellow Rs in congress, they wanted chaos so they could get the policy that they wanted.

This whole mess is part of the Rove permenant majority.


Bankrupt the country so they can tell people the country has to cut all government to shreds and then the peoples power is greatly reduced so it can be overwhelmed by the moneied insterests.

it was their plan
I thought Obama and Democrat super majorities from 2008 to 2010 changed everything, reversed the course of the economy and saved everyone?

Did I miss something? :confused:
Yet another mindless DittoTard parroting his MessiahRushie! :cuckoo:

You missed everything!
 
Part they played?


They orchastrated it for poltical gain.

It was just like Boehner said about his own fellow Rs in congress, they wanted chaos so they could get the policy that they wanted.

This whole mess is part of the Rove permenant majority.


Bankrupt the country so they can tell people the country has to cut all government to shreds and then the peoples power is greatly reduced so it can be overwhelmed by the moneied insterests.

it was their plan
I thought Obama and Democrat super majorities from 2008 to 2010 changed everything, reversed the course of the economy and saved everyone?

Did I miss something? :confused:
Yet another mindless DittoTard parroting his MessiahRushie! :cuckoo:

You missed everything!

Damn you mentioned Rush again, just ask him for a date you freak........................
 
Gini coefficient - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


The Gini coefficient is a measure of statistical dispersion developed by the Italian statistician and sociologist Corrado Gini and published in his 1912 paper "Variability and Mutability" (Italian: Variabilità e mutabilità).[1][2]

The Gini coefficient is a measure of the inequality of a distribution, a value of 0 expressing total equality and a value of 1 maximal inequality. It has found application in the study of inequalities in disciplines as diverse as sociology, economics, health science, ecology, chemistry, engineering and agriculture.[3]

"inequality of a distribution,...."


I understand your dearth of knowledge of economics and government....

...but to set you on the right path, know this:

A nation can have either equality of distribution, or it can have prosperity.

But not both.
 
How anyone can think you owe more cause you have more is foolish.

It's easy to see from the graphs that the 14 trillion dollar deficit we have basically amounted to a mass transfer of wealth to the wealthy, on the government's credit card.

So, yes, if you have more, you owe more.
 
The best way to reduce welfare is to not allow wealth to concentrate into too few hands

It's known as the free market!

Glad you've come to your senses.

Better late than never.
A "free market" exists only in the text books within the ivy covered walls of the CON$ervative universities. :lol:
In the real world there is only MONOPOLY.

I understand that it doesn't exist in your folks basement....but change out of those
pajamas, shave, and get out in the real world.

You will find a relationship between one's efforts and remuneration.
That's called the free market.
 
The free market is crucial to freedom.

Unfettered markets are the death of freedom.
 

Forum List

Back
Top