YooHoo!!! Supply- siders!!! Look here if you dare

[Iceweasel]

lol, I thought Prez policy mattered? Why else would Heritage, CATO, etc claim credit for Ronnie's 17 year miracle AND the right calls Obama a dictator? lol

Because, lolEinstein, Reagan went through congress while obbie bypasses them and the people to ram his shit down our throats.

 

[Uncensored2008]

edward post any links to back himself up? Of course not, he's a lazy conservative. Ironic eh?

What is the national debt, Comrade Dog Cum?

If your little tin god reduced all this spending, it must be about the same as when Bush left office.

I mean if your little tin god TRIPLED it in 4 years - then you must be lying through your ******* teeth, right?

Commies GOTTA lie - it's your duty.

 

[Dad2three]

lol, I thought Prez policy mattered? Why else would Heritage, CATO, etc claim credit for Ronnie's 17 year miracle AND the right calls Obama a dictator? lol

Because, lolEinstein, Reagan went through congress while obbie bypasses them and the people to ram his shit down our throats.

Yeah, Obama just writes checks, NOT like it's from the CR the Congress passed, lol

 

[Dot Com]

Well, I'm going out for a few hours to do some stuff IRL.

bbl to check on the rw history revisionists

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

lol, I thought Prez policy mattered? Why else would Heritage, CATO, etc claim credit for Ronnie's 17 year miracle AND the right calls Obama a dictator? lol

Because, lolEinstein, Reagan went through congress while obbie bypasses them and the people to ram his shit down our throats.

Yeah, Obama just writes checks, NOT like it's from the CR the Congress passed, lol

OP implied Obama was a supply sider because spending went up so little while he was president. Then OP learned it was because of Republican Congress not libcommie Obama who would spend like crazy if he could.

 

[Dad2three]

edward post any links to back himself up? Of course not, he's a lazy conservative. Ironic eh?

What is the national debt, Comrade Dog Cum?

If your little tin god reduced all this spending, it must be about the same as when Bush left office.

I mean if your little tin god TRIPLED it in 4 years - then you must be lying through your ******* teeth, right?

Commies GOTTA lie - it's your duty.

What it is with today's GOP is that the facts - whether scientific, historical, or just common sense - interfere with their ideological utopia.


We already know what economic policies work best for our country. Clinton knew that we had to cut spending and increase revenues. We had revenues of 20.6% of GDP and a surplus in 2000. Then something terrible happened, the Republicans gained complete control in 2001 and instead of sticking with what was working they decided that their ideology was more important AND CUT TAXES TWICE (ONCE AT WAR) AND DROPPED REVENUES TO LESS THAN 15% OF GDP, KOREAN WAR LEVELS! . The debt has gone up $12+ trillion since then.


Clinton's final F/Y budget ends

09/30/2001 $5,807,463,412,200.06


Dubya's final F/Y budget ends

09/30/2009 $11,909,829,003,511.75

$6.1+ TRILLION INCREASE?

Government - Historical Debt Outstanding - Annual 2000 - 2014

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

edward post any links to back himself up? Of course not, he's a lazy conservative. Ironic eh?

What is the national debt, Comrade Dog Cum?

If your little tin god reduced all this spending, it must be about the same as when Bush left office.

I mean if your little tin god TRIPLED it in 4 years - then you must be lying through your ******* teeth, right?

Commies GOTTA lie - it's your duty.

What it is with today's GOP is that the facts - whether scientific, historical, or just common sense - interfere with their ideological utopia.


We already know what economic policies work best for our country. Clinton knew that we had to cut spending and increase revenues. We had revenues of 20.6% of GDP and a surplus in 2000. Then something terrible happened, the Republicans gained complete control in 2001 and instead of sticking with what was working they decided that their ideology was more important AND CUT TAXES TWICE (ONCE AT WAR) AND DROPPED REVENUES TO LESS THAN 15% OF GDP, KOREAN WAR LEVELS! . The debt has gone up $12+ trillion since then.


Clinton's final F/Y budget ends

09/30/2001 $5,807,463,412,200.06


Dubya's final F/Y budget ends

09/30/2009 $11,909,829,003,511.75

$6.1+ TRILLION INCREASE?

Government - Historical Debt Outstanding - Annual 2000 - 2014

op is about supply side economics. Can dumb to 3 comment or must he always change the subject.

 

[Dad2three]

edward post any links to back himself up? Of course not, he's a lazy conservative. Ironic eh?

What is the national debt, Comrade Dog Cum?

If your little tin god reduced all this spending, it must be about the same as when Bush left office.

I mean if your little tin god TRIPLED it in 4 years - then you must be lying through your ******* teeth, right?

Commies GOTTA lie - it's your duty.

What it is with today's GOP is that the facts - whether scientific, historical, or just common sense - interfere with their ideological utopia.


We already know what economic policies work best for our country. Clinton knew that we had to cut spending and increase revenues. We had revenues of 20.6% of GDP and a surplus in 2000. Then something terrible happened, the Republicans gained complete control in 2001 and instead of sticking with what was working they decided that their ideology was more important AND CUT TAXES TWICE (ONCE AT WAR) AND DROPPED REVENUES TO LESS THAN 15% OF GDP, KOREAN WAR LEVELS! . The debt has gone up $12+ trillion since then.


Clinton's final F/Y budget ends

09/30/2001 $5,807,463,412,200.06


Dubya's final F/Y budget ends

09/30/2009 $11,909,829,003,511.75

$6.1+ TRILLION INCREASE?

Government - Historical Debt Outstanding - Annual 2000 - 2014

op is about supply side economics. Can dumb to 3 comment or must he always change the subject.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

What year did Republicans take over Congress????

 

[Dad2three]

What year did Republicans take over Congress????

What does that matter? Either Prez policy is number one or blame goes with Congress, which is it? I keep hearing conservatives praise Ronnie for a supposed 17 year economic miracle? We thanking the Dems for that today? lol

 

[Dot Com]

What year did Republicans take over Congress????

What does that matter? Either Prez policy is number one or blame goes with Congress, which is it? I keep hearing conservatives praise Ronnie for a supposed 17 year economic miracle? We thanking the Dems for that today? lol

 

[Ernie S.]

How about plotting the numbers against what party controlled Congress?

lol, I thought Prez policy mattered? Why else would Heritage, CATO, etc claim credit for Ronnie's 17 year miracle AND the right calls Obama a dictator? lol

So apparently your answer is, "No I refuse to look at anything that might shake my faith in the Democrat Party. OK Fine. Remain stupid.

 

[Dad2three]

How about plotting the numbers against what party controlled Congress?

lol, I thought Prez policy mattered? Why else would Heritage, CATO, etc claim credit for Ronnie's 17 year miracle AND the right calls Obama a dictator? lol

So apparently your answer is, "No I refuse to look at anything that might shake my faith in the Democrat Party. OK Fine. Remain stupid.

Stop projecting dummy. Answer the question. Is it Prez policy number one or is it Congress who gets credit or blame? lol

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

How about plotting the numbers against what party controlled Congress?

lol, I thought Prez policy mattered? Why else would Heritage, CATO, etc claim credit for Ronnie's 17 year miracle AND the right calls Obama a dictator? lol

So apparently your answer is, "No I refuse to look at anything that might shake my faith in the Democrat Party. OK Fine. Remain stupid.

Stop projecting dummy. Answer the question. Is it Prez policy number one or is it Congress who gets credit or blame? lol

." What I want to ask instead is whether any of this makes sense. How much influence does the occupant of the White House have on the economy, anyway? The standard answer among economists, at least when they aren’t being political hacks, is: not much. But is this time different?
To understand why economists usually downplay the economic role of presidents, let’s revisit a much-mythologized episode in U.S. economic history: the recession and recovery of the 1980s.
On the right, of course, the 1980s are remembered as an age of miracles wrought by the blessed Reagan, who cut taxes, conjured up the magic of the marketplace and led the nation to job gains never matched before or since. In reality, the 16 million jobs America added during the Reagan years were only slightly more than the 14 million added over the previous eight years. And a later president — Bill something-or-other — presided over the creation of 22 million jobs. But who’s counting?"-Paul Krugman

 

[Dragonlady]

And right wingers always neglect to mention that millions of jobs were created by Ronnie's debt fuelled domestic defense spending spree that Republicans continue to this day because to stop it, or even slow it down, would throw the country into a recession.

The U.S. Defence budget is spent mostly in the US, because weapons technology cannot leave the U.S. and contracts guarantee the jobs stay in the US.

This acceleration in Defence Department Spending, fuelled by Republican wars and fear of terrorists, is so out of control that Republicans rage that Obama won't take on the Russians over Lithuania or return to Iraq and yet want cuts to social programs at home.

Right wingers never want to touch defence spending even though the U.S. spends more than the combined spending of the rest of the world's top 10 nations, combined. That's a lot of American jobs, which cannot go overseas. And it's the big-ticket budget item that nobody wants to cut.

Ronnie's solution to unemployment was to create a million civil service jobs because government workers buy consumer goods too. So much for cutting the growth of government.

Democrats are always painted as the party which wants to control lives, but the Republicans who refuse to give women freedom of choice in reproduction decisions.

I'd be more supportive of the U.S. Government jobs for Americans program if they legislated programs to keep other sectors of the manufacturing economy at home so that people can support their families with one job so they can spend quality time with their children instead of having to take a second or third job in order to support them.

 

[Dot Com]

And right wingers always neglect to mention that millions of jobs were created by Ronnie's debt fuelled domestic defense spending spree that Republicans continue to this day because to stop it, or even slow it down, would throw the country into a recession.

The U.S. Defence budget is spent mostly in the US, because weapons technology cannot leave the U.S. and contracts guarantee the jobs stay in the US.

This acceleration in Defence Department Spending, fuelled by Republican wars and fear of terrorists, is so out of control that Republicans rage that Obama won't take on the Russians over Lithuania or return to Iraq and yet want cuts to social programs at home.

Right wingers never want to touch defence spending even though the U.S. spends more than the combined spending of the rest of the world's top 10 nations, combined. That's a lot of American jobs, which cannot go overseas. And it's the big-ticket budget item that nobody wants to cut.

Ronnie's solution to unemployment was to create a million civil service jobs because government workers buy consumer goods too. So much for cutting the growth of government.

Democrats are always painted as the party which wants to control lives, but the Republicans who refuse to give women freedom of choice in reproduction decisions.

I'd be more supportive of the U.S. Government jobs for Americans program if they legislated programs to keep other sectors of the manufacturing economy at home so that people can support their families with one job so they can spend quality time with their children instead of having to take a second or third job in order to support them.

 

[Iceweasel]

And right wingers always neglect to mention that millions of jobs were created by Ronnie's debt fuelled domestic defense spending spree that Republicans continue to this day because to stop it, or even slow it down, would throw the country into a recession.

The U.S. Defence budget is spent mostly in the US, because weapons technology cannot leave the U.S. and contracts guarantee the jobs stay in the US.

This acceleration in Defence Department Spending, fuelled by Republican wars and fear of terrorists, is so out of control that Republicans rage that Obama won't take on the Russians over Lithuania or return to Iraq and yet want cuts to social programs at home.

Right wingers never want to touch defence spending even though the U.S. spends more than the combined spending of the rest of the world's top 10 nations, combined. That's a lot of American jobs, which cannot go overseas. And it's the big-ticket budget item that nobody wants to cut.

Ronnie's solution to unemployment was to create a million civil service jobs because government workers buy consumer goods too. So much for cutting the growth of government.

Democrats are always painted as the party which wants to control lives, but the Republicans who refuse to give women freedom of choice in reproduction decisions.

I'd be more supportive of the U.S. Government jobs for Americans program if they legislated programs to keep other sectors of the manufacturing economy at home so that people can support their families with one job so they can spend quality time with their children instead of having to take a second or third job in order to support them.

Wait. So Democrats go along with this evil scheme to create jobs for the people? So the Reagan spending is still keeping us afloat? That's just bizarre.

Government jobs for Americans should employee people to stay at home so they can be with the kids? What kind of public titty were you hoping for?

 

[Dot Com]

And right wingers always neglect to mention that millions of jobs were created by Ronnie's debt fuelled domestic defense spending spree that Republicans continue to this day because to stop it, or even slow it down, would throw the country into a recession.

The U.S. Defence budget is spent mostly in the US, because weapons technology cannot leave the U.S. and contracts guarantee the jobs stay in the US.

This acceleration in Defence Department Spending, fuelled by Republican wars and fear of terrorists, is so out of control that Republicans rage that Obama won't take on the Russians over Lithuania or return to Iraq and yet want cuts to social programs at home.

Right wingers never want to touch defence spending even though the U.S. spends more than the combined spending of the rest of the world's top 10 nations, combined. That's a lot of American jobs, which cannot go overseas. And it's the big-ticket budget item that nobody wants to cut.

Ronnie's solution to unemployment was to create a million civil service jobs because government workers buy consumer goods too. So much for cutting the growth of government.

Democrats are always painted as the party which wants to control lives, but the Republicans who refuse to give women freedom of choice in reproduction decisions.

I'd be more supportive of the U.S. Government jobs for Americans program if they legislated programs to keep other sectors of the manufacturing economy at home so that people can support their families with one job so they can spend quality time with their children instead of having to take a second or third job in order to support them.

Wait. So Democrats go along with this evil scheme to create jobs for the people? So the Reagan spending is still keeping us afloat? That's just bizarre.

Government jobs for Americans should employee people to stay at home so they can be with the kids? What kind of public titty were you hoping for?

what takes up over 50% of the discretionary budget smart guy? Google it. Take your time

 

[Iceweasel]

what takes up over 50% of the discretionary budget smart guy? Google it. Take your time

I don't use google, dumb guy. Since you're too stupid and lazy I did some homework for you.

 

[Dot Com]

what takes up over 50% of the discretionary budget smart guy? Google it. Take your time

I don't use google, dumb guy. Since you're too stupid and lazy I did some homework for you.

.com??? that means its a for-profit site. Here son-