RE: Income Inequality is costing the US on Social Issues

RE: Income Inequality is costing the US on Social Issues (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

MrRodgers -> RE: Income Inequality is costing the US on Social Issues (4/30/2015 2:08:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA quote: ORIGINAL: MrRodgers quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity Leftists love far left biased sources such as the New York Times and MSNBC, PBS, the BBC for their "news"... Other though, prefer more balanced sources for news and information To each their own Oh I agree and the trouble is, nobody can find any on the right or any that support the right's policy prescriptions. http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/SupplySideEconomics.html Once again, not knowing or caring about what he's talking about. Just wants to spew. Supply side is trickle down and all [it] is does is...trickle...down. Supply side does nothing for the middle class or poor who see their taxes changed very little. 'Reagan's' so-called economic growth was from a tremendous increase in defense spending, an increase in the size of govt. and a totally unnecessary passive loss tax reduction in real estate which created investments in housing for rental not ownership and empty office bldgs. and job creation didn't match Carter's until the second and was about the same. Explain these job figures for Reagan supply side theory: (in 1000's of jobs created during their respective terms) Carter 9,041 Reagan 1 5,360 Reagan 2 9,357 GHW Bush 1,510 Clinton 1 10,885 Clinton 2 10,070 Clearly, the opposite of supply side, i.e., higher rates during Carter/Clinton produced approx. 30 million jobs in 12 years and 14 million more jobs as compared to the 12 years of Reagan/Bush of approx. 16 million jobs. Here The facts are and have been, lowering the top marginal income tax rates have no effect on job creation but do create budget deficits and further enrich the few. But you can find plenty of real and actual objective facts to refute so-called supply-side theory. And just to reinforce the point, let's look at W's supply-side and corporate tax cuts: in 1000's of jobs created OR LOST !! GW Bush 1 -841 GW Bush 2 379 A net loss of around 500,000 jobs in 8 years and by a incredible margin...the worst 2 term job performance by any president since WWII that also went through a projected $5 trillion (10 years) surplus left by Clintons tax/job regime and added and additional $6 trillion in debt. That's $11 trillion...squandered by the greedy, capitalist scum of the US elite, all enabled by the right...their hirlings.

HunterCA -> RE: Income Inequality is costing the US on Social Issues (4/30/2015 2:14:51 PM)
Jester, Carter ====> 16% inflation, 21% interest rates, and 7.6% unemployment. Reagan ====> 4.1% inflation, 10% interest rates, and 5.5% unemployment. So where was Reagan just about defense? Oh, that's right he also brought down the evil empire and you hate that don't you?

mnottertail -> RE: Income Inequality is costing the US on Social Issues (4/30/2015 2:16:38 PM)
Nope, he didnt do shit. Charlie Wilson. Learn your history, and Geo Washington did not chop down a cherry tree. But under Carter you could get a bank loan. Under Carter they had good paying jobs. Under Reagan, not. Under Reagan it was the walmart, mcdonalds shit you see today. But Obama looks like a fuckin god compared to those two clowns hah?

mnottertail -> RE: Income Inequality is costing the US on Social Issues (4/30/2015 2:18:45 PM)
Course in fairness, those Reagan numbers you got there were after he raised taxes 5 times.

HunterCA -> RE: Income Inequality is costing the US on Social Issues (4/30/2015 2:18:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MrRodgers quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA quote: ORIGINAL: MrRodgers quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity Leftists love far left biased sources such as the New York Times and MSNBC, PBS, the BBC for their "news"... Other though, prefer more balanced sources for news and information To each their own Oh I agree and the trouble is, nobody can find any on the right or any that support the right's policy prescriptions. http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/SupplySideEconomics.html Once again, not knowing or caring about what he's talking about. Just wants to spew. Supply side is trickle down and all [it] is does is...trickle...down. Supply side does nothing for the middle class or poor who see their taxes changed very little. 'Reagan's' so-called economic growth was from a tremendous increase in defense spending, an increase in the size of govt. and a totally unnecessary passive loss tax reduction in real estate which created investments in housing for rental not ownership and empty office bldgs. and job creation didn't match Carter's until the second and was about the same. Explain these job figures for Reagan supply side theory: (in 1000's of jobs created during their respective terms) Carter 9,041 Reagan 1 5,360 Reagan 2 9,357 GHW Bush 1,510 Clinton 1 10,885 Clinton 2 10,070 Clearly, the opposite of supply side, i.e., higher rates during Carter/Clinton produced approx. 30 million jobs in 12 years and 14 million more jobs as compared to the 12 years of Reagan/Bush of approx. 16 million jobs. Here The facts are and have been, lowering the top marginal income tax rates have no effect on job creation but do create budget deficits and further enrich the few. But you can find plenty of real and actual objective facts to refute so-called supply-side theory. And just to reinforce the point, let;s look at W's supply-side and corporate tax cuts: in 100's of jobs created OR LOST GW Bush 1 -841 GW Bush 2 379 A net creation of less than 500,000 jobs in 8 years and by a incredible margin...the worst 2 term job performance by any president since WWII that also went through a projected $5 trillion surplus left by Clintons tax/job regime and added and additional $6 trillion in debt. That's $11 trillion...squandered by the greedy, capitalist scums all enabled by the right...their hirlings. You have to give the links because we know you take things out of context and twist other things. Consider this, Reagan inheriteted the Carter economy. Clinton inherited the Reagan/Bush economy. Bush W inherited the Clinton economy. They all had to work with that which they were given.

mnottertail -> RE: Income Inequality is costing the US on Social Issues (4/30/2015 2:24:38 PM)
and Obama the W economy. But now you are blaming Carter, shouldnt we start at where it went to hell back at Eisenhower and again at Reagan?

Sanity -> RE: Income Inequality is costing the US on Social Issues (4/30/2015 2:24:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail Nope, he didnt do shit. Charlie Wilson. Learn your history, and Geo Washington did not chop down a cherry tree. But under Carter you could get a bank loan. Under Carter they had good paying jobs. Under Reagan, not. Under Reagan it was the walmart, mcdonalds shit you see today. But Obama looks like a fuckin god compared to those two clowns hah? OBAMA vs. REAGAN on GDP GROWTH — NOT EVEN CLOSE Read more: http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2015/04/obama-vs-reagan-big-government-socialism-proves-to-be-as-disastrous-as-expected/#ixzz3YpWOfUvv

MrRodgers -> RE: Income Inequality is costing the US on Social Issues (4/30/2015 2:26:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA Jester, Carter ====> 16% inflation, 21% interest rates, and 7.6% unemployment. Reagan ====> 4.1% inflation, 10% interest rates, and 5.5% unemployment. So where was Reagan just about defense? Oh, that's right he also brought down the evil empire and you hate that don't you? Inflation didn't mean squat to the slave or the unemployed. It was Paul Volcker (fed) who all but stopped lending with the highest fed rates on record that brought down inflation by almost stopping the economy. Plus, it was Carter getting the Europeans to agree to and in the face of huge demonstrations by the euroleft against...the installation of Pershing II intermediate range nukes over there, which did a whole lot more to win the cold war.

HunterCA -> RE: Income Inequality is costing the US on Social Issues (4/30/2015 2:27:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail Course in fairness, those Reagan numbers you got there were after he raised taxes 5 times. of course in fairness we should point out that every tax Reagan raised was in order to reach across the isle and make a deal with the democrats in order to get spending cuts....something Clinton did, but Obama just can't do. Those taxes that were raised were also not on people. Jester, you twisty little devil you. Spewing once again. Oh and jester, those spending cuts included a 7% cut to defense spending.

mnottertail -> RE: Income Inequality is costing the US on Social Issues (4/30/2015 2:30:01 PM)
GDP growth doesnt mean shit when the debt to get it skyrockets right along with it. Its like selling pigs at $16 when it costs $19 to produce them. And that is a fughazi chunk of shit from gatewaypudlickers. http://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=d5bncppjof8f9_&met_y=ny_gdp_mktp_cd&idim=country:USA&dl=en&hl=en&q=gdp#ctype=l&strail=false&nselm=h&met_y=ny_gdp_mktp_cd&scale_y=lin&ind_y=false&rdim=country&idim=country:USA&ifdim=country&hl=en&dl=en http://www.factandmyth.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/reagan-deficit-stimulus.gif

HunterCA -> RE: Income Inequality is costing the US on Social Issues (4/30/2015 2:32:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MrRodgers quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA Jester, Carter ====> 16% inflation, 21% interest rates, and 7.6% unemployment. Reagan ====> 4.1% inflation, 10% interest rates, and 5.5% unemployment. So where was Reagan just about defense? Oh, that's right he also brought down the evil empire and you hate that don't you? Inflation didn't mean squat to the slave or the unemployed. It was Paul Volcker (fed) who all but stopped lending with the highest fed rates on record that brought down inflation by almost stopping the economy. Plus, it was Carter getting the Europeans to agree to and in the face of huge demonstrations by the euroleft against...the installation of Pershing II intermediate range nukes over there, which did a whole lot more to win the cold war. Really, how insane. Let's say you're trying to feed your family on unemployment insurance...which we do have here. You're saying inflation has no affect on buying food? Okay, I can't take you seriously anymore. You're just what Stalin called a useful idiot.

MrRodgers -> RE: Income Inequality is costing the US on Social Issues (4/30/2015 2:35:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail Nope, he didnt do shit. Charlie Wilson. Learn your history, and Geo Washington did not chop down a cherry tree. But under Carter you could get a bank loan. Under Carter they had good paying jobs. Under Reagan, not. Under Reagan it was the walmart, mcdonalds shit you see today. But Obama looks like a fuckin god compared to those two clowns hah? OBAMA vs. REAGAN on GDP GROWTH — NOT EVEN CLOSE Read more: http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2015/04/obama-vs-reagan-big-government-socialism-proves-to-be-as-disastrous-as-expected/#ixzz3YpWOfUvv Can't just compare job growth no !! You have to compare job growth 'Net of population growth' in order to find anything...anything to try to refute the same numbers used for the 40 years of right wing economic and job growth/tax cute bullshit. You know...those numbers of the past...used by Reagan and the right during his two terms. I stand by my post and its numbers because there is no deviance from one 'type' of job growth. Every pres. is treated the same. Now we have not only 'job participation' numbers scraped up by the right, now we can add 'net of population growth. What's next, gramdma's with wigs job growth ? Oh that's right grandma's with wigs retirement or 'unemployed' !!

HunterCA -> RE: Income Inequality is costing the US on Social Issues (4/30/2015 2:36:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail GDP growth doesnt mean shit when the debt to get it skyrockets right along with it. Its like selling pigs at $16 when it costs $19 to produce them. And that is a fughazi chunk of shit from gatewaypudlickers. http://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=d5bncppjof8f9_&met_y=ny_gdp_mktp_cd&idim=country:USA&dl=en&hl=en&q=gdp#ctype=l&strail=false&nselm=h&met_y=ny_gdp_mktp_cd&scale_y=lin&ind_y=false&rdim=country&idim=country:USA&ifdim=country&hl=en&dl=en http://www.factandmyth.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/reagan-deficit-stimulus.gif Jester, I know I'm going to regret even acknowledging you. But what is the debt under Obama?

Sanity -> RE: Income Inequality is costing the US on Social Issues (4/30/2015 2:38:59 PM)
FR U.S. economic growth slows to 0.2 percent, grinding nearly to a halt http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/04/29/the-u-s-will-release-economic-growth-this-morning/ And so, the Obama miracle continues...

MrRodgers -> RE: Income Inequality is costing the US on Social Issues (4/30/2015 2:40:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA quote: ORIGINAL: MrRodgers quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA Jester, Carter ====> 16% inflation, 21% interest rates, and 7.6% unemployment. Reagan ====> 4.1% inflation, 10% interest rates, and 5.5% unemployment. So where was Reagan just about defense? Oh, that's right he also brought down the evil empire and you hate that don't you? Inflation didn't mean squat to the slave or the unemployed. It was Paul Volcker (fed) who all but stopped lending with the highest fed rates on record that brought down inflation by almost stopping the economy. Plus, it was Carter getting the Europeans to agree to and in the face of huge demonstrations by the euroleft against...the installation of Pershing II intermediate range nukes over there, which did a whole lot more to win the cold war. Really, how insane. Let's say you're trying to feed your family on unemployment insurance...which we do have here. You're saying inflation has no affect on buying food? Okay, I can't take you seriously anymore. You're just what Stalin called a useful idiot. Do you really think that anybody without any job gives shit the gas was 80 cents rather than 70 cents ? Did they care if rent was $850/mo. instead of $800./mo ? Those 14 million people who didn't get jobs under supply-side bullshit, just like the millions who see and have seen their jobs go to China, Vietnam and other oppressed labor environments...don't give a fuck. They just want a decent paying job and one that pays for that gas and rent no matter what the fuck the greedy have done to their prices.

HunterCA -> RE: Income Inequality is costing the US on Social Issues (4/30/2015 2:46:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MrRodgers quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA quote: ORIGINAL: MrRodgers quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA Jester, Carter ====> 16% inflation, 21% interest rates, and 7.6% unemployment. Reagan ====> 4.1% inflation, 10% interest rates, and 5.5% unemployment. So where was Reagan just about defense? Oh, that's right he also brought down the evil empire and you hate that don't you? Inflation didn't mean squat to the slave or the unemployed. It was Paul Volcker (fed) who all but stopped lending with the highest fed rates on record that brought down inflation by almost stopping the economy. Plus, it was Carter getting the Europeans to agree to and in the face of huge demonstrations by the euroleft against...the installation of Pershing II intermediate range nukes over there, which did a whole lot more to win the cold war. Really, how insane. Let's say you're trying to feed your family on unemployment insurance...which we do have here. You're saying inflation has no affect on buying food? Okay, I can't take you seriously anymore. You're just what Stalin called a useful idiot. Do you really think that anybody without any job gives shit the gas was 80 cents rather than 70 cents ? Did they care if rent was $850/mo. instead of $800./mo ? Those 14 million people who didn't get jobs under supply-side bullshit, just like the millions who see and have seen their jobs go to China, Vietnam and other oppressed labor environments...don't give a fuck. They just want a decent paying job and one that pays for that gas and rent no matter what the fuck the greedy have done to their prices. Ummm....under supply side economics unemployment went down from 7.6% to 5.5%. Are you ranting it did something different? Your whole argument may be valid applied jimmy. Well, not actually, socialism never works anywhere. Not even when applied to jimmy.

MrRodgers -> RE: Income Inequality is costing the US on Social Issues (4/30/2015 2:49:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail Course in fairness, those Reagan numbers you got there were after he raised taxes 5 times. of course in fairness we should point out that every tax Reagan raised was in order to reach across the isle and make a deal with the democrats in order to get spending cuts....something Clinton did, but Obama just can't do. Those taxes that were raised were also not on people. Jester, you twisty little devil you. Spewing once again. Oh and jester, those spending cuts included a 7% cut to defense spending. More revisionist history. Obama continued what was 'temporary' Bush tax cuts under the lying right and instead did in fact compromise. And you bring up debt ? Isn't that precious. He said he would not have signed the bill if it did not include "other extensions of relief that were also set to expire." Among other provisions, he cited the extensions of unemployment benefits and tuition tax credits, as well as new tax incentives for businesses. Here

mnottertail -> RE: Income Inequality is costing the US on Social Issues (4/30/2015 2:51:26 PM)
And you should read The Triumph of Politics by Stockmann (one of the only 'republicans' that could count) and see how much of a lie is being fed from the rabid and unknowledgeable right wingers. They love their fairy tales, they dont need no stinkin facts. And the assholes are still trying to run the country on that dismal shit. It aint gonna happen.

HunterCA -> RE: Income Inequality is costing the US on Social Issues (4/30/2015 2:55:02 PM)
Come on jester....how much debt under Obama/Palosi/Reed? Don't change the subject you brought up.

MrRodgers -> RE: Income Inequality is costing the US on Social Issues (4/30/2015 2:56:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA quote: ORIGINAL: MrRodgers quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA quote: ORIGINAL: MrRodgers quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA Jester, Carter ====> 16% inflation, 21% interest rates, and 7.6% unemployment. Reagan ====> 4.1% inflation, 10% interest rates, and 5.5% unemployment. So where was Reagan just about defense? Oh, that's right he also brought down the evil empire and you hate that don't you? Inflation didn't mean squat to the slave or the unemployed. It was Paul Volcker (fed) who all but stopped lending with the highest fed rates on record that brought down inflation by almost stopping the economy. Plus, it was Carter getting the Europeans to agree to and in the face of huge demonstrations by the euroleft against...the installation of Pershing II intermediate range nukes over there, which did a whole lot more to win the cold war. Really, how insane. Let's say you're trying to feed your family on unemployment insurance...which we do have here. You're saying inflation has no affect on buying food? Okay, I can't take you seriously anymore. You're just what Stalin called a useful idiot. Do you really think that anybody without any job gives shit the gas was 80 cents rather than 70 cents ? Did they care if rent was $850/mo. instead of $800./mo ? Those 14 million people who didn't get jobs under supply-side bullshit, just like the millions who see and have seen their jobs go to China, Vietnam and other oppressed labor environments...don't give a fuck. They just want a decent paying job and one that pays for that gas and rent no matter what the fuck the greedy have done to their prices. Ummm....under supply side economics unemployment went down from 7.6% to 5.5%. Are you ranting it did something different? Your whole argument may be valid applied jimmy. Well, not actually, socialism never works anywhere. Not even when applied to jimmy. Under supply side and $2 trillion more in debt, unemployment went down to about what it was before the tax cuts and we're supposed to celebrate that ? Then it only got down to what it was before the oil embargo of 79 that set the economy into recession in the first place. 11/79 5.9 %, 12/79 6 %. the it went up when we had the gas lines and oil fucked us good. The tax cuts served two purposes...enrich the constituency of the right and enrich the bankers. The deficits obviously didn't matter to the right because Bush I didn't change that much.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875