Why can't Republicans explain their "Fiscal Policy"?

[Oldstyle]

Nah. I just toss in a typo once in a while so that you can have something to feel proud about. God knows you need it.

I should feel proud that you supposedly went to college...yet are borderline illiterate? Not quite sure how that follows, Tommy. I feel some pride that I actually learned something during the time I spent in school unlike some others. That's about it though. I'm curious...do you feel "shame" because you supposedly have a college degree...yet you can't spell?

Is that all you have. You just proved yourself to be an economic idiot, but find it really cool that you can find an occasional typo.
Really, oldstyle??? is that all you have? Just more stupid personal attacks, just as I predicted? And it does not bother you that the person whom you are trying to criticize predicts your moves perfectly.

You told me once that you were a had job checking copy after college. You should be good at it. Apparently that is interesting enough to keep your attention still. It is not for me, Oldstyle. It would bore me to death. Which is why I always had someone to do that tedius shit for me when doing business correspondence. But then you spend your days at the restaurant posting to this blog. I have never, ever had a job so inconsequential that I would allow myself to do that. And my boss would have shit bricks. And washing dishes is just a bit lowly, for most of us. So, oldstyle, what I would feel ashamed of is not being nothing more than what you are. A simple dish washer. But I guess it is good enough for you. And you got a degree in History WHY??

LOL...I hate to break this to you, Tommy but a job as a copy editor would NEVER bore you to death. Illiterates aren't hired as copy editors so you'd never get the job in the first place.

You see that's the difference between you and I...I'm actually intelligent enough to do THAT job and the others that I've had. I haven't seen you display enough innate intelligence to do much of anything. You "claim" to be a hot shot business executive with a private secretary that keeps you from looking like an idiot when you correspond with others but THAT story is about as believable as your tall tale about teaching college economics as an undergrad.

 

[Oldstyle]

So, Oldstyle, trying to discuss something about economics says the following, because he is a glutton for punishment:

Watching you pretend to know something about economics is always amusing.

Oh, man, oldstyle. Here is the dishwasher again, having had two classes in econ a long time ago, telling me I know nothing of econ. Now, oldstyle, again you are showing the attributes of a stupid person. Believeing that you know what you do not know. Because you are to ignorant to recognize that you know so little. So, let me see again if I can educate you. Though that may be a task better left to a grade school teacher.

You can indeed cut debt with increases in revenue but only if you use the increased revenue to pay DOWN the debt once you receive it.

So, you are wrong. For really obvious reasons. Bet you have no clue, eh, Oldstyle???
Well, oldstyle, what you do not understand, because you just do not listen, is that the tax increase is spent on STIMULUS. I have explained this, what, 25 times by now??? And stimulus crates jobs. As it did for Clinton. And as it did for Reagan. Now, since these people are employed, guess what, Oldstyle. Now they pay taxes. Honestly, since they are employed, they pay taxes to the gov. Now it should be obvious, but let me explain further. Those taxes are revenue to the federal gov. That means that it decreases the deficit, and thefor the National Debt. . By MUCH more than it cost for the stimulus. As it did for Reagan. And as it did for Clinton. After they increased taxes and spent on stimulus. And, as I told you before, the National Debt will only decrease, and has only decreased historically, when unemployment is under 7%.

You really think the CBO is estimating that the national debt is going to decrease over the upcoming years? God you're dumb! The amount of growth in the national debt may decrease but there is no way on God's Green Earth that the national debt is going decrease. How can it decrease when they are predicting trillion dollar deficits as far as the eye can see and we haven't even seen the true costs of ObamaCare kick in yet.

Oldstyle, you are a clown. You really have no clue, do you. No one looks at the National Debt as a number in determining if it is raising or lowering. How stupid are you. It is always rising, except in very rare situations, such as the Clinton National Debt at the end of his term, and then for only one year. What is looked at by anyone with any economic knowledge, me boy, is the ratio of Debt to GDP. How long it takes to pay of the national debt as it relates to national revenues, or specifically GDP. Once the Deficit gets to something below $450B, the national debt begins to decrease. Which the CBO estimates to be from 2014 on. It is really sad that you are so ignorant that when you hear something about dcreasing the national debt that you would believe they were talking about decreasing the actual number instead of the ratio. You are simply to ignorant to believe.

Apparently your eyes can not see very far. You are again posting nonsense. I said the defict would decrease, and that is what the CBO says, also. Looks like those billion dollar deficits are not in the forecast at all. The last one was last year.

---Years-- -- 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Deficit -1,128 -641 -387 -213 -186 -123 -79 -130 -142 -144 -213
http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/08-22-2012-Update_to_Outlook.pdf

By the way, at this point, the CBO projects that the ACA (Obamacare to you) will decrease the deficit, but only slightly. The latest estimate, in July of last year, was about $109B over 11 years.

Once again...the "teacher of college economics" is the most clueless poster on the board when it comes TO economics. But you don't lie? Sure, Tommy...sure..

Right, oldstyle. You are an economic wasteland. And you think you can criticize what you can not understand. And, you understand very very little.

By the way, oldstyle, I never, ever lie. Which is why, try as you may, you can never prove I did. But you, on the other hand, lie, and lie, and lie. Proveably.

You're avoiding my question with that rather pathetic bout of verbal diarrhea, Tommy! I asked you to show me where it is that Barack Obama has used revenue that's been collected to lower the deficit. I'm still waiting for that.

 

[Oldstyle]

" But if you look at the CBO estimates, you will see that the national debt is expected to decrease over the upcoming years."

That's your statement, Tommy...care to show me a CBO estimate (or anyone else's for that matter!) that has the national debt decreasing over the upcoming years? As usual you don't know what you're babbling about when you TRY and talk economics. Do yourself a favor and stick to cut and pasting the nonsense you read at your favorite progressive sites. Whenever you go off "teleprompter" you make it quite obvious that you are about as ignorant about economics as you are about the word lose.

 

[Oldstyle]

As for your rather amusing claim that ObamaCare is going to lessen the deficit? With the way the CBO keeps adjusting the 10 year costs of ObamaCare to reflect the REAL cost of the program instead of the accounting slight of hand Democrats employed by delaying the implementation of benefits for as much as four years. Does this sound familiar?
CBO: ObamaCare Price Tag Shifts from $940 Billion to $1.76 Trillion - Yahoo! News

 

[Oldstyle]

And even THOSE numbers only work if cuts are made to Medicare that Democratic leaders are already declaring their total opposition to. The CBO estimates are treating those proposed cuts as if they WILL be made and few realists think that will ever happen.

 

[Rshermr]

I should feel proud that you supposedly went to college...yet are borderline illiterate? Not quite sure how that follows, Tommy. I feel some pride that I actually learned something during the time I spent in school unlike some others. That's about it though. I'm curious...do you feel "shame" because you supposedly have a college degree...yet you can't spell?

Is that all you have. You just proved yourself to be an economic idiot, but find it really cool that you can find an occasional typo.
Really, oldstyle??? is that all you have? Just more stupid personal attacks, just as I predicted? And it does not bother you that the person whom you are trying to criticize predicts your moves perfectly.

You told me once that you were a had job checking copy after college. You should be good at it. Apparently that is interesting enough to keep your attention still. It is not for me, Oldstyle. It would bore me to death. Which is why I always had someone to do that tedius shit for me when doing business correspondence. But then you spend your days at the restaurant posting to this blog. I have never, ever had a job so inconsequential that I would allow myself to do that. And my boss would have shit bricks. And washing dishes is just a bit lowly, for most of us. So, oldstyle, what I would feel ashamed of is not being nothing more than what you are. A simple dish washer. But I guess it is good enough for you. And you got a degree in History WHY??

LOL...I hate to break this to you, Tommy but a job as a copy editor would NEVER bore you to death. Illiterates aren't hired as copy editors so you'd never get the job in the first place.

You see that's the difference between you and I...I'm actually intelligent enough to do THAT job and the others that I've had. I haven't seen you display enough innate intelligence to do much of anything. You "claim" to be a hot shot business executive with a private secretary that keeps you from looking like an idiot when you correspond with others but THAT story is about as believable as your tall tale about teaching college economics as an undergrad.

Yup, I am sure you think you are intelligent. Never met a stupid person that did not think he was not intelligent. Good for you , Oldstyle.

 

[Rshermr]

So, Oldstyle, trying to discuss something about economics says the following, because he is a glutton for punishment:

Watching you pretend to know something about economics is always amusing.

Oh, man, oldstyle. Here is the dishwasher again, having had two classes in econ a long time ago, telling me I know nothing of econ. Now, oldstyle, again you are showing the attributes of a stupid person. Believeing that you know what you do not know. Because you are to ignorant to recognize that you know so little. So, let me see again if I can educate you. Though that may be a task better left to a grade school teacher.


So, you are wrong. For really obvious reasons. Bet you have no clue, eh, Oldstyle???
Well, oldstyle, what you do not understand, because you just do not listen, is that the tax increase is spent on STIMULUS. I have explained this, what, 25 times by now??? And stimulus crates jobs. As it did for Clinton. And as it did for Reagan. Now, since these people are employed, guess what, Oldstyle. Now they pay taxes. Honestly, since they are employed, they pay taxes to the gov. Now it should be obvious, but let me explain further. Those taxes are revenue to the federal gov. That means that it decreases the deficit, and thefor the National Debt. . By MUCH more than it cost for the stimulus. As it did for Reagan. And as it did for Clinton. After they increased taxes and spent on stimulus. And, as I told you before, the National Debt will only decrease, and has only decreased historically, when unemployment is under 7%.


Oldstyle, you are a clown. You really have no clue, do you. No one looks at the National Debt as a number in determining if it is raising or lowering. How stupid are you. It is always rising, except in very rare situations, such as the Clinton National Debt at the end of his term, and then for only one year. What is looked at by anyone with any economic knowledge, me boy, is the ratio of Debt to GDP. How long it takes to pay of the national debt as it relates to national revenues, or specifically GDP. Once the Deficit gets to something below $450B, the national debt begins to decrease. Which the CBO estimates to be from 2014 on. It is really sad that you are so ignorant that when you hear something about dcreasing the national debt that you would believe they were talking about decreasing the actual number instead of the ratio. You are simply to ignorant to believe.

Apparently your eyes can not see very far. You are again posting nonsense. I said the defict would decrease, and that is what the CBO says, also. Looks like those billion dollar deficits are not in the forecast at all. The last one was last year.

---Years-- -- 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Deficit -1,128 -641 -387 -213 -186 -123 -79 -130 -142 -144 -213
http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/08-22-2012-Update_to_Outlook.pdf

By the way, at this point, the CBO projects that the ACA (Obamacare to you) will decrease the deficit, but only slightly. The latest estimate, in July of last year, was about $109B over 11 years.

Once again...the "teacher of college economics" is the most clueless poster on the board when it comes TO economics. But you don't lie? Sure, Tommy...sure..

Right, oldstyle. You are an economic wasteland. And you think you can criticize what you can not understand. And, you understand very very little.

By the way, oldstyle, I never, ever lie. Which is why, try as you may, you can never prove I did. But you, on the other hand, lie, and lie, and lie. Proveably.

You're avoiding my question with that rather pathetic bout of verbal diarrhea, Tommy! I asked you to show me where it is that Barack Obama has used revenue that's been collected to lower the deficit. I'm still waiting for that.

Are you suggesting that taxes have increased, Oldstyle???

 

[Rshermr]

" But if you look at the CBO estimates, you will see that the national debt is expected to decrease over the upcoming years."

That's your statement, Tommy...care to show me a CBO estimate (or anyone else's for that matter!) that has the national debt decreasing over the upcoming years? As usual you don't know what you're babbling about when you TRY and talk economics. Do yourself a favor and stick to cut and pasting the nonsense you read at your favorite progressive sites. Whenever you go off "teleprompter" you make it quite obvious that you are about as ignorant about economics as you are about the word lose.

I can not help that you are a congenital idiot. Lowering the national debt has always, to those at all knowledgeable of the numbers, meant lowering the debt to GNP ratio. Sorry you are stupid. I can not help you.

 

[Rshermr]

As for your rather amusing claim that ObamaCare is going to lessen the deficit? With the way the CBO keeps adjusting the 10 year costs of ObamaCare to reflect the REAL cost of the program instead of the accounting slight of hand Democrats employed by delaying the implementation of benefits for as much as four years. Does this sound familiar?
CBO: ObamaCare Price Tag Shifts from $940 Billion to $1.76 Trillion - Yahoo! News

Nice. Brian Koenig. A well known conservative blogger. Contributor to The New American, The Daily Caller, and American Thinker. Every time Oldstyle provides a link, you have to check it out. And sure enough, again it is a bat shit crazy con source.
If it was not so sad it would be funny. The CBO has all sorts of information out there, oldstyle. Monthly updates on the ACA, for instance. Try an actual impartial source. Like I have. By the way, the CBO has adjusted their numbers very little over the last 2 years. Go to the link I gave you, and you can pick the month you want to look at. You need to prove what you are saying, Oldstyle. You lie way to much to be believed.

 

[Oldstyle]

Is that all you have. You just proved yourself to be an economic idiot, but find it really cool that you can find an occasional typo.
Really, oldstyle??? is that all you have? Just more stupid personal attacks, just as I predicted? And it does not bother you that the person whom you are trying to criticize predicts your moves perfectly.

You told me once that you were a had job checking copy after college. You should be good at it. Apparently that is interesting enough to keep your attention still. It is not for me, Oldstyle. It would bore me to death. Which is why I always had someone to do that tedius shit for me when doing business correspondence. But then you spend your days at the restaurant posting to this blog. I have never, ever had a job so inconsequential that I would allow myself to do that. And my boss would have shit bricks. And washing dishes is just a bit lowly, for most of us. So, oldstyle, what I would feel ashamed of is not being nothing more than what you are. A simple dish washer. But I guess it is good enough for you. And you got a degree in History WHY??

LOL...I hate to break this to you, Tommy but a job as a copy editor would NEVER bore you to death. Illiterates aren't hired as copy editors so you'd never get the job in the first place.

You see that's the difference between you and I...I'm actually intelligent enough to do THAT job and the others that I've had. I haven't seen you display enough innate intelligence to do much of anything. You "claim" to be a hot shot business executive with a private secretary that keeps you from looking like an idiot when you correspond with others but THAT story is about as believable as your tall tale about teaching college economics as an undergrad.

Yup, I am sure you think you are intelligent. Never met a stupid person that did not think he was not intelligent. Good for you , Oldstyle.

I'm sure that I'm more intelligent than you, Tommy but let's face it...that's not exactly something to hang your hat on. I'm not sure what you were doing when you were in college (if you indeed ever went) but the fact that you were able to graduate with a degree with your level of proficiency with the English language makes me question what a degree from the school you attended is worth.

 

[Rshermr]

And even THOSE numbers only work if cuts are made to Medicare that Democratic leaders are already declaring their total opposition to. The CBO estimates are treating those proposed cuts as if they WILL be made and few realists think that will ever happen.

Oldstyle, were you refering to realists like you?? You seem to not have a link to back up your pathetic little statement. Was it just too crazy a bat shit crazy site to mention, Oldstyle.

Sorry, I just have trouble believing a congenital liar.

 

[Rshermr]

LOL...I hate to break this to you, Tommy but a job as a copy editor would NEVER bore you to death. Illiterates aren't hired as copy editors so you'd never get the job in the first place.

You see that's the difference between you and I...I'm actually intelligent enough to do THAT job and the others that I've had. I haven't seen you display enough innate intelligence to do much of anything. You "claim" to be a hot shot business executive with a private secretary that keeps you from looking like an idiot when you correspond with others but THAT story is about as believable as your tall tale about teaching college economics as an undergrad.

Yup, I am sure you think you are intelligent. Never met a stupid person that did not think he was not intelligent. Good for you , Oldstyle.

I'm sure that I'm more intelligent than you, Tommy but let's face it...that's not exactly something to hang your hat on. I'm not sure what you were doing when you were in college (if you indeed ever went) but the fact that you were able to graduate with a degree with your level of proficiency with the English language makes me question what a degree from the school you attended is worth.

Yes, Oldstyle. As I said, all the studies say that stupid people think they are intelligent. Funny that you are vouching for yourself. A stupid little man who says he has a degree in history but washes dishes for a living. Yes, you are a very intelligent man in your own mind. Good for you. It would be sad to know the truth. So just keep believing that. No harm in it at all. And gives the rest of us a good laugh.

And Oldstyle, I find it interesting that a dish washer is still posting at 2:45 EST. Either you have no life, or you are paid to post. Because you claim to have a job, menial as it is, yet you post ALL THE TIME, Day and night. And always the same conservative propaganda. I think you are one more of the paid to post folks on this blog. And you do love your Libertarian economist friend, with his close ties to CATO. Who pay all sorts of people to post. But then, it could be one of the other nut case right wing think tanks, or their many organizations. And i am sure you will not tell us.

 

[Oldstyle]

Yup, I am sure you think you are intelligent. Never met a stupid person that did not think he was not intelligent. Good for you , Oldstyle.

I'm sure that I'm more intelligent than you, Tommy but let's face it...that's not exactly something to hang your hat on. I'm not sure what you were doing when you were in college (if you indeed ever went) but the fact that you were able to graduate with a degree with your level of proficiency with the English language makes me question what a degree from the school you attended is worth.

Yes, Oldstyle. As I said, all the studies say that stupid people think they are intelligent. Funny that you are vouching for yourself. A stupid little man who says he has a degree in history but washes dishes for a living. Yes, you are a very intelligent man in your own mind. Good for you. It would be sad to know the truth. So just keep believing that. No harm in it at all. And gives the rest of us a good laugh.

And Oldstyle, I find it interesting that a dish washer is still posting at 2:45 EST. Either you have no life, or you are paid to post. Because you claim to have a job, menial as it is, yet you post ALL THE TIME, Day and night. And always the same conservative propaganda. I think you are one more of the paid to post folks on this blog. And you do love your Libertarian economist friend, with his close ties to CATO. Who pay all sorts of people to post. But then, it could be one of the other nut case right wing think tanks, or their many organizations. And i am sure you will not tell us.

Duh, I manage a restaurant, Tommy...which means I work nights. To you that means that I'm a "dishwasher". But you don't lie ever...right? The truth is...every time you make that claim you know that you're lying. Paid to blog? Here? That's amusing. What's the going rate for that and who's picking up the tab?

As for Thomas Sowell? He was one of my favorite professors from my college years . I learned a lot about economics from the man. He's another died in the wool liberal who became a conservative after observing how things functioned in the "real world"...the kind of common sense person, progressive Kool Aid drinkers like yourself abhor.

 

[Rshermr]

I'm sure that I'm more intelligent than you, Tommy but let's face it...that's not exactly something to hang your hat on. I'm not sure what you were doing when you were in college (if you indeed ever went) but the fact that you were able to graduate with a degree with your level of proficiency with the English language makes me question what a degree from the school you attended is worth.

Yes, Oldstyle. As I said, all the studies say that stupid people think they are intelligent. Funny that you are vouching for yourself. A stupid little man who says he has a degree in history but washes dishes for a living. Yes, you are a very intelligent man in your own mind. Good for you. It would be sad to know the truth. So just keep believing that. No harm in it at all. And gives the rest of us a good laugh.

And Oldstyle, I find it interesting that a dish washer is still posting at 2:45 EST. Either you have no life, or you are paid to post. Because you claim to have a job, menial as it is, yet you post ALL THE TIME, Day and night. And always the same conservative propaganda. I think you are one more of the paid to post folks on this blog. And you do love your Libertarian economist friend, with his close ties to CATO. Who pay all sorts of people to post. But then, it could be one of the other nut case right wing think tanks, or their many organizations. And i am sure you will not tell us.

Duh, I manage a restaurant, Tommy...which means I work nights. To you that means that I'm a "dishwasher". But you don't lie ever...right? The truth is...every time you make that claim you know that you're lying. Paid to blog? Here? That's amusing. What's the going rate for that and who's picking up the tab?

As for Thomas Sowell? He was one of my favorite professors from my college years . I learned a lot about economics from the man. He's another died in the wool liberal who became a conservative after observing how things functioned in the "real world"...the kind of common sense person, progressive Kool Aid drinkers like yourself abhor.

Ah, but you lie continually. So I really do not know what you do. You say you have a degree in economics. Maybe you do, but you lie continually, so why should I believe you.
And Sowell, the Libertarian. Two things wrong with that, Oldstyle. No country, using libertarian economic principles has ever existed for long enough reach late youth. So, you have a supposedly impressive Professor, pushing, and believing in an economic system that has never and will never work. Kind of crazy, unless you love money. Second, he is all over CATO, which is the current John Birch society. And has provided the best pay to those coming out of school with a phd, period. If you want to make money with your economics phd, or your degree in journalism, just work for CATO. They pay really, really well. Way more than any other employer. And, me boy, they are anything but impartial. Cato has an agenda the size of a tanker.
Then, consider who started and ran CATO, at least until this past year. Why, it is the Koch brothers, also all involved with your hero, Sowell. I mean, google thomas sowell and koch brothers, and you get pages of their love fest.
But here is the thing that is most glaring. Most economists have a strong desire to remain politically impartial. Here is a nice little piece about Sowell, that captures the essence of the guy:
Thomas Sowell predicts race riot if Obama loses
Thomas Sowell predicts race riots if Obama loses - Topix
So, pages of involvement with the Koch brothers. Pages of statements that we would have race riots if Obama wins. Yeah, this guy is the kind of objective economist that you would love, oldstyle. An actual economics phd with a bat shit crazy con agenda. Really??? No economist is that partial to a political party unless he is paid to do so. None.

 

[Oldstyle]

Yes, Oldstyle. As I said, all the studies say that stupid people think they are intelligent. Funny that you are vouching for yourself. A stupid little man who says he has a degree in history but washes dishes for a living. Yes, you are a very intelligent man in your own mind. Good for you. It would be sad to know the truth. So just keep believing that. No harm in it at all. And gives the rest of us a good laugh.

And Oldstyle, I find it interesting that a dish washer is still posting at 2:45 EST. Either you have no life, or you are paid to post. Because you claim to have a job, menial as it is, yet you post ALL THE TIME, Day and night. And always the same conservative propaganda. I think you are one more of the paid to post folks on this blog. And you do love your Libertarian economist friend, with his close ties to CATO. Who pay all sorts of people to post. But then, it could be one of the other nut case right wing think tanks, or their many organizations. And i am sure you will not tell us.

Duh, I manage a restaurant, Tommy...which means I work nights. To you that means that I'm a "dishwasher". But you don't lie ever...right? The truth is...every time you make that claim you know that you're lying. Paid to blog? Here? That's amusing. What's the going rate for that and who's picking up the tab?

As for Thomas Sowell? He was one of my favorite professors from my college years . I learned a lot about economics from the man. He's another died in the wool liberal who became a conservative after observing how things functioned in the "real world"...the kind of common sense person, progressive Kool Aid drinkers like yourself abhor.

Ah, but you lie continually. So I really do not know what you do. You say you have a degree in economics. Maybe you do, but you lie continually, so why should I believe you.
And Sowell, the Libertarian. Two things wrong with that, Oldstyle. No country, using libertarian economic principles has ever existed for long enough reach late youth. So, you have a supposedly impressive Professor, pushing, and believing in an economic system that has never and will never work. Kind of crazy, unless you love money. Second, he is all over CATO, which is the current John Birch society. And has provided the best pay to those coming out of school with a phd, period. If you want to make money with your economics phd, or your degree in journalism, just work for CATO. They pay really, really well. Way more than any other employer. And, me boy, they are anything but impartial. Cato has an agenda the size of a tanker.
Then, consider who started and ran CATO, at least until this past year. Why, it is the Koch brothers, also all involved with your hero, Sowell. I mean, google thomas sowell and koch brothers, and you get pages of their love fest.
But here is the thing that is most glaring. Most economists have a strong desire to remain politically impartial. Here is a nice little piece about Sowell, that captures the essence of the guy:
Thomas Sowell predicts race riot if Obama loses
Thomas Sowell predicts race riots if Obama loses - Topix
So, pages of involvement with the Koch brothers. Pages of statements that we would have race riots if Obama wins. Yeah, this guy is the kind of objective economist that you would love, oldstyle. An actual economics phd with a bat shit crazy con agenda. Really??? No economist is that partial to a political party unless he is paid to do so. None.

Ah, Tommy? YOU'RE the one who supposedly has the degree in economics...I graduated with a degree in history! You really can't keep all the lies straight...can you?

Most economists have a strong desire to remain politically impartial? Gee, someone call up Paul Krugman and tell him to cease and desist! As usual what you post is nonsense gleaned from yet another progressive site while you rant about "bat shit crazy cons". The truth is that many economists are extremely politically partial and many of them are partial to a progressive agenda.

And your "proof" that Thomas Sowell is a Koch puppet is a Google search? Well there you have it! Because as we all know...you can't put anything on the internet that's a lie...right Tommy? Let me guess...you're also a French model? You post some idiot blogger's take on Thomas Sowell and that's gospel? You continue to amuse.

 

[Rshermr]

Duh, I manage a restaurant, Tommy...which means I work nights. To you that means that I'm a "dishwasher". But you don't lie ever...right? The truth is...every time you make that claim you know that you're lying. Paid to blog? Here? That's amusing. What's the going rate for that and who's picking up the tab?

As for Thomas Sowell? He was one of my favorite professors from my college years . I learned a lot about economics from the man. He's another died in the wool liberal who became a conservative after observing how things functioned in the "real world"...the kind of common sense person, progressive Kool Aid drinkers like yourself abhor.

Ah, but you lie continually. So I really do not know what you do. You say you have a degree in economics. Maybe you do, but you lie continually, so why should I believe you.
And Sowell, the Libertarian. Two things wrong with that, Oldstyle. No country, using libertarian economic principles has ever existed for long enough reach late youth. So, you have a supposedly impressive Professor, pushing, and believing in an economic system that has never and will never work. Kind of crazy, unless you love money. Second, he is all over CATO, which is the current John Birch society. And has provided the best pay to those coming out of school with a phd, period. If you want to make money with your economics phd, or your degree in journalism, just work for CATO. They pay really, really well. Way more than any other employer. And, me boy, they are anything but impartial. Cato has an agenda the size of a tanker.
Then, consider who started and ran CATO, at least until this past year. Why, it is the Koch brothers, also all involved with your hero, Sowell. I mean, google thomas sowell and koch brothers, and you get pages of their love fest.
But here is the thing that is most glaring. Most economists have a strong desire to remain politically impartial. Here is a nice little piece about Sowell, that captures the essence of the guy:
Thomas Sowell predicts race riot if Obama loses
Thomas Sowell predicts race riots if Obama loses - Topix
So, pages of involvement with the Koch brothers. Pages of statements that we would have race riots if Obama wins. Yeah, this guy is the kind of objective economist that you would love, oldstyle. An actual economics phd with a bat shit crazy con agenda. Really??? No economist is that partial to a political party unless he is paid to do so. None.

Ah, Tommy? YOU'RE the one who supposedly has the degree in economics...I graduated with a degree in history! You really can't keep all the lies straight...can you?

Most economists have a strong desire to remain politically impartial? Gee, someone call up Paul Krugman and tell him to cease and desist! As usual what you post is nonsense gleaned from yet another progressive site while you rant about "bat shit crazy cons". The truth is that many economists are extremely politically partial and many of them are partial to a progressive agenda.

And your "proof" that Thomas Sowell is a Koch puppet is a Google search? Well there you have it! Because as we all know...you can't put anything on the internet that's a lie...right Tommy? Let me guess...you're also a French model? You post some idiot blogger's take on Thomas Sowell and that's gospel? You continue to amuse.

Most economists have a strong desire to remain politically impartial? Gee, someone call up Paul Krugman and tell him to cease and desist! As usual what you post is nonsense gleaned from yet another progressive site while you rant about "bat shit crazy cons". The truth is that many economists are extremely politically partial and many of them are partial to a progressive agenda.

Sure, Oldstyle. By the way, you may want to look up the definition of the word MOST. And I have seen no economist who carries the water for a bat shit crazy site similar to CATO. Ever. And nothing at all like the single claim made by Sowell, that we would have race riots if Obama lost. Nor have you. Krugman included. Nor have you. Which is why you are not providing statements as Crazy as this from any other Economist. Dipshit.

You used Sowell as a source, knowing how agenda driven he was, over and over until I caught you at it. Then thought it was funny that I had not caught you before. Because, of course, you have such integrity. Now, I know that as a Con, you hate Krugman. So I have never, ever used him as a source. See the difference, Oldstyle. Or is it simply to complex for you.

And your "proof" that Thomas Sowell is a Koch puppet is a Google search? Well there you have it! Because as we all know...you can't put anything on the internet that's a lie...right Tommy? Let me guess...you're also a French model? You post some idiot blogger's take on Thomas Sowell and that's gospel? You continue to amuse.

Well, you see, here it that thing, Oldstyle. If you have integity, you do not use bat shit crazy web sites. You try to use rational web sites. But not Oldstyle, you use whatever agrees with your agenda. That is the difference, oldstyle.

Your concern about Google is funny. Obviously, you do not like research. My opinion of Sowell is based on who he associates with, and what he says. Period. You know, I am sure, that he has his very own web site. Which covers everything that I have accused him of. From his very own mouth. Actually, I have no idea of any so called progessive site that says anything about Sowell. In general, except among nut case cons, Sowell is a non issue. But lets see what wikipedia has to say:
"Sowell compared President Barack Obama's actions to Adolf Hitler's in a June 2010 editorial for Investor's Business Daily titled "Is U.S. Now On Slippery Slope To Tyranny?"
Thomas Sowell - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This statement because Obama organized a drive to provide money to those hurt by the BP Oil spill.

Have you an example of any econ phd that ever made a criticism of a president comparing him to Hitler, me boy? Do you suppose that comparison may actually cement the fact that Sowell is a right wing nut case?

Sowell posts over and over in the nut case crazy con sites. Like the National Review. Over and over. Have you any examples of any economist writing opinion pieces for Move on.ORG? Here is a recent one, from National Review:
Gun-Control Ignorance
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/335848/gun-control-ignorance-thomas-sowell
Just an example of an opinion piece supporting another right wing issue, but HAVING NOTHING TO DO WITH ECONOMICS. And nothing abnormal here. That is what this clown does. An economist who carries the water for the conservative cause. Just your kind of economist, Oldstyle.

Most economist do not carry the water for any side. Please, please, oldstyle. Show me an article by Krugman, or some other economist you consider to be agenda driven, posting opinion pieces on things not economic in nature.

Nice, oldstyle. Too bad there is no economist from the left to compare with Sowell. Because there are none. I mean, this guy states that he is a tea party republican. Of course, being a CATO guy, he would. The Koch brothers finance one of the main tea party groups.

I actually associate economics phd's with integrity. I can see no reason to do so with Sowell.

 

[Oldstyle]

Ah, but you lie continually. So I really do not know what you do. You say you have a degree in economics. Maybe you do, but you lie continually, so why should I believe you.
And Sowell, the Libertarian. Two things wrong with that, Oldstyle. No country, using libertarian economic principles has ever existed for long enough reach late youth. So, you have a supposedly impressive Professor, pushing, and believing in an economic system that has never and will never work. Kind of crazy, unless you love money. Second, he is all over CATO, which is the current John Birch society. And has provided the best pay to those coming out of school with a phd, period. If you want to make money with your economics phd, or your degree in journalism, just work for CATO. They pay really, really well. Way more than any other employer. And, me boy, they are anything but impartial. Cato has an agenda the size of a tanker.
Then, consider who started and ran CATO, at least until this past year. Why, it is the Koch brothers, also all involved with your hero, Sowell. I mean, google thomas sowell and koch brothers, and you get pages of their love fest.
But here is the thing that is most glaring. Most economists have a strong desire to remain politically impartial. Here is a nice little piece about Sowell, that captures the essence of the guy:
Thomas Sowell predicts race riot if Obama loses
Thomas Sowell predicts race riots if Obama loses - Topix
So, pages of involvement with the Koch brothers. Pages of statements that we would have race riots if Obama wins. Yeah, this guy is the kind of objective economist that you would love, oldstyle. An actual economics phd with a bat shit crazy con agenda. Really??? No economist is that partial to a political party unless he is paid to do so. None.

Ah, Tommy? YOU'RE the one who supposedly has the degree in economics...I graduated with a degree in history! You really can't keep all the lies straight...can you?

Most economists have a strong desire to remain politically impartial? Gee, someone call up Paul Krugman and tell him to cease and desist! As usual what you post is nonsense gleaned from yet another progressive site while you rant about "bat shit crazy cons". The truth is that many economists are extremely politically partial and many of them are partial to a progressive agenda.

And your "proof" that Thomas Sowell is a Koch puppet is a Google search? Well there you have it! Because as we all know...you can't put anything on the internet that's a lie...right Tommy? Let me guess...you're also a French model? You post some idiot blogger's take on Thomas Sowell and that's gospel? You continue to amuse.

Most economists have a strong desire to remain politically impartial? Gee, someone call up Paul Krugman and tell him to cease and desist! As usual what you post is nonsense gleaned from yet another progressive site while you rant about "bat shit crazy cons". The truth is that many economists are extremely politically partial and many of them are partial to a progressive agenda.

Sure, Oldstyle. By the way, you may want to look up the definition of the word MOST. And I have seen no economist who carries the water for a bat shit crazy site similar to CATO. Ever. And nothing at all like the single claim made by Sowell, that we would have race riots if Obama lost. Nor have you. Krugman included. Nor have you. Which is why you are not providing statements as Crazy as this from any other Economist. Dipshit.

You used Sowell as a source, knowing how agenda driven he was, over and over until I caught you at it. Then thought it was funny that I had not caught you before. Because, of course, you have such integrity. Now, I know that as a Con, you hate Krugman. So I have never, ever used him as a source. See the difference, Oldstyle. Or is it simply to complex for you.

And your "proof" that Thomas Sowell is a Koch puppet is a Google search? Well there you have it! Because as we all know...you can't put anything on the internet that's a lie...right Tommy? Let me guess...you're also a French model? You post some idiot blogger's take on Thomas Sowell and that's gospel? You continue to amuse.

Well, you see, here it that thing, Oldstyle. If you have integity, you do not use bat shit crazy web sites. You try to use rational web sites. But not Oldstyle, you use whatever agrees with your agenda. That is the difference, oldstyle.

Your concern about Google is funny. Obviously, you do not like research. My opinion of Sowell is based on who he associates with, and what he says. Period. You know, I am sure, that he has his very own web site. Which covers everything that I have accused him of. From his very own mouth. Actually, I have no idea of any so called progessive site that says anything about Sowell. In general, except among nut case cons, Sowell is a non issue. But lets see what wikipedia has to say:
"Sowell compared President Barack Obama's actions to Adolf Hitler's in a June 2010 editorial for Investor's Business Daily titled "Is U.S. Now On Slippery Slope To Tyranny?"
Thomas Sowell - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This statement because Obama organized a drive to provide money to those hurt by the BP Oil spill.

Have you an example of any econ phd that ever made a criticism of a president comparing him to Hitler, me boy? Do you suppose that comparison may actually cement the fact that Sowell is a right wing nut case?

Sowell posts over and over in the nut case crazy con sites. Like the National Review. Over and over. Have you any examples of any economist writing opinion pieces for Move on.ORG? Here is a recent one, from National Review:
Gun-Control Ignorance
Gun-Control Ignorance - Thomas Sowell - National Review Online
Just an example of an opinion piece supporting another right wing issue, but HAVING NOTHING TO DO WITH ECONOMICS. And nothing abnormal here. That is what this clown does. An economist who carries the water for the conservative cause. Just your kind of economist, Oldstyle.

Most economist do not carry the water for any side. Please, please, oldstyle. Show me an article by Krugman, or some other economist you consider to be agenda driven, posting opinion pieces on things not economic in nature.

Nice, oldstyle. Too bad there is no economist from the left to compare with Sowell. Because there are none. I mean, this guy states that he is a tea party republican. Of course, being a CATO guy, he would. The Koch brothers finance one of the main tea party groups.

I actually associate economics phd's with integrity. I can see no reason to do so with Sowell.

Did you REALLY just ask me to show you an article by Paul Krugman that is agenda driven? Just when I think you couldn't be any more ignorant...

 

[Rshermr]

Ah, Tommy? YOU'RE the one who supposedly has the degree in economics...I graduated with a degree in history! You really can't keep all the lies straight...can you?

Most economists have a strong desire to remain politically impartial? Gee, someone call up Paul Krugman and tell him to cease and desist! As usual what you post is nonsense gleaned from yet another progressive site while you rant about "bat shit crazy cons". The truth is that many economists are extremely politically partial and many of them are partial to a progressive agenda.

And your "proof" that Thomas Sowell is a Koch puppet is a Google search? Well there you have it! Because as we all know...you can't put anything on the internet that's a lie...right Tommy? Let me guess...you're also a French model? You post some idiot blogger's take on Thomas Sowell and that's gospel? You continue to amuse.

But then, Oldstyle, idiots are often always amused.
Sure, Oldstyle. By the way, you may want to look up the definition of the word MOST. And I have seen no economist who carries the water for a bat shit crazy site similar to CATO. Ever. And nothing at all like the single claim made by Sowell, that we would have race riots if Obama lost. Nor have you. Krugman included. Nor have you. Which is why you are not providing statements as Crazy as this from any other Economist. Dipshit.

You used Sowell as a source, knowing how agenda driven he was, over and over until I caught you at it. Then thought it was funny that I had not caught you before. Because, of course, you have such integrity. Now, I know that as a Con, you hate Krugman. So I have never, ever used him as a source. See the difference, Oldstyle. Or is it simply to complex for you.

And your "proof" that Thomas Sowell is a Koch puppet is a Google search? Well there you have it! Because as we all know...you can't put anything on the internet that's a lie...right Tommy? Let me guess...you're also a French model? You post some idiot blogger's take on Thomas Sowell and that's gospel? You continue to amuse.

Well, you see, here it that thing, Oldstyle. If you have integity, you do not use bat shit crazy web sites. You try to use rational web sites. But not Oldstyle, you use whatever agrees with your agenda. That is the difference, oldstyle.

Your concern about Google is funny. Obviously, you do not like research. My opinion of Sowell is based on who he associates with, and what he says. Period. You know, I am sure, that he has his very own web site. Which covers everything that I have accused him of. From his very own mouth. Actually, I have no idea of any so called progessive site that says anything about Sowell. In general, except among nut case cons, Sowell is a non issue. But lets see what wikipedia has to say:
"Sowell compared President Barack Obama's actions to Adolf Hitler's in a June 2010 editorial for Investor's Business Daily titled "Is U.S. Now On Slippery Slope To Tyranny?"
Thomas Sowell - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This statement because Obama organized a drive to provide money to those hurt by the BP Oil spill.

Have you an example of any econ phd that ever made a criticism of a president comparing him to Hitler, me boy? Do you suppose that comparison may actually cement the fact that Sowell is a right wing nut case?

Sowell posts over and over in the nut case crazy con sites. Like the National Review. Over and over. Have you any examples of any economist writing opinion pieces for Move on.ORG? Here is a recent one, from National Review:
Gun-Control Ignorance
Gun-Control Ignorance - Thomas Sowell - National Review Online
Just an example of an opinion piece supporting another right wing issue, but HAVING NOTHING TO DO WITH ECONOMICS. And nothing abnormal here. That is what this clown does. An economist who carries the water for the conservative cause. Just your kind of economist, Oldstyle.

Most economist do not carry the water for any side. Please, please, oldstyle. Show me an article by Krugman, or some other economist you consider to be agenda driven, posting opinion pieces on things not economic in nature.

Nice, oldstyle. Too bad there is no economist from the left to compare with Sowell. Because there are none. I mean, this guy states that he is a tea party republican. Of course, being a CATO guy, he would. The Koch brothers finance one of the main tea party groups.

I actually associate economics phd's with integrity. I can see no reason to do so with Sowell.

Did you REALLY just ask me to show you an article by Paul Krugman that is agenda driven? Just when I think you couldn't be any more ignorant...

No, Oldstyle. Lets read what I said together. It is just a ways above in this post, but obviously you can not read. so let me help Here is the quote:

Most economist do not carry the water for any side. Please, please, oldstyle. Show me an article by Krugman, or some other economist you consider to be agenda driven, posting opinion pieces on things not economic in nature.

You need to try a little truth in your posts. Your lack of integrity is just too obvious.
But Sowell comments over and over about conservative issues having nothing to do with Economics. You know, like calling the President akin to Hitler. Or providing his great expertise on gun control issues. Or any of the following:
"The proposed mosque near where the World Trade Center was attacked and destroyed, along with thousands of American lives, would be a 15-story middle finger to America."
Directly from the pen of Sowell.
The Mosque Controversy - Thomas Sowell - [page]

"Yet what are we preoccupied with or outraged about? Whether the American government should intercept the phone calls of these cutthroats to people in the United States."
And here, an economist is backing the far rights position on government wire tapping. Not sure what that has to do with economics, but it is typical of Sowell's carying the water for republican
causes, and the far right in general.
Thomas Sowell on the NSA ?scandal? controversy « Sister Toldjah

So, your beloved economist posts almost entirely in right wing nut case web sites. And he agrees entirely with what the right wing nut case sites post. Always. And, me boy, ALWAYS in complete allignment with the Koch brothers, and their Tea Party beliefs. And always in alignment with the CATO institute. Always. Now, I am sure in your pea brain, that makes him an impartial economist.
And one who protects his integrity by sticking with economic issues. Just like normal phd's in economics, who value their independence.

 

[Oldstyle]

No, unlike YOU...I'm quite comfortable calling Thomas Sowell what he is...a conservative economist who has been commenting on social issues as well as economic issues for decades. You're the buffoon that can't bring himself to even admit that Paul Krugman is a far left liberal.

As for where Sowell "posts"? He's a syndicated columnist to over 150 newspapers from coast to coast as well as a regular contributor to Forbes and the Wall Street Journal. Sowell does not post almost entirely in right wing nut case web sites as you have alleged...just one more of your usual lies.

 

[Rshermr]

No, unlike YOU...I'm quite comfortable calling Thomas Sowell what he is...a conservative economist who has been commenting on social issues as well as economic issues for decades. You're the buffoon that can't bring himself to even admit that Paul Krugman is a far left liberal.

As for where Sowell "posts"? He's a syndicated columnist to over 150 newspapers from coast to coast as well as a regular contributor to Forbes and the Wall Street Journal. Sowell does not post almost entirely in right wing nut case web sites as you have alleged...just one more of your usual lies.

Ah, but he does. Take a look, dipshit. Syndicate simply says he writes a single article and it is placed in lots of outlets. Newspapers, for instance. What I am saying is that his effort to write particular opinion pieces and post them is almost entirely to right wing nut case web sites.

But the real point is, if you are going to take an economist seriously, you should look for considered opinion. Not agenda. And Sowell is entirely agenda. Name an opinion, and you know what he is going to say, at least 95% of the time. So, why bother reading his agenda. It is a total waste of time. What you have then is entertainment value. No real objective analysis, because you know where the guy is going.

Your opinion of Paul Krugman is your opinion. Sorry, I see him as a realist. And I do not see him posting about social issues, with his nose up the ass of any political nut cases like the Koch brothers. Nor do I see him clinging to an economic theory that has never, ever produced a working economy. So, what does anyone see in Sowell. If you are honest with yourself, you see agenda. And if you look a bit, you see paid for agenda. Dipshit.

By the way, where are those left wing non economic issues that Krugman or some other progressive phd economist are writing and talking about. You know, the ones you were so amazed that I was suggesting he does not comment on. In the above post where you misquoted me. As usual.