Only In America:

[Soggy in NOLA]

And the right fights for the 1% to have more...They must want a royalty to form! We taxed our riches a lot more then the 30s, 40s, 50s and 60s and had a far bigger middle class. We had the best!

We did things as a nation...

What the right wants is for a few people to have it all.

Go back to sleep... you babble on like an incoherent child.

 

[Rustic]

Read Carefully:

Of the 1%, by the 1%, for the 1%

What's wrong with that??

By the way, that Robin Hood sh!t has and will never work.

Hashtag envy is for the petty

I'll tell you what won't work.....a bunch of goddamned self righteous Republicans. They expect their lawns to be mowed, their children to be cared for, well educated and spoiled rotten while those who do the work starve and see their kids go off to fight Republican wars. Get this through your thick skulls.....if you really want things to be more fair raise the minimum wage to $15.00 an hour with time and a half for anything over forty hours a week. No working man or woman in the United States of America should be expected to work 40-50 hours a week and live below the poverty line. That's when Republicans are happiest.....when they are surrounded by poor people taking care of them.

With progressives are all about take, take, take.
Envy looks bad on you....

Now go and hide

 

[Dot Com]

Read Carefully:

Of the 1%, by the 1%, for the 1%

that's Randianism at work. Swell aint it?

 

[The Rabbi]

If you draw a trend line for the top 1 percent, we see during economic crashes their income returns to that line. This suggest the top 1 percent's income is in another ginormous bubble.

Horse shit!! In the 1940's, 1950's a corporate executive earned about 12-15 times what a plumber or electrician earned. By the 1970's that had grown to 100 times as much. In 2012 a typical CEO made over 500 times what the average worker earned.

As far as the chart. Look closely at the top 1% line at the end of Clinton's two terms just before George W. Bush cut taxes for the wealthy not once but twice, 2001 and 2003. If he had been paying attention to the CIA and FBI 9/11 might have been avoided but Oh No......more money for his rich Buds was much more important.

I notice several of the Republican candidates are already harping on a flat tax.....Grover Norquist will come on himself if they can get that. They can fire all their tax accountants if they can get it set up that way. The rich people used to pay their way in America but they haven't in a long time....specifically, since Reagan's first years....or as I like to call it......the end of my 30 years as a Republican. I'm 80 years old and I used to hang yard sign in local elections and make phone calls for any Republican. I voted for Eisenhower, Goldwater, Nixon three times and even the spoiler one time. Following Reagan I didn't even show up at the polls for twenty years. Now....I've voted Democrat in a national election three times but of one thing I'm sure.....I'll not vote Republican again if I live to 100.

BWAHAHA!!! Dick Cheney!!! Halliburton!!! Iraq! Bush lied, people died! Florida hanging chads! Republicans rich!
Geezus Campbell you are the dimmest bulb on here. It is not shocking that in an economy that doesnt resemble the 1950s relationships in income wont resemble the 1950s either. Successful people are successful. Then there are people like you. In a global economy with many more opportunities to make money the most talented people will seize those opportunities and make more money. And note all these things happened with Republicans presidents, Democratic presidents, Republican Congresses and Democratic Congresses.

Horse shit!! It's the massive tax cuts for the rich by Reagan and the Bushes which skewed the chart. I've been around a long time and during the Kennedy/Johnson years the rich paid at a 65%-70% rate. That's how the nation was able to send men to the moon and return them safely to the earth. The goddam Republicans won't even fix our roads and dams. Middle eastern wars is the only thing they get thrilled about.....I think they're living in some kind of Dirty Harry dream. They believe their gun is longer than the other guns...or as Sigmund Freud might put it.....preoccupied with penis size.

Bill Clinton raised taxes on the rich. So did Obama. So why do we have the results we do?
You are a moron.

Whatever happened it worked:

Can't beat education:

Another idiot who cant read a graph.
So the tax increases under Clinton "worked" while the tax reductions under Reagan are responsible for our present problems.
Campbell, you have outdone yourself in stupid today. Have on on me.

 

[The Rabbi]

Read Carefully:

Of the 1%, by the 1%, for the 1%

that's Randianism at work. Swell aint it?

Proving that liberal worldviews are shaped by fiction and comics.

 

[g5000]

Read Carefully:

Of the 1%, by the 1%, for the 1%

If you draw a trend line for the top 1 percent, we see during economic crashes their income returns to that line. This suggest the top 1 percent's income is in another ginormous bubble.

As far as the chart. Look closely at the top 1% line at the end of Clinton's two terms

Yes, look at the chart. What happened at the end of Clinton's second term?

Another bubble. The infamous "tech bubble". And then the chart shows you what happened after the bubble popped. The 1 percenters' income reverted back to the trend line.

The one percent graph has wider variations because much of their income is dependent on stock market gyrations. However, they do follow a trend line, and not even their income kept up with inflation.

Got that? Not one single income group's income has kept up with inflation!

None.

Stop being a piss drinking class warrior and look at the bigger picture.

We have a serious debt problem that is choking the entire economy FROM TOP TO BOTTOM.

 

[Campbell]

Read Carefully:

Of the 1%, by the 1%, for the 1%

Yes, we suck. You are to good for us, let's be honest. You probably want to be in Canada or Europe. I don't blame you, bye

Don't sweat it ol' boy.....I've been around for 80 years and I'm for damn sure not going anywhere now. I will say this....you sound exactly like a Republican, "My Way Or The HiWay"

 

[kaz]

Read Carefully:

Of the 1%, by the 1%, for the 1%

Yes, we suck. You are to good for us, let's be honest. You probably want to be in Canada or Europe. I don't blame you, bye

Don't sweat it ol' boy.....I've been around for 80 years and I'm for damn sure not going anywhere now. I will say this....you sound exactly like a Republican, "My Way Or The HiWay"

Do I? 80 years and you're still clueless. You are going to leave the world as you came in

 

[Campbell]

Read Carefully:

Of the 1%, by the 1%, for the 1%

If you draw a trend line for the top 1 percent, we see during economic crashes their income returns to that line. This suggest the top 1 percent's income is in another ginormous bubble.

As far as the chart. Look closely at the top 1% line at the end of Clinton's two terms

Yes, look at the chart. What happened at the end of Clinton's second term?

Another bubble. The infamous "tech bubble". And then the chart shows you what happened after the bubble popped. The 1 percenters' income reverted back to the trend line.

The one percent graph has wider variations because much of their income is dependent on stock market gyrations. However, they do follow a trend line, and not even their income kept up with inflation.

Got that? Not one single income group's income has kept up with inflation!

None.

Stop being a piss drinking class warrior and look at the bigger picture.

We have a serious debt problem that is choking the entire economy FROM TOP TO BOTTOM.

Are you really that stupid? That's when George W. Bush cut taxes, not once but two times, 2001 and 2003. Clinton left a balanced budget with surpluses reaching far enough into the future to completely settle the national debt. The the goddam Republican did one of their tax cuts for the rich deals...

..........................Total U S Debt...........................

09/30/2014 $17,824,071,380,733.82
09/30/2013 $16,738,183,526,697.32
09/30/2012 $16,066,241,407,385.89
09/30/2011 $14,790,340,328,557.15
09/30/2010 $13,561,623,030,891.79
09/30/2009 $11,909,829,003,511.75(80% Of All Debt Across 232 Years Borrowed By Reagan And Bushes)
09/30/2008 $10,024,724,896,912.49(Times Square Debt Clock Modified To Accommodate Tens of Trillions)
09/30/2007 $9,007,653,372,262.48
09/30/2006 $8,506,973,899,215.23
09/30/2005 $7,932,709,661,723.50
09/30/2004 $7,379,052,696,330.32
09/30/2003 $6,783,231,062,743.62(Second Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation)
09/30/2002 $6,228,235,965,597.16
09/30/2001 $5,807,463,412,200.06(First Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation)
09/30/2000 $5,674,178,209,886.86(Administration And Congress Arguing About How To Use Surplus)
09/30/1999 $5,656,270,901,615.43(First Surplus Generated...On Track To Pay Off Debt By 2012)
09/30/1998 $5,526,193,008,897.62
09/30/1997 $5,413,146,011,397.34
09/30/1996 $5,224,810,939,135.73
09/29/1995 $4,973,982,900,709.39
09/30/1994 $4,692,749,910,013.32
09/30/1993 $4,411,488,883,139.38 ( Debt Quadrupled By Reagan/Bush41)
09/30/1992 $4,064,620,655,521.66
09/30/1991 $3,665,303,351,697.03
09/28/1990 $3,233,313,451,777.25
09/29/1989 $2,857,430,960,187.32
09/30/1988 $2,602,337,712,041.16
09/30/1987 $2,350,276,890,953.00
09/30/1986 $2,125,302,616,658.42
09/30/1985 $1,823,103,000,000.00
09/30/1984 $1,572,266,000,000.00
09/30/1983 $1,377,210,000,000.00
09/30/1982 $1,142,034,000,000.00(Total Debt Passes $1 Trillion)(Reagan Slashed Tax Rates To Pre Depression Levels)
09/30/1981 $997,855,000,000.00

 

[Campbell]

Horse shit!! In the 1940's, 1950's a corporate executive earned about 12-15 times what a plumber or electrician earned. By the 1970's that had grown to 100 times as much. In 2012 a typical CEO made over 500 times what the average worker earned.

As far as the chart. Look closely at the top 1% line at the end of Clinton's two terms just before George W. Bush cut taxes for the wealthy not once but twice, 2001 and 2003. If he had been paying attention to the CIA and FBI 9/11 might have been avoided but Oh No......more money for his rich Buds was much more important.

I notice several of the Republican candidates are already harping on a flat tax.....Grover Norquist will come on himself if they can get that. They can fire all their tax accountants if they can get it set up that way. The rich people used to pay their way in America but they haven't in a long time....specifically, since Reagan's first years....or as I like to call it......the end of my 30 years as a Republican. I'm 80 years old and I used to hang yard sign in local elections and make phone calls for any Republican. I voted for Eisenhower, Goldwater, Nixon three times and even the spoiler one time. Following Reagan I didn't even show up at the polls for twenty years. Now....I've voted Democrat in a national election three times but of one thing I'm sure.....I'll not vote Republican again if I live to 100.

BWAHAHA!!! Dick Cheney!!! Halliburton!!! Iraq! Bush lied, people died! Florida hanging chads! Republicans rich!
Geezus Campbell you are the dimmest bulb on here. It is not shocking that in an economy that doesnt resemble the 1950s relationships in income wont resemble the 1950s either. Successful people are successful. Then there are people like you. In a global economy with many more opportunities to make money the most talented people will seize those opportunities and make more money. And note all these things happened with Republicans presidents, Democratic presidents, Republican Congresses and Democratic Congresses.

Horse shit!! It's the massive tax cuts for the rich by Reagan and the Bushes which skewed the chart. I've been around a long time and during the Kennedy/Johnson years the rich paid at a 65%-70% rate. That's how the nation was able to send men to the moon and return them safely to the earth. The goddam Republicans won't even fix our roads and dams. Middle eastern wars is the only thing they get thrilled about.....I think they're living in some kind of Dirty Harry dream. They believe their gun is longer than the other guns...or as Sigmund Freud might put it.....preoccupied with penis size.

Bill Clinton raised taxes on the rich. So did Obama. So why do we have the results we do?
You are a moron.

Whatever happened it worked:

Can't beat education:

Another idiot who cant read a graph.
So the tax increases under Clinton "worked" while the tax reductions under Reagan are responsible for our present problems.
Campbell, you have outdone yourself in stupid today. Have on on me.

Look Idiot.....when taxes are cut that should be followed by cuts in spending. No goddam Republican cuts their spending....just their taxes:

 

[007]

Read Carefully:

Of the 1%, by the 1%, for the 1%

If you draw a trend line for the top 1 percent, we see during economic crashes their income returns to that line. This suggest the top 1 percent's income is in another ginormous bubble.

What else do you think Quantitative Easing was all about?

That's your boi king Bath House Barry's little gem right there.

One could almost get the impression that he in on making the rich richer and doesn't give a flying **** about the middle class... ahem.

 

[easyt65]

Campbell, Liberals have proven they really don't give a damn about spending or the Deficit Ceiling. Obama added over $6 Trillion in debt in only 4 years and allowed the 1st ever US Credit Rating down-grade to happen because he refused to heed the warnings and embrace more spending cuts to shoe he was serious about reducing the debt, which he WASN'T! The Liberal answer to record-setting criminally fiscal spending was/is to simply raise the debt ceiling.

 

[Campbell]

Read Carefully:

Of the 1%, by the 1%, for the 1%

If you draw a trend line for the top 1 percent, we see during economic crashes their income returns to that line. This suggest the top 1 percent's income is in another ginormous bubble.

What else do you think Quantitative Easing was all about?

That's your boi king Bath House Barry's little gem right there.

One could almost get the impression that he in on making the rich richer and doesn't give a flying **** about the middle class... ahem.

You don't have to tell us how you feel about the president....we already know:



HOW'S THAT WORKING FOR YOU?

 

[FA_Q2]

BWAHAHA!!! Dick Cheney!!! Halliburton!!! Iraq! Bush lied, people died! Florida hanging chads! Republicans rich!
Geezus Campbell you are the dimmest bulb on here. It is not shocking that in an economy that doesnt resemble the 1950s relationships in income wont resemble the 1950s either. Successful people are successful. Then there are people like you. In a global economy with many more opportunities to make money the most talented people will seize those opportunities and make more money. And note all these things happened with Republicans presidents, Democratic presidents, Republican Congresses and Democratic Congresses.

Horse shit!! It's the massive tax cuts for the rich by Reagan and the Bushes which skewed the chart. I've been around a long time and during the Kennedy/Johnson years the rich paid at a 65%-70% rate. That's how the nation was able to send men to the moon and return them safely to the earth. The goddam Republicans won't even fix our roads and dams. Middle eastern wars is the only thing they get thrilled about.....I think they're living in some kind of Dirty Harry dream. They believe their gun is longer than the other guns...or as Sigmund Freud might put it.....preoccupied with penis size.

Bill Clinton raised taxes on the rich. So did Obama. So why do we have the results we do?
You are a moron.

Whatever happened it worked:

Can't beat education:

Another idiot who cant read a graph.
So the tax increases under Clinton "worked" while the tax reductions under Reagan are responsible for our present problems.
Campbell, you have outdone yourself in stupid today. Have on on me.

Look Idiot.....when taxes are cut that should be followed by cuts in spending. No goddam Republican cuts their spending....just their taxes:

Annualized growth spending 'slowest' because Bush passed a one time trillion dollar stimulus that Obama is using as a baseline - pure idiocy.

Obama is a big spender just like the rest of them - one of the core problems we have with out of control government - no one maintains governmental spending. They all are in a rush to increase it as much as they can.

 

[Campbell]

Horse shit!! It's the massive tax cuts for the rich by Reagan and the Bushes which skewed the chart. I've been around a long time and during the Kennedy/Johnson years the rich paid at a 65%-70% rate. That's how the nation was able to send men to the moon and return them safely to the earth. The goddam Republicans won't even fix our roads and dams. Middle eastern wars is the only thing they get thrilled about.....I think they're living in some kind of Dirty Harry dream. They believe their gun is longer than the other guns...or as Sigmund Freud might put it.....preoccupied with penis size.

Bill Clinton raised taxes on the rich. So did Obama. So why do we have the results we do?
You are a moron.

Whatever happened it worked:

Can't beat education:

Another idiot who cant read a graph.
So the tax increases under Clinton "worked" while the tax reductions under Reagan are responsible for our present problems.
Campbell, you have outdone yourself in stupid today. Have on on me.

Look Idiot.....when taxes are cut that should be followed by cuts in spending. No goddam Republican cuts their spending....just their taxes:

Annualized growth spending 'slowest' because Bush passed a one time trillion dollar stimulus that Obama is using as a baseline - pure idiocy.

Obama is a big spender just like the rest of them - one of the core problems we have with out of control government - no one maintains governmental spending. They all are in a rush to increase it as much as they can.

You know....I kinda like what the official records show rather than what some tax cutting, debt building right winger tells me. I've watched enough Fox News to know they lie 24/7. A third of all the voting public are Republican and every one of them watch Fox to the exclusion of all others. That's how Fox maintains their ratings.....they have a captive audience.

 

[FA_Q2]

Bill Clinton raised taxes on the rich. So did Obama. So why do we have the results we do?
You are a moron.

Whatever happened it worked:

Can't beat education:

Another idiot who cant read a graph.
So the tax increases under Clinton "worked" while the tax reductions under Reagan are responsible for our present problems.
Campbell, you have outdone yourself in stupid today. Have on on me.

Look Idiot.....when taxes are cut that should be followed by cuts in spending. No goddam Republican cuts their spending....just their taxes:

Annualized growth spending 'slowest' because Bush passed a one time trillion dollar stimulus that Obama is using as a baseline - pure idiocy.

Obama is a big spender just like the rest of them - one of the core problems we have with out of control government - no one maintains governmental spending. They all are in a rush to increase it as much as they can.

You know....I kinda like what the official records show rather than what some tax cutting, debt building right winger tells me. I've watched enough Fox News to know they lie 24/7. A third of all the voting public are Republican and every one of them watch Fox to the exclusion of all others. That's how Fox maintains their ratings.....they have a captive audience.

Uh huh.

I notice that you are unable to actually address any point put to you. You don't like the 'record,' you like whatever story you can spin around selected data that does not show anything remotely connected to the whole picture. Your tirade on FOX is wholly irrelevant - you have no idea what I watch if anything and I do not feel inclined to explain to you the various sources I use to get information from as long as you are unable to come up with an original, coherent thought.

There are 3 types of lies:

"There are lies, damned lies and statistics."
- Mark Twain

 

[bedowin62]

Bill Clinton raised taxes on the rich. So did Obama. So why do we have the results we do?
You are a moron.

Whatever happened it worked:

Can't beat education:

Another idiot who cant read a graph.
So the tax increases under Clinton "worked" while the tax reductions under Reagan are responsible for our present problems.
Campbell, you have outdone yourself in stupid today. Have on on me.

Look Idiot.....when taxes are cut that should be followed by cuts in spending. No goddam Republican cuts their spending....just their taxes:

Annualized growth spending 'slowest' because Bush passed a one time trillion dollar stimulus that Obama is using as a baseline - pure idiocy.

Obama is a big spender just like the rest of them - one of the core problems we have with out of control government - no one maintains governmental spending. They all are in a rush to increase it as much as they can.

You know....I kinda like what the official records show rather than what some tax cutting, debt building right winger tells me. I've watched enough Fox News to know they lie 24/7. A third of all the voting public are Republican and every one of them watch Fox to the exclusion of all others. That's how Fox maintains their ratings.....they have a captive audience.

here's a Republican "lie" about obama, see if you can actually prove it's a lie though. Obama added OVER $200 BILLION IN SPENDING THAT WENT ON THE LAST "BUSH BUDGET"

i'll hang around and wait for a lil while left-wing moron. let's see who really spews propanganda and who tells the truth ok?

 

[easyt65]

here's a Republican "lie" about obama, see if you can actually prove it's a lie though. Obama added OVER $200 BILLION IN SPENDING THAT WENT ON THE LAST "BUSH BUDGET"

Obama did not add it, but the DEMOCRATS did...and it wasn't $200 Billion, it was $2.5 TRILLION. Do the research, as you demand of others.

Democrats took over a NEAR Super Majority control of the House and Senate (3 seats shy), and in doing so THEY took over control of the 'purse strings' - the nation's spending. They took over the task of creating and passing the budgets....but there was NO budget:

Congress passes first budget in 6 years - Washington Times
May 2015: (Congress finally controlled by the GOP) "Congress Passes It's 1st Budget in 6 Years"
-- Do the Math. That means No budget had been passed since 2009, shortly after LIBERALS took over Congress.

The Bush administration's debt total after 6 years was $1.5 Trillion...and then Democrats took over Congress with this near super majority Control. Liberals not only stopped creating and passing Budgets - WHICH IS REQUIRED EVERY YEAR BY LAW, $2.5 Trillion more was added to the Debt. THEY controlled the Purse Strings / Spending, it's THEIR DEBT! The Liberal-Controlled Congress added $1 Trillion more to the debt in only 2 years than Bush's administration had spent up to that point over 6 years!