On The 'Good' Unemployment Rate

[Kathianne]

http://blog.american.com/2011/12/november-jobs-report-7-reasons-why-its-better-but-still-terrible/

As anyone that's been looking for work in the past 3 years can tell you, things haven't changed much. Perhaps the good news would be that fewer people hope for a better position so they aren't looking any longer. Fewer people clamoring for the few good jobs?


...1. The red flag here is the sharp drop in the size of the labor force versus October. The participation rate fell from an already low 64.2 percent to 64.0 percent. In a strong jobs recovery, that number should be rising as more people look for work. If the labor force participation rate were back at its January 2009 level, the U-3 rate would be 11.0 percent.
2. As it is, the broader U-6 rate — which includes part timers who wish they were full timers — is still a sky-high 15.6 percent, down from 16.2 percent last month.
3. The broadest measure of employment is the employment/population ratio and it rose to 58.5 percent from 58.4 percent. But as MKM Partners (http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCAQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mkmpartners.com%2F&ei=1-_YTsLvK6Le0QG_s73hDQ&usg=AFQjCNFledJj3DnH2-rpWJRFzqlnPnonJQ) notes: “The employment/population ratio has averaged 58.4 since December 2009, meaning there has essentially been no real progress on employment in two years’ time. … In other words, we are not growing fast enough to reduce the so-called output gap/labor market slack.”
4. The workweek was flat, at 34.3 hours in November, but aggregate hours worked actually fell 0.1 percent after two months of relatively strong gains. (MKM)
5. Nominal wages also slipped in November for the first time since August. MKM: “The product of hours worked and wages paid is a proxy for nominal income, and it has decelerated to a 2.6% annualized rate over the last six months from just over a 4% rate this summer (prior to the sharp tightening in financial conditions). … While the economic data have been better of late, we remain concerned that we are seeing a bounce back from a series of supply shocks earlier in the year that may not be sustained against the foliage of tighter financial conditions, a deep recession in Europe and a sharp slowdown in China and emerging-market countries.”
6. We may not have seen the last of the unemployment 9-handle given a likely growth slowdown next year. As IHS Global Insight notes:

...

[Psychoblues]

Instead of following the incessant cries of doom, gloom and the skies are falling why don't you do a little research for a more balanced view, Kath? Here's a few articles that differ a bit on the take you seem to have:

http://finance.yahoo.com/video/economy-18773128/unemployment-rate-decline-a-positive-sign-for-housing-27474358.html

http://economics.about.com/od/helpforeconomicsstudents/f/unemployment.htm

Lots more out there and many perspectives. The American economy has been improving ever since President Barack Hussein Obama implemented his stimulus packages and the only ones that don't recognize that are those with their own agendas or those that are misinformed or deliberately ignorant. There's probably not much can be said or done to help those that will not seek truth or more information on their own.

Psychoblues

[fj1200]

The American economy has been improving ever since President Barack Hussein Obama implemented his stimulus packages...

Improving? Arguable. Held back by said's stimulus and other policies? Undoubtedly.

[ConHog]

Instead of following the incessant cries of doom, gloom and the skies are falling why don't you do a little research for a more balanced view, Kath? Here's a few articles that differ a bit on the take you seem to have:

http://finance.yahoo.com/video/economy-18773128/unemployment-rate-decline-a-positive-sign-for-housing-27474358.html

http://economics.about.com/od/helpforeconomicsstudents/f/unemployment.htm

Lots more out there and many perspectives. The American economy has been improving ever since President Barack Hussein Obama implemented his stimulus packages and the only ones that don't recognize that are those with their own agendas or those that are misinformed or deliberately ignorant. There's probably not much can be said or done to help those that will not seek truth or more information on their own.

Psychoblues

I have to wonder what you're attempting to do here because there is absolutely positively no argument that the economy hasn't been improving since Obama took office. Which leads one to wonder if you are

A) Stupid and can't recognize that fact

or

B) A liar who knows he's lying

Again, there is no valid argument that economy is improving. Now true there have been small ebbs either way, but to say that there has been any great improvement.

[Psychoblues]

I have to wonder what you're attempting to do here because there is absolutely positively no argument that the economy hasn't been improving since Obama took office. Which leads one to wonder if you are

A) Stupid and can't recognize that fact

or

B) A liar who knows he's lying

Again, there is no valid argument that economy is improving. Now true there have been small ebbs either way, but to say that there has been any great improvement.

Your opinion makes me neither stupid nor a liar. But in good keeping I also regard much the same of you. Here is an article from the New Yorker and written by an individual far smarter and well informed than either of us. Perhaps you care to argue with some of the points that he is sharing with us?

The Financial Page

Second Helpings

by James Surowiecki (http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/bios/james_surowiecki/search?contributorName=james surowiecki)

When President Obama unveiled an array of new tax-cut and spending proposals last week, one word was noticeably missing from his speeches: “stimulus.” Republicans, meanwhile, energetically set about decrying the plan as “more of the same failed ‘stimulus’ ” and as simply a “second stimulus”—as if the word itself were a damning indictment. The idea of using countercyclical fiscal policy to help get a weak economy moving is hardly radical. But in Washington stimulus has become the policy that dare not speak its name.

This wouldn’t be surprising if we were talking about a failed program. But, by any reasonable measure, the $800-billion stimulus package that Congress passed in the winter of 2009 was a clear, if limited, success. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that it reduced unemployment by somewhere between 0.8 and 1.7 per cent in recent months. Economists at various Wall Street houses suggest that it boosted G.D.P. by more than two per cent. And a recent study by Mark Zandi and Alan Blinder, economists from, respectively, Moody’s and Princeton, argues that, in the absence of the stimulus, unemployment would have risen above eleven per cent and that G.D.P. would have been almost half a trillion dollars lower. The weight of the evidence suggests that fiscal policy softened the impact of the recession, boosting demand, creating jobs, and helping the economy start growing again. What’s more, it did so without any of the negative effects that deficit spending can entail: interest rates remain at remarkably low levels, and government borrowing didn’t crowd out private investment........................................ .................................................. .


read lots more: http://www.newyorker.com/talk/financial/2010/09/20/100920ta_talk_surowiecki





Read more http://www.newyorker.com/talk/financial/2010/09/20/100920ta_talk_surowiecki#ixzz1fWVeSAjf

[ConHog]

Your opinion makes me neither stupid nor a liar. But in good keeping I also regard much the same of you. Here is an article from the New Yorker and written by an individual far smarter and well informed than either of us. Perhaps you care to argue with some of the points that he is sharing with us?

The Financial Page

Second Helpings

by James Surowiecki (http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/bios/james_surowiecki/search?contributorName=james surowiecki)

When President Obama unveiled an array of new tax-cut and spending proposals last week, one word was noticeably missing from his speeches: “stimulus.” Republicans, meanwhile, energetically set about decrying the plan as “more of the same failed ‘stimulus’ ” and as simply a “second stimulus”—as if the word itself were a damning indictment. The idea of using countercyclical fiscal policy to help get a weak economy moving is hardly radical. But in Washington stimulus has become the policy that dare not speak its name.

This wouldn’t be surprising if we were talking about a failed program. But, by any reasonable measure, the $800-billion stimulus package that Congress passed in the winter of 2009 was a clear, if limited, success. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that it reduced unemployment by somewhere between 0.8 and 1.7 per cent in recent months. Economists at various Wall Street houses suggest that it boosted G.D.P. by more than two per cent. And a recent study by Mark Zandi and Alan Blinder, economists from, respectively, Moody’s and Princeton, argues that, in the absence of the stimulus, unemployment would have risen above eleven per cent and that G.D.P. would have been almost half a trillion dollars lower. The weight of the evidence suggests that fiscal policy softened the impact of the recession, boosting demand, creating jobs, and helping the economy start growing again. What’s more, it did so without any of the negative effects that deficit spending can entail: interest rates remain at remarkably low levels, and government borrowing didn’t crowd out private investment........................................ .................................................. .


read lots more: http://www.newyorker.com/talk/financial/2010/09/20/100920ta_talk_surowiecki





Read more http://www.newyorker.com/talk/financial/2010/09/20/100920ta_talk_surowiecki#ixzz1fWVeSAjf


Oh please. That jackass can write whatever he would like. I am looking at actual facts, you know people who have lost their homes because they don't have jobs, people on welfare because they don't have jobs, unemployment benefit rosters, that sort of thing. As I said, there have undoubtedly been upswings here and there, but by and large NO ONE can with a straight face say we are seeing a recovery of any sort.

[Missileman]

Your opinion makes me neither stupid nor a liar. But in good keeping I also regard much the same of you. Here is an article from the New Yorker and written by an individual far smarter and well informed than either of us. Perhaps you care to argue with some of the points that he is sharing with us?

The Financial Page

Second Helpings

by James Surowiecki (http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/bios/james_surowiecki/search?contributorName=james surowiecki)

When President Obama unveiled an array of new tax-cut and spending proposals last week, one word was noticeably missing from his speeches: “stimulus.” Republicans, meanwhile, energetically set about decrying the plan as “more of the same failed ‘stimulus’ ” and as simply a “second stimulus”—as if the word itself were a damning indictment. The idea of using countercyclical fiscal policy to help get a weak economy moving is hardly radical. But in Washington stimulus has become the policy that dare not speak its name.

This wouldn’t be surprising if we were talking about a failed program. But, by any reasonable measure, the $800-billion stimulus package that Congress passed in the winter of 2009 was a clear, if limited, success. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that it reduced unemployment by somewhere between 0.8 and 1.7 per cent in recent months. Economists at various Wall Street houses suggest that it boosted G.D.P. by more than two per cent. And a recent study by Mark Zandi and Alan Blinder, economists from, respectively, Moody’s and Princeton, argues that, in the absence of the stimulus, unemployment would have risen above eleven per cent and that G.D.P. would have been almost half a trillion dollars lower. The weight of the evidence suggests that fiscal policy softened the impact of the recession, boosting demand, creating jobs, and helping the economy start growing again. What’s more, it did so without any of the negative effects that deficit spending can entail: interest rates remain at remarkably low levels, and government borrowing didn’t crowd out private investment........................................ .................................................. .


read lots more: http://www.newyorker.com/talk/financial/2010/09/20/100920ta_talk_surowiecki





Read more http://www.newyorker.com/talk/financial/2010/09/20/100920ta_talk_surowiecki#ixzz1fWVeSAjf



The CBO arrives at its conclusions using the bullshit numbers provided to it. You can tell for sure it's a bullshit conclusion because you can't prove a negative. They can no more say for sure what might have happened without the stimulus than you can tell the truth when it come to Obama.

[Psychoblues]

Oh please. That jackass can write whatever he would like. I am looking at actual facts, you know people who have lost their homes because they don't have jobs, people on welfare because they don't have jobs, unemployment benefit rosters, that sort of thing. As I said, there have undoubtedly been upswings here and there, but by and large NO ONE can with a straight face say we are seeing a recovery of any sort.

We are seeing recovery in every economic equation that counts, they are studied, stated, observable, measurable and you can't demonstrate or in any way truthfully prove otherwise. And your blathering about people not having jobs, losing homes, on welfare and unemployed, just what single day in American history can you name that none of these things existed and if you can't name a single day then when do you expect to see a single day when none of those things that you seem to be so concerned about will no longer exist? Or are you still feeling like just so much of a liar and a simpleton?

Psychoblues

[Psychoblues]

The CBO arrives at its conclusions using the bullshit numbers provided to it. You can tell for sure it's a bullshit conclusion because you can't prove a negative. They can no more say for sure what might have happened without the stimulus than you can tell the truth when it come to Obama.

You don't have to just believe the CBO, Mm. There are many economic entities that reflect much the same. Something good for certain happened at precisely the time the stimulus began. If you want to attribute that to something or someone else then I will not argue if you can demonstrate the validity of your claim. At this time I am left only with the successes of the stimulus to satisfy my inquiring mind. In your case, I'd simply suggest that you read the article that I posted and linked to.

Psychoblues

[Missileman]

You don't have to just believe the CBO, Mm. There are many economic entities that reflect much the same. Something good for certain happened at precisely the time the stimulus began. If you want to attribute that to something or someone else then I will not argue if you can demonstrate the validity of your claim. At this time I am left only with the successes of the stimulus to satisfy my inquiring mind. In your case, I'd simply suggest that you read the article that I posted and linked to.

Psychoblues

Unemployment rose 2%...color that anyway you like.

[Psychoblues]

Unemployment rose 2%...color that anyway you like.

The rapid and devastating downward spiral of the gwb economy was reversed simultaneously with the implementation of the President Obama stimulus packages any color you want to paint it. Everyone that was anyone from all political sides were forecasting depression possibly and probably worse than the one in '29. The perfect economic storm was upon us and the world in 2006, 2007, 2008 and early 2009. Most of us are still reeling from that, no doubt, but we are improving, each day, in every way.

Psychoblues

[Missileman]

The rapid and devastating downward spiral of the gwb economy was reversed simultaneously with the implementation of the President Obama stimulus packages any color you want to paint it. Everyone that was anyone from all political sides were forecasting depression possibly and probably worse than the one in '29. The perfect economic storm was upon us and the world in 2006, 2007, 2008 and early 2009. Most of us are still reeling from that, no doubt, but we are improving, each day, in every way.

Psychoblues


The stimulus succeeded only in wasting a trillion dollars and adding the same amount to our debt.

[Psychoblues]

The stimulus succeeded only in wasting a trillion dollars and adding the same amount to our debt.

Soooooooo,,,,,,you're saying the forecast depression just straightened itself out? You're saying the unpaid for gwb wars were free flukes of American ingenuity? You're saying the unpaid for gwb tax cuts were also free and have no effect on any debt or deficit? And the prescription drug benefit, also free, no child left behind, free? How does all that make you feel, Mm? The Obama stimulus is working better than ever imagined and it's benefits will be felt for decades. That and the Patients Protection and Affordable Care Act assures that President Barack Hussein Obama will go down in American history as one of the greatest presidents and ending the longest wars in American history may cause him to capture the distinction as being the very greatest president in all of our history.

Psychoblues

[fj1200]

Your opinion makes me neither stupid nor a liar. But in good keeping I also regard much the same of you. Here is an article from the New Yorker and written by an individual far smarter and well informed than either of us. Perhaps you care to argue with some of the points that he is sharing with us?

Why do I try? :bang3:


more jobs were lost in the first seven quarters of the 2001 recession than were lost in the first seven quarters of this recession. How is that possible? How could job losses have been worse in 2001 but unemployment so much higher now? Weak job creation. The latest Bureau of Labor and Statistics data show that employers have created 8.6 million fewer new jobs this time around than they did almost a decade ago.
http://blog.heritage.org/2010/06/07/morning-bell-why-obamas-stimulus-failed/

And the stimulus package cost per job is (low end) of $185,000 which would be minimum 3 times the average US wage. Money well spent? No.

[Missileman]

Soooooooo,,,,,,you're saying the forecast depression just straightened itself out? You're saying the unpaid for gwb wars were free flukes of American ingenuity? You're saying the unpaid for gwb tax cuts were also free and have no effect on any debt or deficit? And the prescription drug benefit, also free, no child left behind, free? How does all that make you feel, Mm? The Obama stimulus is working better than ever imagined and it's benefits will be felt for decades. That and the Patients Protection and Affordable Care Act assures that President Barack Hussein Obama will go down in American history as one of the greatest presidents and ending the longest wars in American history may cause him to capture the distinction as being the very greatest president in all of our history.

Psychoblues

There's some typical LIB think for ya. A tax cut that's unpaid for? Are you really that dense? The deficit and debt are solely the result of SPENDING, PERIOD. As for Obamacare, it will die it's horrible, unconstitutional death as soon as the Supreme Court gets ahold of it. Obama will go down in history as worse than even Carter. He's a one-term mistake that is soon to be remedied.

[fj1200]

The Obama stimulus is working better than ever imagined and it's benefits will be felt for decades.

Why stimulus is failure and any success is, at best, temporary. Bastiat asks, "but by what do we measure our well being? By the result of our effort, or by the effort itself?" It can't be disputed that effort by itself does not produce long term wealth creation as one man digging a hole only to be filled in by another does not lead to wealth. It may produce phantom GDP but the effects are not long term. Also to the extent that BO admitted that there were no "shovel ready jobs" he also admitted to its failure. If the stimulus had actually added to the long-term infrastructure of the country by building bridges, roads, etc. then the results of the effort would add to our well being and more likely worth the investment. And as a criticism to the tax cut portion of the stimulus bill; that was also a failure as it did nothing to encourage investment by those who could actually increase our well being. The tax "cuts" were also temporary in nature and are measurable failures by the other rebates that were given out under the Bush administration; in 2001 and 2008.

What say you?

[Psychoblues]

There's some typical LIB think for ya. A tax cut that's unpaid for? Are you really that dense? The deficit and debt are solely the result of SPENDING, PERIOD. As for Obamacare, it will die it's horrible, unconstitutional death as soon as the Supreme Court gets ahold of it. Obama will go down in history as worse than even Carter. He's a one-term mistake that is soon to be remedied.

You do understand that the SCOTUS is not being asked to rule on the constitutionality of the Patients Protection and Affordable Care Act but only it's mandate for participation don't you? You do understand this exact argument has been used repeatedly in attempts to wipe away Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and all manner of forms of social safety nets, unemployment insurance, etc.? And you do realize that none of those efforts have been successful in any way, don't you?

Now, let's address your complete misunderstanding of the "unpaid for tax cuts." What this means is that our budgets contain many forecasts and balance sheets. When a "tax cut" is proposed then an equal cut in forecast spending must accompany it or the tax cut becomes the burden on our children and grandchildren that the right wingers like to sensationalize about. Partisanship aside, it is real and it is something for us to be very concerned about.

I can already see you squinting your eyes, banging your head on the table and about to lose it so I'll just leave this with you for now but I hope to continue the conversation as you become more able to understand and carry on a civil if not intelligent dialogue.

:laugh2::laugh2::laugh2:

Psychoblues

[Psychoblues]

Why stimulus is failure and any success is, at best, temporary. Bastiat asks, "but by what do we measure our well being? By the result of our effort, or by the effort itself?" It can't be disputed that effort by itself does not produce long term wealth creation as one man digging a hole only to be filled in by another does not lead to wealth. It may produce phantom GDP but the effects are not long term. Also to the extent that BO admitted that there were no "shovel ready jobs" he also admitted to its failure. If the stimulus had actually added to the long-term infrastructure of the country by building bridges, roads, etc. then the results of the effort would add to our well being and more likely worth the investment. And as a criticism to the tax cut portion of the stimulus bill; that was also a failure as it did nothing to encourage investment by those who could actually increase our well being. The tax "cuts" were also temporary in nature and are measurable failures by the other rebates that were given out under the Bush administration; in 2001 and 2008.

What say you?

I love you, Good Buddy, but you need to do a little catching up. Please see posts, 2, 5, 8, 9, 11 and 13 in this thread. Think a little and get back with me.

What say you?

Psychoblues

[fj1200]

I love you, Good Buddy, but you need to do a little catching up. Please see posts, 2, 5, 8, 9, 11 and 13 in this thread. Think a little and get back with me.

What say you?

I read your parrots and was attempting to get a bit deeper into the subject matter; Bastiat a little too deep for you? And quoting Zandi is a bit beyond the pale as his projections prior to stimulus implementation have not turned as hoped. The problem with any study of economics is the projections upon which they are based; his were optimistic prior and are likely optimistic after. They have to assume that "depression" to which you referred to provide a baseline so low as to how "successful" any stimulus may turn out to be.

Do you not accept Bastiat's premise?

[Psychoblues]

I read your parrots and was attempting to get a bit deeper into the subject matter; Bastiat a little too deep for you? And quoting Zandi is a bit beyond the pale as his projections prior to stimulus implementation have not turned as hoped. The problem with any study of economics is the projections upon which they are based; his were optimistic prior and are likely optimistic after. They have to assume that "depression" to which you referred to provide a baseline so low as to how "successful" any stimulus may turn out to be.

Do you not accept Bastiat's premise?

I readily concede that you are richer in the Bastiat department as I tend to concentrate on more immediate and relevant information. Didn't Bastiat die in his home county of France in 1850? Rather than beating around the subject matter and dragging up old and rather dubious information and theories in these instances why don't you concentrate with me on the more recently distinctive market and economic criterion that fully indicates a very good if not very strong return to macroeconomic stability in the US? BTW. I do not "parrot" as you claim. If you have evidence of parroting or plagiarisms by me please post them, link me to them but please stop whining about them. You make yourself look silly to me when you do that.

Psychoblues

[cadet]

I readily concede that you are richer in the Bastiat department as I tend to concentrate on more immediate and relevant information. Didn't Bastiat die in his home county of France in 1850? Rather than beating around the subject matter and dragging up old and rather dubious information and theories in these instances why don't you concentrate with me on the more recently distinctive market and economic criterion that fully indicates a very good if not very strong return to macroeconomic stability in the US? BTW. I do not "parrot" as you claim. If you have evidence of parroting or plagiarisms by me please post them, link me to them but please stop whining about them. You make yourself look silly to me when you do that.

Psychoblues

"Those who don't understand history, are doomed to repeat it."

[cadet]

ok, phycoblues, i'm going to put your thinking out on the table. you've obviously been to vegas, considering the way you count.

spent $200 and made $10. and you claim you made $10.

lets, just not forget that you spent $200 getting there. our economy is in the hole and he f**ked us.

Also, one question, How far has he put us in debt? and i don't want any of that crap about bush, cause he didn't spend HALF as much as this loon. (no i'm not saying bush was right, he's an idiot too)

[Psychoblues]

"Those who don't understand history, are doomed to repeat it."

In this case, dumbo, history is not in question. Theory and only theory is the hallmark of the Bastiat conversation. If you're going to look so sad then why don't you just go ahead and cry?

Psychoblues

[Kathianne]

In this case, dumbo, history is not in question. Theory and only theory is the hallmark of the Bastiat conversation. If you're going to look so sad then why don't you just go ahead and cry?

Psychoblues

Dumbo? Cry? Why do you claim to only respond in kind? He didn't call you names. If you didn't like his premise, you could have rebutted. You could have ignored. But no, you chose the low road.

[cadet]

In this case, dumbo, history is not in question. Theory and only theory is the hallmark of the Bastiat conversation. If you're going to look so sad then why don't you just go ahead and cry?

Psychoblues

Ok, how about I put it this way.

Times have changed, that's a fact. How much though, is the question. We have cars, we have internet, and we have cell phones.
some things have not changed though. government systems that work for one. and people, people haven't changed a bit. sure we live longer, and sure we're lazier, but i guarantee you way back when if they were given the chance to sit back, they would have.

things that work, will always continue to work.
which is why when Obama said "lets change" my first thought was "but its already so nice. why would i want something different?"

[cadet]

oh, and you didn't answer my question.

[Kathianne]

oh, and you didn't answer my question.

That would be a first. :rolleyes: Go look at 'this thread' and 'these posts' then get back to him. :laugh:

[Missileman]

You do understand that the SCOTUS is not being asked to rule on the constitutionality of the Patients Protection and Affordable Care Act but only it's mandate for participation don't you? You do understand this exact argument has been used repeatedly in attempts to wipe away Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and all manner of forms of social safety nets, unemployment insurance, etc.? And you do realize that none of those efforts have been successful in any way, don't you?

Now, let's address your complete misunderstanding of the "unpaid for tax cuts." What this means is that our budgets contain many forecasts and balance sheets. When a "tax cut" is proposed then an equal cut in forecast spending must accompany it or the tax cut becomes the burden on our children and grandchildren that the right wingers like to sensationalize about. Partisanship aside, it is real and it is something for us to be very concerned about.

I can already see you squinting your eyes, banging your head on the table and about to lose it so I'll just leave this with you for now but I hope to continue the conversation as you become more able to understand and carry on a civil if not intelligent dialogue.

:laugh2::laugh2::laugh2:

Psychoblues

The mandate IS and will be deemed unconstitutional. The rest of the house of cards known as Obamacare will collapse without the mandate. The other programs you listed involve TAXES and are within the scope of the constitution. The DEMS fucked up by not instituting a new healthcare tax to fund their program, which would have passed muster. Of course they're all a bunch of political cowards and knew calling the mandate a tax would result in massive rejection.

Spending is dependent on revenue, NOT the other way around. The spending wasn't paid for, NOT the tax cut.

As for burdening our future generations, I've not heard you utter a single word about the non-stop reckless spending of your messiah...why is that?

[Psychoblues]

ok, phycoblues, i'm going to put your thinking out on the table. you've obviously been to vegas, considering the way you count.

spent $200 and made $10. and you claim you made $10.

lets, just not forget that you spent $200 getting there. our economy is in the hole and he f**ked us.

Also, one question, How far has he put us in debt? and i don't want any of that crap about bush, cause he didn't spend HALF as much as this loon. (no i'm not saying bush was right, he's an idiot too)

I have never dropped a quarter in any casino, dumbo. I don't gamble, I don't believe in gambling and I don't want my government gambling with my tax dollars. As much as you might not want to hear about gwb he exactly put the US on this rapid spiral to God only knows where. He and his cohorts were convinced that the wars in Afghanistan but even moreso in Iraq would pay for themselves. I could write you a book about all that but there are others available and I suggest you read a few of them. President Barack Hussein Obama has reversed that rapid and devastaing downward spiral of the United States economy that he indeed inherited from the gwb cabal and that miraculous reversal is evidenced by hundreds of economic data points, again more information is available for you if you seek it out. You are correct in that gwb was and probably remains an idiot. President Barack Hussein Obama, however, will go down in history as one of the greatest leaders and presidents in the history of this democratic nation. I qualify the distinction of democratic nation by only stating that I fear the gwb prediction and desire for a dictatorship in this country. Many right wingers consciously or unconsciously are driving this political environment quite definitely in that direction. Any even casual reading some on this rather obscure website bears that out very clearly.

Psychoblues

[cadet]

I have never dropped a quarter in any casino, dumbo. I don't gamble, I don't believe in gambling and I don't want my government gambling with my tax dollars. As much as you might not want to hear about gwb he exactly put the US on this rapid spiral to God only knows where. He and his cohorts were convinced that the wars in Afghanistan but even moreso in Iraq would pay for themselves. I could write you a book about all that but there are others available and I suggest you read a few of them. President Barack Hussein Obama has reversed that rapid and devastaing downward spiral of the United States economy that he indeed inherited from the gwb cabal and that miraculous reversal is evidenced by hundreds of economic data points, again more information is available for you if you seek it out. You are correct in that gwb was and probably remains an idiot. President Barack Hussein Obama, however, will go down in history as one of the greatest leaders and presidents in the history of this democratic nation. I qualify the distinction of democratic nation by only stating that I fear the gwb prediction and desire for a dictatorship in this country. Many right wingers consciously or unconsciously are driving this political environment quite definitely in that direction. Any even casual reading some on this rather obscure website bears that out very clearly.

Psychoblues


ya know, when i first saw your airforce stuff, i had to assume that you'd be a smart conservative guy. Guess i was wrong.

now, gwb should NEVER have done what he did. and i agree with that. however, BO has the same STUPID idea that spending money will help you get money.

if your going into debt, do you go to a fancy dinner? no, you save your money.
(and, if you tell me that you have to spend money to make money, that's when starting a business, not handling your own finances.)

and btw, the only thing he's done right so far, is made the republicans look oh so much better. and for that BO, we salute you.

[Psychoblues]

Dumbo? Cry? Why do you claim to only respond in kind? He didn't call you names. If you didn't like his premise, you could have rebutted. You could have ignored. But no, you chose the low road.

I had already seen post #22 in this thread, Kath. The jr. cadet in this conversation has a history much like my own. Comprende'? But, I will try and do better.

Psychoblues

[Psychoblues]

Ok, how about I put it this way.

Times have changed, that's a fact. How much though, is the question. We have cars, we have internet, and we have cell phones.
some things have not changed though. government systems that work for one. and people, people haven't changed a bit. sure we live longer, and sure we're lazier, but i guarantee you way back when if they were given the chance to sit back, they would have.

things that work, will always continue to work.
which is why when Obama said "lets change" my first thought was "but its already so nice. why would i want something different?"

That's where you and the vast majority of Americans differ, caddie. We didn't think it looked so nice and we voted to change it. The change seems to be catching up and working very well, at least to me. We'll have another election in 2012. Maybe we'll return to the stone ages.

Psychoblues

[Psychoblues]

oh, and you didn't answer my question.

I did answer your question. You failed to understand it. Do you have any other questions for clarification? I'll do my best.

Psychoblues

[Psychoblues]

That would be a first. :rolleyes: Go look at 'this thread' and 'these posts' then get back to him. :laugh:

I only say that when the information has clearly already been discussed, Kath. Your inference otherwise is ludicrous.

:laugh2::laugh2::laugh2:

Psychoblues

[Missileman]

Hey PB, I have a question for you. You claim that without government interference via the stimulus bill, things would have for sure been worse.

The House held up Obama's $500 billion dollar jobs bill, yet unemployment fell from 9% to 8.6%. How is that possible? Could it be that the extra $500 billion in spending isn't/wasn't necessary?

[Psychoblues]

The mandate IS and will be deemed unconstitutional. The rest of the house of cards known as Obamacare will collapse without the mandate. The other programs you listed involve TAXES and are within the scope of the constitution. The DEMS fucked up by not instituting a new healthcare tax to fund their program, which would have passed muster. Of course they're all a bunch of political cowards and knew calling the mandate a tax would result in massive rejection.

Spending is dependent on revenue, NOT the other way around. The spending wasn't paid for, NOT the tax cut.

As for burdening our future generations, I've not heard you utter a single word about the non-stop reckless spending of your messiah...why is that?

You are a pretty sad clown, Mm. The Patients Protection and Affordable Care Act will prevail with or without the mandate. I will probably die in the next 30 years or so but I fully expect to know then that the Patients Protection and Affordable Care Act is alive and well and will have proven to be the greatest advancement in American healthcare for all in our history.

I'm going to type this real slow so you might be able to understand it. This is and has been the Republican mantra for decades, cut taxes and lower spending. Without any reduction in spending the tax cuts accumulate debt to be addressed by future generations. There are accounting methods and balance sheet considerations that can put debt far into the future or even outright hide the truth but eventually someone has to pay the piper. Republicans very irresponsibly do not want to do that and refuse to address shortfalls. My, my. Guess who they want to blame all that on?

You haven't heard me complain about dept and deficits? That's because you don't listen. I would have preferred hearing more about all that in 2001 to 2009 but I guess things have changed, haven't they?

Psychoblues

[Missileman]

You are a pretty sad clown, Mm. The Patients Protection and Affordable Care Act will prevail with or without the mandate. I will probably die in the next 30 years or so but I fully expect to know then that the Patients Protection and Affordable Care Act is alive and well and will have proven to be the greatest advancement in American healthcare for all in our history.

I'm going to type this real slow so you might be able to understand it. This is and has been the Republican mantra for decades, cut taxes and lower spending. Without any reduction in spending the tax cuts accumulate debt to be addressed by future generations. There are accounting methods and balance sheet considerations that can put debt far into the future or even outright hide the truth but eventually someone has to pay the piper. Republicans very irresponsibly do not want to do that and refuse to address shortfalls. My, my. Guess who they want to blame all that on?

You haven't heard me complain about dept and deficits? That's because you don't listen. I would have preferred hearing more about all that in 2001 to 2009 but I guess things have changed, haven't they?

Psychoblues

Post a link to a single post of yours that's critical of Obama and the Dems spending...we both know it doesn't exist.

[Psychoblues]

ya know, when i first saw your airforce stuff, i had to assume that you'd be a smart conservative guy. Guess i was wrong.

now, gwb should NEVER have done what he did. and i agree with that. however, BO has the same STUPID idea that spending money will help you get money.

if your going into debt, do you go to a fancy dinner? no, you save your money.
(and, if you tell me that you have to spend money to make money, that's when starting a business, not handling your own finances.)

and btw, the only thing he's done right so far, is made the republicans look oh so much better. and for that BO, we salute you.

You're welcome to assume anything you like and most always you'll be completely wrong about it.

President Barack Hussein Obama inherited the worst economy since President Franklin Delano Roosevelt in 1933. There wasn't any money then either. In this case, however, we are a far more wealthy and smart nation regardless where gwb and the republicathugs wanted to take us. gwb actually did a few things out the door that seemed to be helpful but virtually all the heavy lifting was left for the Obama administration and they accepted the challenge and have done very well with it according to the vast majority of credible economists and business forecasters.

If I am going into business and I can't afford a fine dining experience with my wife and a few friends then most assuredly I have no business in business. While a business plan may indicate a $250,000 start up I would highly recommend having a half million available, at the least.

I'm glad that you are saluting the President. He certainly has earned my respect as commander in chief as well.

Psychoblues

[Kathianne]

Hey PB, I have a question for you. You claim that without government interference via the stimulus bill, things would have for sure been worse.

The House held up Obama's $500 billion dollar jobs bill, yet unemployment fell from 9% to 8.6%. How is that possible? Could it be that the extra $500 billion in spending isn't/wasn't necessary?

That was a very interesting question, one I hadn't thought of. Kudos to you!

[Psychoblues]

Hey PB, I have a question for you. You claim that without government interference via the stimulus bill, things would have for sure been worse.

The House held up Obama's $500 billion dollar jobs bill, yet unemployment fell from 9% to 8.6%. How is that possible? Could it be that the extra $500 billion in spending isn't/wasn't necessary?

So, you're happy with 8.6% unemployment? Seems to me that you are and that is the shame of it all. You don't have to take anything I say about the stimulus bill for a fact, Mm. There are lots of sources much more credible that back up what I say. The $450 billion dollar jobs bill indeed saves millions of jobs and creates millions more. The infrastructure of this country is falling apart. People are falling off caving bridges, being crushed in collapsing buildings, being poisoned by tainted drinking water, are we a goddamned 3rd world country? If we don't start fixing these things now then when do you propose that we do? After a few more are killed or sickened? After a few more thousand, or million?

The bill will go a very long way in helping the US return to 1st world status and more respected internally and externally. It's the very cheapest thing we can do. The long run doesn't look very promising without it.

Psychoblues

[Kathianne]

So, you're happy with 8.6% unemployment? Seems to me that you are and that is the shame of it all. You don't have to take anything I say about the stimulus bill for a fact, Mm. There are lots of sources much more credible that back up what I say. The $450 billion dollar jobs bill indeed saves millions of jobs and creates millions more. The infrastructure of this country is falling apart. People are falling off caving bridges, being crushed in collapsing buildings, being poisoned by tainted drinking water, are we a goddamned 3rd world country? If we don't start fixing these things now then when do you propose that we do? After a few more are killed or sickened? After a few more thousand, or million?

The bill will go a very long way in helping the US return to 1st world status and more respected internally and externally. It's the very cheapest thing we can do. The long run doesn't look very promising without it.

Psychoblues

I highlighted the pertinent part, please link to these sites. Thank you, gracias, what have you.

[Psychoblues]

I highlighted the pertinent part, please link to these sites. Thank you, gracias, what have you.

I didn't quote any sites, Kath. I merely stated many exist that relate quite favorably to the way I think and the things that I am saying. Are you accusing me of pulling these things out of a vacuum or my ass and just throwing them out there? If so I am so sorry for you. I thought you were a teacher and somewhat of a self avowed intellectual.

Salute to the captain on the ship
'scuse me captain, finger slipped

:fu:

:laugh2::laugh2:

Psychoblues

[Kathianne]

I didn't quote any sites, Kath. I merely stated many exist that relate quite favorably to the way I think and the things that I am saying. Are you accusing me of pulling these things out of a vacuum or my ass and just throwing them out there? If so I am so sorry for you. I thought you were a teacher and somewhat of a self avowed intellectual.

Salute to the captain on the ship
'scuse me captain, finger slipped

http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/smilies/fu.gif

http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/smilies/laugh2.gifhttp://www.debatepolicy.com/images/smilies/laugh2.gif

Psychoblues

Yeah, post a link, regardless of this classy post. :gag:

[Missileman]

So, you're happy with 8.6% unemployment? Seems to me that you are and that is the shame of it all. You don't have to take anything I say about the stimulus bill for a fact, Mm. There are lots of sources much more credible that back up what I say. The $450 billion dollar jobs bill indeed saves millions of jobs and creates millions more. The infrastructure of this country is falling apart. People are falling off caving bridges, being crushed in collapsing buildings, being poisoned by tainted drinking water, are we a goddamned 3rd world country? If we don't start fixing these things now then when do you propose that we do? After a few more are killed or sickened? After a few more thousand, or million?

The bill will go a very long way in helping the US return to 1st world status and more respected internally and externally. It's the very cheapest thing we can do. The long run doesn't look very promising without it.

Psychoblues

Way to totally ignore the question.

[Psychoblues]

I see you, Kath, moving from the ridiculous into the absurd!!!!!!!!

:laugh2:

Psychoblues

[Kathianne]

I see you, Kath, moving from the ridiculous into the absurd!!!!!!!!

:laugh2:

Psychoblues

uh, huh...

[Psychoblues]

Way to totally ignore the question.

I totally answered your question and your failure to address my observations but only to project your own failures is getting pretty old, Mm. We've already determined that you are happy with 8.6% unemployment. I don't want to hear anymore whining from you about it. Rather than address my answers as they relate to your questions you whine I have somehow ignored you. So be it. I just don't want to hear you and others like you whining more as our infrastructures continue to fail, our municipalities, fire, police, first responders, teaching staffs, schools, etc., etc. go to the wayside. Am I to congratulate you and your ilk for these failures or do you think I should condemn you for it or better yet why don't both of us agree to approach and solve the problems even though we may have to agree to disagree on some concepts? That's what votes and democracy are all about. As American people we determined long ago that we do not have to live in misery, unequal and wanting for happiness. We have been problem solvers for centuries. What do you want to be? The problem or the solution?

Psychoblues

[Psychoblues]

uh, huh...

Not real subtle, I see. That's got to be a sign of something.

:laugh2:

Psychoblues

[Kathianne]

Not real subtle, I see. That's got to be a sign of something.

:laugh2:

Psychoblues

Yeah, something you might want to consider.

Oh yeah, not laughing.

[Psychoblues]

Yeah, something you might want to consider.

Oh yeah, not laughing.

That looks to me like a threat. Have I not been playing fair with you or is it you that maybe needs a nap? I remain amused and if you have something private to say to me my pm box is open. I promised jimmy that I would be a better player and actor on this board. I feel like I am doing just that. I really am doing my best, Kath.

Psychoblues

[Kathianne]

That looks to me like a threat. Have I not been playing fair with you or is it you that maybe needs a nap? I remain amused and if you have something private to say to me my pm box is open. I promised jimmy that I would be a better player and actor on this board. I feel like I am doing just that. I really am doing my best, Kath.

Psychoblues

No threat, I'm not subtle. Legions will agree. I am not amused at what you are doing, I do think that's clear as crystal.

[Psychoblues]

No threat, I'm not subtle. Legions will agree. I am not amused at what you are doing, I do think that's clear as crystal.

Just what is it that you think I am doing, Kath? Have I offended you? If so, how so? That has never been my purpose even though it does happen periodically. Just tonight another poster and I crossed paths. I hit a nerve. He hit back. I hope we got it worked out like gentlemen. That's all I can do. I offer the same with you, as always.

Psychoblues

[fj1200]

I readily concede that you are richer in the Bastiat department as I tend to concentrate on more immediate and relevant information. Didn't Bastiat die in his home county of France in 1850? Rather than beating around the subject matter and dragging up old and rather dubious information and theories in these instances why don't you concentrate with me on the more recently distinctive market and economic criterion that fully indicates a very good if not very strong return to macroeconomic stability in the US? BTW. I do not "parrot" as you claim. If you have evidence of parroting or plagiarisms by me please post them, link me to them but please stop whining about them. You make yourself look silly to me when you do that.

Bastiat died in 1850? Google is your friend 'eh? ;) But you don't need to be "rich" in the Bastiat department to read a sentence and comprehend the point being made. But you're right, I can find stuff... you can find stuff... and it comes down to exactly what I stated earlier; the devil is in the assumptions especially when it comes to economics which is why I was attempting to go deeper. As another economist said about the failure of the stimulus, it doesn't truly create anything positive it merely shifts when economic activity happens.

Regarding Bastiat and his untimely death; I will promise to no longer look to his thoughts as a window to understanding the world today if we can all ignore Keynes (after all he died 65 years ago in his home country of England) and Keynesian economics which causes us to spend a whole lot of money that could be better spent or not as the case may be. Agreed? Except the part where he validates the Laffer curve of course. :laugh:

BTW, I never said you plagiarized anything; I said you parrot which is repetition without understanding.

[fj1200]

Maybe we'll return to the stone ages.

We are certainly on that track aren't we? Damn government types thinking they can create prosperity. :rolleyes:

[fj1200]

So, you're happy with 8.6% unemployment? Seems to me that you are and that is the shame of it all. You don't have to take anything I say about the stimulus bill for a fact, Mm. There are lots of sources much more credible that back up what I say. The $450 billion dollar jobs bill indeed saves millions of jobs and creates millions more. The infrastructure of this country is falling apart. People are falling off caving bridges, being crushed in collapsing buildings, being poisoned by tainted drinking water, are we a goddamned 3rd world country? If we don't start fixing these things now then when do you propose that we do? After a few more are killed or sickened? After a few more thousand, or million?

The bill will go a very long way in helping the US return to 1st world status and more respected internally and externally. It's the very cheapest thing we can do. The long run doesn't look very promising without it.

Psychoblues

:laugh:

[ConHog]

Just what is it that you think I am doing, Kath? Have I offended you? If so, how so? That has never been my purpose even though it does happen periodically. Just tonight another poster and I crossed paths. I hit a nerve. He hit back. I hope we got it worked out like gentlemen. That's all I can do. I offer the same with you, as always.

Psychoblues

Why oh why are you trying to turn Kath into a gentleman? I'm confused. Oh, and mayhaps if you'd stop calling Cadet dumbo when he's done no such thing to you your claims of trying t be a better poster wouldn't ring so hollow.

[Psychoblues]

Bastiat died in 1850? Google is your friend 'eh? ;) But you don't need to be "rich" in the Bastiat department to read a sentence and comprehend the point being made. But you're right, I can find stuff... you can find stuff... and it comes down to exactly what I stated earlier; the devil is in the assumptions especially when it comes to economics which is why I was attempting to go deeper. As another economist said about the failure of the stimulus, it doesn't truly create anything positive it merely shifts when economic activity happens.

Regarding Bastiat and his untimely death; I will promise to no longer look to his thoughts as a window to understanding the world today if we can all ignore Keynes (after all he died 65 years ago in his home country of England) and Keynesian economics which causes us to spend a whole lot of money that could be better spent or not as the case may be. Agreed? Except the part where he validates the Laffer curve of course. :laugh:

BTW, I never said you plagiarized anything; I said you parrot which is repetition without understanding.

I remain fairly happy with Keynesian economics as his theories do well in the American environment and I promise no such propensity to ignore him. I am shocked that you would expect me to abandon proven and relevant theories based on your own willingness to abandon at best out dated and obscure ones. Tsk, tsk.

Thanks for clarifying your remarks about parroting. Now I understand you fully but I'm afraid you continue to misunderstand me completely. It really doesn't matter what I have to say or any facts that I may share with you. You remain a very superior debater and far more intelligent than me and that is not to mention your oft demonstrated willingness to go that extra mile, dig that extra foot or so, get your hands dirty and mind in motion and go for broke on whatever discussion you may be interested in. I feel like I do better than most around here but I don't hold a candle to your tenacities, or those of a few more either. That is what I like here. Totally opposing viewpoints, no requirements to ever accept anothers blathering for anything other than that and people like you that challenge me to the enth. That alone helps keep me sober and I am indebted to you and others here for that.

Psychoblues

[fj1200]

I remain fairly happy with Keynesian economics as his theories do well in the American environment and I promise no such propensity to ignore him. I am shocked that you would expect me to abandon proven and relevant theories based on your own willingness to abandon at best out dated and obscure ones. Tsk, tsk.

So it's not the fact that Bastiat was dead that you ignore him, it's either that Keynes hasn't been dead as long or you just prefer his failures, err, theories because they fit your world view. How about his views on the Laffer Curve:


When, on the contrary, I show, a little elaborately, as in the ensuing chapter, that to create wealth will increase the national income and that a large proportion of any increase in the national income will accrue to an Exchequer, amongst whose largest outgoings is the payment of incomes to those who are unemployed and whose receipts are a proportion of the incomes of those who are occupied...
Nor should the argument seem strange that taxation may be so high as to defeat its object, and that, given sufficient time to gather the fruits, a reduction of taxation will run a better chance than an increase of balancing the budget. For to take the opposite view today is to resemble a manufacturer who, running at a loss, decides to raise his price, and when his declining sales increase the loss, wrapping himself in the rectitude of plain arithmetic, decides that prudence requires him to raise the price still more--and who, when at last his account is balanced with nought on both sides, is still found righteously declaring that it would have been the act of a gambler to reduce the price when you were already making a loss.

Give Reagan and Bush a pass on those tax cuts then?

And if it's because Keynes hasn't been dead as long then perhaps Milton Friedman is the preferred economist to be given credence too; Dead, but not too dead.

[ConHog]

So it's not the fact that Bastiat was dead that you ignore him, it's either that Keynes hasn't been dead as long or you just prefer his failures, err, theories because they fit your world view. How about his views on the Laffer Curve:


Give Reagan and Bush a pass on those tax cuts then?

And if it's because Keynes hasn't been dead as long then perhaps Milton Friedman is the preferred economist to be given credence too; Dead, but not too dead.

You're wasting your breath. I wonder if PB would also discount Einstein's work in phyyics simply b/c the man is dead? Is Beethoven any less of a musical genius simply b/c he is dead?

Just laughable.

[fj1200]

You're wasting your breath.

Of course I am but it's mental exercise. :salute:

[ConHog]

Of course I am but it's mental exercise. :salute:

And in contrast PB is just mental. :laugh2:

[Psychoblues]

Of course I am but it's mental exercise. :salute:

Boy, conway picked up on your dead theory and ran with it. What a freaking doofus. I like your style, fj, but you're beginning to out run me and I'm old and weak. Can we maybe change the subject or at least reduce the conversation to a more elementary level? I got Keynes and Bastiat coming outta my freaking ears and eyes right now and I really don't want to pursue that discussion much deeper. I continue to be convinced via much reading and listening to media and literature that I consider credible that the American situation is on the rise and things are looking better now than they have in years and the POTUS Barack Hussein Obama loves us and will protect us to the best of his abilities and in good keeping with his oath to the Constitution.

Psychoblues

[red states rule]

Instead of following the incessant cries of doom, gloom and the skies are falling why don't you do a little research for a more balanced view, Kath? Here's a few articles that differ a bit on the take you seem to have:

http://finance.yahoo.com/video/economy-18773128/unemployment-rate-decline-a-positive-sign-for-housing-27474358.html

http://economics.about.com/od/helpforeconomicsstudents/f/unemployment.htm

Lots more out there and many perspectives. The American economy has been improving ever since President Barack Hussein Obama implemented his stimulus packages and the only ones that don't recognize that are those with their own agendas or those that are misinformed or deliberately ignorant. There's probably not much can be said or done to help those that will not seek truth or more information on their own.

Psychoblues


The economy is improving? Where?

When Obama took office the unemployment rate was 7% - now it is 8.6%. The number of people working has gone down to the point where if the same number of people were in the workforce when Obama took office the unemployment rate would have been around 11%

Last month alone, 300,000 people gave up looking for work in the Obama economy and that was the reason for the drop in the unemployment rate

[red states rule]

Your opinion makes me neither stupid nor a liar. But in good keeping I also regard much the same of you. Here is an article from the New Yorker and written by an individual far smarter and well informed than either of us. Perhaps you care to argue with some of the points that he is sharing with us?

The Financial Page

Second Helpings

by James Surowiecki (http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/bios/james_surowiecki/search?contributorName=james surowiecki)

When President Obama unveiled an array of new tax-cut and spending proposals last week, one word was noticeably missing from his speeches: “stimulus.” Republicans, meanwhile, energetically set about decrying the plan as “more of the same failed ‘stimulus’ ” and as simply a “second stimulus”—as if the word itself were a damning indictment. The idea of using countercyclical fiscal policy to help get a weak economy moving is hardly radical. But in Washington stimulus has become the policy that dare not speak its name.

This wouldn’t be surprising if we were talking about a failed program. But, by any reasonable measure, the $800-billion stimulus package that Congress passed in the winter of 2009 was a clear, if limited, success. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that it reduced unemployment by somewhere between 0.8 and 1.7 per cent in recent months. Economists at various Wall Street houses suggest that it boosted G.D.P. by more than two per cent. And a recent study by Mark Zandi and Alan Blinder, economists from, respectively, Moody’s and Princeton, argues that, in the absence of the stimulus, unemployment would have risen above eleven per cent and that G.D.P. would have been almost half a trillion dollars lower. The weight of the evidence suggests that fiscal policy softened the impact of the recession, boosting demand, creating jobs, and helping the economy start growing again. What’s more, it did so without any of the negative effects that deficit spending can entail: interest rates remain at remarkably low levels, and government borrowing didn’t crowd out private investment........................................ .................................................. .


read lots more: http://www.newyorker.com/talk/financial/2010/09/20/100920ta_talk_surowiecki





Read more http://www.newyorker.com/talk/financial/2010/09/20/100920ta_talk_surowiecki#ixzz1fWVeSAjf





The "stimulus" plan was success?



CBO on the Stimulus: "A net negative effect on the growth of GDP over 10 years." (http://reason.com/blog/2011/11/17/cbo-on-the-stimulus)


As with all CBO's projections, you have to take these with a grain of salt, especially when you start looking out two decades into the future. I've been critical (http://reason.com/blog/2011/07/05/the-obama-administrations-conv) of the way folks have used the CBO's stimulus job-creation numbers in the past, and this sort of long-term economic forecasting is not the most precise tool either, to say the least. Counterfactuals—like asking what economic growth would have looked like the absence of the stimulus—probably tell us more about our current economic assumptions than about alternate economic timelines.

Still, it's worth noting, if only because even the mildly Keynesian congressional scorekeeper agrees that borrowing $800 billion dollars ultimately creates a drag on the economy and a net loss in economic performance relative to what otherwise might have been. And yet the administration went ahead with the legislation anyway, arguing that it would be more or less a free lunch in the long run.

http://reason.com/blog/2011/11/17/cbo-on-the-stimulus

[fj1200]

... I really don't want to pursue that discussion much deeper.

It was one line.

[fj1200]

When Socialism fails, blame Capitalism and demand more Socialism.

[cadet]

You're welcome to assume anything you like and most always you'll be completely wrong about it.

President Barack Hussein Obama inherited the worst economy since President Franklin Delano Roosevelt in 1933. There wasn't any money then either. In this case, however, we are a far more wealthy and smart nation regardless where gwb and the republicathugs wanted to take us. gwb actually did a few things out the door that seemed to be helpful but virtually all the heavy lifting was left for the Obama administration and they accepted the challenge and have done very well with it according to the vast majority of credible economists and business forecasters.

If I am going into business and I can't afford a fine dining experience with my wife and a few friends then most assuredly I have no business in business. While a business plan may indicate a $250,000 start up I would highly recommend having a half million available, at the least.

I'm glad that you are saluting the President. He certainly has earned my respect as commander in chief as well.

Psychoblues

i guarantee you that the next president shall inherit the worst economy EVER. Due to this fucktard. you don't spend spend spend to make money, YOU SAVE!!!!!! YOU TELL AMERICA TO GET OFF IT'S LAZY ASS AND GET A JOB! NOT SAY "oh, i'm sorry you can't stay in business cause noone likes you, here have half a million so you can put off going out."

EVERY LAST ONE OF THESE FUCKING PLANS OF HIS IS "HELPING" THE DIPSHITS WHO ARE TO LAZY TO WORK FOR THEMSELVES!

"give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day, teach him how to fish, and he'll eat for life" <- the main diffrence between reps and dems/libs.

and as my commander in chief, I'm happy he'll be long gone when I'm finally in. its hard to listen to a man who you can't respect.

do you know what America needs? a good moral person who's all about people helping themselves. you live and dye by your own hand, its what America was based on. i don't live here so i can pay for some dipshit to fuck us all, if this keeps up, i bet you most of the HARD WORKING AMERICANS, will leave and all of you pieces of crap will have to fend for yourselves, i give you a month before you run out of supplies and all die.

[Psychoblues]

It was one line.

You may not have dazzled me with your brilliance but you certainly baffled me with your bullshit.

Psychoblues

[Psychoblues]

When Socialism fails, blame Capitalism and demand more Socialism.

I, for one, would appreciate a government more sensitive to the pursuit of happiness by it's people. It is without doubt the American style of faux capitalism that tends to stifle that pursuit.

Psychoblues

[jimnyc]

You may not have dazzled me with your brilliance but you certainly baffled me with your bullshit.

Psychoblues

Pretty much every thread you post in baffles you, at least according to 90%+ of your posts.

[Psychoblues]

i guarantee you that the next president shall inherit the worst economy EVER. Due to this fucktard. you don't spend spend spend to make money, YOU SAVE!!!!!! YOU TELL AMERICA TO GET OFF IT'S LAZY ASS AND GET A JOB! NOT SAY "oh, i'm sorry you can't stay in business cause noone likes you, here have half a million so you can put off going out."

EVERY LAST ONE OF THESE FUCKING PLANS OF HIS IS "HELPING" THE DIPSHITS WHO ARE TO LAZY TO WORK FOR THEMSELVES!

"give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day, teach him how to fish, and he'll eat for life" <- the main diffrence between reps and dems/libs.

and as my commander in chief, I'm happy he'll be long gone when I'm finally in. its hard to listen to a man who you can't respect.

do you know what America needs? a good moral person who's all about people helping themselves. you live and dye by your own hand, its what America was based on. i don't live here so i can pay for some dipshit to fuck us all, if this keeps up, i bet you most of the HARD WORKING AMERICANS, will leave and all of you pieces of crap will have to fend for yourselves, i give you a month before you run out of supplies and all die.

Oh, so it's YOU that's throwing all these slurs about Americans not being hardworking and that they are lazy, according to you? Do your friends also feel that way? How does that make you feel, cadet? I do hope a qualified psychologist examines you before you are allowed anywhere close to the greatest military on Earth. You will certainly diminish the military and the reputation of the armed forces of attracting only the brightest and the best into their ranks. We don't really need any unAmerican idiot pieces of crap like you out there contributing your vileness, stupidities, bigotries and ridiculous hyperbole to matters of our security. On the other hand, some of that will be addressed in basic training. After that, however, you'll have to fend mostly for yourself on those accords as they are in no way conducive to any military environment I was ever in.

Good luck. You'll need it. You certainly have no skills and demonstrate no capacity to acquire them.

:laugh2::laugh2::laugh2:

Psychoblues

[Psychoblues]

Pretty much every thread you post in baffles you, at least according to 90%+ of your posts.

Don't be such a hemorrhoid, jimbo. You have no clue as to the conversation between fj and me so really you need to catch up and contribute or just butt the fuck out. Please bear in mind that right now I consider our colloquy to be poster to poster. If you, however, want to make it an administration effort I will crawfish right on away from it as I simply don't want to be accused of any disruption and possibly get banned again. You may not believe it, jim, as my politics and concerns are far different than yours but I am doing my very best to abide your wishes here.

Que Sera Sera

Psychoblues

[jimnyc]

Don't be such a hemorrhoid, jimbo. You have no clue as to the conversation between fj and me so really you need to catch up and contribute or just butt the fuck out. Please bear in mind that right now I consider our colloquy to be poster to poster. If you, however, want to make it an administration effort I will crawfish right on away from it as I simply don't want to be accused of any disruption and possibly get banned again. You may not believe it, jim, as my politics and concerns are far different than yours but I am doing my very best to abide your wishes here.

Que Sera Sera

Psychoblues

I'm pretty confident that I can post wherever I like, and even enter conversations that involve you. Whether you think it's "poster to poster" matters little when on a message board.

But let me ask you something. You seem to be a little upset with my rather benign comments - then you post this to another:


Oh, so it's YOU that's throwing all these slurs about Americans not being hardworking and that they are lazy, according to you? Do your friends also feel that way? How does that make you feel, cadet? I do hope a qualified psychologist examines you before you are allowed anywhere close to the greatest military on Earth. You will certainly diminish the military and the reputation of the armed forces of attracting only the brightest and the best into their ranks. We don't really need any unAmerican idiot pieces of crap like you out there contributing your vileness, stupidities, bigotries and ridiculous hyperbole to matters of our security. On the other hand, some of that will be addressed in basic training. After that, however, you'll have to fend mostly for yourself on those accords as they are in no way conducive to any military environment I was ever in.

Good luck. You'll need it. You certainly have no skills and demonstrate no capacity to acquire them.


How can you possibly expect people to treat you in a respectful manner when it's YOU that almost ALWAYS treats people in this manner?

[ConHog]

Oh, so it's YOU that's throwing all these slurs about Americans not being hardworking and that they are lazy, according to you? Do your friends also feel that way? How does that make you feel, cadet? I do hope a qualified psychologist examines you before you are allowed anywhere close to the greatest military on Earth. You will certainly diminish the military and the reputation of the armed forces of attracting only the brightest and the best into their ranks. We don't really need any unAmerican idiot pieces of crap like you out there contributing your vileness, stupidities, bigotries and ridiculous hyperbole to matters of our security. On the other hand, some of that will be addressed in basic training. After that, however, you'll have to fend mostly for yourself on those accords as they are in no way conducive to any military environment I was ever in.

Good luck. You'll need it. You certainly have no skills and demonstrate no capacity to acquire them.

:laugh2::laugh2::laugh2:

Psychoblues




FACT: Most Americans are lazy and or stupid.

[logroller]

FACT: Most Americans are lazy and or stupid.

I disagree. I can't be bothered to explain to you why, as it would take way too much mental effort.:coffee:

[ConHog]

I disagree. I can't be bothered to explain to you why, as it would take way too much mental effort.:coffee:

I see what you did there. :laugh2:

[cadet]

I, for one, would appreciate a government more sensitive to the pursuit of happiness by it's people. It is without doubt the American style of faux capitalism that tends to stifle that pursuit.

Psychoblues

move to china, our country is about doing your best and doing the right thing. the right thing is not making hard working Americans pay for lazy pieces of crap, which, by your stance, i can only assume that you are.

and yes, we are about the pursuit of happiness. happiness that i can make it big, or fail on m own accord, not saying everyone can be great, but at least if we try none of us will be torn down for it. i am the 1%. as are the rest of the workers of America.

get the hell out of my country and fuck up somebody elses, i like it the way it is, without your and your liberal dumbass minds deciding to fuck us all. screw you you communist. Read animal farm, you might learn something.

[ConHog]

move to china, our country is about doing your best and doing the right thing. the right thing is not making hard working Americans pay for lazy pieces of crap, which, by your stance, i can only assume that you are.

and yes, we are about the pursuit of happiness. happiness that i can make it big, or fail on m own accord, not saying everyone can be great, but at least if we try none of us will be torn down for it. i am the 1%. as are the rest of the workers of America.

get the hell out of my country and fuck up somebody elses, i like it the way it is, without your and your liberal dumbass minds deciding to fuck us all. screw you you communist. Read animal farm, you might learn something.

Telling others to get out of the country if you don't agree with them is NOT cool my friend. When you do join the military you are going to learn that the very first thing they teach is that the MOST important person's rights to defend is the person you MOST disagree with.

I disagree with nearly everything PB posts, but I would defend to the death his right to say it.

[cadet]

Telling others to get out of the country if you don't agree with them is NOT cool my friend. When you do join the military you are going to learn that the very first thing they teach is that the MOST important person's rights to defend is the person you MOST disagree with.

I disagree with nearly everything PB posts, but I would defend to the death his right to say it.

Sorry, got kinda really pissed.

[fj1200]

You may not have dazzled me with your brilliance but you certainly baffled me with your bullshit.

One sentence leads to BS and bafflement? :slap:


I, for one, would appreciate a government more sensitive to the pursuit of happiness by it's people. It is without doubt the American style of faux capitalism that tends to stifle that pursuit.

So you agree that the "faux capitalism" that we have here is not true capitalism? That it's been perverted by government involvement? If that's the case then it is that same involvement that stifles the pursuit of happiness.

BTW, how would you prefer government "be more sensitive to the pursuit of happiness"? Without compromising our natural rights that is.

[ConHog]

One sentence leads to BS and bafflement? :slap:



So you agree that the "faux capitalism" that we have here is not true capitalism? That it's been perverted by government involvement? If that's the case then it is that same involvement that stifles the pursuit of happiness.

BTW, how would you prefer government "be more sensitive to the pursuit of happiness"? Without compromising our natural rights that is.

PB is , like many others, confusing the right to pursue happiness with the right to be happy.

Lord only knows if he's doing it purposely or if he just doesn't understand the difference.

[Psychoblues]

I'm pretty confident that I can post wherever I like, and even enter conversations that involve you. Whether you think it's "poster to poster" matters little when on a message board.

But let me ask you something. You seem to be a little upset with my rather benign comments - then you post this to another:



How can you possibly expect people to treat you in a respectful manner when it's YOU that almost ALWAYS treats people in this manner?

Did you read what caddie wrote to precipitate that diatribe from me? He thinks you are a lazy piece of shit as are all other Americans that he knows nothing about. You are correct though. Respect begets respect and caddie came through the door kicking it down with me. I remain very confident my remarks to him are spot on and I really don't give a rat's ass how he feels about it. He did neg me over those remarks, after all!!!!!! Ain't he just the cutest damned thing you ever saw?!?!?!?!??!

:laugh2::laugh2::laugh2:

Psychoblues

[Psychoblues]

Sorry, got kinda really pissed.

Being pissed never excuses your kind of willful ignorance and obvious hatred for other Americans. Thanks for the rep, kiddie. You get more sad the more I learn about you.

:laugh2::laugh2::laugh2:

Psychoblues

[Psychoblues]

One sentence leads to BS and bafflement? :slap:



So you agree that the "faux capitalism" that we have here is not true capitalism? That it's been perverted by government involvement? If that's the case then it is that same involvement that stifles the pursuit of happiness.

BTW, how would you prefer government "be more sensitive to the pursuit of happiness"? Without compromising our natural rights that is.

I do agree with myself or anyone else that agrees with me that what is known as capitalism in this country absolutely is not true capitalism. I do not agree that it necessarily has been perverted by governmental involvement. In fact, it would be made better if more regulations were enacted to ensure fairness and the abilities of regular Americans to indeed pursue happiness. Not everyone wants to run a business but those that don't want those that do should be prevented from using dirty tricks, monopolizing suppliers, even violence against those that would become legitimate competitors. Although we have laws against some of that our very own police forces and other law enforcement authorities have been used all too often to stifle the people and support the evil intents of the corporations, monopolies and their puppets.

Psychoblues

[jimnyc]

Did you read what caddie wrote to precipitate that diatribe from me? He thinks you are a lazy piece of shit as are all other Americans that he knows nothing about. You are correct though. Respect begets respect and caddie came through the door kicking it down with me. I remain very confident my remarks to him are spot on and I really don't give a rat's ass how he feels about it. He did neg me over those remarks, after all!!!!!! Ain't he just the cutest damned thing you ever saw?!?!?!?!??!

I don't think cadet directed any of his comments directly at you, as you did to him. And here's just yet another member who you are going to purposely change their name as if its funny. Your antics aren't funny. Maybe once in awhile, but not every damned post. You shit on 95% of the members here with your snide remarks and will be the first to bellyache over something as lame as a rep comment. You get what you give.

[Psychoblues]

I don't think cadet directed any of his comments directly at you, as you did to him. And here's just yet another member who you are going to purposely change their name as if its funny. Your antics aren't funny. Maybe once in awhile, but not every damned post. You shit on 95% of the members here with your snide remarks and will be the first to bellyache over something as lame as a rep comment. You get what you give.

Soooooooo,,,,,,,,you think I am not fully aware that what goes around comes around? Do you understand just where the carousel starts and stops? I hate to say it, jim, as this is your board and you more than any other should know what is going on but I believe that you don't. You said something to me many years ago during an interview on the old board that I had developed a rep as being controversial. In most of my circles I'm not controversial at all but here I am, I guess. My politics are much different from ANYONE here as they are in my own party. Organizing Democrats is like herding cats. But, most Dems accept me and even you as we may be. We don't cotton threats, slurs and violence but I have found Democrats to be more inclusive as compared to any political entity I have ever known. For my own reasons I always encourage exclusionary tactics and attitudes from the right as it normally fully exposes them for what they really are. But, that's a different conversation.

Yep, kiddie directed comments in his second post addressing me (I had never answered the first at that time) directly to me and they weren't very nice.

Psychoblues

[jimnyc]

Soooooooo,,,,,,,,you think I am not fully aware that what goes around comes around? Do you understand just where the carousel starts and stops? I hate to say it, jim, as this is your board and you more than any other should know what is going on but I believe that you don't. You said something to me many years ago during an interview on the old board that I had developed a rep as being controversial. In most of my circles I'm not controversial at all but here I am, I guess. My politics are much different from ANYONE here as they are in my own party. Organizing Democrats is like herding cats. But, most Dems accept me and even you as we may be. We don't cotton threats, slurs and violence but I have found Democrats to be more inclusive as compared to any political entity I have ever known. For my own reasons I always encourage exclusionary tactics and attitudes from the right as it normally fully exposes them for what they really are. But, that's a different conversation.

Yep, kiddie directed comments in his second post addressing me (I had never answered the first at that time) directly to me and they weren't very nice.

Psychoblues

None of your long winded nonsense changes the facts. Don't whine anymore when you are perhaps the one who starts the crap the overwhelming majority of the time. I don't give a fuck if you acknowledge it or not, but every other sane poster knows exactly what I am saying.

[Psychoblues]

None of your long winded nonsense changes the facts. Don't whine anymore when you are perhaps the one who starts the crap the overwhelming majority of the time. I don't give a fuck if you acknowledge it or not, but every other sane poster knows exactly what I am saying.

Obviously you are a concerned party in this interaction but what really concerns me is that you somehow think you always know the facts. If you're going to interfere in these interactions I would hope that it would be you that gets your facts straight. "You are perhaps the one who starts the crap the overwhelming majority of the time?" What is that supposed to mean, jim? I agree that crap many times starts in threads in which I am a participant but I disagree that it is I that starts any of it. I have already explained to you that I am fully aware that my politics are very different from ANYONE else here. The way I see the problem is the intolerance of you and most other posters here and the conversation tends to explode due to that intolerance. Me just being me is inclined to give as good or better than I get. I think it was ConHog that pointed that out one night. But you cannot blame me for the shittinesses of others here. Whether we fight, argue or not I still learn every day that I post and/or read here.

I would suppose, however, that you are correct in that other posters would agree with what you are saying about me. I would not agree that you have many sane posters including yourself.

Psychoblues

[ConHog]

Obviously you are a concerned party in this interaction but what really concerns me is that you somehow think you always know the facts. If you're going to interfere in these interactions I would hope that it would be you that gets your facts straight. "You are perhaps the one who starts the crap the overwhelming majority of the time?" What is that supposed to mean, jim? I agree that crap many times starts in threads in which I am a participant but I disagree that it is I that starts any of it. I have already explained to you that I am fully aware that my politics are very different from ANYONE else here. The way I see the problem is the intolerance of you and most other posters here and the conversation tends to explode due to that intolerance. Me just being me is inclined to give as good or better than I get. I think it was ConHog that pointed that out one night. But you cannot blame me for the shittinesses of others here. Whether we fight, argue or not I still learn every day that I post and/or read here.

I would suppose, however, that you are correct in that other posters would agree with what you are saying about me. I would not agree that you have many sane posters including yourself.

Psychoblues


Being not as even handed as Jim was trying to be . I'll say it. Stop fucking starting fights with your snide remarks when your intent is to then cry about being attacked.

[jimnyc]

Obviously you are a concerned party in this interaction but what really concerns me is that you somehow think you always know the facts. If you're going to interfere in these interactions I would hope that it would be you that gets your facts straight. "You are perhaps the one who starts the crap the overwhelming majority of the time?" What is that supposed to mean, jim? I agree that crap many times starts in threads in which I am a participant but I disagree that it is I that starts any of it. I have already explained to you that I am fully aware that my politics are very different from ANYONE else here. The way I see the problem is the intolerance of you and most other posters here and the conversation tends to explode due to that intolerance. Me just being me is inclined to give as good or better than I get. I think it was ConHog that pointed that out one night. But you cannot blame me for the shittinesses of others here. Whether we fight, argue or not I still learn every day that I post and/or read here.

I would suppose, however, that you are correct in that other posters would agree with what you are saying about me. I would not agree that you have many sane posters including yourself.

Psychoblues

You disagree that you start the flaming or trolling in threads. That's rich! "Comedy gold I tell ya, Jerry, comedy gold!" Ok, whatever you say, PB. I cry uncle, my head always hurt after posting with you.

[Psychoblues]

Being not as even handed as Jim was trying to be . I'll say it. Stop fucking starting fights with your snide remarks when your intent is to then cry about being attacked.

I wasn't saying a single word about being attacked by anyone, conway, and I really don't think I'll be taking many lectures from someone that spent 2 days crying to get me thread banned because they didn't agree that communities have rights to legislate and enforce laws whether YOU like it or not. Pissing contests are the MO of this board also whether YOU like it or not and they were here before I came along and they will remain when I leave, and you, too. And as long as there is fucking fighting going on I suppose I'll be getting blamed for them whether I have anything to do with them or not. On the other hand, I like fucking fighting. I guess it's in the jeans.

:laugh2::laugh2::laugh2:

Psychoblues

[jimnyc]

I wasn't saying a single word about being attacked by anyone, conway, and I really don't think I'll be taking many lectures from someone that spent 2 days crying to get me thread banned because they didn't agree that communities have rights to legislate and enforce laws whether YOU like it or not. Pissing contests are the MO of this board also whether YOU like it or not and they were here before I came along and they will remain when I leave, and you, too. And as long as there is fucking fighting going on I suppose I'll be getting blamed for them whether I have anything to do with them or not. On the other hand, I like fucking fighting. I guess it's in the jeans.


Bullshit to the bold portion. Other than a few members I can count on less than one hand, the board rarely has "pissing contests" to the likes of when those members start posting.

[Psychoblues]

Bullshit to the bold portion. Other than a few members I can count on less than one hand, the board rarely has "pissing contests" to the likes of when those members start posting.

What I said was the truth. What you are saying may be an ideal but it does not in any way represent the truth. The very nature of political oppositions is adversarial. On the other hand, maybe you just want a board full of ditto heads where one posts some awful bullshit crap and everybody else simply chimes in with accolades and agreements. At that point I don't think you'll have a board much longer, jim. How could anyone including you tolerate that boredom?

:laugh2::laugh2::laugh2:

Psychoblues

[jimnyc]

What I said was the truth. What you are saying may be an ideal but it does not in any way represent the truth. The very nature of political oppositions is adversarial. On the other hand, maybe you just want a board full of ditto heads where one posts some awful bullshit crap and everybody else simply chimes in with accolades and agreements. At that point I don't think you'll have a board much longer, jim. How could anyone including you tolerate that boredom?

Mature debates do not equal "pissing contests", unless the "debate" includes a few special members. Without them, the board has great debates without the constant trolling, name calling and personal comments.

[Psychoblues]

Mature debates do not equal "pissing contests", unless the "debate" includes a few special members. Without them, the board has great debates without the constant trolling, name calling and personal comments.

With that I can agree 100% and there are several here with whom I converse regularly and we don't seem to have any pissing contests other than an occasional jab just to wake the other one up. The problem comes in when someone pokes me or a few others around here then I or they poke back all hell breaks loose and many times the blame comes back to the wrong side. I see it and you should but I don't argue with you or staff about it any more as promised. It is what it is. Period. I'm just proud to be here and able to shed different light on various topics.

Psychoblues

[red states rule]

Oh, so it's YOU that's throwing all these slurs about Americans not being hardworking and that they are lazy, according to you? Do your friends also feel that way? How does that make you feel, cadet? I do hope a qualified psychologist examines you before you are allowed anywhere close to the greatest military on Earth. You will certainly diminish the military and the reputation of the armed forces of attracting only the brightest and the best into their ranks. We don't really need any unAmerican idiot pieces of crap like you out there contributing your vileness, stupidities, bigotries and ridiculous hyperbole to matters of our security. On the other hand, some of that will be addressed in basic training. After that, however, you'll have to fend mostly for yourself on those accords as they are in no way conducive to any military environment I was ever in.

Good luck. You'll need it. You certainly have no skills and demonstrate no capacity to acquire them.

:laugh2::laugh2::laugh2:

Psychoblues




No PB, it is Obama who is calling American works LAZY and SOFT

<IFRAME height=315 src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/5pKMisRGMx4" frameBorder=0 width=420 allowfullscreen></IFRAME>


I remember well liberals during the Bush year comparing members of the military to Nazi's, Pol Pot, terroists, and called them cold blooded murders

The liberal media went out of their way to smear them and look for anything they could "report" that would cast them in a bad light

And what would you know about the US military. Based on your conduct it is clear you do not have the self discipline and maturity that members have after basic training

[red states rule]

I have never dropped a quarter in any casino, dumbo. I don't gamble, I don't believe in gambling and I don't want my government gambling with my tax dollars. As much as you might not want to hear about gwb he exactly put the US on this rapid spiral to God only knows where. He and his cohorts were convinced that the wars in Afghanistan but even moreso in Iraq would pay for themselves. I could write you a book about all that but there are others available and I suggest you read a few of them. President Barack Hussein Obama has reversed that rapid and devastaing downward spiral of the United States economy that he indeed inherited from the gwb cabal and that miraculous reversal is evidenced by hundreds of economic data points, again more information is available for you if you seek it out. You are correct in that gwb was and probably remains an idiot. President Barack Hussein Obama, however, will go down in history as one of the greatest leaders and presidents in the history of this democratic nation. I qualify the distinction of democratic nation by only stating that I fear the gwb prediction and desire for a dictatorship in this country. Many right wingers consciously or unconsciously are driving this political environment quite definitely in that direction. Any even casual reading some on this rather obscure website bears that out very clearly.

Psychoblues


So you don't like the government gambling with your tax money PB? What about the BILLIONS lost on Obama's "green" energy projects? All the pork in the stimulus bill? Paying people not to worK? Our allowing guns to croos the border into Mexico and resulting the people being MURDERED? Seems to be alot of gambling there by Dems who think throwing money at a problem is the solution, or liberal ideas will provide that hope and change we were promised

OK, now you can move along and ignore this post PB

[ConHog]

I wasn't saying a single word about being attacked by anyone, conway, and I really don't think I'll be taking many lectures from someone that spent 2 days crying to get me thread banned because they didn't agree that communities have rights to legislate and enforce laws whether YOU like it or not. Pissing contests are the MO of this board also whether YOU like it or not and they were here before I came along and they will remain when I leave, and you, too. And as long as there is fucking fighting going on I suppose I'll be getting blamed for them whether I have anything to do with them or not. On the other hand, I like fucking fighting. I guess it's in the jeans.

:laugh2::laugh2::laugh2:

Psychoblues

Sir, that is a bold faced lie. I have NEVER asked for ANYONE to be banned. Not from a thread nor from the board.

FACT I abhor bans of any kind and have said as much to Jim. I think it's MUCH funnier to keep people around and make fun of them than it is to ban them if they say shit you don't like.

[fj1200]

I do agree with myself or anyone else that agrees with me that what is known as capitalism in this country absolutely is not true capitalism. I do not agree that it necessarily has been perverted by governmental involvement. In fact, it would be made better if more regulations were enacted to ensure fairness and the abilities of regular Americans to indeed pursue happiness. Not everyone wants to run a business but those that don't want those that do should be prevented from using dirty tricks, monopolizing suppliers, even violence against those that would become legitimate competitors. Although we have laws against some of that our very own police forces and other law enforcement authorities have been used all too often to stifle the people and support the evil intents of the corporations, monopolies and their puppets.

Then your head is in the sand good sir; there is nothing else that CAN pervert capitalism. There is a necessity of government involvement but there is no doubt that we have gone beyond what is necessary. Laws should further the underlying circumstances required for a capitalist society to function, transparency, property rights, contracts, etc.; our tax laws, for example, have gone far beyond that.

[ConHog]

Then your head is in the sand good sir; there is nothing else that CAN pervert capitalism. There is a necessity of government involvement but there is no doubt that we have gone beyond what is necessary. Laws should further the underlying circumstances required for a capitalist society to function, transparency, property rights, contracts, etc.; our tax laws, for example, have gone far beyond that.

People like PB would foolishly argue that any sort of government intervention means it's not really capitalism. Hell, I've seen, and I'm sure you have as well, people argue that we are socialists because we have public roads and schools. :laugh2:

They just don't want to admit that even mean, greedy old capitalists recognize that there should be SOME government oversight.

[Psychoblues]

Sir, that is a bold faced lie. I have NEVER asked for ANYONE to be banned. Not from a thread nor from the board.

FACT I abhor bans of any kind and have said as much to Jim. I think it's MUCH funnier to keep people around and make fun of them than it is to ban them if they say shit you don't like.

You, sir, are a goddamned liar. See this: http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?32895-How-bad-is-the-paranoia-getting

And take it back up in the cage. Make fun of that.

:laugh2::laugh2::laugh2:

Sorry, jimnyc, I had to do it. conway is just such a freaking clown, don't you know!!!!!!!!!

Psychoblues

[ConHog]

You, sir, are a goddamned liar. See this: http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?32895-How-bad-is-the-paranoia-getting

And take it back up in the cage. Make fun of that.

:laugh2::laugh2::laugh2:

Sorry, jimnyc, I had to do it. conway is just such a freaking clown, don't you know!!!!!!!!!

Psychoblues

Jim please let this clown come back and confine him to the steel cage LOL. He doesn't even recognize that me saying essentially that I will be back in a thread after PB invariably gets himself thread banned is not the same thing as me trying to get that person thread banned. :laugh2: