Republicans Own Detroit Bankruptcy

[Spoonman]

with all of the money that has been poured into detroit it should be a show place. but it just shows you how poorly democrats manage money. not only the money that was put in, but think of the money owned that was never paid because the GM filed for bankruptcy.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The USA had its greatest economic growth during the postwar years when unions were at their strongest and taxes were at their highest. American jobs were protected by Washington despite the fact that the wealthy were begging for greater access to cheap Chinese Labor.

Enter Reagan. He worked with business to make it easier to ship manufacturing to COMMUNIST China where our corporations could benefit from ultra cheap sweat shop labor.

We spent 30 year shipping middle class jobs to places where our corporations could make more money...

Having lost the high wages and benefits that came with those jobs, we created the world's largest credit industrial complex to fund consumption. Starting with Reagan, household debt reached unprecedented levels.

We spent 30 years hollowing out the middle class with debt.

We ran out of ways to loan money into the economy. We turned to our houses, the last thing left with any value.

Now we having nothing.

California is running on fumes. Detroit is gone.

We are California. We are Detroit.

Welcome to the consequence of Reaganomics.

The middle class is dead.

We destroyed the goose that laid the golden egg.

We destroyed demand.

100 Monkeys typing have a better chance of getting things right than you did

 

[kaz]

It hovered around 13% for the first three quarters of 1980, no thanks to Carter's economic policies. Remember Stagflation? All during his administration in the late 1970s. In 1977, the inflation rate sat at 5%. The Federal Reserve Board in 1979 tried to combat this by clamping down on the money supply. That backfired. By February of 1980, it hit 14.73%. This coincided with high unemployment and increased government spending during his administration, along with the establishment of a "voluntary wage." It was indeed by October of 1980 that it began to drop to 12.77%. After Reagan's election and first year in office, the inflation rate had dropped to 8.92% in December of 1981.

Carter may not have had a clue about the economy, but he did make sure they didn't waste too many paper clips in the pentagon...

 

[LadyGunSlinger]

LIBERALISM FAILED.. No amount of spin, lies, propaganda will ever change that truth... and the American people know it also.. the real question is, Do they care more about today's freebies (Over their own children's future) or the economic collapse coming to every city if this WILD ASS SPENDING doesn't stop?? What's it going to be?

 

[kaz]

That's an awful lot of words just to agree, yeah, that poster was a moron for claiming the inflation rate was up to 17%.

Someone may be confusing inflation with interest rates, which topped off at 21.5% when he left office.

 

[peach174]

Are you claiming that Kennedy didn't primary Carter?

Or are you claiming that the Democrats weren't divided?

We're laughing your lack of knowledge

Only an idiot claims that the Dems were SO divided they allowed Reagan to win by one of the largest margins in history.

Obama beat McCain with more votes than Reagan beat Carter.

Therefore, Obama has won with a larger margin of victory - one of the largest in history!

Yes, you are right.
In his 1st term Obama won by over 9 million votes, compared to Regan who won by over 8million votes.

But Regan won by over 16 million votes in his 2nd term compared to Obama who won by over 4 million.
I would not call that a victory of any kind for Obama.

Obama also lost over 3 1/2 million voters who voted for him the 1st time.

 

[Synthaholic]

tell us some more you don't know about political history

Are you claiming that Kennedy didn't primary Carter?

Or are you claiming that the Democrats weren't divided?

Ted Kennedy has ZERO to do with Carter being trounced by Reagan. Carter alone bears that cross.
BTW, there was no way this country was going to have a drunken, philandering, disconnected, ultra wealthy New England liberal as president.
Carter...

In August 1980, Carter’s approval rating among Democrats was about equal to Obama’s current rating among Americans as a whole. That was due to Kennedy's challenge.

Carter was ahead until the last week or so, when, on Sunday morning, November 1, the Iranian parliament announced their conditions for freeing the American hostages. Carter abandoned campaigning that day, addressing the nation that night.


From Gallup:

 

[Synthaholic]

We're laughing your lack of knowledge

Only an idiot claims that the Dems were SO divided they allowed Reagan to win by one of the largest margins in history.

Obama beat McCain with more votes than Reagan beat Carter.

Therefore, Obama has won with a larger margin of victory - one of the largest in history!

Are you sure you want to leave up that post?
Tell ya what, I will give you a chance to take it down ti save yourself the embarrassment of the ridicule that is about to follow.
BTW,m Detroit is a piss pool and the democrats which have been running that city for 50 years OWN it.

Yeah, I'm leaving it up.


Reagan: 43,903,230
Carter: 35,480,115
___________________

8,423,115

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1980


Obama: 66,862,039
McCain: 58,319,442
___________________

8,542,597

President Map - Election Results 2008 - The New York Times



Now, I'm no math major, but I know that 8,542,597 is larger than 8,423,115.


Dumbass.

 

[Synthaholic]

Yep, synthy doesn't know much...and what he does know is wrong!

Then prove me wrong if you can. (SPOILER ALERT: you can't!)

Dude, you've been bitchslapped so many times in this one thread I'm surprised you keep slinking back. Just reinforces my theory that to be a libtard (at least a pro like you) you have to be intellectually dishonest, brainless, and have no sense of shame or propriety.
You qualify in all areas.

Drive-bys of posters saying this is the dumbest thread ever does not qualify as a bitchslapping.

 

[Synthaholic]

Obama beat McCain with more votes than Reagan beat Carter.

Therefore, Obama has won with a larger margin of victory - one of the largest in history!

Are you sure you want to leave up that post?
Tell ya what, I will give you a chance to take it down ti save yourself the embarrassment of the ridicule that is about to follow.
BTW,m Detroit is a piss pool and the democrats which have been running that city for 50 years OWN it.

I love it. Don't worry, Synth won't take the post down

That's no how he rolls

See, when you prove he's a silly tool he does this. ......

"You know that's not what I meant" then try's to divert attention elsewhere

It's funny because he zigs and zags so much he can't even keep up with himself after awhile. Proof is just a few posts up.

I await your apology.

 

[Synthaholic]

"hovered around 12% at the time of the 1980 election campaign"

Jimmy Carter on Budget & Economy

Yes, I suppose 18% is "around" 12%. I love how they cherry picked the times they did. The lowest for those particular quarters. Those of us who lived at that time know the truth however. 17% inflation killed the housing market...among other things.

17% inflation????

You must be one of them, low information voters.

In October, 1980, the inflation rate was 12.77%

Historical Inflation Rate | InflationData.com

Which is what I also told him.

 

[Meathead]

Yeah, I'm leaving it up.


Reagan: 43,903,230
Carter: 35,480,115
___________________

8,423,115

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1980


Obama: 66,862,039
McCain: 58,319,442
___________________

8,542,597

President Map - Election Results 2008 - The New York Times



Now, I'm no math major, but I know that 8,542,597 is larger than 8,423,115.


Dumbass.

Gawd, what a disingenuous prick you are, and a dumb ass to boot.

 

[Synthaholic]

Sorry. Not going to pull that crap on me. During the 107th Congress, the Senate switched majorities three times before the end of the term in 2003. It held a Democratic majority in 2003. The House remained Republican throughout. No wonder the 2003 bill died. It died in a Democratically held Senate!

You're a ******* rightard, there's just no other way around it. Democrats control of the Senate ended on January 4th, 2003, 7 months before S.1508 was even introduced. To claim that bill died under Democrat control is announce to the world that you're not playing with a full deck.


That's as idiotic as your statement above. Democrats did not block any of those bills. All three died because Republican leadership didn't want them. At least one of them was even bashed by Bush. So to blame Democrats is rightarded. And your nonsense that they wouldn't put it to a vote because they cowered in fear over a filibuster makes no sense. There were 61 filibusters during the 108th Congress. Clearly, Republicans had no qualms about putting legislation up for a vote even if they feared it would go nowhere. Hell, how many times have Republicans voted on repealing ObamaCare, knowing full well any such bill will go nowhere.

I know you worked hard to try and pin me with that one, but it was a futile effort. I love when people like you try to pin everything on the majority party, without first considering the political atmosphere in which the bills were introduced.

Have a seat.

Sure, the minority party can block legislation, but you can't blame the minority party for the policies that come out of Washington. And of course, we have Bush accepting the blame ...

"Thanks to our policies, home ownership in America is at an all-time high." ~ George Bush, 9.2.2004, RNC acceptance speech​

Lol. You really are spinning that wheel, aren't you, you liberal hamster you.

Okay then I'll give you that, but it still died, because the threat of a filibuster by Democrats was there in the 108th. You're pretty clueless Faun.

You're flailing. And failing. Again.

Show that there was a filibuster threat.

 

[GHook93]

Are you claiming that Kennedy didn't primary Carter?

Or are you claiming that the Democrats weren't divided?

Ted Kennedy has ZERO to do with Carter being trounced by Reagan. Carter alone bears that cross.
BTW, there was no way this country was going to have a drunken, philandering, disconnected, ultra wealthy New England liberal as president.
Carter...

In August 1980, Carter’s approval rating among Democrats was about equal to Obama’s current rating among Americans as a whole. That was due to Kennedy's challenge.

Carter was ahead until the last week or so, when, on Sunday morning, November 1, the Iranian parliament announced their conditions for freeing the American hostages. Carter abandoned campaigning that day, addressing the nation that night.


From Gallup:

So your point is Obama is equal to or less than Carter, who even liberals think sucked ballz! Point well taken!

 

[Synthaholic]

Holy shit! You've got nothing to give me. You made the moronic claim that Democrats controlled the Senate in the summer of 2003. If nothing else, it reflects how ignorant you are on the matter. You don't even know which party was in charge, yet you believe that Republicans cowered in fear over a potential filibuster. Despite the fact that there were over 60 filibusters during that Senate. Despite the fact that Republicans (and Democrats) routinely vote for, and pass, legislation they know isn't going anywhere. Which may or may not have even been the case with any one of those bills.

And again, even Bush didn't like at least one of them. So just how retarded are you for blaming Democrats when even the Republican president panned his own party's bill??

Lovely, the Bush did it argument. It doesn't take that many words to tell me how helplessly misinformed you are. Move along.

You have any idea how stoopid it looks to call someone misinformed after you said Democrats controlled the Senate in the summer of 2003???



At any rate, your ignorance knows no boundaries. Republicans had nothing to lose by putting any one of those bills up for a full vote in the Senate. It's beyond ridiculous to even think they didn't because they were afraid Democrats might filibuster it.

If Republicans are afraid to vote on bills they fear might not make it to the president's desk, why on Earth would they vote to repeal ObamaCare 39 times???

Just like your absurd comment about Republicans not allowing a vote in the Senate on H.R. 1461 because they were afraid Democrats might filibuster it when in fact, it was the Bush administration who opposed it, you make absolutely no sense.

Oh, shit! THAT'S gonna leave a mark!

 

[Synthaholic]

Yeah, I'm leaving it up.


Reagan: 43,903,230
Carter: 35,480,115
___________________

8,423,115

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1980


Obama: 66,862,039
McCain: 58,319,442
___________________

8,542,597

President Map - Election Results 2008 - The New York Times



Now, I'm no math major, but I know that 8,542,597 is larger than 8,423,115.


Dumbass.

Gawd, what a disingenuous prick you are, and a dumb ass to boot.

You forgot to mention that I am also correct.

 

[Synthaholic]

Ted Kennedy has ZERO to do with Carter being trounced by Reagan. Carter alone bears that cross.
BTW, there was no way this country was going to have a drunken, philandering, disconnected, ultra wealthy New England liberal as president.
Carter...

In August 1980, Carter’s approval rating among Democrats was about equal to Obama’s current rating among Americans as a whole. That was due to Kennedy's challenge.

Carter was ahead until the last week or so, when, on Sunday morning, November 1, the Iranian parliament announced their conditions for freeing the American hostages. Carter abandoned campaigning that day, addressing the nation that night.


From Gallup:

So your point is Obama is equal to or less than Carter, who even liberals think sucked ballz! Point well taken!

No, my point is that Kennedy weakened Carter. A united Democratic Party may have won in 1980.

 

[Synthaholic]

OK, you all have deflected long enough, and I am tired of proving you wrong.

Back to the OP:

If it was Obama's Economy after 2 years in office, why isn't it Snyder's Detroit after 2 years?

 

[thanatos144]

To say Republicans are responsible for Detroit a city ran by criminal democrats for over 50 years shows how dishonest democrats are.

 

[antiquity]

Who has the control of the money in Washington, dumbass? the House or the President?

Answer that, moron.

I will answer that question since you don't have a clue how our government works. All MONEY bills come out of the House but the Senate, you know the Congressional branch that is controlled by the democrats. must concur and if they do the president must either agree to or veto. So in the final say its the democrats 100%.

So where do you get that Obama is raising the debt?

The debt is caused by those in power starting with their leader, the President.

The debt is an accumulation of years of liberal social tinkering. Starting with FDR and SS and LBJ 'Great Society' and the start of the massive welfare programs that continue today. The democratic government creating a massive system using SS to help finance workman disability is total abused. The government creating a even more massive food stamp program that includes many who don't belong on the program. School lunches, etc. All the above social tinkering has created a society that is wholly depend on government.
There now more people on government assistance than people in the work force.
Does any of that get thru to you and your liberal friends.