Time for honest posters to admit mistakes

[Si modo]

Not a shred of evidence to prove the stimulus was worthless but a butt load of insults for the PROOF it has created and saved jobs right out of the mouths of the Cos and Counties that benifited.

It's rather early to be so drunk, IMO.

 

[007]

Not a shred of evidence to prove the stimulus was worthless but a butt load of insults for the PROOF it has created and saved jobs right out of the mouths of the Cos and Counties that benifited.

Seriously... and I mean HONESTLY... I think you should be seen by a psychiatrist. YOU are a pathological liar. The worst I have ever seen.

You are without close rival, the worst here.

 

[Immanuel]

Not a shred of evidence to prove the stimulus was worthless but a butt load of insults for the PROOF it has created and saved jobs right out of the mouths of the Cos and Counties that benifited.

Seriously... and I mean HONESTLY... I think you should be seen by a psychiatrist. YOU are a pathological liar. The worst I have ever seen.

You are without close rival, the worst here.

I hate to say this, but I disagree with you. She would have to disbelieve so much of what she writes to be a pathological liar. I must confess, that I think she believes everything she types and she does it with the most sincere intentions.

I don't think there is even a tiny bit of insincerity in her heart. She may be wrong in a lot of what she says, but she believes it all to be true.

And no TM, that is not intended to be a slam against you, in fact, it is intended as a compliment.

Immie

 

[Truthmatters]

Not a shred of evidence to prove the stimulus was worthless but a butt load of insults for the PROOF it has created and saved jobs right out of the mouths of the Cos and Counties that benifited.

Seriously... and I mean HONESTLY... I think you should be seen by a psychiatrist. YOU are a pathological liar. The worst I have ever seen.

You are without close rival, the worst here.

I hate to say this, but I disagree with you. She would have to disbelieve so much of what she writes to be a pathological liar. I must confess, that I think she believes everything she types and she does it with the most sincere intentions.

I don't think there is even a tiny bit of insincerity in her heart. She may be wrong in a lot of what she says, but she believes it all to be true.

And no TM, that is not intended to be a slam against you, in fact, it is intended as a compliment.

Immie

Thnak you Immie.

We can disagree and still have some respect for each other.

Your a good man and I hope a job comes your way soon.

That is what obama is trying to do.

Lets not forget how you became unemployed, it was a world recession caused by a republican government.

 

[Si modo]

Seriously... and I mean HONESTLY... I think you should be seen by a psychiatrist. YOU are a pathological liar. The worst I have ever seen.

You are without close rival, the worst here.

I hate to say this, but I disagree with you. She would have to disbelieve so much of what she writes to be a pathological liar. I must confess, that I think she believes everything she types and she does it with the most sincere intentions.

I don't think there is even a tiny bit of insincerity in her heart. She may be wrong in a lot of what she says, but she believes it all to be true.

And no TM, that is not intended to be a slam against you, in fact, it is intended as a compliment.

Immie

Thnak you Immie.

We can disagree and still have some respect for each other.

Your a good man and I hope a job comes your way soon.

That is what obama is trying to do.

Lets not forget how you became unemployed, it was a world recession caused by a republican government.

Ahhh. You ARE drunk, then.

 

[code1211]

Its not impossible Immie.

The states were set to fire people before it came down and the firings were trimed due to the stimulus.

First that does not prove that things would not have been worse without the Stimulus package and second, I know better than to ask you to prove something.

Also do I hear "saved jobs" in this: "firings were trim[m]ed due to the stimulus"?

Give me a break, "saved jobs" is a mythical number pulled out of the administration's ass.

Immie

Immie why is it you join in on the lie that I do not provide evidence?

Saved jobs are just that , every state was dumping state workers and you know that. When they were sent stim money some of that kept people from being let go.

You see contrary to what many claim MONEY reacts the same wether it came from fed tax dollars or state tax dollars.

When a state has reduced tax revenue because the state is in recession and gets fed money to make up for some of the gap the peopel who get payed get payed because of the fed money. That means they did not get ssent to the unemployemnt office becuase the state got fed dollars.

Does the income pais to people who would have lost their job due to reduced tax collections actually stimulate the economy or just maintain that jos which is itself a drain on the reduced amount of taxes being collected?

If that employee was laid off and had to collect unemployment, would that be a bigger drain on the economy or would paying that employ 3 or 4 times that amount from the same coffers be a bigger drain?

Paying collected taxes to a government worker does not stimulate the economy. Paying uncollected taxes that will need to be collected from the future years' tax revenues will continue to drain the economy well into the future.

This is like paying for groceries with a second mortgage.

 

[code1211]

What part of a near depression do you not understand?


Would you perfer the people who didnt get fired got fired too?

Bush and team left a HUGE economic mess and you think the Dems should have ot cleaned up in ONE year?

Tell me how long did it take Bush to get us out of the small recession that started under Clinton?

It was not too long for that one. It was the one that followed the Twin Towers attack that really bites. The recession that started under Clinton was really leaving the starting line on January 1, 2000. When every computer on the planet did not crash as we turned over the Y2K clocks, the recession started.

What was the cost of the Bush tax cuts and how many of his cronies pocketed billions as a result?

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

I'll go first:

I posted my opposition to the Afghan surge but I now have to admit that it is paying off. Some very real progress is happening there. Some very hard-line militants have been killed, captured and/or driven to the negotiating table. It also appears that by expressing our own committment, we have convinced many allies to join in the effort in a much bigger way than they were before. (Pakistan & Russia to name two)

So in that same spirit of honesty and now that our economic recovery is showing some real traction, it's time for some of you posters (you and I BOTH know who you are) to admit that you were wrong about the futility of the economic stimulus packages and to admit that you were wrong in your promises of hyper-inflation.

Wow... I'm surprised, but pleasently pleased to see a Leftist come to admit what is otherwise patently obvious...

And I am tickled to the bone that in so doing, she comes to demand that such is grounds for her opposition to 'admit' to an etheral fantasy...

ROFL... Funny stuff.

Bad news on the economic recovery... there is no sign of such; what we've been living on, is the largess which was drawn from the hyper-inflated values of Real-estate... The inevitable result of Leftist government will be to over-regulate the market; which must stagnate the market; which must depress the markets; which must, when combined with confiscatory taxation, result in a depressed economy... which we have not even BEGUN to experience.

 

[code1211]

Fewer people were sednt to those unemployment rolls because of the sstimulus.

That is a fact.

You can't know that since nobody can. It's probably even money that without the stimulus, the economy would be moving faster now than it is.

The stimulus and the promise of higher taxes that go along with it coupled with the UHC boondoggle is confusing employers and they simply don't know what the cost of hiring an employee will be.

The economy gets better when spending rises. Right now, the policy of the US Government is to slow spending by consumers and spend as much money as they can in the form of graft and favoritism.

This is a bad policy. If the only jobs created are in government, they are not having a ripple effect in like a car company that sells a car and needs to buy parts. The dollar is spent and it's gone.

 

[Si modo]

Fewer people were sednt to those unemployment rolls because of the sstimulus.

That is a fact.

I'll have some wonton soup with that order of rolls. Thanks.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Fewer people were sednt to those unemployment rolls because of the sstimulus.

That is a fact.

No, that is a theory. And you are a liar. You should change your name because you wouldn't know the truth if it punched you in your pie hole.

 

[Truthmatters]

First that does not prove that things would not have been worse without the Stimulus package and second, I know better than to ask you to prove something.

Also do I hear "saved jobs" in this: "firings were trim[m]ed due to the stimulus"?

Give me a break, "saved jobs" is a mythical number pulled out of the administration's ass.

Immie

Immie why is it you join in on the lie that I do not provide evidence?

Saved jobs are just that , every state was dumping state workers and you know that. When they were sent stim money some of that kept people from being let go.

You see contrary to what many claim MONEY reacts the same wether it came from fed tax dollars or state tax dollars.

When a state has reduced tax revenue because the state is in recession and gets fed money to make up for some of the gap the peopel who get payed get payed because of the fed money. That means they did not get ssent to the unemployemnt office becuase the state got fed dollars.

Does the income pais to people who would have lost their job due to reduced tax collections actually stimulate the economy or just maintain that jos which is itself a drain on the reduced amount of taxes being collected?

If that employee was laid off and had to collect unemployment, would that be a bigger drain on the economy or would paying that employ 3 or 4 times that amount from the same coffers be a bigger drain?

Paying collected taxes to a government worker does not stimulate the economy. Paying uncollected taxes that will need to be collected from the future years' tax revenues will continue to drain the economy well into the future.

This is like paying for groceries with a second mortgage.

You fail to calculate in the money these workers then turn and spend into the economy. That sustains and stimulates all business until the recovery starts to chug along. Then when the economy begins to recover the tax revenues go up because the economy is paying into it.

If you do nothing you get a protracted economy that will stagnate into a depression when the numbers are as large as in this recession.


Its like saying the medic giving someone morphine after an a battle injury does not help them recover. Without it the person would go into shock and die before they get to the hospital.

 

[Truthmatters]

Fewer people were sednt to those unemployment rolls because of the sstimulus.

That is a fact.

No, that is a theory. And you are a liar. You should change your name because you wouldn't know the truth if it punched you in your pie hole.

Where would they work if this stim job was not there to employ them?

 

[Truthmatters]

Fewer people were sednt to those unemployment rolls because of the sstimulus.

That is a fact.

You can't know that since nobody can. It's probably even money that without the stimulus, the economy would be moving faster now than it is.

The stimulus and the promise of higher taxes that go along with it coupled with the UHC boondoggle is confusing employers and they simply don't know what the cost of hiring an employee will be.

The economy gets better when spending rises. Right now, the policy of the US Government is to slow spending by consumers and spend as much money as they can in the form of graft and favoritism.

This is a bad policy. If the only jobs created are in government, they are not having a ripple effect in like a car company that sells a car and needs to buy parts. The dollar is spent and it's gone.

Yes we can know. The jobs are trackable. If you have a new project that started ONLY because the stim money was there to start it then those jobs would NOT have be available without the stim.

Its very simple but you dont like the facts it produces.

Which is really sad because you dont seem to like recovery or people having jobs to be able to pay into the tax coffers.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Fewer people were sednt to those unemployment rolls because of the sstimulus.

That is a fact.

No, it's actually not a fact; what it is, is a baseless assertion...

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Fewer people were sednt to those unemployment rolls because of the sstimulus.

That is a fact.

You can't know that since nobody can. It's probably even money that without the stimulus, the economy would be moving faster now than it is.

The stimulus and the promise of higher taxes that go along with it coupled with the UHC boondoggle is confusing employers and they simply don't know what the cost of hiring an employee will be.

The economy gets better when spending rises. Right now, the policy of the US Government is to slow spending by consumers and spend as much money as they can in the form of graft and favoritism.

This is a bad policy. If the only jobs created are in government, they are not having a ripple effect in like a car company that sells a car and needs to buy parts. The dollar is spent and it's gone.

Yes we can know. The jobs are trackable. If you have a new project that started ONLY because the stim money was there to start it then those jobs would NOT have be available without the stim.

Its very simple but you dont like the facts it produces.

Which is really sad because you dont seem to like recovery or people having jobs to be able to pay into the tax coffers.

ROFLMNAO...

Wow... So the Government has formed entirely new companies, through the stimulus funding; which then hired employees to perform jobs that other already existing companies were not prepared or willing to perform?

Sounds so fictional and ao absolutely UnAmerican...

 

[amrchaos]

I believed republicans back in '94, when they claimed that they would get rid of the Departments of Energy, Commerce and Edumacation (among other stupid programs) if given a majority in congress, and voted for them on that basis.

They lied....I got suckered.

Hey Dude

Why would you want to get rid of the Department of Energy and Department of Education??

 

[Truthmatters]

You can't know that since nobody can. It's probably even money that without the stimulus, the economy would be moving faster now than it is.

The stimulus and the promise of higher taxes that go along with it coupled with the UHC boondoggle is confusing employers and they simply don't know what the cost of hiring an employee will be.

The economy gets better when spending rises. Right now, the policy of the US Government is to slow spending by consumers and spend as much money as they can in the form of graft and favoritism.

This is a bad policy. If the only jobs created are in government, they are not having a ripple effect in like a car company that sells a car and needs to buy parts. The dollar is spent and it's gone.

Yes we can know. The jobs are trackable. If you have a new project that started ONLY because the stim money was there to start it then those jobs would NOT have be available without the stim.

Its very simple but you dont like the facts it produces.

Which is really sad because you dont seem to like recovery or people having jobs to be able to pay into the tax coffers.

ROFLMNAO...

Wow... So the Government has formed entirely new companies, through the stimulus funding; which then hired employees to perform jobs that other already existing companies were not prepared or willing to perform?

Sounds so fictional and ao absolutely UnAmerican...

You are delousional , I never said what you claim.

 

[Si modo]

You can't know that since nobody can. It's probably even money that without the stimulus, the economy would be moving faster now than it is.

The stimulus and the promise of higher taxes that go along with it coupled with the UHC boondoggle is confusing employers and they simply don't know what the cost of hiring an employee will be.

The economy gets better when spending rises. Right now, the policy of the US Government is to slow spending by consumers and spend as much money as they can in the form of graft and favoritism.

This is a bad policy. If the only jobs created are in government, they are not having a ripple effect in like a car company that sells a car and needs to buy parts. The dollar is spent and it's gone.

Yes we can know. The jobs are trackable. If you have a new project that started ONLY because the stim money was there to start it then those jobs would NOT have be available without the stim.

Its very simple but you dont like the facts it produces.

Which is really sad because you dont seem to like recovery or people having jobs to be able to pay into the tax coffers.

ROFLMNAO...

Wow... So the Government has formed entirely new companies, through the stimulus funding; which then hired employees to perform jobs that other already existing companies were not prepared or willing to perform?

Sounds so fictional and ao absolutely UnAmerican...

As you can see in the post just above, some libs believe legislation occurs in a vacuum.

 

[George Costanza]

When I am wrong, I promptly admit it.