[quote]Sloth wrote:
100meters wrote:
Tiribulus wrote:
100meters wrote:
<<< Thankfully, yes, deranged wingnuts like yourself remain the fringe.
What the rest of your post has to do with fixing the republican created mess is beyond me.
Deranged wingnuts who believed what I believe, some of them from your state, set this country in motion pal, in direct opposition to moral and social weaklings like you.
This is a liberal mess with much participation by the Republicans. My commitment is to principle not party. Yes, there was much debate in the early days of this nation, but no signer of the declaration of independence could overcome the urge to fall to their knees and weep bitterly at what people like you have done with what they left us. Their tears would flow over this abomination of a 1000 page attack on everything they fought for.
No, deranged conservative wingnuts like you supported the King you idiot. And how in the hell this is a liberal mess, when we’re fixing the results of excessive deregulation supported universally by economic idiots like you and your party, while dealing with the financial constraints put on us by 8 years of crazy Republican big govt. spending, borrowed tax cuts for the rich, and countless stimulus packages for Iraq.
Again reality would point you to the end result of 8 years of total republican control. The philosophy has again been proven an utter failure. Your post has proven you, a total moron.
Yes, and you fix that big spending Bush government by…spending $787 billion…so far.[/quote]
technically you’d fill the 2-3 trillion shortfall with a bit more than $787 billion, and also you aren’t fixing “big spending” you’re fixing (or stopping at least) the economic disaster created by the last 8 years.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
And wait until the politicians realize they can’t keep kicking Social Sec. and Medicare down the road forever. I keep saying it, but it deserves repeating. Upcoming generations of taxpayers are going to despise us.[/quote]
Social is still fine and easily fixed (relatively speaking). Medicare–that’ll be difficult. But hopefully yes future taxpayers will remember what Bush/republican brought us, and how painful it was to repair the damage.
[quote]100meters wrote:
Sloth wrote:
100meters wrote:
Tiribulus wrote:
100meters wrote:
<<< Thankfully, yes, deranged wingnuts like yourself remain the fringe.
What the rest of your post has to do with fixing the republican created mess is beyond me.
Deranged wingnuts who believed what I believe, some of them from your state, set this country in motion pal, in direct opposition to moral and social weaklings like you.
This is a liberal mess with much participation by the Republicans. My commitment is to principle not party. Yes, there was much debate in the early days of this nation, but no signer of the declaration of independence could overcome the urge to fall to their knees and weep bitterly at what people like you have done with what they left us. Their tears would flow over this abomination of a 1000 page attack on everything they fought for.
No, deranged conservative wingnuts like you supported the King you idiot. And how in the hell this is a liberal mess, when we’re fixing the results of excessive deregulation supported universally by economic idiots like you and your party, while dealing with the financial constraints put on us by 8 years of crazy Republican big govt. spending, borrowed tax cuts for the rich, and countless stimulus packages for Iraq.
Again reality would point you to the end result of 8 years of total republican control. The philosophy has again been proven an utter failure. Your post has proven you, a total moron.
Yes, and you fix that big spending Bush government by…spending $787 billion…so far.
technically you’d fill the 2-3 trillion shortfall with a bit more than $787 billion, and also you aren’t fixing “big spending” you’re fixing (or stopping at least) the economic disaster created by the last 8 years.
[/quote]
Again I will ask you how does spending money on something that does not generate money equal to or greater then what you spent on it stimulate the economy? I realized that once you figured out I knew what the hell I was talking about you ducked me now answer or get out of here.
[quote]John S. wrote:
Again I will ask you how does spending money on something that does not generate money equal to or greater then what you spent on it stimulate the economy? I realized that once you figured out I knew what the hell I was talking about you ducked me now answer or get out of here.
[/quote]
It’s really not all that complicated, and no one is stupid enough to “figure out” that you knew what the hell you were talking about, because you really have no clue. You’ll never get it because you simply don’t want to or are too thick to think through the ditto echo, and no amount of explaining is ever going change that.
[quote]tme wrote:
John S. wrote:
Again I will ask you how does spending money on something that does not generate money equal to or greater then what you spent on it stimulate the economy? I realized that once you figured out I knew what the hell I was talking about you ducked me now answer or get out of here.
It’s really not all that complicated, and no one is stupid enough to “figure out” that you knew what the hell you were talking about, because you really have no clue. You’ll never get it because you simply don’t want to or are too thick to think through the ditto echo, and no amount of explaining is ever going change that.
[/quote]
See that’s all I get, when I’m questioned about something I go into detail you expect me to take you at your word.
If you owed the bank $40,000 would you take out a 20,000 dollar loan to fix up your house? This spending bill is just like that except Its a 800 billion dollar loan. When you owe money the last thing you do is take out more but that’s just common sense.
[quote]100meters wrote:
Sloth wrote:
And wait until the politicians realize they can’t keep kicking Social Sec. and Medicare down the road forever. I keep saying it, but it deserves repeating. Upcoming generations of taxpayers are going to despise us.
Social is still fine and easily fixed (relatively speaking). Medicare–that’ll be difficult. But hopefully yes future taxpayers will remember what Bush/republican brought us, and how painful it was to repair the damage.[/quote]
Just wondering … can GB and the republican crew also be blamed for the mess in East Europe?
[quote]Loose Tool wrote:
100meters wrote:
Sloth wrote:
And wait until the politicians realize they can’t keep kicking Social Sec. and Medicare down the road forever. I keep saying it, but it deserves repeating. Upcoming generations of taxpayers are going to despise us.
Social is still fine and easily fixed (relatively speaking). Medicare–that’ll be difficult. But hopefully yes future taxpayers will remember what Bush/republican brought us, and how painful it was to repair the damage.
Just wondering … can GB and the republican crew also be blamed for the mess in East Europe?
[/quote]
Bush Derangement Syndrome is still alive and well.
Nevermind that even the Messiah Himself, President Obama, admits that the (Clinton) policies that reinforced the Community Reinvestment Act was significant part in the housing and financial meltdown. Banks were essentially forced to handout subprime loans to people that had no business having a mortgage-- and exacerbated by the incompetent Dodd and the dick-swallowing Barney (takes-it-in-the-ass) Frank. No doubt Bush’s drunken sailor spending spree has contributed to financial instability, but to try to pin any of this Republicans and Bush only is retarded at best.
100m, just answer the questions you’ve been asked.
How is spending money that does not exist a solution?
If government spending works so well to “stimulate the economy” then why not just equally divide up all the money they are printing and distribute it to everyone? Why not just give everyone a million dollars? Surely that will get the economy moving again, won’t it?
[quote]Loose Tool wrote:
100meters wrote:
Sloth wrote:
And wait until the politicians realize they can’t keep kicking Social Sec. and Medicare down the road forever. I keep saying it, but it deserves repeating. Upcoming generations of taxpayers are going to despise us.
Social is still fine and easily fixed (relatively speaking). Medicare–that’ll be difficult. But hopefully yes future taxpayers will remember what Bush/republican brought us, and how painful it was to repair the damage.
Just wondering … can GB and the republican crew also be blamed for the mess in East Europe?
[/quote]
If there’s one thing that article makes me think, it’s that we’ve got it fucking GOLDEN over here compared to that epic clusterfuck. Didn’t our GDP still expand in spite of all the doom and gloom? And now we’ve gone and made things much worse by spending ridiculuous amounts of money on things that are not going to give us the return we want.
There is always the possibility, however, that when the European economy melts down further it gives us Yanks a new playground for ours. That could help us in a roundabout way.
Not that it will blunt the severe Bush Derangement Syndrome, but here’s the Bush Administration warning about the state and potential financial problems of Fannie/Freddy in 2003 and Barney (sits-on-cucumbers) Frank (and later Schumer) brushing off the warnings.
[quote]SteelyD wrote:
Not that it will blunt the severe Bush Derangement Syndrome, but here’s the Bush Administration warning about the state and potential financial problems of Fannie/Freddy in 2003 and Barney (sits-on-cucumbers) Frank (and later Schumer) brushing off the warnings.
[/quote]
What I like is how 100meters always disappears when Frank’s involvement in deregulation and the fannie/freddie mess is brought up. I did this in another stimulus thread and he dropped off the planet.
[quote]100meters wrote:
Sloth wrote:
And wait until the politicians realize they can’t keep kicking Social Sec. and Medicare down the road forever. I keep saying it, but it deserves repeating. Upcoming generations of taxpayers are going to despise us.
Social is still fine and easily fixed (relatively speaking). Medicare–that’ll be difficult. But hopefully yes future taxpayers will remember what Bush/republican brought us, and how painful it was to repair the damage.[/quote]
?
If a private company had pension obligations as severely underfunded as SS, their stock would be trading for pennies and their executives would be in jail.
SS’s own website admits that its current structure cannot be sustained, future retirees will have to have benefits reduced if the system is not reformed, the long-term problems are “very large and serious”,
the system is “pay-as-you-go”, that the “trust fund” is made up of IOU’s rather than tangible assets, and that the underfunded status of the system is $4.3 trillion.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
100m, just answer the questions you’ve been asked.
How is spending money that does not exist a solution?
If government spending works so well to “stimulate the economy” then why not just equally divide up all the money they are printing and distribute it to everyone? Why not just give everyone a million dollars? Surely that will get the economy moving again, won’t it?[/quote]
obviously not, see last 8 years.
Giving some people money helps, but the multipliers are better with the spending, not so much the tax cuts/rebates (excepting those given to the poor), hence the stimulus.
[quote]snipeout wrote:
SteelyD wrote:
Not that it will blunt the severe Bush Derangement Syndrome, but here’s the Bush Administration warning about the state and potential financial problems of Fannie/Freddy in 2003 and Barney (sits-on-cucumbers) Frank (and later Schumer) brushing off the warnings.
What I like is how 100meters always disappears when Frank’s involvement in deregulation and the fannie/freddie mess is brought up. I did this in another stimulus thread and he dropped off the planet.
[/quote]
Frank supported efforts and voted to regulate fannie and freddie. You’re just repeating what Rush and Fox say, and remember they get paid to lie. So I’m not disappearing so much as ignoring your ignorance. (I can’t respond to every made up thing in here)
[quote]SteelyD wrote:
Loose Tool wrote:
100meters wrote:
Sloth wrote:
And wait until the politicians realize they can’t keep kicking Social Sec. and Medicare down the road forever. I keep saying it, but it deserves repeating. Upcoming generations of taxpayers are going to despise us.
Social is still fine and easily fixed (relatively speaking). Medicare–that’ll be difficult. But hopefully yes future taxpayers will remember what Bush/republican brought us, and how painful it was to repair the damage.
Just wondering … can GB and the republican crew also be blamed for the mess in East Europe?
Bush Derangement Syndrome is still alive and well.
Nevermind that even the Messiah Himself, President Obama, admits that the (Clinton) policies that reinforced the Community Reinvestment Act was significant part in the housing and financial meltdown. Banks were essentially forced to handout subprime loans to people that had no business having a mortgage-- and exacerbated by the incompetent Dodd and the dick-swallowing Barney (takes-it-in-the-ass) Frank. No doubt Bush’s drunken sailor spending spree has contributed to financial instability, but to try to pin any of this Republicans and Bush only is retarded at best.[/quote]
Uh, Dodd and Frank in the minority during the Bush years. Retarded would be blaming 2 dems during the time republicans had complete control, fought for deregulation, bragged about every american having a home (The only thing Bush could tout: “more americans own homes than ever before”) and yes wasted alot of money, and borrowed more for tax cuts for Paris Hilton.
Also funny you went with the Rush talking point of blaming the CRA, oblivious to what percentage of sub-prime loans went through them. Because to be aware would mean admitting that final institutions deregulated by republicans not under control of the CRA were to blame, and that kind of messes up your bullshit. And again sub-prime loans are just a tiny part of the problem. The real problem is the institutions (again heavily deregulated under the republican philosophy) that leveraged themselves on the real estate/bad loan derivatives, leveraged 44 to 1, and bought at peak values to boot!
The sub-prime mess costs hundreds of billions, the banking mess costs trillions! But yes please stay focused on Barney Frank and ignore that he vote FOR REGULATION of fannie and freddie.
[quote]100meters wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
100m, just answer the questions you’ve been asked.
How is spending money that does not exist a solution?
If government spending works so well to “stimulate the economy” then why not just equally divide up all the money they are printing and distribute it to everyone? Why not just give everyone a million dollars? Surely that will get the economy moving again, won’t it?
obviously not, see last 8 years.
Giving some people money helps, but the multipliers are better with the spending, not so much the tax cuts/rebates (excepting those given to the poor), hence the stimulus.[/quote]
But giving money to poor people is like giving money to your dumb-ass cousin who will undoubtedly spend it on whiskey and women. Poor people waste their money and do not spend it on productive means. They are going to go to Walmart to make some more Chinese business owners rich.
This money needs to go back to productive means so poor people can have jobs.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
100meters wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
100m, just answer the questions you’ve been asked.
How is spending money that does not exist a solution?
If government spending works so well to “stimulate the economy” then why not just equally divide up all the money they are printing and distribute it to everyone? Why not just give everyone a million dollars? Surely that will get the economy moving again, won’t it?
obviously not, see last 8 years.
Giving some people money helps, but the multipliers are better with the spending, not so much the tax cuts/rebates (excepting those given to the poor), hence the stimulus.
But giving money to poor people is like giving money to your dumb-ass cousin who will undoubtedly spend it on whiskey and women. Poor people waste their money and do not spend it on productive means. They are going to go to Walmart to make some more Chinese business owners rich.
This money needs to go back to productive means so poor people can have jobs.[/quote]
