| Name: |
MartiniMan
- 
|
|
| Subject: |
More bad economic news
|
|
Date:
|
2/17/2011 5:08:50 PM
|
Unemployment has officially crept up over 10% (something Gallup has been saying for two months) with underemployment rising from 17% to 19%. On the inflation front there is also bad news as more and more evidence seems to point to creeping inflation. Whatever they are trying in Washington is not working which is in and of itself the problem. Job creation, other than new federal jobs (of which 200,000 have been added since Obama took office) does not occur in D.C. It occurs when businesses come to believe their long term prospects outweigh the potential risk of hiring new employees. Given that the Obama budget makes clear his intention to raise taxes on the investment class, his lack of seriousness about reducing the federal budget and that apparent willingness of Dems in the Senate to go along with him I would say optimism is waning.
FDR did the very same thing in the 1930's and those that are ignorant of history like Democrats are doomed to repeat it. Let's hope the GOP in the House can combine forces with what is left of fiscally conservative Democrats in the Senate (or even Dems that are in desperate shape for 2012) and force a budget with real reductions in spending as a first step.
|
| Name: |
water_watcher
-
|
|
| Subject: |
I agree with the Democrats ...
|
|
Date:
|
2/17/2011 8:24:17 PM
|
We should just keep spending and increasing the deficit. We should also raise taxes so people have less to spend. We should also stop deep water drilling and liming oil exploration, take away any oil incentives while we increase our imports more and more. That will drive up gas prices higher and hurt lower and middle income people.
This plan will work ... don't you agree. Seems so logical, I am not sure why it took me this long to see the light.
I am convinced this will put more people to work and get the economy moving.
|
| Name: |
MAJ USA RET
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Pay me now - or pay me later (Fram)
|
|
Date:
|
2/18/2011 8:24:27 AM
|
I'd say let us not nickel and dime this. Let us not negotiate - compromise - comfort the lobbyists – grandfather the favored… or otherwise in engage in quid pro quo. We should take the spear now, because our generation is guilty of mismanagement and self-indulgence (in practice or by vote).
Immediately cut ALL spending back to 2008 levels.
Wham! The screaming will be deafening. Old people, poor people, veterans, government unions, the arts, teachers – they will all claim disenfranchisement. There WILL BE DEMONSTRATIONS… and probably RIOTING in the blue states and California. Everyone, save the wealthy, will be wounded.
Wounded equally… but not dead.
If we DO NOT drastically cut spending, the spear will come anyway. Our children and grandchildren will then take that spear… because our generation was guilty of mismanagement and self-indulgence in practice or by vote by inaction… but, mostly because our generation was guilty of cowardice in the face of adversity.
Wham! The screaming will be deafening. Everyone will be disenfranchised. There WILL BE DEMONSTRATIONS… and probably RIOTING (a la Greece, Ireland, Wisconsin, and other riots not yet accomplished). Everyone, save the fabulously and internationally wealthy, will be ruined.
Egregiously wounded equally… and some financially… DEAD.
Our economy will be devastated. Our bond ratings will plummet. There will be no “EU” to pump us up.
And the greatest nation and economy on earth… will be China.
As the old Fram oil filter commercial said, with a smirk, “Pay me now… or pay me later.”
|
| Name: |
architect
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Interesting
|
|
Date:
|
2/18/2011 8:51:44 AM
|
Cut spending back to 2008 levels and we solve the problem....everybody is hurt....EXCEPT THE WEALTHY....interesting.
|
| Name: |
lamont
-
|
|
| Subject: |
So typical Archie
|
|
Date:
|
2/18/2011 8:56:39 AM
|
Are you "wealthy?" Just curious. I mean.... you know... you being an Architect and all. Perhaps you can give away all your wealth and help those in need. Just a thought.
|
| Name: |
MAJ USA RET
-
|
|
| Subject: |
So typical Archie
|
|
Date:
|
2/18/2011 9:17:00 AM
|
Except the wealthy! Was I perhaps unclear about that?
From where comes investment risk? If you were to make $1 on every $10 invested, you would consider that acceptable. If you were to make $10 on every $100 invested, you would also consider that acceptable. But, if someone else makes make $100,000 on every $1,000,000 invested, you would consider that inappropriate.
I don’t know what percentage of the client's capital investment you think is an appropriate fee for an architect… but, I would be willing to bet it’s more than 10%.
|
| Name: |
MAJ USA RET
-
|
|
| Subject: |
So typical Archie
|
|
Date:
|
2/18/2011 9:28:14 AM
|
To be sure, the wealthy will be hit. But it won’t take food off the table or cars out of their driveways. Unless, of course, they were “all in.”
|
| Name: |
comrade
-
|
|
| Subject: |
So typical Archie
|
|
Date:
|
2/18/2011 11:15:43 AM
|
Architect (like most liberals, lawyers, liberal lawyers,etc.) is a good talker, but just no conviction (sorry about the double entendre.) Sort of like the preacher leading the revival, and then getting drunk and watching porn in the hotel (think Jim & Tammy, Jimmy Swaggart, et al.) That may be just the frailties of the human condition though...so we should forgive him :)
|
| Name: |
MAJ USA RET
-
|
|
| Subject: |
No Sin
|
|
Date:
|
2/18/2011 12:06:35 PM
|
The skewed perspective of Archy and Fishy do not make them sinners. Indeed, their posts make for “entertaining” counterpoint. I just wish they were more robust… substantive… like Hound, for example. Hound’s perspective comes from a career in civil service which, in itself, is a culture. To the most of us we find her arguments… ummm… well slanted, but interestingly parallel. Hound does not arrive at the debate with the bed of her truck empty.
If there is anything at all in the back of Fishy’s truck, he doesn’t know what it is anyway.
I see Archy as all tweed jacket with leather elbow patches… a liberal ideologue.
For comparison, I am an “originalist” ideologue… an adamant advocate for compliance with the original Constitution and those amendments accepted by the states. Those who don’t know me personally, are quick (justifiably so) to label me conservative. Those who know me as an author/artist/musician/scientist/and Christian aren’t so sure about me being all that conservative.
It is easy to detect that there are scholars on our forum who research their posits… whose positions are adjusted by well argued points by others. That would suggest that, despite their appearance of conservatism, they maintain a right to be intellectually malleable.
It is always better to be tractable than intractable. It is always better to be positive than cynical. And, it is okay to be a curmudgeon… if you are amusingly so.
|
| Name: |
architect
-
|
|
| Subject: |
I'm willing are you?
|
|
Date:
|
2/18/2011 2:45:05 PM
|
For the good of the nation, I'm willing to go back to the 2008 spending level even if it hurts "all but the wealthy", but I'm also willing to share the sacrifice by giving up the 2001 and 03 tax cuts which I have been able to take advantage of some years and not others. Now, Maj, WW, MM, Lamont Lotowner .....etc, ARE YOU?........... I didn't think so!
|
| Name: |
MAJ USA RET
-
|
|
| Subject: |
I'm willing are you?
|
|
Date:
|
2/18/2011 4:04:41 PM
|
Archy -
1 – Speak for yourself… you have no authority to either speak for me or suggest how I might answer.
2 – NOBODY has the right to point out to another they think. You know as much about what I am thinking as I know about what you are thinking.
3 – Read again, my post above. Did you see any hint that I wanted to exclude myself from the pain of the budget cuts? Remember, I am both a veteran and a participant in government contracts. I’ll take the hit now, rather than dump on my grandchildren.
4 – I am NOT wealthy… it will hurt.
5 – I walk the talk I make. Do you?
|
| Name: |
water_watcher
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Archie ... good news
|
|
Date:
|
2/18/2011 5:40:51 PM
|
Since you have done so well in the OBAMA economy ... you will not be hurt. Of course, as I have always said when you say you are willing to pay more .... there is nothing stopping you from send the government more of your money. They will take it .... so write those checks.
|
| Name: |
comrade
-
|
|
| Subject: |
I'm willing are you?
|
|
Date:
|
2/18/2011 9:36:11 PM
|
How did a renaissance man such as you ever become encumbered in something as banal as triplicate governmental forms, and saluting Peter-Principled wannabes?
|
| Name: |
MAJ USA RET
-
|
|
| Subject: |
I'm willing are you?
|
|
Date:
|
2/18/2011 9:56:50 PM
|
Comrade, being eloquent is NOT an affectation. Perhaps, you are waxing verbose.
|
| Name: |
comrade
-
|
|
| Subject: |
I'm willing are you?
|
|
Date:
|
2/18/2011 10:04:49 PM
|
I'm sure they bought that completely in the military, while you dreamed of verdant hillsides and unicorns....
|
| Name: |
architect
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Anybody else notice
|
|
Date:
|
2/19/2011 9:24:51 AM
|
That none of these folks answered my question? I didn't think they would. I'll up the stakes,... anybody besides me willing to give back not only the upper income Bush tax cuts, but ALL the Bush tax cuts with the caveat that the legislation includes the absolute requirement that ALL the added tax revenue* be used to reduce the debt rather than spent on any goverment program or interest on the current debt? I didn't think so.
*I think I remember that CBO estimates $200 billion plus in the first year and $3 trillion in 10 years. (makes the GOP $61 B look p-poor). Of course I know none of you accept the CBO estimates except in the cases where they happen to support your beliefs.
PS: Major, I did not tell you how or what to think, nor did I claim to know your thoughts, Based on your post, I simply asked a question. If you do not desire to answer, that is your right. Also, my disagreement with much of your politics in no way lessens my admiration and appreciation of your national service. I am sure you will agree, that you served as much to protect my rights as those of MM, WW,etc...... And further, to whomever...I have never in my life owned a tweed jacket with or without leather elbow patches. Most days in winter my work costume is jeans and a flannel shirt. I'm more likely to be mistaken for an overweight south GA tractor salesman or a really butch lesbian than a erudit member of the liberal elite. :->
|
| Name: |
water_watcher
-
|
|
| Subject: |
I'll answer
|
|
Date:
|
2/19/2011 9:48:22 AM
|
ABSOLUTELY NOT. We pay too much in taxes already.
WE DO NOT have a tax problem ... we have a SPENDING problem. We have a current administration that thinks government is the answer and wants to bigger and bigger. They believe in more and more entitlements.
I would be willing to give up SS benefits, government services, and have a smaller government by getting them out of trying to make decisions and choices for me .... before I would want to be taxed more.
Higher taxes just means less choices and more government control.
SO MY ANSWER IS WITHOUT A DOUBT ... NO !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
But since you feel you should be taxed more ... i do expect you to start NOW sending more of your money to Washington ... why wait until they take it from you ... since you have no problem ... help them now and start paying more. They will appreciate it.
|
| Name: |
MAJ USA RET
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Anybody else notice
|
|
Date:
|
2/19/2011 9:53:09 AM
|
Well, Archy, I DID ANSWER YOUR QUESTION! But, since your superiority gets in the way of your acuity, let me be clearer:
YES, I will agree to cuts in ALL spending to 2008 levels... even if it comes to my pay and benefits, including Social Security (which I don’t get yet). I just want the excesses of government under the Democrats reversed.
NO, I do not agree to give the government any more money (go back to the pre-Bush tax rates). Because:
a) The government has a history of poor stewardship of the citizens’ money.
b) Money given to the government is taken from productive use, and used to increase the size of government.
c) History has shown that more money in the private sector results in higher revenue for the government, even at a lower tax rate,
d) I neither trust the government to keep promises nor the empty babbling of the lawyers and accountants who dominate Congress, and
e) I will not increase the allowance of an insolent teenager.
Unlike you, Archy, my taxes did not seem to go down under the Bush tax cuts. It may be that I don’t have all of those offsetting deductions to creatively apply to my simple income. I served my country before I served myself.
|
| Name: |
water_watcher
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Archie, there is no shame ...
|
|
Date:
|
2/19/2011 9:58:46 AM
|
in putting your money where your mouth is.
I do feel those that feel we should be taxed higher should start immediately doing that. They believe in bigger government and more entitlements and handouts ... so walk the talk and start paying more now. You can make contributions to the treasury.
Let us all know if you are going to do that or just be silent like you accuse others. We have now spoken ... so are you going to tell us if you will start paying more in taxes now (back to pre Bush). Not wait for the law to change ... start doing it now.
What say you?
|
| Name: |
MAJ USA RET
-
|
|
| Subject: |
And the pump was dry
|
|
Date:
|
2/19/2011 10:23:58 AM
|
Hmmm… let me take this a step further.
How is it possible, with my modest income, that I am debt free? Let me capitalize that so that Archy doesn’t get confused… DEBT FREE.
Could it be that we put off self indulgence until we paid the bills? Could it be that we drove automobiles which fit our budgets? (We keep and maintain automobiles for 8 years.) Could it be that we saved up for things we wanted? Could it be that we put away for old age… and rainy days? Could it be that we paid off credit cards in full each month?
You see, Archy, we realize both the dangers and the power of interest. Avoid paying it - maximize receiving it. Something our government hasn’t figured out yet. Why would I want to give more money to the government.
I am not asking more from my government than I ask of myself. I am not suggesting that you do more than I have myself.
The “common bowl” is getting larger and there are fewer workers to refill it. Some of those dipping into the bowl seem to believe that they are entitled to its contents without obligation to contribute. It is these parasites which need to first suffer.
But, no Archy, you imply that we workers should keep filling that bowl without holding anyone accountable.
Just wait. Someday we will go to the pump and the priming bucket… will be empty. Just remember to tell your grandchildren how cool and refreshing was the water.
|
| Name: |
architect
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Anybody else notice
|
|
Date:
|
2/19/2011 10:29:16 AM
|
Major, did you carefully read my post?
WW, Just think what we could do with the deficit and debt* if we went back to the pre Bush tax rates AND instituted the GOP cuts? If we completely stopped ALL discretionary spending we would cut the deficit 23%(Ever been to a National Park?). How much do you advocate we cut the military and homeland defense? Shall we stop paying interest on the debt (default!!!)? I'm sure you would have no problem completely stopping all SS payments to my wife and me (are you collecting yet). Somebody has to pay the Piper. As Messers Simpson and Bowles have said, the day will eventually come when it decomes obvious to the liberals that BIG spending cuts are a must and to conservative that BIG tax increases are unavoidable.
WW, I will send back ALL my Bush tax savings for 2011 income specifically to be used to offset the debt if you will send back ONE HALF of your's.
* Isn't it interesting that Bush financed the both wars in the middle east, Katrina and other disaster relief and the Medicare drug program off budget so that the funding did not appear in the his deficits? I wonder if W (and for that matter WW) didn't realize that the funds were still included in the debt? Of course, Nasty dishonest Obama has put these items on budget. If he used the Bush method the current deficit would be $162billion less. Maybe the GOP would be smart to offer a budget without the wars included. Man that way the Tea Party could trumpet they have cut the deficit $223 billion!!!
Lordy, Lordy...I love hypocrisy!!!!!
|
| Name: |
architect
-
|
|
| Subject: |
And the pump was dry
|
|
Date:
|
2/19/2011 10:34:07 AM
|
Major, I too am debt free including a 2d home. I'm not bragging, just answering your question. I'm beginning to think based on your posts, that perhaps I was being overly optimistic when I assumed you were defending even my rights with your service.
|
| Name: |
MAJ USA RET
-
|
|
| Subject: |
And the pump was dry
|
|
Date:
|
2/19/2011 10:39:14 AM
|
AH! It's Bush's fault!
|
| Name: |
MAJ USA RET
-
|
|
| Subject: |
[Message deleted by author]
|
|
Date:
|
2/19/2011 10:56:11 AM (updated 2/19/2011 11:06:18 AM)
|
|
| Name: |
MAJ USA RET
-
|
|
| Subject: |
[Message deleted by author]
|
|
Date:
|
2/19/2011 10:59:41 AM (updated 2/19/2011 11:06:04 AM)
|
|
| Name: |
MAJ USA RET
-
|
|
| Subject: |
[Message deleted by author]
|
|
Date:
|
2/19/2011 11:03:53 AM (updated 2/19/2011 11:15:20 AM)
|
|
| Name: |
water_watcher
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Why ...
|
|
Date:
|
2/19/2011 11:14:07 AM
|
Are you trying to confuse archy with facts ... he only deals in emotion and his liberal socialist views.
He, just like the currect disaster we call our president, wants to blame Bush for everything and take no responsibility for the deficit they have cause and the high unemployment and weak recovery ... and soon to be high inflation.
|
| Name: |
water_watcher
-
|
|
| Subject: |
What is interesting is
|
|
Date:
|
2/19/2011 11:16:28 AM
|
even the administrations own estimates of their lowest deficit never reach the worst deficit under Bush .... yup it is all Bush's fault. What a joke!!
|
| Name: |
MAJ USA RET
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Whose Deficit REDUX
|
|
Date:
|
2/19/2011 11:19:49 AM
|
|
| Name: |
water_watcher
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Anybody else notice
|
|
Date:
|
2/19/2011 11:25:43 AM
|
I will not send a cent back because the deficit has NOTHING to do with the Bush tax cuts ... what is a matter with you.
Look at the chart that was provided ... if it was the Bush tax cuts fault, why don't we see the deficits under Bush that we do under Obama ....
It is a SPENDING problem. When the administration gets spending back to levels equal to or below Bush, and if we still have a problem, that is the time to discuss taxes. But adding more now will do nothing to address the real problem ... THE OUT OD CONTROL SPENDING BY OBAMA AND THE DEMOCRATS.
They own the problem and you, just like them, is to tax more and tax more away from hard working americans that EARNED the money. All that will do is create higher deficits through lower employment growth and a weaker economy. If raising taxes will help employment and make the economy stronger, I would be infavor of doubling taxes.
If you can show me facts that higher taxes help unemployment and makes the economy stronger ... bring them on.
So since you believe in higher taxes ... YOU should start now ... why do you need people to join you? Answer that. You are such a hypocrite.
|
| Name: |
architect
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Do any of you
|
|
Date:
|
2/19/2011 11:28:28 AM
|
understand there is a difference between pointing out factual events and placing blame? Do any of you understand that one way to respond to a question is to answer it and another is to try to hide the answer under bullsh**?
|
| Name: |
MAJ USA RET
-
|
|
| Subject: |
So you have said, Archy
|
|
Date:
|
2/19/2011 11:37:19 AM
|
Now it is YOUR turn to back up your hypothesis that:
a) raising taxes will LOWER the deficit
b) Congress and the Executive will heed the exacted promise that all increased revenues will be applied to the debt
c) That Congress will indeed decrease the spending (including obligations) to 2008 levels
There is NO history for your case… unless, of course YOU can provide it (and not hide behind, in YOUR term, bullsh**)
|
| Name: |
water_watcher
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Do any of you
|
|
Date:
|
2/19/2011 11:39:56 AM
|
Wow ... so are you saying facts do not matter?
What part of the chart is BS? You are the one saying we should roll back all the Bush tax cuts ... obviously NOT the problem ... it is the Dems and Obama spending. Even with the tax cuts under Bush and the two wars ... we had small deficits and the trend was showing they were being eliminated ... until the dems took over and destroyed the economy.
Again ... It is a SPENDING PROBLEM.
|
| Name: |
MartiniMan
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Archie. Archie, Archie.....
|
|
Date:
|
2/19/2011 11:40:03 AM
|
Sometimes you just don't know when to stay silent for you own sake. Archie, why stop at 2001/2003? How about this idea, lets go back to the taxation levels of the federal government at its founding and how it was conceived.
You see Archie, going back to 2008 levels for spending is just a start. In 2008 we still had a large budget deficit. What we need to do is return to the size and scope of the federal government prior to the Civil War. Only then will it be under control.
But I don't expect you to agree with that concept because for some reason you don't think you pay eneough in taxes and yet I am willing to bet you, like every other hypocritical libtard, takes advantage of every single deduction and tax dodge you can. If you don't think you pay enough in taxes then send more in.....no one is stopping you.
|
| Name: |
architect
-
|
|
| Subject: |
1,2,3
|
|
Date:
|
2/19/2011 4:31:21 PM
|
1/ 1993, Bill Clinton raised taxes, the GOP swooned, the economy boomed and the deficit went down and infact
away.
2/ I doubt congress would heed a "promise" that all added revenue went to the debt. Major, I proposed writing
into the law as a requirement of the increase, not a promise or suggestion.
3/ Whether congress cuts spending to 2008* levels is up to congress. At today's idelogical loggerheads it is not
going to happen, but if members from both parties ever get the balls to start putting the country first instead of
ideology, or the party, or special interests, or their "base, whose knows what is possible.
*It is my understanding that the Republican proposal to cut spending back to 2008 levels is not that across the board all expenses would be rolled back to 2008 levels. Oh no. Military spending would actually go above today's level and everybody else would have to fall to well below 2008 to make up for it.
|
| Name: |
architect
-
|
|
| Subject: |
WW
|
|
Date:
|
2/19/2011 4:37:27 PM
|
what does the Bush side of the chart look like when you add on the cost of 2 wars, disaster relief, the medicare unfunded drug program and the firt year of TARP expenses to it? I know, It always more fun to make comparisons when your comparing rotten apples and sour oranges.
|
| Name: |
architect
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Oh, BTW WW
|
|
Date:
|
2/19/2011 4:41:30 PM
|
Any guess as to what happened to upset the apple chart between 01 and 02?
|
| Name: |
architect
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Yeah Marteinistein
|
|
Date:
|
2/19/2011 4:48:06 PM
|
I can imagine you would like to go back to those good old days before Abe Lincoln instituted the first income tax. Back to the days when in the north you didn't have to pay workers a fair wage and in the south you didn't have to pay them at all! Sounds great!!!!
|
| Name: |
water_watcher
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Archie ... Please answer ...
|
|
Date:
|
2/19/2011 6:59:06 PM
|
If you REALLY believe that Clinton raising taxes contributed to growth ... do you think if he raised them even higher we would have had more growth?
Please use your brain ... I am sure you are a smart person.
But again ... if you feel taxes should be higher, you really should start paying more immmediately.
|
The comparisons are the same ... why would you adjust one without the other ... I know dems like to do that to change the facts ... but like it or not, they are the facts.
As for TARP ... look back, I was on the record for supporting it at the time and still believe it was necessary to save the financial markets. As Bush and Poulsen said, it would be paid back with a credit to the treasury/taxpayer .... and it has.
My problem with it was Obama using it to bail out auto companies and his personal slush fund, then giving 35% ownership of GM to the unions ... that is wrong to waste taxpayers money that way.
face it ... YOUR president that you voted for is a disaster to this country.
I will still ask you ... what has he done that people wanted, you are proud of and good for the country.???
|
| Name: |
MartiniMan
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Yeah Archiestein
|
|
Date:
|
2/19/2011 8:07:26 PM
|
Actually Archie, them was Democrats in those days. Can you name for me any Republicans that supported slavery.....let's see old Abe, nope, he was a Republican........ You see Archie, unlike libtards like you we are not obsessed with the color of someone's skin, just the content of their character. And we are all for not only a person being paid a fair wage for a day's work but also having the right to keep the majority of their hard earned money.
Archie, even when you think you are clever you are stupid......
|
| Name: |
MartiniMan
-
|
|
| Subject: |
I answered your stupid question
|
|
Date:
|
2/19/2011 8:08:57 PM
|
But you of course had a stupid response.....
|
| Name: |
architect
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Yeah Archiestein
|
|
Date:
|
2/20/2011 12:13:12 AM
|
Are you dumb enough to believe that an Abe Lincoln today would be a part of the modern GOP or that the modern GOP would have him as a member? Give me a break. I am old enough to remember when the few Republicans in the GA General Assembly were the "liberals" who received black support. To a man they were moderate to liberal folks from the Atlanta area. The right wingers were the majority rural Democrats. The same type of folks run GA today but now call themselves Republicans.
|
| Name: |
water_watcher
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Archie ... silence ... I thought so :)
|
|
Date:
|
2/20/2011 9:12:38 AM
|
|
| Name: |
water_watcher
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Archie ... silence ... I thought so :)
|
|
Date:
|
2/20/2011 9:13:15 AM
|
|
| Name: |
MartiniMan
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Nice try Archiestein
|
|
Date:
|
2/20/2011 9:47:51 AM
|
Nice try to change the subject Archie but my point is the same.....why stop at 2001? Lets roll the federal government back to pre Abe Lincoln days in terns of its size and scope and the burden of taxes placed on the citizens. My entire point is to hoist you on your own petard, which is so ridiculously easy to do that it is almost boring. Are you willing???? I am as are millions of other Americans!!!!
As I have pointed out before I can't comment about which party your racist, redneck friends and acquaintances belong to as my only experience are the hundreds of Republicans I know, none of which are racists and all of which judge a man not by the color of his skin but by the content of his character. These days only libtards are obsessed with race, color, creed and sexual orientation. Conservatives could care less.....
|
| Name: |
architect
-
|
|
| Subject: |
MM, I'll tell it like it is
|
|
Date:
|
2/20/2011 9:32:40 PM
|
You are an idiot as well as a pompous jacka**! If you don't know any racist Republicans you don't know very many Republicans.
|
| Name: |
architect
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Answer!!!...
|
|
Date:
|
2/20/2011 9:44:44 PM
|
WW,THINK FOR A CHANGE!! Clinton's tax increase did not have a direct effect on economic growth. I didn't claim it did. but, neither did run the economy into the ditch as guaranteed at the time by the Republicans. On the other hand it sure as he// had an effect on reducing the deficit to the point we had such a surplus that Alan Greenspan was actually worried that we were paying down the debt too fast. LOOK IT UP WW.
|
| Name: |
water_watcher
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Answer!!!...
|
|
Date:
|
2/20/2011 9:52:04 PM
|
You are so dumb .... the Clinton surplus came from the "job gains" from the tech bubble that ultimately burst and Bush had to deal with the resulting recession as well as 9/11 ... which he and the republicans handled very well.
What it does prove is job growth will fix many problems ... so the answer is what will create job growth?? It is not raising taxes ... if it is I would be on board and say raise them as high as what will create the most jobs.
BUT ... higher taxes do not create jobs .... in fact just the opposite. You are dumber than a rock.
|
| Name: |
water_watcher
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Archie ... still no answer ... I thought so!
|
|
Date:
|
2/20/2011 9:53:00 PM
|
|
| Name: |
MartiniMan
-
|
|
| Subject: |
My, my, how mean spirited and childish
|
|
Date:
|
2/20/2011 9:56:10 PM
|
Gee, Archiestein, didn't you get the memo from the Messiah that we need to be more civil these days? Calling me names is so 3rd grade. Some adult maturity might be helpful for you, maybe some anger management classes or therapy. Whatever works for you.
As I said, I know hundreds of Republicans, none of which are like your redneck, racist buddies that you seem to hang around with. I guess I am just lucky and you seem to attract the wrong kind of people. That is the way it is Archie.......
|
| Name: |
architect
-
|
|
| Subject: |
In your dreams WW
|
|
Date:
|
2/21/2011 8:04:26 AM
|
|
| Name: |
architect
-
|
|
| Subject: |
My, my, how mean spirited and childish
|
|
Date:
|
2/21/2011 8:15:43 AM
|
I cannot understand how you read most of the posts on this forum (including your own) yet call me "childish". Oh, well, it least that is an upgrade from "baby killer", "blame america firster", "stupid sh*/" and some of the other things you've called me in your moments of "childish" pique!!!
|
| Name: |
water_watcher
-
|
|
| Subject: |
You prove it with every post
|
|
Date:
|
2/21/2011 11:00:46 AM
|
You make statements, when someone presents facts, you do not say what you don't agree with or support your position to say why you disagree.
|
| Name: |
MartiniMan
-
|
|
| Subject: |
My, my, how mean spirited and childish
|
|
Date:
|
2/21/2011 1:33:31 PM
|
I am just trying to take the Messiah's request for more civility seriously.....I suggest you reflect on your lack of civility or you might not get a smiley face from the Obama administration. And don't take the very poor example of those civil servant-union thugs in Wisconsin........
|
|
New Post
Search
Off-Topic Forum
Reply
»
Pennsylvania Lakes
»
Lake Wallenpaupack
Login
|
Home
