Republicans are afraid to propose spending cuts!

[Oldstyle]

So you're now making the contention that the Dot Com boom and bust never took place? Really? Simply because the stock market worth of high tech companies has increased over the past ten years? I'm sorry, Koios but the investment frenzy that accompanied the Dot Com Boom back in 2000 does not exist now...not even a SHADOW of what was happening then.

Meanwhile, how're those mechanisms coming along? You know, Keynesian Economics, and such. You ever even read the wiki, top to bottom, much less study it at the university level? Hmmm?

Studied it at both the University of Massachusetts and Amherst College. Wiki? Seriously?

 

[Koios]

Gee, the "full faith and credit" of the biggest debtor nation in the history of mankind? What part of we're broke do you not get?

The part where we aren't actually. We just do not tax suffient to our needs. But the country is rich and richer daily. Go look.

You really are an idiot. We're borrowing 40 cents of every dollar we currently spend, Einstein. If we were to increase taxes in order to offset that deficit those new tax rates would be staggering. Our economy would crater and businesses would flee this country in a stampede.

Coming from someone who I suspect never so much as consumed the entire wiki on our good friend, John Keynes, I'll take that as a compliment.

Thanks pal.

 

[Koios]

So you're now making the contention that the Dot Com boom and bust never took place? Really? Simply because the stock market worth of high tech companies has increased over the past ten years? I'm sorry, Koios but the investment frenzy that accompanied the Dot Com Boom back in 2000 does not exist now...not even a SHADOW of what was happening then.

Meanwhile, how're those mechanisms coming along? You know, Keynesian Economics, and such. You ever even read the wiki, top to bottom, much less study it at the university level? Hmmm?

Studied it at both the University of Massachusetts and Amherst College. Wiki? Seriously?

Then please, do tell. Whadja learn?

 

[Oldstyle]

Coming from someone who it seems gets ALL of his "knowledge" for Wikipedia? It explains WHY you are so generally clueless.

 

[Koios]

Coming from someone who it seems gets ALL of his "knowledge" for Wikipedia? It explains WHY you are so generally clueless.

Atta boy, Oldstyle. When you're gettin' your ass handed to ya, bring out the, 'Huh uh; you're dumb.' defense. Brilliant.

I'm in ******* awe.

 

[Oldstyle]

Meanwhile, how're those mechanisms coming along? You know, Keynesian Economics, and such. You ever even read the wiki, top to bottom, much less study it at the university level? Hmmm?

Studied it at both the University of Massachusetts and Amherst College. Wiki? Seriously?

Then please, do tell. Whadja learn?

You want me to give you a synopsis of what I learned about economics in college? I suppose I COULD do that but since you're the kind of idiot that thinks reading about something on Wikipedia tells you everything you need to know...it would seem to be a waste of BOTH our times.

 

[Oldstyle]

Coming from someone who it seems gets ALL of his "knowledge" for Wikipedia? It explains WHY you are so generally clueless.

Atta boy, Oldstyle. When you're gettin' your ass handed to ya, bring out the, 'Huh uh; you're dumb.' defense. Brilliant.

I'm in ******* awe.

You "handed" me my ass by stating that the Dot Com bust never took place? You're not in "awe", little buddy...you're in full blown delusion mode.

 

[GoneBezerk]

Your GED doesn't impress us.....shut the **** up.

Coming from someone who it seems gets ALL of his "knowledge" for Wikipedia? It explains WHY you are so generally clueless.

Atta boy, Oldstyle. When you're gettin' your ass handed to ya, bring out the, 'Huh uh; you're dumb.' defense. Brilliant.

I'm in ******* awe.

 

[Koios]

Coming from someone who it seems gets ALL of his "knowledge" for Wikipedia? It explains WHY you are so generally clueless.

Atta boy, Oldstyle. When you're gettin' your ass handed to ya, bring out the, 'Huh uh; you're dumb.' defense. Brilliant.

I'm in ******* awe.

You "handed" me my ass by stating that the Dot Com bust never took place? You're not in "awe", little buddy...you're in full blown delusion mode.

Nah; that was just the question part. Note the punctuation at the end; it'll clue you in.

And I'm on ******* pins and needles awaiting the answer part. But I'll busy myself gathering a glass and some champagne whilst you're typing it up. Praise babayjesus, I'll be learning something new today! Can't wait.

 

[Too Tall]

Your so full of shit! Taxes don't destroy jobs, lack of demand does.

And any spending that puts American's back to work, contibutes to consumers.

Taxing people deprives them of the money they would normally spend. That lack of spending creates a lack of demand and destroys jobs. See how easy that is!

if this were true, then the Clinton era tax increase should have led to a huge recession. can you explain why it didnt?

Tax increases had absolutely NOTHING to do with the economic boom in the 90's.

1. Personal computers and the Internet came of age, bringing a revolution in the efficiency of processing information and making workers more productive.

2. Manufacturing companies embraced more efficient production methods.

3. A massive reduction in military spending, begun during the George H.W. Bush administration following the collapse of the former Soviet Union, allowed capital to be deployed to more economically productive ends.

4. No major war disrupted the world’s rapidly growing trade.

5. Oil prices declined during much of Clinton’s presidency, partly because of squabbling and cheating among the OPEC oil-producing nations. As late as 1999 crude oil was selling for less than $10 per barrel and gasoline hit a low of 95 cents per gallon at the pump.

6. Clinton inherited a GDP growth rate that averaged 3.9% in 1989. There is nothing wrong with raising taxes during an economic boom.

7. By the time Clinton left office, the economy was slowing rapidly, and it slipped into recession in March 2001, just weeks after George W. Bush was sworn in. GWB did what had to be done and lowered tax rates.

 

[Oldstyle]

Atta boy, Oldstyle. When you're gettin' your ass handed to ya, bring out the, 'Huh uh; you're dumb.' defense. Brilliant.

I'm in ******* awe.

You "handed" me my ass by stating that the Dot Com bust never took place? You're not in "awe", little buddy...you're in full blown delusion mode.

Nah; that was just the question part. Note the punctuation at the end; it'll clue you in.

And I'm on ******* pins and needles awaiting the answer part. But I'll busy myself gathering a glass and some champagne whilst you're typing it up. Praise babayjesus, I'll be learning something new today! Can't wait.

What we've "learned today" is that you derive your economic know-how from Wikipedia whereas I got mine from actual Professors like Thomas Sowell. Now you'd like me to pass some of what I learned along to you so you don't appear quite so ignorant? Here's a suggestion, Koios. Go to a bookstore and buy an economics text by Sowell and read it. I expect it's going to be a bit of a tough slog for you after Wikipedia...but stick with it. Once you've educated yourself then perhaps you won't make such an ass of yourself here.

 

[Koios]

You "handed" me my ass by stating that the Dot Com bust never took place? You're not in "awe", little buddy...you're in full blown delusion mode.

Nah; that was just the question part. Note the punctuation at the end; it'll clue you in.

And I'm on ******* pins and needles awaiting the answer part. But I'll busy myself gathering a glass and some champagne whilst you're typing it up. Praise babayjesus, I'll be learning something new today! Can't wait.

What we've "learned today" is that you derive your economic know-how from Wikipedia whereas I got mine from actual Professors like Thomas Sowell. Now you'd like me to pass some of what I learned along to you so you don't appear quite so ignorant? Here's a suggestion, Koios. Go to a bookstore and buy an economics text by Sowell and read it. I expect it's going to be a bit of a tough slog for you after Wikipedia...but stick with it. Once you've educated yourself then perhaps you won't make such an ass of yourself here.

It's getting circular, Oldstyle. I think I'll call it a day, since the kibitzing is having a diminsihing recreational value, for me.

So: Uncle; you win, pal. Pop open a Milwaukee's Best 24 and celebrate.

 

[Oldstyle]

Nah; that was just the question part. Note the punctuation at the end; it'll clue you in.

And I'm on ******* pins and needles awaiting the answer part. But I'll busy myself gathering a glass and some champagne whilst you're typing it up. Praise babayjesus, I'll be learning something new today! Can't wait.

What we've "learned today" is that you derive your economic know-how from Wikipedia whereas I got mine from actual Professors like Thomas Sowell. Now you'd like me to pass some of what I learned along to you so you don't appear quite so ignorant? Here's a suggestion, Koios. Go to a bookstore and buy an economics text by Sowell and read it. I expect it's going to be a bit of a tough slog for you after Wikipedia...but stick with it. Once you've educated yourself then perhaps you won't make such an ass of yourself here.

It's getting circular, Oldstyle. I think I'll call it a day, since the kibitzing is having a diminsihing recreational value, for me.

So: Uncle; you win, pal. Pop open a Milwaukee's Best 24 and celebrate.

Have a nice day doing whatever it is you "do", Koios but try to swing by that bookstore. A mind is a terrible thing to waste.

 

[Too Tall]

So you're now making the contention that the Dot Com boom and bust never took place? Really? Simply because the stock market worth of high tech companies has increased over the past ten years? I'm sorry, Koios but the investment frenzy that accompanied the Dot Com Boom back in 2000 does not exist now...not even a SHADOW of what was happening then.

No I said it was chicken feed. That there's what we call a metaphor, for something comparatively small.

Does the clear it up for you?

Ten years ago, the Nasdaq composite index hit its all-time high of 5,048, and the so-called bubble burst.
The stock exchange, home to a lot of the Internet and telecom stocks that shot into the stratosphere during the dot-com boom, is still recovering.
During the boom, stocks like WorldCom, AOL and Yahoo traded at astronomical levels.

When the tech bubble burst, it left scars on the economy that are still being felt today.

On March 10, 2000, tech stocks began a fall they've never really recovered from.

Siegel notes that the Nasdaq is still 50 percent below where it was a decade ago. But he says it took almost 30 years for the Dow Jones Industrial Average to recover all the ground it lost in the crash of 1929.
And it could take just as long for the tech sector to recover this time around.

Excerpts from this article:
NASDAQ Is Half Of Its All-Time High A Decade Later : NPR

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

It's what Reagan's "Trickle Down" did and if this shit makes sense you've got 15 minutes to take a shit in the floor of the first national bank. He cut taxes for the welthiest people in America and began to borrow from foreign banks to cover the shortfall. He and Bush41 quadrupled the national debt. Clinton raised taxes in 1993 and straightened his mess out with actual surpluses then along came George...slow walkin', slow talkin' George, cut taxes twice using reconciliation to block Democratic opposition and doubled the national debt again.What do you people want....the uppercrust to have all the money?

Today the top 1 percent of Americans control 43 percent of the financial wealth while the bottom 80 percent control only 7 percent. Incredibly, the wealthiest 400 Americans have the same combined wealth as the poorest half of Americans -- over 150 million people.

What would it take to satisfy the Republicans......the top 1000 having it all?

Within all of this also once laid the incentive system, and this is a system where people must earn their way in America, instead of everything just being a given unto them, but what the government favoring corporations and itself has done, is to make this system more and more and/or less workable for we the working class citizens in America. How about for starters congress and other governmental branches voting themselves pay raises in the midst of very troubling times in our nation, and on and on it all goes with the helping of corporations to destroy our capitalistic set up we once had, and turning it into a socialistic/communistic type of system, just so they could get all of us eventually at cheap labor rates, in order to equal out with the world is what they were touting all the time (gone global), then things would be better for all is what they were saying. The nations major problem is how it's government has gotten itself in bed with these corporations, who have changed this nation and our government into what we have right now today, and now we see the results of it all, and the sell outs in it all. I bet you know a sell out right now in this nation, and this goes for any of you this question, and don't they just make you sick to your stomach ?

LOL...looks like the "givers" need to loosen their purse strings a bit.

The wealthiest 400 Americans have the same combined wealth as the poorest half of Americans -- over 150 million people.

I'll tell you what....if you folks didn't learn a damn thing from the ass kicking you just took keep it up and we'll see what a real landslide looks like.

If the left hasn't learned anything from California with respect to raising taxes and jobs moving out of state ...... keep it up, and we will see what a real financial economic disaster looks like in this nation. Here's a hint ...... GREECE.

 

[Koios]

Within all of this also once laid the incentive system, and this is a system where people must earn their way in America, instead of everything just being a given unto them, but what the government favoring corporations and itself has done, is to make this system more and more and/or less workable for we the working class citizens in America. How about for starters congress and other governmental branches voting themselves pay raises in the midst of very troubling times in our nation, and on and on it all goes with the helping of corporations to destroy our capitalistic set up we once had, and turning it into a socialistic/communistic type of system, just so they could get all of us eventually at cheap labor rates, in order to equal out with the world is what they were touting all the time (gone global), then things would be better for all is what they were saying. The nations major problem is how it's government has gotten itself in bed with these corporations, who have changed this nation and our government into what we have right now today, and now we see the results of it all, and the sell outs in it all. I bet you know a sell out right now in this nation, and this goes for any of you this question, and don't they just make you sick to your stomach ?

LOL...looks like the "givers" need to loosen their purse strings a bit.

The wealthiest 400 Americans have the same combined wealth as the poorest half of Americans -- over 150 million people.

I'll tell you what....if you folks didn't learn a damn thing from the ass kicking you just took keep it up and we'll see what a real landslide looks like.

If the left hasn't learned anything from California with respect to raising taxes and jobs moving out of state ...... keep it up, and we will see what a real financial economic disaster looks like in this nation.

Great idea!!! Let's look at CA, and try to learn from past performance. Be right back ...

 

[Koios]

LOL...looks like the "givers" need to loosen their purse strings a bit.

The wealthiest 400 Americans have the same combined wealth as the poorest half of Americans -- over 150 million people.

I'll tell you what....if you folks didn't learn a damn thing from the ass kicking you just took keep it up and we'll see what a real landslide looks like.

If the left hasn't learned anything from California with respect to raising taxes and jobs moving out of state ...... keep it up, and we will see what a real financial economic disaster looks like in this nation.

Great idea!!! Let's look at CA, and try to learn from past performance. Be right back ...

Well **** me, what a surprise! Seems it does not track to taxes going up or down. CA was hard-, if not hardest-hit, by the Great Recession; lost a butt load of jobs. But now, seems they're #4 in JOB GROWTH!!!

What the ****? Taxes don't send jobs to North Korea and install Obama as Supreme Leader??? Seems other stuff is at play? Well knock me over with a feather, SOB(G).

And thanks for the tip; learning is the cat's pajamas. Great suggestion.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

LOL...looks like the "givers" need to loosen their purse strings a bit.

The wealthiest 400 Americans have the same combined wealth as the poorest half of Americans -- over 150 million people.

I'll tell you what....if you folks didn't learn a damn thing from the ass kicking you just took keep it up and we'll see what a real landslide looks like.

If the left hasn't learned anything from California with respect to raising taxes and jobs moving out of state ...... keep it up, and we will see what a real financial economic disaster looks like in this nation.

Great idea!!! Let's look at CA, and try to learn from past performance. Be right back ...

Yes let's look....

How California's income tax and sales tax rates compare

We're No. 1 -- only more so.

The budget deal the Legislature reached today will keep California's top personal income tax rate and sales tax rate the highest in the Union.

The agreement will raise personal income tax rates by 0.25 of a percentage point across the board, beginning with the current tax year. The highest rate, on taxable income of more than $1 million, will rise to 10.55% from 10.3%. The next-highest tax rate, on taxable income of more than $94,110 for a married couple filing jointly, will rise to 9.55% from 9.3%. For singles, the threshold for the new 9.55% tax rate is $47,055. The 0.25-point hike could be reduced to 0.125 of a point depending on how much federal help the state gets as part of Congress' economic stimulus package.

How California's income tax and sales tax rates compare - latimes.com

What happened to all this supposed "revenue" from all these tax increases? Shouldn't they be enjoying a surplus? Why is California the state with the biggest debt in the union? It's controlled by Democrats with w democrat legislature, with no shortages finding the "rich" to collect from between Hollywood and corporate taxes from America's technology heartland ... Silicon valley. So what's the problem?

Companies Leaving California in Record Numbers

"In 2011, 254 California companies moved some or all of their work and jobs out of state, 26% more than in 2010, according to Irvine business consultant Joe Vranich who has been tracking these departures since 2009.

The pace is accelerating, Vranich said. An average of 4.9 businesses left California each week of 2011, compared to 3.9 per week (202 total) in 2010 and one a week (51 total) in 2009. In what he calls "disinvestment events," Vranich counts companies that move jobs, facilities or headquarters out of California and "in carefully selected instances, companies making major capital investments in plants elsewhere that in the past would have been built in California," Vranich said.

http:www.mjperry.blogspot.com/2012/03/companies-leaving-california-in-record.html

I can see how the proposal of raising taxes on the wealthy has completely turned the state of California around. You cannot pass on this myth about taxes and the debt, when you have an example of FACTS that points otherwise..... staring at you in the face.

 

[Koios]

Companies Leaving California in Record Numbers

"In 2011, 254 California companies moved some or all of their work and jobs out of state

You gotta love that peach. Headline = Companies leaving!!! Then, moved "some or all." Pure comedy.

Meanwhile back to what's happening right now: CA is #4 in JOB GROWTH. (55,445 added in October) And it's our most populous state. They're creating more ******* jobs, probably, than any state. So who gives a **** if some companies are taking all of part and creating jobs in other states, who are probably sucking wind and really need the ******* jobs?

 

[Oldstyle]

Companies Leaving California in Record Numbers

"In 2011, 254 California companies moved some or all of their work and jobs out of state

You gotta love that peach. Headline = Companies leaving!!! Then, moved "some or all." Pure comedy.

Meanwhile back to what's happening right now: CA is #4 in JOB GROWTH. (55,445 added in October) And it's our most populous state. They're creating more ******* jobs, probably, than any state. So who gives a **** if some companies are taking all of part and creating jobs in other states, who are probably sucking wind and really need the ******* jobs?

I hate to break your progressive "bubble", Koios but the truth is that for the first time in it's history more people are leaving California than are coming in. That isn't happening because it's such a progressive wonderland...that's happening because you progressives have turned it into the closest thing we have to Greece.