income inequality, poverty, crime...shame on you America!

[danielpalos]

[p
Hoover's solution was even worse.

The rest of the world recovered from the Depression pretty damn quick. It took the US many years longer because of the stupid big government interference policies of FDR. Go read the report.

The same thing happen in 2008 when we had the recession caused by the CRA and piss poor management by the Democrat Congress that was elected in 2006. The recovery was starting within six months after that Obama asshole was elected by you dumbass Moon Bats but he fucked it up. We have a very poor recovery with increased poverty, decreased family income, tremendous more debt, more income disparity and Obama couldn't even get us 3% economic growth in any of his years as President. A disaster. What the hell were you Moon Bats thinking when you elected the asshole?

Too bad the economy did not recover quickly enough for Hoover.

 

[Weatherman2020]

[

Still living in right wing fantasy? FDR's brand of Socialism replaced Hoover's, laissez-fair capitalism, last millennium.

Social services pays around fourteen dollars an hour, it is why our minimum wage needs to compete with that, merely so socialism can use capitalism, for all of its worth.

If anybody lives in a fantasy world it is you Moon Bats thinking that the filthy ass corrupt bloated government somehow creates prosperity.

By the way, speaking of FDR and disastrous big government policies ******* everything up:

FDR's policies prolonged Depression by 7 years, UCLA economists calculate


FDR's policies prolonged Depression by 7 years, UCLA economists calculate

Two UCLA economists say they have figured out why the Great Depression dragged on for almost 15 years, and they blame a suspect previously thought to be beyond reproach: President Franklin D. Roosevelt.

After scrutinizing Roosevelt's record for four years, Harold L. Cole and Lee E. Ohanian conclude in a new study that New Deal policies signed into law 71 years ago thwarted economic recovery for seven long years.

"Why the Great Depression lasted so long has always been a great mystery, and because we never really knew the reason, we have always worried whether we would have another 10- to 15-year economic slump," said Ohanian, vice chair of UCLA's Department of Economics. "We found that a relapse isn't likely unless lawmakers gum up a recovery with ill-conceived stimulus policies."

And we got a repeat in 08 that validates that study

Capitalism died 1929; socialism has been bailing it out, ever since.

So Apple and Microsoft didn't get started by some guys having an idea?
Typical delusional bubble world of the commies.

 

[danielpalos]

[

Still living in right wing fantasy? FDR's brand of Socialism replaced Hoover's, laissez-fair capitalism, last millennium.

Social services pays around fourteen dollars an hour, it is why our minimum wage needs to compete with that, merely so socialism can use capitalism, for all of its worth.

If anybody lives in a fantasy world it is you Moon Bats thinking that the filthy ass corrupt bloated government somehow creates prosperity.

By the way, speaking of FDR and disastrous big government policies ******* everything up:

FDR's policies prolonged Depression by 7 years, UCLA economists calculate


FDR's policies prolonged Depression by 7 years, UCLA economists calculate

Two UCLA economists say they have figured out why the Great Depression dragged on for almost 15 years, and they blame a suspect previously thought to be beyond reproach: President Franklin D. Roosevelt.

After scrutinizing Roosevelt's record for four years, Harold L. Cole and Lee E. Ohanian conclude in a new study that New Deal policies signed into law 71 years ago thwarted economic recovery for seven long years.

"Why the Great Depression lasted so long has always been a great mystery, and because we never really knew the reason, we have always worried whether we would have another 10- to 15-year economic slump," said Ohanian, vice chair of UCLA's Department of Economics. "We found that a relapse isn't likely unless lawmakers gum up a recovery with ill-conceived stimulus policies."

And we got a repeat in 08 that validates that study

Capitalism died 1929; socialism has been bailing it out, ever since.

So Apple and Microsoft didn't get started by some guys having an idea?
Typical delusional bubble world of the commies.

We have a command economy with a supply side economic paradigm; only the right wing, never gets it.

 

[Flash]

[

We have a command economy with a supply side economic paradigm; only the right wing, never gets it.

"Supply side economics".

Isn't that where you get to spend the money that you earn rather than having some dumbass corrupt politician, elected by special interest groups, to spend it for you?

The Left never undestands what is wrong with the government weenies spending the money that you earn.

 

[Weatherman2020]

[

Still living in right wing fantasy? FDR's brand of Socialism replaced Hoover's, laissez-fair capitalism, last millennium.

Social services pays around fourteen dollars an hour, it is why our minimum wage needs to compete with that, merely so socialism can use capitalism, for all of its worth.

If anybody lives in a fantasy world it is you Moon Bats thinking that the filthy ass corrupt bloated government somehow creates prosperity.

By the way, speaking of FDR and disastrous big government policies ******* everything up:

FDR's policies prolonged Depression by 7 years, UCLA economists calculate


FDR's policies prolonged Depression by 7 years, UCLA economists calculate

Two UCLA economists say they have figured out why the Great Depression dragged on for almost 15 years, and they blame a suspect previously thought to be beyond reproach: President Franklin D. Roosevelt.

After scrutinizing Roosevelt's record for four years, Harold L. Cole and Lee E. Ohanian conclude in a new study that New Deal policies signed into law 71 years ago thwarted economic recovery for seven long years.

"Why the Great Depression lasted so long has always been a great mystery, and because we never really knew the reason, we have always worried whether we would have another 10- to 15-year economic slump," said Ohanian, vice chair of UCLA's Department of Economics. "We found that a relapse isn't likely unless lawmakers gum up a recovery with ill-conceived stimulus policies."

And we got a repeat in 08 that validates that study

Capitalism died 1929; socialism has been bailing it out, ever since.

So Apple and Microsoft didn't get started by some guys having an idea?
Typical delusional bubble world of the commies.

We have a command economy with a supply side economic paradigm; only the right wing, never gets it.

"Command economy, economic system in which the means of production are publicly owned and economic activity is controlled by a central authority that assigns quantitative production goals and allots raw materials to productive enterprises."

So who is the central authority assigning how many black iphones 7's with 64 gigs and how many rolls of Charmin 2 ply toilet paper are to be built?

You have to go to a modern university to be as brainwashed as you are.

 

[BluesLegend]

You assume that wealth would even exist without the wealthy generating it. Without the wealthy the world would just be poorer.

 

[Weatherman2020]

[

We have a command economy with a supply side economic paradigm; only the right wing, never gets it.

"Supply side economics".

Isn't that where you get to spend the money that you earn rather than having some dumbass corrupt politician, elected by special interest groups, to spend it for you?

The Left never undestands what is wrong with the government weenies spending the money that you earn.

With every failure of socialist governments the lefts only answer every time is they just didn't do it right.

 

[kaz]

Let's remove the harmful habits endemic to low income, and see how your non-referenced stat works out. Eliminate those who die because of bad choices.

how would you do that? social policy or capital policy.

You quoted a figure --- poor men die 24 years younger --- as if being poor was the primary causative factor. Yet, we know that alcoholism, drug use, etc., is endemic to the lower income strata.

Remove those from your computation and get back to us with REAL figures about the impact of financial status on life expectancy.

Until then, you're just trying to mislead people.

True. And anyway, that it's society, government or an employer's responsibility to go to a poor person, overpay them and coax them into trying harder and caring more is stupid. Leftists need to tell the poor to take advantage of the limitless opportunity in this country. But they don't want the poor to stop being poor, they'll stop voting for Democrats. Leftists are amoral.

Poverty is other than in unusual instances a choice

As long as one person is paid more than everybody else, poverty is, by definition, a requirement. SOMEBODY has to make less than everybody else.

poverty can be solved; only poor is relative. the right wing, never gets it.

Stop posting your inane drivel and write real posts

 

[Flash]

the privileged in America are doing better than at any time since economic records began. the poor are doing worse than at any time records began. TRUMP WILL REVERSE!

Obama increased income disparity. Hopefully Trump can reverse that by bringing up the Middle Class, something Obama neglected in favor of his billionaire globalists buddies and welfare queens.

 

[Spare_change]

Let's remove the harmful habits endemic to low income, and see how your non-referenced stat works out. Eliminate those who die because of bad choices.

how would you do that? social policy or capital policy.

You quoted a figure --- poor men die 24 years younger --- as if being poor was the primary causative factor. Yet, we know that alcoholism, drug use, etc., is endemic to the lower income strata.

Remove those from your computation and get back to us with REAL figures about the impact of financial status on life expectancy.

Until then, you're just trying to mislead people.

True. And anyway, that it's society, government or an employer's responsibility to go to a poor person, overpay them and coax them into trying harder and caring more is stupid. Leftists need to tell the poor to take advantage of the limitless opportunity in this country. But they don't want the poor to stop being poor, they'll stop voting for Democrats. Leftists are amoral.

Poverty is other than in unusual instances a choice

As long as one person is paid more than everybody else, poverty is, by definition, a requirement. SOMEBODY has to make less than everybody else.

poverty can be solved; only poor is relative. the right wing, never gets it.

The only way to solve poverty is to make sure everybody is in it.

 

[danielpalos]

[

We have a command economy with a supply side economic paradigm; only the right wing, never gets it.

"Supply side economics".

Isn't that where you get to spend the money that you earn rather than having some dumbass corrupt politician, elected by special interest groups, to spend it for you?

The Left never undestands what is wrong with the government weenies spending the money that you earn.

no, it is one step down from crony capitalism where government contracts determine profit margin.

 

[danielpalos]

If anybody lives in a fantasy world it is you Moon Bats thinking that the filthy ass corrupt bloated government somehow creates prosperity.

By the way, speaking of FDR and disastrous big government policies ******* everything up:

FDR's policies prolonged Depression by 7 years, UCLA economists calculate


FDR's policies prolonged Depression by 7 years, UCLA economists calculate

Two UCLA economists say they have figured out why the Great Depression dragged on for almost 15 years, and they blame a suspect previously thought to be beyond reproach: President Franklin D. Roosevelt.

After scrutinizing Roosevelt's record for four years, Harold L. Cole and Lee E. Ohanian conclude in a new study that New Deal policies signed into law 71 years ago thwarted economic recovery for seven long years.

"Why the Great Depression lasted so long has always been a great mystery, and because we never really knew the reason, we have always worried whether we would have another 10- to 15-year economic slump," said Ohanian, vice chair of UCLA's Department of Economics. "We found that a relapse isn't likely unless lawmakers gum up a recovery with ill-conceived stimulus policies."

And we got a repeat in 08 that validates that study

Capitalism died 1929; socialism has been bailing it out, ever since.

So Apple and Microsoft didn't get started by some guys having an idea?
Typical delusional bubble world of the commies.

We have a command economy with a supply side economic paradigm; only the right wing, never gets it.

"Command economy, economic system in which the means of production are publicly owned and economic activity is controlled by a central authority that assigns quantitative production goals and allots raw materials to productive enterprises."

So who is the central authority assigning how many black iphones 7's with 64 gigs and how many rolls of Charmin 2 ply toilet paper are to be built?

You have to go to a modern university to be as brainwashed as you are.

Micromanaging our tax codes via the law, is command economics.

 

[danielpalos]

You assume that wealth would even exist without the wealthy generating it. Without the wealthy the world would just be poorer.

what wealth do the wealthy generate? Concentration of wealth, is what you probably mean, but were simply too clueless and too Causeless to understand it. Probably due to being on the right.

 

[danielpalos]

[

We have a command economy with a supply side economic paradigm; only the right wing, never gets it.

"Supply side economics".

Isn't that where you get to spend the money that you earn rather than having some dumbass corrupt politician, elected by special interest groups, to spend it for you?

The Left never undestands what is wrong with the government weenies spending the money that you earn.

With every failure of socialist governments the lefts only answer every time is they just didn't do it right.

Yes, it is merely lousy management, with command economics.

 

[danielpalos]

how would you do that? social policy or capital policy.

You quoted a figure --- poor men die 24 years younger --- as if being poor was the primary causative factor. Yet, we know that alcoholism, drug use, etc., is endemic to the lower income strata.

Remove those from your computation and get back to us with REAL figures about the impact of financial status on life expectancy.

Until then, you're just trying to mislead people.

True. And anyway, that it's society, government or an employer's responsibility to go to a poor person, overpay them and coax them into trying harder and caring more is stupid. Leftists need to tell the poor to take advantage of the limitless opportunity in this country. But they don't want the poor to stop being poor, they'll stop voting for Democrats. Leftists are amoral.

Poverty is other than in unusual instances a choice

As long as one person is paid more than everybody else, poverty is, by definition, a requirement. SOMEBODY has to make less than everybody else.

poverty can be solved; only poor is relative. the right wing, never gets it.

The only way to solve poverty is to make sure everybody is in it.

That is Only the right's way, not the left's way.

 

[jc456]

Society that wishes to be civilized should not tolerate a high inequality of income between its citizens.

People who can't afford children shouldn't have children. Not sure why that's societies problem!

 

[jc456]

[

We have a command economy with a supply side economic paradigm; only the right wing, never gets it.

"Supply side economics".

Isn't that where you get to spend the money that you earn rather than having some dumbass corrupt politician, elected by special interest groups, to spend it for you?

The Left never undestands what is wrong with the government weenies spending the money that you earn.

With every failure of socialist governments the lefts only answer every time is they just didn't do it right.

Yes, it is merely lousy management, with command economics.

It's called poor choices by humans who are only in it for themselves. Not concerned with the consequences

 

[jc456]

You quoted a figure --- poor men die 24 years younger --- as if being poor was the primary causative factor. Yet, we know that alcoholism, drug use, etc., is endemic to the lower income strata.

Remove those from your computation and get back to us with REAL figures about the impact of financial status on life expectancy.

Until then, you're just trying to mislead people.

True. And anyway, that it's society, government or an employer's responsibility to go to a poor person, overpay them and coax them into trying harder and caring more is stupid. Leftists need to tell the poor to take advantage of the limitless opportunity in this country. But they don't want the poor to stop being poor, they'll stop voting for Democrats. Leftists are amoral.

Poverty is other than in unusual instances a choice

As long as one person is paid more than everybody else, poverty is, by definition, a requirement. SOMEBODY has to make less than everybody else.

poverty can be solved; only poor is relative. the right wing, never gets it.

The only way to solve poverty is to make sure everybody is in it.

That is Only the right's way, not the left's way.

The left is lost

 

[Spare_change]

You quoted a figure --- poor men die 24 years younger --- as if being poor was the primary causative factor. Yet, we know that alcoholism, drug use, etc., is endemic to the lower income strata.

Remove those from your computation and get back to us with REAL figures about the impact of financial status on life expectancy.

Until then, you're just trying to mislead people.

True. And anyway, that it's society, government or an employer's responsibility to go to a poor person, overpay them and coax them into trying harder and caring more is stupid. Leftists need to tell the poor to take advantage of the limitless opportunity in this country. But they don't want the poor to stop being poor, they'll stop voting for Democrats. Leftists are amoral.

Poverty is other than in unusual instances a choice

As long as one person is paid more than everybody else, poverty is, by definition, a requirement. SOMEBODY has to make less than everybody else.

poverty can be solved; only poor is relative. the right wing, never gets it.

The only way to solve poverty is to make sure everybody is in it.

That is Only the right's way, not the left's way.

You quoted a figure --- poor men die 24 years younger --- as if being poor was the primary causative factor. Yet, we know that alcoholism, drug use, etc., is endemic to the lower income strata.

Remove those from your computation and get back to us with REAL figures about the impact of financial status on life expectancy.

Until then, you're just trying to mislead people.

True. And anyway, that it's society, government or an employer's responsibility to go to a poor person, overpay them and coax them into trying harder and caring more is stupid. Leftists need to tell the poor to take advantage of the limitless opportunity in this country. But they don't want the poor to stop being poor, they'll stop voting for Democrats. Leftists are amoral.

Poverty is other than in unusual instances a choice

As long as one person is paid more than everybody else, poverty is, by definition, a requirement. SOMEBODY has to make less than everybody else.

poverty can be solved; only poor is relative. the right wing, never gets it.

The only way to solve poverty is to make sure everybody is in it.

That is Only the right's way, not the left's way.

The left doesn't have a way, remember? We've watched you flounder for 8 years trying to implement a flawed pathology --- and we've summarily rejected your way.

Learn it - live it.

 

[gallantwarrior]

Society that wishes to be civilized should not tolerate a high inequality of income between its citizens.

Societies that think it's their job to decide how much someone can earn, save and invest are not civilized

Involuntary servitude of one, or more, persons and the taking of the fruits of the labors for the purpose of enriching others who did not earn those fruits. How many here have voluntarily surrendered what they have worked for and earned so that those unwilling to do the same may live a life of equal comfort? Let's see those hands...