quote Originally posted by ray b: ... and then want to repeatedly do the same things again over and over expecting a better result

Perfect description of a dumbocrat.

quote Originally posted by fierobear: HOW do conservatives CAUSE depressions?

conservatives hate good government and expect poor government
and do their very very best to see exactly what they expect as a direct result of their flawed ideas

conservatives limit and restrict regulation or put fools in important jobs who then do NOTHING
as they want a markets know best idea to work even after repeated being shown their ideals FAIL

a good example is madoff
deregulation and not paying attention combined to allow madoff to run his scam for years
guess what the MARKETS DONOT KNOW BEST
thieves scammers and outright frauds do love deregulation as it allows them a free hand

quote Originally posted by ray b: conservatives hate good government and expect poor government and do their very very best to see exactly what they expect as a direct result of their flawed ideas

WHAT?!? How is that anything other than your OPINION? Conservatives hate good government? What the f*** is that?

quote conservatives limit and restrict regulation or put fools in important jobs who then do NOTHING as they want a markets know best idea to work even after repeated being shown their ideals FAIL

Gee, Bush and McCain wanted to put more regulation in place of the housing situation and banks, but Democrats like Barney Frank shot it down. They couldn't get enough support. But don't tell me Republicans didn't try. Now, the housing bubble burst and sent the economy into a tailspin. That situation was started by Democrats, with the CRA and working with leftist organizations like ACORN, FORCING banks to make home loans to people who had no business getting a home loan (low income, poor credit). Then, your a-hole Democrats have the GALL to blame banks for making loans to people who couldn't afford it.

Your argument is not supported by facts or history, ray, only your preconceptions and hatred of conservatives.

quote a good example is madoff deregulation and not paying attention combined to allow madoff to run his scam for years guess what the MARKETS DONOT KNOW BEST thieves scammers and outright frauds do love deregulation as it allows them a free hand

We already have a system to deal with people like Madoff. It's called JAIL. You catch someone stealing, you convict them and put them in jail. Short of a totalitarian government that controls everything, and has police and cameras watching you every minute, you CANNOT achieve a crime-free state in a free society. That's the price of freedom, ray, some people abuse the freedom and commit crimes.

BTW, in case you missed it, your beloved Democrats, who passed this so-called financial reform bill, included a provision that the SEC is exepmt from FOIA requests. Not only that, but the new law wouldn't have made a difference in the Madoff case.

link: http://hotair.com/archives/...empts-sec-from-foia/

quoting:

The Dodd-Frank bill had a lot of bad ideas rolled into it, but this may be the worst. As Mintz notes, the next time a Bernie Madoff-type scam occurs, the American public won’t have any idea about it, or about the SEC’s efforts to prevent it. The use of FOIA has uncovered many problems at the SEC, which is undoubtedly why Chris Dodd and Barney Frank wanted the exemption. Among the cases listed by Fox Business as having been boosted by FOIA requests are:

• March 2009 – Fox used FOIA to discover that the SEC had investigated Madoff and R. Allen Stanford, but failed to follow through on prosecution in time to save investors.
  
  
• 2009 – Fox again used FOIA to get records showing that the Fed knew AIG execs would get their bonuses under the bailout legislation proposed by Congress.
  
  
• SEC whistleblower Gary Aguirre forced the SEC to release documents through FOIA requests that showed he was correct in accusing the agency of interfering in an investigation of Pequot Asset Management — and allowed him to get a settlement for wrongful termination.

None of these would have happened without FOIA. Government has only one purpose in issuing FOIA exemptions — opacity. Some functions in government require secrecy, but those should be limited to acute national security operations and other such public-safety tasks (such as raw FBI files, for instance).

Barack Obama and the Democrats don’t want people to see how the SEC does its work, and that should worry everyone who has watched the SEC blow its regulatory responsibilities over the last few years. This is an agency that needs more oversight, not less, especially with its increased power and authority.


=====================================================

First of all, it's not Congress or the President's job to deal with people like Madoff, it's the SEC. Your fracking Democrats just handed the SEC a get out of jail free card. So explain to me how they prevented another Madoff?

quote Originally posted by ray b: well you almost get it the conservatives CAUSE DEPRESSIONS then try to blame others for the depressions that the conservatives policy created and to prevent acts to limit or recover from the depressions and then want to repeatedly do the same things again over and over expecting a better result

The ironic thing is, your complete partisan BS makes it impossible for you to arrive at any truthful conclusion about anything that has anything to do with politics.

The PERFECT article for ray(I hate conservatives so much I can't bother to read facts)b

Obama and the Age of Reaganomics

Certain ideas get so firmly fixed in some folks' brains that no amount of evidence can dislodge them. Such ideas become articles of faith. And one article of faith that is particularly deeply stuck in the minds of "the faithful" is that Reaganomics doesn't work.

The big idea behind Reaganomics is that cutting tax rates boosts the economy, which results in more tax revenue. The history of the last three decades bears this out.

The faithful have tried to disprove Reaganomics by contending that the 1993 tax rate hike is what gave us the good economy and the balanced budgets of the 1990s. This is pure speculation, because the faithful don't know what GDP and federal revenue would have been had rates remained lower.

But the bigger problem for the faithful is this: Reagan's 28-percent top rate on the Feds' largest source of revenue, the Individual Income Tax, didn't kick in until the 1986 tax bill. And what's more, Reagan's 1981 rate cuts were phased in over three years. So for most of Reagan's tenure, the top rate was 50 percent or more. Now, I don't have a degree in economics, but 50 percent is higher than Clinton's 39.6 percent. Also, the Republican Congress pushed through the tax rate cuts of 1997, which Clinton signed.

So the inconvenient truth the faithful fail to grasp is that the case for Reaganomics continued to be made during the 1990s, and it might have been demonstrated even more conclusively under Clinton than under Reagan.

But that doesn't stop the faithful -- guys like Marxist Andy Stern, former president of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), who said on "60 Minutes," "I think I'm going to win the Nobel Prize because I think I can finally prove that Ronald Reagan is wrong, George Bush is wrong. Wealth does not trickle down, it trickles up."

And the late left-wing columnist Molly Ivins wrote, "[The] tax cut is part of a continuing right-wing fantasy going back to the Laffer Curve."

But this "continuing right-wing fantasy" has been the de facto policy of the U.S. since 1981, during which America has enjoyed her longest expansions, record job creation, low inflation, exploding GDP, etc, etc. Look at the numbers: Total federal revenue for fiscal 1980 was $517 billion, and for fiscal 2000 was more than $2 trillion. You do the math: During those twenty years, revenue shot up by a factor of 3.86, with radically lower tax rates throughout.

So the Age of Reaganomics never ended, not even under Clinton, and it continues apace to this day. The question becomes: for how much longer? Because now we hear that we can cure what ails us by raising tax rates. That's the plan of the Anointed One. And the faithful are falling in line behind Him. He who doubts Himself Not has designs on your money, which occasions another question:

How exactly does one help a faltering economy by taking money out of it?

On January 20, 1981, Ronald Reagan inherited the worst economy since the Great Depression. A new disease called "stagflation" infected America -- simultaneous high unemployment and high inflation, which theoretically weren't supposed to co-exist. The economy was so bad economists threw out economic theory, like the Phillip's Curve. The stock market hadn't inched up for fifteen years; parts of the country were in depression.

So if not with Reaganomics, how do the faithful explain the turnaround? (Historical inevitability?)

One of the cardinal sins the faithful regularly commit is their conflating the economy with the government. Whenever you hear the faithful talk about the economy, notice how quickly they segue into government finances, especially the federal deficit. It's as though their only criterion for judging an economy is whether or not it's adequately funding the government; if there's a federal deficit, it's the economy's fault.

We've had gangbusters economies while running deficits, and we've had lousy economies with balanced budgets. Example: The feds ran an on-budget surplus of $86.5 billion in fiscal 2000, the largest ever, even though the stock market suffered a historic meltdown and the fourth quarter saw negative GDP.

Deficits are a function of two things: revenue and spending. We understand how to increase revenue (Reaganomics), but Congress just can't help itself when it comes to spending. Increase revenue, and Congress will find something to spend it on, be it universal health care, universal pre-K, the Cowgirl Hall of Fame, a bridge to nowhere, or some public works project in West Virginia named for Robert Byrd.

The real reasons the feds ran budget surpluses at the end of the 1990s are:

• The Republicans kept a lid on new spending. Even before they captured Congress in 1994, they killed HillaryCare, which would have been a budget-buster.
  
• It was smack-dab in the middle of the dot-com bubble. As soon as the bubble burst, the extra revenue vanished.
  
• We weren't spending nearly enough on defense, homeland security, intelligence, and anti-terrorism. When we started spending again on these essentials, the deficit returned.
  
• We were practicing Reaganomics.

It should be obvious that a tax rate can't be too high lest it kill off whatever it's taxing. The "killing effect" of high tax rates is implicit in sin taxes, which seek to mold folks' behavior. For example, the government uses high tax rates on tobacco to deter kids from smoking. If government wanted to totally kill off the tobacco industry, it could, say, raise cigarette taxes to a hundred bucks a pack.

Let's define "optimal tax rate" as that rate which brings in the most revenue over the long haul. Government could jack up tax rates above the "optimal tax rate" and perhaps get more revenue -- but only for a while. Eventually the disincentive of the higher rates would come into play, and revenues would plunge.

As to what the "optimal tax rate" might be, I haven't the foggiest. But fiscal 2007 saw total federal revenue of $2.568 trillion (see Table 1.1). This is the record, the most federal revenue ever. It is five times the revenue right before Reagan, and 26 percent more than Clinton's best year. And it happened under the Bush tax rates.

Those would be the same Bush rates that are set to expire in 2011. So Obama and the Democrats could be setting themselves up for a fall if their higher rates fail to quickly bring in more revenue than the lower rates did in 2007. That kind of revenue is unlikely without considerably higher economic growth. But Obama has also instituted a slew of new taxes with ObamaCare that are set to go into effect in 2011. If these new taxes and the return of higher rates on the old taxes coincide with a double-dip in the recession, then Reaganomics will have additional vindication.

In the April 16, 2008 Democratic debate on ABC, Charles Gibson asked Senator Obama about tax rates:

GIBSON: All right. You have, however, said you would favor an increase in the capital gains tax. As a matter of fact, you said on CNBC, and I quote, "I certainly would not go above what existed under Bill Clinton," which was 28 percent. It's now 15 percent. That's almost a doubling, if you went to 28 percent. But actually, Bill Clinton, in 1997, signed legislation that dropped the capital gains tax to 20 percent.

OBAMA: Right.

GIBSON: And George Bush has taken it down to 15 percent.

OBAMA: Right.

GIBSON: And in each instance, when the rate dropped, revenues from the tax increased; the government took in more money. And in the 1980s, when the tax was increased to 28 percent, the revenues went down. So why raise it at all, especially given the fact that 100 million people in this country own stock and would be affected?

OBAMA: Well, Charlie, what I've said is that I would look at raising the capital gains tax for purposes of fairness. ... [Emphasis added.]

GIBSON: But history shows that when you drop the capital gains tax, the revenues go up.

OBAMA: Well, that might happen, or it might not.

Obama seems more committed to "fairness" than to higher revenue. But since we've had record federal revenue with the current rates, why change them?

If Congress taxed at the "optimal tax rate" but ran a deficit, the reason for that deficit would clearly be spending. Congress is forever tinkering with tax rates, but it has never controlled its spending. Mechanisms like Gramm-Rudman, which trigger automatic cuts, don't work because Congress will just override them. And pay-go? Pay-go is a fraud.

The only way a rate hike could be justified is if Congress preceded it with radical spending cuts. Otherwise, it'll just be more billions down the rat hole -- your money, squandered by professional politicians. So let's see Congress pass some rescission bills and reform entitlements before we allow them to even think about raising tax rates.

The faithful have given President Bush so much grief for his tax rates. For eight years, he had to endure an unending chorus of "tax cuts for rich, tax cuts for the rich." But Bush's phased-in rate cuts for the top bracket totaled only 4.6 percent. Did Reagan ever receive such flak for his massive 42-percent cut?

Do the faithful really wish to go back to the 70-percent top rate under Carter? Or would they prefer the 91-percent rate Kennedy inherited? Or do they just have a fetish for the number 39.6? In any event, it would be a stunning victory if the faithful would just agree that a man should be allowed to keep 50 percent of what he makes.

When it comes to cutting tax rates, Reagan's still the all-time champ. Since Reagan, none of the rate adjustments in the Individual Income Tax, neither up nor down, have been very sizable. Surely, we're pretty close to the "optimal tax rate."

Ave Ronaldus Magnus.

you move right threw the great depression

and jump in to st ronny raygun the brain dead's voodoo

most of the gain in taxable income is due to inflation not voodoo based tax rates
and thats called bracket creep

if you actually look at the LOL CURVE a tax rate of 50% for the top rates
produces the max income tax funds [the rate pre=rayguns cuts ]
and tax rates below 50% PRODUCE THE SAME LOSS IN TAX FUNDS
as rates over 50% the curve drops at the same slope for over or under 50% rates
now that a whole nother fiction
so the LOL curve DOESNOT SUPPORT VOODOO

back to the great depression
GOP CAUSED IT
GOP PROLONGED
in both cases with the aid of the very very conservative south
gingrich is wrong and is just spinning for all he is worth

quote Originally posted by ray b: back to the great depression GOP CAUSED IT GOP PROLONGED in both cases with the aid of the very very conservative south gingrich is wrong and is just spinning for all he is worth

Ray, the GOP was out of power for over a decade during the great depression. FDR was a virtual DICTATOR. There was NO WAY the Republicans could have prolonged the great depression. To suggest they did or could is absurd.

On a related note, how is it that FDR was soooo popular that his body wasn't even cold when they passed the 22nd amendment, limiting presidents to 2 terms?

quote Originally posted by ray b: you move right threw the great depression and jump in to st ronny raygun the brain dead's voodoo

I thought we were finished with the great depression. That's OK, see above.

quote most of the gain in taxable income is due to inflation not voodoo based tax rates and thats called bracket creep

WHAT? Where do you come up with this crap?

The inflation rate since 1980 (Reagan) has been below 6%

Inflation would affect everything, not just tax revenues. It also affects costs and erodes buying power. But assuming what you're saying is true, how would that be Republicans' fault? Are you saying that lower tax rates CAUSE inflation?

BTW, here is the definition of bracket creep:

Bracket Creep

The movement of a taxpayer into higher tax brackets as his or her taxable income increases over time. Bracket creep occurs because of the progressive nature of the federal income tax structure, that is, extra income is taxed at higher and higher rates. As a result of bracket creep, more and more individuals seek tax-advantaged investments. Bracket creep was reduced significantly by 1986 tax reform, which reduced the number of tax brackets. Several additional brackets were added in the early 1990s.

===============

Progessive income tax - a favorite of liberals.

quote Originally posted by fierobear: Reality and the American Left By Steve McCann Europe, the birthplace of socialist/Marxist theory, is rapidly retreating from this failed ideology -- and has been for some time. There is now an open discussion among the most die-hard of Leftist ideologues conceding the fact that a political or economic system which guarantees prosperity to that country's citizens, and operates a massive central government model, cannot work in the modern age of global economy and communication. In the United States, however, the Left, including those in the White House, are determined to go where others have failed. The 20% of the population who consider themselves Liberal or Progressive have succeeded in dominating not only government, but most of our institutions. It is this domination that has led the United States to the brink of bankruptcy and societal upheaval. Yet as a group, they are oblivious to the damage they are causing to a country which has given them so much and asked for so little in return. The current manifestation of the American Left was incubated in a petri dish of overwhelming prosperity and freedom from any significant national hardship. They were free to sit about coffee houses and faculty lounges engaging in games of one-upmanship, trying to impress each other with their mental acumen and unquestioned intellect. That environment inevitably fostered a sense of superiority for the self-anointed and disdain for those masses who did not possess, in the ruling class's opinion, such a high degree of intelligence and education and were stuck in the mundane and archaic belief in the God-given rights of man. It thus became a natural progression to turn to those social and economic philosophies that emphasize the power of the state over the individual, as only those doctrines empower a ruling class with the ability to permanently dominate a society. There was no doubt in the minds of the true believers of the Left that they were preordained to rule. Whether they are called Socialism, Marxism, Communism, or Fascism, all totalitarian philosophies have in common the guise of wealth redistribution -- theoretically resulting in a classless society wherein all are treated fairly. Yet all require a permanent class of those who are more equal and must enforce equality on the rest of society. However, for any of these philosophies to succeed, it must have an economic underpinning that can provide the foundation for massive social spending. The Soviet Union, as early as the 1920s and '30s, proved that complete state control of the means of production iss a colossal failure, as it could not produce sufficient wealth to support the population. Therefore, only the capitalist economic system, which is anathema to a powerful central government and its attendant oligarchy, can produce sufficient wealth to underwrite a social safety net for the general public and continue to expand the standard of living for all. Capitalism (which reinforces the superiority of the individual) and authoritarianism, of which the American Left is so enamored, cannot coexist. The most dominant characteristic of the human race is to survive and prosper. Thus, the liberty so necessary for prosperity is ingrained in our souls. In the modern era, the tension between those who wish to dominate and those who desire freedom has resulted in unfathomable death and destruction. The 20th century was the bloodiest in the history of mankind. It was so because totalitarian philosophies were imposed by or sustained with the barrel of a rifle. Beginning in 1917 with the Russian Revolution through the civil war in the Congo in 2000, over 179,000,000 people were killed, and another perhaps 200,000,000 wounded and displaced. This figure of 379,000,000 exceeds the total population of the earth as late as the year 1400 AD and is greater than the current combined populations of the United States and Canada. The American Left appears to believe that they, due to their intellectual superiority, can succeed where others have failed on such a devastating basis. Only they can turn human nature on its head and force the most advanced society on earth to buckle under to egalitarian doctrine as administered by them. The Left in the United States are fools. They know nothing of living in a society that is the product of what they espouse. They cannot fathom the prospect of not having a tomorrow to look forward to while others strive to live through another day. They dismiss the untold millions who suffered under various collective dogmas as nameless and cold statistics. These people, too, had hopes and dreams -- however, theirs were brutally dashed on the rocks by ego-driven rulers and oligarchies justified by the pursuit of a classless and just society. Those on the Left are not intellectually superior to the vast majority of the citizens of this country; rather, they are nothing but unthinking followers looking to be a part of the current ruling class -- thus susceptible to flattery and a sense of their own importance. Despite their best efforts to transform the United States, they will not succeed. Over the past fifty years, while the Left was busy infiltrating the education and media establishments, as well as government bureaucracies, the people, thanks to unparalleled prosperity, slept. Yet deep within the unique American character beats the heart of a proud and independent people who will never accede to a so-called Progressive ruling class wreaking havoc upon so blessed a nation. The Left fail to understand that the foundation of liberty and freedom will not be eroded by their self-aggrandizing actions. The damage the American Left have caused to the future prospects of this country is overwhelming, but thanks to their ascendancy to power, the people have awakened, and revolution, albeit peaceful, is in the air. It is time that that those who call themselves Liberal or Progressive also awaken and thank the God they so adamantly are trying to eliminate from the public square for allowing each of them to be born in a country that has enabled them to prosper and espouse such devastating political and economic views. Perhaps time and reason will cause many to reconsider the folly of blindly following those who will not learn from the past and present.

bear, I finally figured this out! ray b is your straight man; feeds us lots of bs so you can post facts. How much you pay him for such good openings?

quote Originally posted by texasfiero: bear, I finally figured this out! ray b is your straight man; feeds us lots of bs so you can post facts. How much you pay him for such good openings?

LOL!

Damn. The cat's outta the bag.

quote Originally posted by newf: You're like two sides of the same coin. Don't you think both parties have had good and bad policies, and that they both have what's best for the country in mind. Not that you have to agree with everything an opposing party does but this belief that the opposite side is evil and wants to destroy the country is to me...well..un-American (this is coming from an outsider so no disrespect intended) Informed critisizm and disagreement is natural and healthy but the name calling and hatred seems childish. You don't have to agree on things but a little bit of respect would be nice. From both sides. Look at politicians for example do you think they actually hate the other side, some may but the majority would probably run for the other side if they thought it would get them elected. It's their job to critisize and oppose things the other party does and try to say they would have done things better when in actual fact they would just do what they think is best for what ever reason, sometimes they are right and sometimes wrong. Part of this problem is with the media, the hunger for ratings tends to have idiots spewing crap and hatred, playing on peoples fears for their own numbers and popularity. Some seem to be able to sift through it and see it for what it is while others buy into it.

It frustrates me that you are from Canada and have such a better grip on American politics than half the people here

RayB, why are you so hateful? Gosh I know people jumped on you quickly in this thread but it's because it isn't the first thread in which this has happened...

quote Originally posted by theBDub: It frustrates me that you are from Canada and have such a better grip on American politics than half the people here RayB, why are you so hateful? Gosh I know people jumped on you quickly in this thread but it's because it isn't the first thread in which this has happened...

because I know who and what they are really behind the smoke and mirrors

in 1964 I was inside the GOP and watched as the change first started to happen as a young teen

before that my family had summered in the Detroit suburbs and by the first snows fled south to Miami until spring
I saw the effects of the old south racist schools systems vs the north's totally integrated schools first hand

sure as time went on they dropped the out right racist BS and switched to the code words
but the core ideas were the old south racist ideas reworded to fit the new south's GOP
so instead of anti black BS it became anti busing or welfare BS the underlining hates was still there just redirected
then the anti-war movements started up big time with many of the same people who fought the civil rights movements
now lined up against the anti-war people

it was not hard to see the GOP was on the WRONG SIDE in both
and all to willing to use BIG LIES to support their failed ideals

as a student of history the attempts to rewrite history and spin BS like the newt does
in the piece on the great depression trying to blame the people who worked to get country going again
and useing false claims to try to shift blame for the GOP's mess much like today
that is simply something I can not stand

------------------
Question wonder and be wierd
are you kind?

Speaking of lies Rayb, take your pick of these.
Obama lies.
http://obamawtf.blogspot.co...-claimed-he-had.html

quote 158 Obama claims he wrote letter to US Treasurer to try to prevent the housing crisis; but he acted only AFTER he had caused it by blocking McCain's bill 157 Obama claims he is bipartisan ; Congressional Quarterly shows he voted with his party 97% of the time 156 Obama's dirty lie scares seniors: falsely claims McCain plans to cut $880 billion from Medicare: liar liar liar says Annenberg Factcheck 155 Obama lies about his mother turning to food stamps AND still sending him to top schools; his grandmother paid for education 154 Obama lied about being asked to wear dead soldier's bracelet: family had asked Obama to stop wearing it 153 Obama claimed all new spending is economic plan was self-funding; short by $3.5 Trillion says nonpartisan Tax Policy Center 152 Obama denied Admiral Mike Mullen had called Obama's Iraqi troop plan "dangerous"; Mullen made comment on Fox in July 2008 according to WaPo 151 Obama lied about Kissinger's views of diplomacy during first debate; Kissinger confirms the lie 150 During Debate 1 Obama denied voting to tax some people making $42000 a year: Annenburg Factcheck,org confirms Obama is lying 149 After Debate 1, Team Obama denied Obama ever said, "Iran's not a threat": Video proves Obama DID say "Iran is NOT a threat." 148 Obama claims under McCain employers would be taxed on the health care benefits it grants to workers; he's lying 147 Obama refers to an Iraqi surplus of $79 billion and says US should have it; its $60 billion and dwindling 146 Obama claims only 5% of Americans would see tax increase; he's grossly understating the number of people effected 145 Obama accuses McCain of lying about Biden being against clean coal; video proves Obama is lying 144 Obama claims McCain is opposed to abortion in cases of rape or incest; McCain has never held that position. 143 Obama accuses McCain of making an ad about Obama's vote to approve leaving babies who survive abortion procedures to die; McCain did not make the ad 142 Obama's ad on abortion claims BHO always supported medical care to protect infants; text of the Bill he supported shows he wanted babies born alive after abortions to be left to die 141 Obama's ad on abortion uses quotes by journalists who made negative comments about a McCain ad; but Obama is misleading because both journalists have been proven to be incorrect 140 Obama's lying when he says McCain's ad misstated BHO's Sex Ed for Kindergartners Bill: McCain's ad was accurate; here's the Sex Ed Bill text 139 Obama and Biden both truncate McCain's comments on the strength of the economy's fundamentals: deliberate distortion 138 Biden claims McCain tried to hurt our veterans by denying them educational benefits; NewsWeek confirms Biden is lying 137 Obama claims under McCain, Elderly would have had Social Security tied up in the Stock market; Newsweek cries BS 136 Obama claims his opponent will cut social security in half: NOT true; Obama guilty of scare-mongering aimed at Seniors 135 Biden claims McCain wouldn't help small borrowers hurt by housing crisis; this is untrue according to Newsweek 134 Obama claimed during the primary he had more Ex President Clinton Foreign Policy advisers than Sen. Clinton; she had 70% more 133 Obama claimed his father served in World War 2: his Kenyan-born father never served 132 Obama grossly misquoted Sen.Clinton about her vote on a banking bill; BHO used the false quote to show why voters don't trust Government 131 Obama claimed employers are more likely to be struck by lightning than be prosecuted for employing illegals; Gov stats prove he's lying 130 Pushing his Green agenda Obama claimed Japanese Car average 45 mpg fuel efficiency; its actually around 29 mph 129 Obama disparaged the President saying he hadn't met with auto makers until the sixth year of his presidency; GWB met automakers in April 2003 128 Obama disparaged the efficiency of our healthcare system saying the U.S. spends twice per capita than other countries: WaPo proves he's lying 127 Obama claims President Clinton's Labor Secretary said BHO's healthcare plan, "Does more than anybody to reduce costs"; Robert Reich did NOT say it 126 Obama falsely claimed he won the Michigan Democrat primary: he was not on the ballot 125 Obama's Spanish language ad lies about McCain's position on immigration; tries to stir race-war: lies debunked by ABC 124 Obama lies about his interference in Iraqi negotiations; but his campaign admits his treachery 123 Obama took credit for the economic stimulus package passed in Feb 08; BHO's colleagues on Capitol Hill cry BS 122 Obama claims Big Oil is ignoring 68 million acres of oil fields they could be drilling; most fields are being worked 121 Obama claims never questions his opponent's patriotism; asks of McCain "WHICH country first?": ABC says he's questioning McCain's patriotism 120 Obama claims personal savings rates are lowest since the Great Depression; currently higher than under President Clinton 119 Obama claims on this video that he doesn't switch positions; list of 31 flip flops show he's lying 118 In the Primaries Obama puffed his resume claiming he was a "Professor"; State Senate bio shows he was not ; he now agrees 117 When Obama ran for US Senate his web site claimed "5 years as a community organizer"; he admits it was only 3 years 116 Obama's attack ad in Michigan claims McCain doesn't support loan guarantees for auto-industry. McCain DOES support them 115 Obama says "if we're STILL in recession when he takes office...etc"; the economy is NOT in recession 114 Obama claims he signed up for Selective Service when he graduated from High School; records show he did NOT until he'd been at college 1 year 113 Attacking Palin, Obama has the audacity to claim,"Words mean something; you can't just make things up "; BHO makes stuff up 112 Biden claims McCain will increase taxes for workers & Obama will only increase taxes on those making $435k: he's lying 111 Biden claims Obama drew the Nation's attention to problems at Walter Reed Army Hospital; it was two WaPo reporters that reported the issues to the Nation 110 to make Obama seems more American/less exotic, Biden tells Scranton crowd Obama grew up in Kansas; BHO grew up in Hawaii and Indonesia 109 Obama lies yet again to disparage Gov. Palin; ignores her executive experience as Governor of Alaska 108 Obama says the US economy has failed under Bush; World Bank stats proves Obama's been lying; US a world leader in growth, employment, incomes 107 Obama claims if you are born into poverty in America you are on your own: there are many government programs 106 Obama claims he's bi-partisan: voting records prove Obama is #11 most partisan 105 Claimed Hillary would be on anyone's short-list; Hillary wasn't on Obama's short-list 104 Obama claims abortion rates have not gone down under the Bush Administration; stats show they have gone down 103 Obama dismissed Bomber Bill Ayers as "some guy who lives in the neighborhood";they had a close working relationship 102 Obama claims there's no charge to attend his acceptance speech: CBS 4 in Denver proves he's lying; some tickets cost $1000 101 Obama used being a first-time-buyer to justify consulting with Rezko before he bought his house; BHO had already purchased a residence 100 Obama lies about his support for infanticide; campaign concedes in 03 he opposed a bill stopping the killing of kids born alive after abortions 99 Obama overstates Oil Industry's contributions to McCain; ignores cash the Oil industry gave BHO; Newsweek debunks 98 To belittle America,Obama exaggerated the growth in Debt under the current Administration; debunked by WaPo 97 Obama claims President George W Bush had not left the country before he became President; WaPo confirms he's lying 96 To promote "green", Obama claimed he drove a vehicle that uses ethanol; GM confirmed the model was NOT ethanol-ready 95 Obama claims he's taking his family for a week's rest in Hawaii with no campaigning; schedules a rally for first day 94: Obama claims "properly inflating tires" will save as much energy as we could drill offshore; analysis shows not even close 93 Obama denies accusing McCain of using race against him; ABC, NYT confirm Obama did accuse McCain of making racial attacks 92 Obama claims he's not being political when he's flip-flopping; timing & direction of major flip-flops show he's lying 91: Obama INVENTS a wall between Christians and Jews; deceptively omits the major religious wall is caused by a "fatwah" to kill American Christians and Jews 90 Obama claims he made a substantive call for Germany to help in Iraq; Berlin speech transcript proves he's lying 89: Obama admits he underestimated the decline in violence from the Surge; falsely claims McCain made same mistake 88 Obama turned a disappointing crowd of 20,000 into media reports of 200,000 87 Obama lied about his father's religious upbringing! half-brother confirms Obama's father was "RAISED Muslim" 86 Obama claimed we only made one fundraising trip to Florida during the Primary; Florida papers proved he lied 85 Claims reducing obesity to 80's levels would save Medicaid ONE TRILLION DOLLARS; not even close 84 To make Iraq/Afghan Wars look bad, Obama claimed demands on Nat Guard personnel hurt flood relief; Guards prove lying 83 Claimed due to overseas commitments, too few helecopters were available to help with Midwest flood relief; now concedes not true 82 Starting in Iowa, Obama claimed Clinton's healthcare plan would "punish families that couldn't afford healthcare"; NYT calls BS 81 Obama claims McCain's tax plan will do nothing to help the middle-class: The Tax Policy Center proves he's lying 80 claims the use of an Email with a big red DONATE button is NOT a fundraising solicitation 79 Obama claims his trip to Europe was non-political: uses video of Berlin speech to raise money within hours 78 Tells NBC that during the debate on the Surge he said the Surge would work in Baghdad; video proves during the debate he said the opposite 77 Obama's "Changing World" ad claims he'll fast-track alternatives to oil to stop us buying from hostile nations; "fast track" is totally misleading 76 Obama tells Israeli media that he's a member of the Senate Banking Committee; CNN confirms he's delusional 75 Obama claims Lou Dobbs caused hate crimes against Latinos to double; the FBI and CNN confirm Obama is lying 74 Obama claims the military brass think like he does; top US commanders say his plan for Iraq is unworkable 73: Obama promised to filibust FISA; later Obama voted for FISA and now denies changing his position 72 Obama belittles Americans claiming we can't speak European languages; he's talking merde; mierda; Scheiße 71 Obama denied he accused President Bush of starting the War for political reasons; Russert transcript proves Obama made that false claim 70 Obama claims there has been substantial job losses from NAFTA; Independent studies show its at least" job neutral" 69 Claimed in Feb 08 he got 90% of funds from donors giving $25, $50; fed filings show he got only about a third from donors below $200 68 Obama rewrites history about what specifically he had said during his October 2002 anti-war speech 67 Obama claimed in 04 that he had never supported bringing troops out of Iraq; rare video of 03 Teamsters rally shows he's lying 66 Obama lied about the softness of the Stock Market to support his false claim the War was being used to distract the public 65 To justify move to private funds, Obama claims McCain's campaign is" fuelled" by PACs and Lobbyists; its less than 2% of McCain's money 64 Obama's "Dignity" ad claims he "worked his way" thru college and law school; campaign admits only two summer jobs 63 Obama's "Dignity" ad gives him credit for reducing Welfare rolls by 80%: he's deceptive as he was opposed to Fed Welfare Reform in '96 62 In Obama's The Country I love ad, he takes credit for passing a healthcare bill he did NOT vote for 61 Claims he first ran in Chicago as an unendorsed candidate; his '96 election questionnaire proves he had several 60 Obama claims he wants a vigorous and open debate on the issues: then goes out of his way to avoid it 59 Obama omits key details about a false rumor re video of Michelle's "whitey" rant to justify breaking his public funding promise 58 Obama tries to deceive about why he voted "present" more than 100 times in the Illinois Senate; Chicago paper reveals the truth 57 Trying to claim patriotism Obama says his grandad signed up the day after Pearl Harbor; army records disagree 56 Claims race and party not important to how people vote as they put America first; 93% block vote disproves 55 On June 5, Obama stated that Israel must remain undivided; June 6 on CNN he reversed his position, but denied he had done so 54 To further his own agenda, Obama grossly overstates the number of potential African-American votes in MS, GA, SC 53 Promise of $2500 reduction in Healthcare premiums needs billions in Admin cost savings by 2012: not possible 52 Obama omits to mention his 3 week trip to the Islamic Republic of Pakistan until it slips out trying to out-do Clinton 51 Obama claims McCain wants to wage a lengthy war in Iraq: Video proves Obama's lying 50 Obama claimed he never prayed in a mosque; his campaign had to retract that statement 49 Obama dishonestly used endorsements in ads to pump up his healthcare plan 48 Claims he never discussed politics with Pastor; rebutted by photo of Obama with team of lobbyists led by Wright 47 Obama, an expert at parsing words, claimed he wasn't familiar with the word "Clintonian"; then changed his story 46 Despite reeking of cigarettes, Obama denied smoking to ABC; now admits smoking on MSNBC 45 Obama said he'd meet unconditionally with Leader of Iran: now claims he "didn't have Ahmadinejad in mind" 44 Obama claims he is using public financing to avoid special interests: WSJ nails his switcheroo 43 Obama's rhetoric claims more young black men in jail than college: BoJ Stats disprove 42 Claims he never said he was a proponent of single-payer universal healthcare; Video proves he did 41 Obama claims remarks to industrialists were greeted with silence, shows he can deliver tough message: video of ovation 40 Obamas claim you dont rip opponents & leave on roadside:he did to Alice Palmer 39 Obama denies saying Indiana could be tie-breaker: he did 38 Obama omits that Pastor Wright led divestiture campaign from Israel 37 Obama claims Church not controversial; he knew it was controversial since 86 36 Lied about intention of taking US out of NAFTA 35 Obamas claim poverty growing up: both distort reality 34 Obama denies meeting Saddam's Auchi; sworn Fed. witness places Obama at undisclosed party for Auchi at Rezkos 33 Obama lies about not attacking Clinton over her Bosnia lies 32 Obama claims he passed ethics reform; ABC News shows he lied 31 Obama says he's consistently opposed NAFTA; in October 2007 he supported expansion to Peru 30 Obama claims he's above dirty political tricks; Clinton proves he lies 29 Obama claims his "bitter" remarks were mangled; then repeats attacks on guns religion and angry people 28 Obama claims never said he wouldn't wear US flag-pin; video shows he did 27 Obama says he did no favors for Rezko;untrue; he lobbied for him 26 Changes story repeatedly re Rezko's help in buying mansion 25 Obama claims he never supported a ban on handguns; he has twice 24 Obama claims stays at UCC as Pastor acknowledged comments were inappropriate; Wright never made this statement 23 Campaign is beholden to "only the people" as unlike McCain/Clinton he does not take lobbyist /PAC money; LIES! 22 Claims campaign never called Canada to say Obama not truthful re wanting leave NAFTA; smoking gun memo proves lied 21 Mrs Obama admits she's never been proud of America; Video disproves Sen. Obama's later claim she was misquoted 20 Claimed would not run for President, as he would not be qualified by 2008: confirmed 3 times to Tim Russert in one 2006 interview 19 Claims famous in Il. for not letting lobbyists even buy him lunch; took from teachers, trial lawyers, hospital admins 18 Claims his parents met at Selma civil rights march; Washington Post noted it occurred 4 yrs after Obama's birth 17 BO claims courageously opposed war in 2002 during US Senate campaign; He did not announce his senate bid until 2003 16 Claims he passes tough Nuclear Law; NYT uncovers he took Nuclear Industry pay-off and watered down the bill 15 Claimed he didn't know Rezko was corrupt when did a real estate deal with him; Chicago papers prove he lied 14 Claims does not accept money from Big Oil: Real Clear Politics proves he lied 13 Denies using his Hopefund PAC to influence endorsers; but the Washington Post reviewed the record and disagreed 12 Claims his State Chair is not a drug company lobbyist; Time magazine cries Bullshit 11 Lies about how much he received in campaign funds from Rezko; forced to significantly increase the amount twice 10 Claims he did not fill out the 1996 candidate questionaire; Politico proves he lied 9 Took credit for achievement of others in Chicago; resume puffing exposed by LA Times 8 Claims he kept no State Senate records; now he changes his story 7 Denies doubling wife's salary was due to becoming US Senator; omits within months he earmarked $1 million for hospital 6 Denied meeting Saddam bagman Auchi; now admits he was at his dinner but does not remember talking to him 5 Denies using his church for politics: IRS disagree 4 Claims he was unaware of Pastor Wrights 911 comments: NYT proves he lied 3 Claims his father was a goat-herd; actually he was a man of privilige 2 Claims not an active muslim as child; Indonesian paper proves he lied 1 Claims father linked to Kennedys; Washington Post proves he lied Obama WTF defines "DOCUMENTED LIE " as : 1) a statement by one or more reliable news agencies or credible authorities citing supporting verifiable facts which rebut a reported statement by Obama. 2) observable video/transcript contradictions 3) the omission of an important fact the exclusion of which defies common sense unless the intent is to deceive This therefore EXCLUDES unintentional gaffes eg the Auschwitz Memorial Day blip; the 57 States etc which can be found at New Gaffe City

Meanwhile...

Democrats Scatter Monday as Obama Comes to Town

quote Originally posted by fierobear: Meanwhile... Democrats Scatter Monday as Obama Comes to Town

Damn it all! At this rate there is no way I will get Obama reelected!!

I can't believe you guys still try to reason with Ray. That's like trying to have a meaningful conversation with a yard gnome.

quote Originally posted by Blacktree: I can't believe you guys still try to reason with Ray. That's like trying to have a meaningful conversation with a yard gnome.

LOL

My responses aren't so much for him, but other thinking people who want to learn what's really going on, and would like to prepare themselves to deal with it.

Laffer: Taxing Rich Will Kill Recovery
http://www.moneynews.com/St...al&promo_code=A65D-1

quote Economist Arthur Laffer says that the Obama administration's desire to increase taxes on the wealthiest Americans is ultimately self-defeating and will lead to lowered economic growth. “Sadly, in the debate over whether to extend the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts … there is a false presumption that higher tax rates on the top 1 percent of income earners will raise tax revenues,” Laffer writes in The Wall Street Journal. The fact is, Laffer says, that lower tax rates increase tax revenues. “Anyone who is familiar with the historical data available from the IRS ... knows that raising income tax rates on the top 1 percent of income earners will most likely reduce the direct tax receipts from the now higher taxed income-even without considering the secondary tax revenue effects, all of which will be negative,” Laffer says. "And who on Earth wants higher tax rates on anyone if it means larger deficits?" Tax cuts enacted since 1978, Laffer notes, increased tax revenues from the top 1 percent of income earners. Income tax receipts from the bottom 95 percent of income earners, on the other hand, fell from 5.4 percent to 3.2 percent of GDP during the same time period. Reuters reports that House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi wants a vote before November elections on whether to extend tax cuts for those with annual income over $250,000 a year. "The tax cuts for the wealthiest ... were the Bush initiative," Pelosi said on ABC's "This Week.” "I don't see any reason why we should renew a tax cut that only gives a tax cut to the wealthiest people in America, increases the deficit, and doesn't create jobs," Pelosi said. "That doesn't make any sense."

It seems Nancy Pelosi doesn't get it either.

Gingrich: Renew Bush Tax Cuts or Economy Will Sink
http://www.moneynews.com/St...al&promo_code=A65D-1

quote In an exclusive interview with Newsmax.TV, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said, “If we have large tax increases in January, this economy will sink deeper into recession, there will be higher unemployment, the recovery will be longer. This was exactly the mistake made in 1937 and ’38 and it created a second mini-depression . . . I think the simple battle cry ought to be ‘No tax increase in 2011, period.’ Keep current law exactly as it is through 2011.” The architect of the "Contract with America" also excoriated the financial overhaul law as "one more job-killing bill" Democrats have passed.

Even Greenspan is confused by the whole thing now.
Greenspan Flip-Flops on Tax Cuts

quote There he goes again. Alan Greenspan, the former Federal Reserve chairman who oversaw the two largest asset bubble's in world history and dismissed signs of their impending implosions, now has become a deficit hawk and says tax cuts "don't work." Recently, Greenspan has come out for allowing all the Bush tax cuts to expire at the end of this year. On Sunday's "Meet the Press," David Gregory asked Greenspan: "You don't agree with Republican leaders who say tax cuts pay for themselves?" "They do not," Greenspan responded. But that was not the tune Greenspan was singing in 2001 when he testified before Congress about the proposed Bush tax cuts. Though Greenspan suggested tax cuts are not the best way to immediately jump-start an economy, he strongly favored the Bush tax cuts and suggested they would add, not deduct, revenues to the federal coffers. In his 2001 testimony, Greenspan said he concurred with Bush administration revenue projections based on the implementation of the tax cuts. He then added: "And should current economic weakness spread beyond what now appears likely, having a tax cut in place may, in fact, do noticeable good." In a recent interview with Bloomberg, Greenspan admitted that letting the tax cuts expire “probably will” slow economic growth. Nevertheless, Greenspan said the deficit should be the prime concern for policymakers.

[This message has been edited by avengador1 (edited 08-02-2010).]

The dumbass Democrats keep repeating the same old lie..."tax cuts for the weathly". EVERY tax bracket got a tax cut under the Bush tax cuts. Everyone. Period. Fact.

quote Originally posted by fierobear: The dumbass Democrats keep repeating the same old lie..."tax cuts for the weathly". EVERY tax bracket got a tax cut under the Bush tax cuts. Everyone. Period. Fact.

fierobear,
The ray b's of the world (all the liberal socialist) do not undestand how the economy works. Because they are so infintile, all they are capable of doing is calling people names and making up disjointed lies. One day, I hope upon hope to have a one-on-one conversation with a ray b (or other socialist) so I can scewer they pea brains. I would enjoy it. I think it would be cathartic.

Cordially,
Kevin

What I still don't understand is why ANYBODY gives a crap what the disgraced former Speaker of the House thinks anyway.
http://articles.latimes.com.../opinion/oe-cooper14
http://www.salon.com/news/o...ingrich_gop_disgrace
http://www.washingtonmonthl...l/2010_04/023221.php
http://www.huffingtonpost.c...sts-at_n_665063.html
http://www.washingtonpost.c...ml?hpid=opinionsbox1


Talk about a HACK, Lizard Man is the very definition of the word.
Most of the failed "reganomic" BS he spouts has been proven wrong by history.
He's a moral reprobate.
He BELONGS on FOX "news", the only place lame enough to give him an audience or care what he thinks.
------------------

[This message has been edited by NEPTUNE (edited 08-03-2010).]

Yeah, Newt Gingrich definitely has a colored past. However, he does seem to be pretty savvy with economics. Would I trust him with much of anything aside from financial advice? Mmm... not really...

quote Originally posted by kevin: fierobear, The ray b's of the world (all the liberal socialist) do not undestand how the economy works. Because they are so infintile, all they are capable of doing is calling people names and making up disjointed lies. One day, I hope upon hope to have a one-on-one conversation with a ray b (or other socialist) so I can scewer they pea brains. I would enjoy it. I think it would be cathartic. Cordially, Kevin

Yeah, I know. Glenn Beck said the following quote today that I think sums it up: "The darkness doesn't understand the light".

Speaking of infantile and name calling...

quote Originally posted by NEPTUNE: What I still don't understand is why ANYBODY gives a crap what the disgraced former Speaker of the House thinks anyway. http://articles.latimes.com.../opinion/oe-cooper14 http://www.salon.com/news/o...ingrich_gop_disgrace http://www.washingtonmonthl...l/2010_04/023221.php http://www.huffingtonpost.c...sts-at_n_665063.html http://www.washingtonpost.c...ml?hpid=opinionsbox1 Talk about a HACK, Lizard Man is the very definition of the word. Most of the failed "reganomic" BS he spouts has been proven wrong by history. He's a moral reprobate. He BELONGS on FOX "news", the only place lame enough to give him an audience or care what he thinks.

Wow. Salon and HuffPo. Talk about "news" in quotes.

quote Originally posted by kevin: fierobear, The ray b's of the world (all the liberal socialist) do not undestand how the economy works. Because they are so infintile, all they are capable of doing is calling people names and making up disjointed lies. One day, I hope upon hope to have a one-on-one conversation with a ray b (or other socialist) so I can scewer they pea brains. I would enjoy it. I think it would be cathartic. Cordially, Kevin

if you actually look at the LOL CURVE a tax rate of 50% for the top rates
produces the max income tax funds [the rate pre-raygun's tax cuts ]
and tax rates below 50% PRODUCE THE SAME LOSS IN TAX FUNDS
as rates over 50% the curve drops at the same slope for over or under 50% rates

the SWEET SPOT is the 50% rate
your hero cut way below that WHY???????
raygun cut below the 50% there by guaranteeing less tax funding
BuSh2 also cut rates that were already below the curve max point

do your guys totally miss the basic math
or do you not believe in the LOL CURVE

or is it just as daddy bush said VOODOO
so the LOL curve DOESNOT SUPPORT VOODOO

quote Originally posted by ray b: the SWEET SPOT is the 50% rate your hero cut way below that WHY??????? raygun cut below the 50% there by guaranteeing less tax funding BuSh2 also cut rates that were already below the curve max point

You are looking at it too simply. The Laffer Curve is not intended to suggest that 50% is is the "sweet spot". That spot is *somewhere* in the middle, and depends on other factors. Tax rates don't exist in a vacuum.

Here is a description in Arthur Laffer's own words:
http://www.heritage.org/Res...t-Present-and-Future

Theory Basics
The basic idea behind the relationship between tax rates and tax revenues is that changes in tax rates have two effects on revenues: the arithmetic effect and the economic effect. The arithmetic effect is simply that if tax rates are lowered, tax revenues (per dollar of tax base) will be lowered by the amount of the decrease in the rate. The reverse is true for an increase in tax rates. The economic effect, however, recognizes the positive impact that lower tax rates have on work, output, and employment--and thereby the tax base--by providing incentives to increase these activities. Raising tax rates has the opposite economic effect by penalizing participation in the taxed activities. The arithmetic effect always works in the opposite direction from the economic effect. Therefore, when the economic and the arithmetic effects of tax-rate changes are combined, the consequences of the change in tax rates on total tax revenues are no longer quite so obvious.

Figure 1 is a graphic illustration of the concept of the Laffer Curve--not the exact levels of taxation corresponding to specific levels of revenues. At a tax rate of 0 percent, the government would collect no tax revenues, no matter how large the tax base. Likewise, at a tax rate of 100 percent, the government would also collect no tax revenues because no one would willingly work for an after-tax wage of zero (i.e., there would be no tax base). Between these two extremes there are two tax rates that will collect the same amount of revenue: a high tax rate on a small tax base and a low tax rate on a large tax base.



The Laffer Curve itself does not say whether a tax cut will raise or lower revenues. Revenue responses to a tax rate change will depend upon the tax system in place, the time period being considered, the ease of movement into underground activities, the level of tax rates already in place, the prevalence of legal and accounting-driven tax loopholes, and the proclivities of the productive factors. If the existing tax rate is too high--in the "prohibitive range" shown above--then a tax-rate cut would result in increased tax revenues. The economic effect of the tax cut would outweigh the arithmetic effect of the tax cut.

Moving from total tax revenues to budgets, there is one expenditure effect in addition to the two effects that tax-rate changes have on revenues. Because tax cuts create an incentive to increase output, employment, and production, they also help balance the budget by reducing means-tested government expenditures. A faster-growing economy means lower unemployment and higher incomes, resulting in reduced unemployment benefits and other social welfare programs.

Over the past 100 years, there have been three major periods of tax-rate cuts in the U.S.: the Harding-Coolidge cuts of the mid-1920s; the Kennedy cuts of the mid-1960s; and the Reagan cuts of the early 1980s. Each of these periods of tax cuts was remarkably successful as measured by virtually any public policy metric.
Prior to discussing and measuring these three major periods of U.S. tax cuts, three critical points should be made regarding the size, timing, and location of tax cuts.

=========================================

The article goes on to describe the various factors that influence the best taxation rate.

quote Originally posted by ray b: btw post your OWN words I am sick of blogg posts you neo-conns put up as ''facts''' BS spin is not facts can you think for yourself without some blogged BS

Good luck with that.

------------------

quote btw post your OWN words I am sick of blogg posts you neo-conns put up as ''facts''' BS spin is not facts can you think for yourself without some blogged BS

Here's a real fact. I don't enjoy paying taxes, do you? I don't like Uncle Sam's hand in my pocket taking my hard earned cash. I am willing to contribute some of my money for the community and our country's needs, but I want to keep the lion's share of my money, I earned it afterall. Taking my money to give it to those who didn't earn it is theft. They have no right to it.
Here is another, forcing us to pay for a medical plan we did not ask for is theft too and unconstitutional. If you enjoy doing so, pay for mine while you are at it.
Want another? Who do think is going to be paying for all the bail outs that have been handed out like lollipops at the dentist office? Where to do think government gets the money to pay for this? Why didn't we just let these companies take care of their own problems? They have done so before. Do you mind your children and their children paying for this? I do, because it is wrong.
Should government spend above it's means? NO and HELL NO. Why can't they stick to a budget like the rest of us are forced to do? It's nice to want things but, like us, they should save and plan to be able to afford them, not use us like their own private piggy bank, forcing us to pay the bill.
Why do you think people are so mad at our government lately? Do you need a blogg to tell you why? Do you think our government is doing right by us and that they still represent us, or are they only looking out for their own interests?

[This message has been edited by avengador1 (edited 08-04-2010).]

quote Originally posted by NEPTUNE: Good luck with that.

Hey, we are into the 18th month of stimulus and it won't go above 8% and the housing market is falling on it's face.
His approval rating has dropped like Bush's did in the second term, and he no longer looks like the strong confident leader the the country voted for. That is of the utmost importance in the public's eye. And as his confidence drops, so will the confidence that people will have in him.
Blame Bush is wearing thin in the arena as well, shows he has no clue to the inpatient public.
And the fact that the GOP's policies in your eyes will always be a failure, and looking at the polls around the country, you must have a nice knot in the hull of your belly going in to the mid-terms.
Yea I know the polls only count when they favor what you like.
I feel for ya Tune.

quote Originally posted by pokeyfiero: Damn it all! At this rate there is no way I will get Obama reelected!!

Yes you will.

It'll be a cake walk if the FOX/talk radio/tea hee nation runs Palin or Gingrich or Huckabee for president.
Because in the USA, we aren't allowed to vote for "none of the above."

[This message has been edited by NEPTUNE (edited 08-04-2010).]

quote Originally posted by NEPTUNE: Yes you will. It'll be a cake walk if the FOX/talk radio/tea hee nation runs Palin or Gingrich or Romney or Huckabee for president. Because in the USA, we aren't allowed to vote for "none of the above."

Speaking of a cake walk, our nation under BO looks a bit like a cake that someone trampled on.

quote Originally posted by ray b: if you actually look at the LOL CURVE a tax rate of 50% for the top rates produces the max income tax funds [the rate pre-raygun's tax cuts ] and tax rates below 50% PRODUCE THE SAME LOSS IN TAX FUNDS as rates over 50% the curve drops at the same slope for over or under 50% rates the SWEET SPOT is the 50% rate your hero cut way below that WHY??????? raygun cut below the 50% there by guaranteeing less tax funding BuSh2 also cut rates that were already below the curve max point do your guys totally miss the basic math or do you not believe in the LOL CURVE or is it just as daddy bush said VOODOO so the LOL curve DOESNOT SUPPORT VOODOO

ray b,---& Pythian and NEPTUNE,
What is so infuriating with guys (dumb lummox's?) like you, is your evidentiary lack of schooling. Teaching a class in economics, I would give you a flat F for not doing your research. Yet, you say things (with improper spelling, incorrect diction and errors in your lexicon) all point to a person I doubt graduated from high school. And if so, I doubt you had high grades. And even if your grades were presentable, how was your high school graded against other schools? I do not think they were an established standardized high level school if they graduated guys like you. I said it before, and I will say it again, I feel bad for America when we have people like yourself, voting for our elected official's, when they do not know how to read, write and think rationally!

Cordially,
Kevin

You don't have to agree with someone elses opinions but at least respect them for having one, that's what a site like this is all about.

After reading all this I have learned one thing.

I hate Politics.

But I do agree with the above.

[This message has been edited by mattwa (edited 08-04-2010).]

quote Originally posted by kevin: ray b,---& Pythian and NEPTUNE, What is so infuriating with guys (dumb lummox's?) like you, is your evidentiary lack of schooling. Teaching a class in economics, I would give you a flat F for not doing your research. Yet, you say things (with improper spelling, incorrect diction and errors in your lexicon) all point to a person I doubt graduated from high school. And if so, I doubt you had high grades. And even if your grades were presentable, how was your high school graded against other schools? I do not think they were an established standardized high level school if they graduated guys like you. I said it before, and I will say it again, I feel bad for America when we have people like yourself, voting for our elected official's, when they do not know how to read, write and think rationally! Cordially, Kevin

attack the person if you got nothing else

the basic question remains unanswered

THE LOL curve puts the max tax rates for federal revenues at 50%
as raygun cut from 50% to 28% but the LOL curve clearly shows
cuts below the 50% point produce less government income
BUT YOUR SIDE REPEATEDLY [ falsely ] claims tax cuts produce more income to the feds
that is directly contrary to the LOL curve

you can bwitch about grammar but this point is basic math not grammar
#1 are your guys disbelieving in the LOL curve
#2 donot understand basic math as shown by the LOL curve
#3 believe in voodoo and not the LOL cruve
#4 really just want the feds to fail by increasing debts

quote Originally posted by ray b: both the depression of the 30's and our current mess WERE CAUSED BY THE GOP and in both cases the GOP did NOTHING to help and a lot to make it worse learning from mistaken ideals is something the GOP doesNOT do

So says the clown who knows nothing about economics. In fact, Herbert Hoover was the only one in Power to predict the 1929 Stock market crash (yes, it is on the record) and he offered solutions to the problems which Congress and the Fed ignored. He was only in office 8 months before the disaster created by 100% financing of stocks and margins calls tumbled the house of cards. Men Like Joe Kennedy and other rich Democrats where prinicple architects of the disaster. FDR continued it with works projects that simply devalued the dollar, ran up debt, and nearly bankrupted this country. If it were not for WWII and lend Lease we would have sank under the weight of our own debt...kinda like we are doing now.

Go read a book rayb

[This message has been edited by Toddster (edited 08-04-2010).]

quote Originally posted by ray b: the basic question remains unanswered

No it hasn't. I just GAVE you the answer from LAFFER HIMSELF. You didn't even read it, did you? You couldn't POSSIBLY have read it, or you wouldn't have repeated what you just wrote below...

quote THE LOL curve puts the max tax rates for federal revenues at 50% as raygun cut from 50% to 28% but the LOL curve clearly shows cuts below the 50% point produce less government income BUT YOUR SIDE REPEATEDLY [ falsely ] claims tax cuts produce more income to the feds that is directly contrary to the LOL curve

quote Originally posted by ray b: attack the person if you got nothing else

Then you go on to call Ronald Reagan "raygun".

Irony? NAAHH!

so none of you understand the math based on the LOL curve

yes I read that hand waving and flat tax BS worse russian flat tax BS
NOTE IT IS OLD DATA cut off in 2003 at latest

none of that has anything to do with real math