Lucky...

Spoken like a true cop, now go beat up (insert which ever group you target) and claim they assaulted you first. And after all that, you are still sadly unable to show me a major fed tax cut that has benefited the country.

And this is germane to the conversation exactly HOW, in a political sub-forum? You want to argue against Lucky's points, that's cool - trying to make some vague smear based on jump numbers is bullshit. For once we agree. Who cares what classes anyone has or has not attended, if they jump, how much, how long, etc. Post data. For anyone who cares, don;t know why, I am a current D lic jumper. Don't jump as much as I need to, but I am current.

Oh, they employ just over half of all private sector employees? So factor in gov employees at all levels and they employ what, 35-40% of all workers? Awesome point So < half and you act as tho they are a majority Gee, if that's true, what is all this big gov hyp about? BS? BTW, show me your source. So just over half? Not a real sterling arrgument there. OK, even if your data is correct, you still haven't supported your claim that these small businesses are grossly relevant to all other sectors as your inferred. Ah, identified. So these small businesses export that much huh? I call bullshit on that and you will be good little Mikeepoo and not post your source. http://www.worldsrichestcountries.com/top_us_exports.html I see a lot of major corporations producing those, unless you're hiding behind the operative word, "IDENTIFIED EXPORTERS." Apparently they mean identified in that survey. So post your RW liar site for us all. OK, that's irrelevant if teh patents are for insignificant things, whereas major corps invent/devise larger items that affect the GDP more directly. Great, quit being Mike and post the data site. You'll wiggle out. Freeloaders, come on pouty, I haven't been to the doc forever, you likely suck down more welfare than I ever have. Just keep pretending that all is well cause you have HC, fuck others who don't and get offended by people who feel your position is sociopathic, meaning no conscience for other's pain.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100909/ap_on_bi_ge/us_stem_cells Stem cell funding to begin/resume after your hero ended it. Nice job, neo-cons.

Then make a point. It's quite obvious it was a swipe at u8nemp numbers. You and the neo's would never address the 3.4% increase Obama inherited the year before he took office. Nor would you discuss the GDP the 5 Q's preceding his term.

The last neo-con asked if I has an economics class, now you wonder if I jump. I can show you neo-ons like you who don't and post here, I do jump and am D licensed. Now, on to your neo-con brothers who don't jump, I guess you don't care about that, save your ad hominems for those you disagree with. Sad you can't formulate an argument.

Well, duh..... government spending is ALWAYS good!!! (unless it's the Republicans doing it, then it's bad bad bad) Wrong, taxes aren't always a partisan thing. Eisenhower kept taxes high and we did well for it. GHWB slightly raised taxes and that started a recovery. Low taxes are bad, higher taxes good; you can't show me data that speaks otherwise.

Well Lucky...it is a cut and paste from the article you cited. Wasn't it you that called this brilliant? Why don't you explain the brilliance of spending 3 trillion vs. 700 billion. I didn't call the article brilliant, I called Obama's fiscal plan brillaint. I looked for and cited the agency's site, couldn't find teh article they were talking about. Again: - It's a 10-year forecast, worthless really. In 2000 could we have forecasted GWB would be elected and add 5 T to the debt, 911 would have happened? Hardly, don't hang your hat on a 10-year estimate, esp that we can't even find the article of. - Show me a major fed tax cut that has helepd. - Show me a majopr fed tax incr that has hurt. You gujys just keep ignoring historical data in exchange for tired, proven wrong theory/hypothesis.

We're beyond theory. We're into history now. What you're witnessing, and what we're suffering from, is the result of a quarter of a century long experiment in laissez faire and trickle down economics. We tried it. It didn't work. Capitalism is great. Unchecked capitalism is/was the recipe for disaster. We also have no shortage of history of what happens to nations who's debt gets out of control. Or what has happened to every attempt at communism, something a neocom like Lucky will do best to avoid thinking about. Well, thing is simple people can't look at tax history over the last 100 years and see that in times of what you call Socialism/Communism where taxes were highest, we did the best. Lowest taxes, we did/are doing teh worst. Those who accidentally ignore boldfaced history are ignorant, those who purposely do so are intentionally ignorant or just dishonest. Show us where low taxes (capitalism) has lead to good times. Show us where high taxes (Communsim) have led to bad times. I didn;t think so, just more failed theory.

You have been told, over and over again - we quit trying to talk sense to rhys in the truther threads, why should we keep trying with you when you don't show any more comprehension than he does? You tried to act as tho capital gains tax is that much a part of the total tax revenue chart, then trued to tell us the 8% Clinton agreed to chop as a deal with the devil amounted to anything. You have never shown us a maj fed tax cut that has led to prosperity for the masses. Thanks for yet again proving the point. You're the rhys of economy threads. So no answer? Shocker. You're the Belgian of governmental understanding. And yet both Belgian and I understand that it's the small businesses and the people that make up the economy, not government - guess we're both *still* ahead of you. Of course, everyone here but you already knew that. Riiiight, it's just the small businesses and teh people, whatever, "the people" is supposed to mean. Does that mean the people who you like to deny HC ins to? And I think it's an immature understanding to think it's just small business and the people, it's - Government - Small business - workers - corporations - Military It's all these and probably other agencies/demographics where each has its part, it's grossly simplistic to narrow it to any 1 or 2 of those.

We're beyond theory. We're into history now. What you're witnessing, and what we're suffering from, is the result of a quarter of a century long experiment in laissez faire and trickle down economics. We tried it. It didn't work. Capitalism is great. Unchecked capitalism is/was the recipe for disaster. Capitalism is great. Unchecked government spending is/was the recipe for disaster. DING DING DING! Hey Dingy, we spend out the ass in the 40's, 50's, 60's yet the debt didn't go crazy until taxes started getting cut, the lower they were cut, the bigger the debt increases. I don;t expect a cogent answer. "Unchecked government spending is/was the recipe for disaster." We know you can't comprehend it, but there it is. I know decades of your M.I.C. has hammered the dogshit out of the debt. Your fascist boy, ramp-ing up the military to defeat a country with a joke of a conventional military really fucked us.

nah, that's close to his average. Many sets of 8 out there. I figure his record is in the low teens. I know, I s/b like you and leave a 3-word cliche. Instead, you leave 500 word cliches. My 500-word cliches, as you call them, have these things called websites that direct a person who can read into supporting info. Whereas yours and other neo-cons don't.

Other than you hate Obama, what's your point?

nah, that's close to his average. Many sets of 8 out there. I figure his record is in the low teens. Usually it occurs most prolifically in his own threads where he feels the OP would be sympathetic to his causes. http://instantrimshot.com/classic/?sound=rimshot

nah, that's close to his average. Many sets of 8 out there. I figure his record is in the low teens. I know, I s/b like you and leave a 3-word cliche.

You have been told, over and over again - we quit trying to talk sense to rhys in the truther threads, why should we keep trying with you when you don't show any more comprehension than he does? You tried to act as tho capital gains tax is that much a part of the total tax revenue chart, then trued to tell us the 8% Clinton agreed to chop as a deal with the devil amounted to anything. You have never shown us a maj fed tax cut that has led to prosperity for the masses. Thanks for yet again proving the point. You're the rhys of economy threads. So no answer? Shocker. You're the Belgian of governmental understanding.

We're beyond theory. We're into history now. What you're witnessing, and what we're suffering from, is the result of a quarter of a century long experiment in laissez faire and trickle down economics. We tried it. It didn't work. Capitalism is great. Unchecked capitalism is/was the recipe for disaster. Capitalism is great. Unchecked government spending is/was the recipe for disaster. DING DING DING! Hey Dingy, we spend out the ass in the 40's, 50's, 60's yet the debt didn't go crazy until taxes started getting cut, the lower they were cut, the bigger the debt increases. I don;t expect a cogent answer.

You have been told, over and over again - we quit trying to talk sense to rhys in the truther threads, why should we keep trying with you when you don't show any more comprehension than he does? You tried to act as tho capital gains tax is that much a part of the total tax revenue chart, then trued to tell us the 8% Clinton agreed to chop as a deal with the devil amounted to anything. You have never shown us a maj fed tax cut that has led to prosperity for the masses.

We're beyond theory. We're into history now. What you're witnessing, and what we're suffering from, is the result of a quarter of a century long experiment in laissez faire and trickle down economics. We tried it. It didn't work. Capitalism is great. Unchecked capitalism is/was the recipe for disaster. Yep, Capitalism is the best system, but it's too prone to tampering and then becomes one of the worst. Capitalism relies onup reinvestment rather than profit-taking, low taxes encourage profit-taking.

Failed misserably? I could post the GDP, unemp and DJIA data once again, but you would just ignore it and then claim victory. Amazing how the lower party that got us here is claiming innocence. If you can't address data, the intelligent thing is to avoid teh issue. Einstein, if you have an AGI of 32k or less you amount for

Stats, not economics. So be a good little neo-con and issue an ad hominem or actually be intelligent and post a reason why my ideas are not viable. Also, tell us why Reagan-appointed Greenspan recently said that tax cuts don't pay for themselves. If you have an arg to make, make it, if your arg is that I don't know what I'm talking about, that is a strawman that AVOIDS HAVVING TO TELL US WHY TAX ALLEGEDLY WORK FOR THE SYSTEM. I don't expect you to address the issue or the data.

Road building, bridges, and trains. I'm thinking that by November, the construction industry and unions will be providing a lot of political support. And hopefully remebering who got us here. The polls clearly show that they do!!! \ We'll see the polls in Nov, the ones that count. And then again in 2012 as the young vote comes out again due to the Republitards sending some moralist, some dinosaur or some fringe nutjob out there that will rally the kids again.

Of course we could always consider military spending in teh same light, as it is corporate welfare. BTW, how was the GD recovery? Any stimulus? No, just 10 years of recovery. So now you enjoy a quick recovery on the credit card, many brainless repubtards got the 8k home buy gift and they still denounce stimulus. Considering it took the US 8 years longer than the rest of the world is great evidence to that which you support By the way, not working today? Wonder why? http://www.fsmitha.com/h2/ch15wd3.htm Rememebr, the GD started here and was worse here than in Europe, so that little fact may have slipped your guess. - Sweden's industrial production fell no more than 10 percent from its peak in 1929. And its unemployment rose no higher than 12 percent. Nevertheless, the relatively hard times in Sweden resulted in a loss of power for the incumbent conservatives. In September 1932 the Social Democrats were elected to power. But Sweden would recover faster. This was the result of both a liberal monetary policy and public spending. A reduction in taxes for the average wage earner gave him more money to spend. A raised minimum wage increased the ability of low-income people to spend money. The government increased investments in public works. Federal money was pumped into unemployment insurance, medical care and old age pensions. The government willingly created a deficit, believing that it was emergency spending that would be paid back after the recovery. And with recovery being rapid and revenues increasing as a result of the rising economy, the deficits were quickly overcome. SEE, THE VERY THINGS OBAMA IS DOING AND LITTLE OLE YOU ARE PRAISING EUROPE FOR A FASTER RECOVERY; YOIU MUST THEN PRAISE OBAMA FOR DOING THE SAME OR BEING A HYPOCRITE. - Recovery in Britain slower than Sweden's The world's economic depression caught the Labour Party running the government, and some folks in Britain blamed Labour Party politicians for their economy's poor performance. Their vote helped to send more Conservatives to parliament, and a new government of national unity was formed -- a coalition of Labour and Conservatives. The overall result kept Britain's economy from falling as far as did the U.S. and German economies. Britain's economy hit bottom in 1932, and its recovery was slower than Sweden's. In 1935, Britain's industrial output returned to its 1929 level, and its unemployment returned to 10 percent -- twice as high as Sweden's. So Britain installed more conservatives and utilized those policies and the recovery as slower. Ya, you really make good arguments. So to summarize, the GD started here, hit us far worse than other countries, yet European nations who didn't realize teh mess we did recovered a little sooner as a rule. The more socialism and liberasl who were in charge meant sooner recovery. Yep, great arguments for me, thank you. Now give me your one-liner response and we'll be good. Uh, took us 8 years longer? When do you consider the start and stop for the US and for Europe? Me thinks you're not all here. Not working today? - http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/gdp_glance.htm Not fast enough? Not working? - http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet?data_tool=latest_numbers&series_id=LNS14000000 Not working? Not fast enough? What would be acceptable? Finish your arguments for once, IK'm tired of making u look silly.

Road building, bridges, and trains. I'm thinking that by November, the construction industry and unions will be providing a lot of political support. And hopefully remebering who got us here. Will the mere geniuses ever understand Hoovernomics? Will they understand that even Hoover was smart enought o raise taxes 260% from 25% top brkt ro 63% and then recovery started?

Failed misserably? I could post the GDP, unemp and DJIA data once again, but you would just ignore it and then claim victory. Amazing how the lower party that got us here is claiming innocence. If you can't address data, the intelligent thing is to avoid teh issue.