1 in 6 Draw Welfare in Predominantly Red States

[JonKoch]

Without false premises, distortions and lies what would right wingers EVER have?




All Property, indeed, except the Savage's temporary Cabin, his Bow, his Matchcoat, and other little Acquisitions, absolutely necessary for his Subsistence, seems to me to be the Creature of public Convention. Hence the Public has the Right of Regulating Descents, and all other Conveyances of Property, and even of limiting the Quantity and the Uses of it. All the Property that is necessary to a Man, for the Conservation of the Individual and the Propagation of the Species, is his natural Right, which none can justly deprive him of: But all Property superfluous to such purposes is the Property of the Publick, who, by their Laws, have created it, and who may therefore by other Laws dispose of it, whenever the Welfare of the Publick shall demand such Disposition. He that does not like civil Society on these Terms, let him retire and live among Savages. He can have no right to the benefits of Society, who will not pay his Club towards the Support of it. Ben
Franklin

"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution that grants Congress the right, of expending on articles of benevolence, the money of their constituents."
James Madison, Annals of Congress, 1794

Republicans would agree with James Madison's centuries-old thinking.

Correct, we do, and do you know why? Because if we followed the words of Madison, we would not be 20 trillion in debt nor have the government dependency we have today.

Your opinion is groundless speculation.

It is? Then why don't you take a look at our spending and tell me what isn't benevolence? Food stamps, school lunch program, foreign aid, funding planned parenthood, HUD, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, welfare checks, Obama Care, day care centers........

Yes, that's all benevolence and so much more I don't have time to list.

 

[Iceweasel]

"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution that grants Congress the right, of expending on articles of benevolence, the money of their constituents."
James Madison, Annals of Congress, 1794

Republicans would agree with James Madison's centuries-old thinking.

Correct, we do, and do you know why? Because if we followed the words of Madison, we would not be 20 trillion in debt nor have the government dependency we have today.

Your opinion is groundless speculation.

It is? Then why don't you take a look at our spending and tell me what isn't benevolence? Food stamps, school lunch program, foreign aid, funding planned parenthood, HUD, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, welfare checks, Obama Care, day care centers........

Yes, that's all benevolence and so much more I don't have time to list.

Congress controls spending, Buttlick. You didn't know? LOL

 

[2aguy]

"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution that grants Congress the right, of expending on articles of benevolence, the money of their constituents."
James Madison, Annals of Congress, 1794

Republicans would agree with James Madison's centuries-old thinking.

Correct, we do, and do you know why? Because if we followed the words of Madison, we would not be 20 trillion in debt nor have the government dependency we have today.

Your opinion is groundless speculation.

It is? Then why don't you take a look at our spending and tell me what isn't benevolence? Food stamps, school lunch program, foreign aid, funding planned parenthood, HUD, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, welfare checks, Obama Care, day care centers........

Yes, that's all benevolence and so much more I don't have time to list.

Reagan was lied to by the democrats who promised to cut spending...they didn't........and clinton, the rapist, the republicans gained control of the House for the first time in 40 years...and they cut deficit....clinton had no plans to do anything about it.....

 

[JonKoch]

Typical European Union countries have more social and economic equality than the USA. The largest EU economy is Germany where there is manifestly more equality than the USA.

There is less middle class and upward economic mobility via opportunity in EU. People want economic opportunity equality.

Equality does not depend on a few people being able to enter the high income upper middle class but in the disparity of income. The USA is about the worst country in the free world for the gaping gap between the top upper middle class and the poorer working class. The U.S. poverty rate in 2011 was higher compared to all other OECD countries other than Israel, Mexico and Turkey - none of which are in the European Union.
How the U.S. compares on income inequality and poverty

2011, now let's see, who was President at that time? Who allowed the feds to pump in trillions of dollars into the stock market to artificially inflate the market so millionaires could make millions more?

Income inequality in the USA will be about the same regardless of who is president. The capitalist system is entrenched there.

No it has not been the same. It's been increasing since the 90's. Do you know why? Because of technology and more things to buy today.

The only people responsible for income inequality are the consumers. This week, you are going to freely give your money to the top 1%; in fact I'd be willing to bet you will do it several times this week.

You are going to pay your cable bill, your internet bill, your cell phone bill, stop at a fast food joint, buy gasoline, stop at Walmart or some other store, pay your satellite radio bill, NetFlix, buy an application for your computer or phone.........

We simply have way more things to buy today than we ever have in the past. That's how income inequality happens. If you don't like income inequality, then don't buy anything you don't have to have. We will miss you when you give up being on this internet.

 

[JonKoch]

What we only made cars with our industry Cupcake? IF that's all it was why is Germany 40% the size of US and yet they export as much as US Cupcake? OH RIGHT, THEY HAVE GOOD GOV'T POLICIES!


Reagan GUTTED taxes on the richest AND his and the CONServatives policies REWARDED those (Chinese/Mexico) "job creators" to off shore US jobs

What bullshit. Companies didn't leave because of any permission by the government. The only tax breaks companies get when they leave is writing off their moving expenses. That's it. The rest is a liberal lie. Need the FactCheck article? I have it in my folder, just ask.

Unions and government are responsible for the jobs leaving this country. The American consumer buys whatever items are the cheapest. That's how Walmart became our number one store. That's why brick and mortar stores are closing up all the time, because people get cheaper products through the internet.

In order for a company to sell products to the American consumer, they have to produce those products as cheap as possible. It had nothing to do with Reagan.

Hey dumbfuck, think the US Gov't could set the rules for who sells in the worlds largest economy, if it wanted too?


You know like stopping the ability to write off shipping jobs oversea? Having strong policy on creating FAIR trade vs CONservatives "free trade" BS?

 

[Iceweasel]

There is less middle class and upward economic mobility via opportunity in EU. People want economic opportunity equality.

Equality does not depend on a few people being able to enter the high income upper middle class but in the disparity of income. The USA is about the worst country in the free world for the gaping gap between the top upper middle class and the poorer working class. The U.S. poverty rate in 2011 was higher compared to all other OECD countries other than Israel, Mexico and Turkey - none of which are in the European Union.
How the U.S. compares on income inequality and poverty

2011, now let's see, who was President at that time? Who allowed the feds to pump in trillions of dollars into the stock market to artificially inflate the market so millionaires could make millions more?

Income inequality in the USA will be about the same regardless of who is president. The capitalist system is entrenched there.

No it has not been the same. It's been increasing since the 90's. Do you know why? Because of technology and more things to buy today.

The only people responsible for income inequality are the consumers. This week, you are going to freely give your money to the top 1%; in fact I'd be willing to bet you will do it several times this week.

You are going to pay your cable bill, your internet bill, your cell phone bill, stop at a fast food joint, buy gasoline, stop at Walmart or some other store, pay your satellite radio bill, NetFlix, buy an application for your computer or phone.........

We simply have way more things to buy today than we ever have in the past. That's how income inequality happens. If you don't like income inequality, then don't buy anything you don't have to have. We will miss you when you give up being on this internet.

Buttlick continues with his cartoon meme expecting different results.

LOL

 

[JonKoch]

1 in 5? CONservative "math" huh Cupcake?

Slightly less than that. 21%.

Do the math., Libroid....

Link Cupcake? Because I don't accept SS which you pay into is welfare Cupcake

Government withholding is paying into welfare? Oh, I see, calling someone cupcake makes it true and you smart, right?

LOL

Your inability to use reading comprehension noted Buttercup

Your inability to comprehend is noted, Buttlick.

Once more Cupcake since you seem to be having reading comprehension issues again :0

Link Cupcake? Because I don't accept SS which you pay into, is welfare Cupcake

 

[JonKoch]

Republicans would agree with James Madison's centuries-old thinking.

Correct, we do, and do you know why? Because if we followed the words of Madison, we would not be 20 trillion in debt nor have the government dependency we have today.

Your opinion is groundless speculation.

It is? Then why don't you take a look at our spending and tell me what isn't benevolence? Food stamps, school lunch program, foreign aid, funding planned parenthood, HUD, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, welfare checks, Obama Care, day care centers........

Yes, that's all benevolence and so much more I don't have time to list.

Congress controls spending, Buttlick. You didn't know? LOL

Yet I keep hearing from the right wingers Obama created debt???

 

[mudwhistle]

What's really weird is the fact that 1 in 5 get Welfare nationwide....so it has to be worse in Blue States like California. And a Red State like Texas has alot of illegals dragging down the numbers.

1 in 5? CONservative "math" huh Cupcake?

Slightly less than that. 21%.

Do the math., Libroid....

Link Cupcake? Because I don't accept SS which you pay into is welfare Cupcake

Government withholding is paying into welfare? Oh, I see, calling someone cupcake makes it true and you smart, right?

LOL

Your inability to use reading comprehension noted Buttercup

*

 

[mudwhistle]

"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution that grants Congress the right, of expending on articles of benevolence, the money of their constituents."
James Madison, Annals of Congress, 1794

Republicans would agree with James Madison's centuries-old thinking.

Correct, we do, and do you know why? Because if we followed the words of Madison, we would not be 20 trillion in debt nor have the government dependency we have today.

Your opinion is groundless speculation.

It is? Then why don't you take a look at our spending and tell me what isn't benevolence? Food stamps, school lunch program, foreign aid, funding planned parenthood, HUD, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, welfare checks, Obama Care, day care centers........

Yes, that's all benevolence and so much more I don't have time to list.

*

 

[JonKoch]

Republicans would agree with James Madison's centuries-old thinking.

Correct, we do, and do you know why? Because if we followed the words of Madison, we would not be 20 trillion in debt nor have the government dependency we have today.

Your opinion is groundless speculation.

It is? Then why don't you take a look at our spending and tell me what isn't benevolence? Food stamps, school lunch program, foreign aid, funding planned parenthood, HUD, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, welfare checks, Obama Care, day care centers........

Yes, that's all benevolence and so much more I don't have time to list.

Reagan was lied to by the democrats who promised to cut spending...they didn't........and clinton, the rapist, the republicans gained control of the House for the first time in 40 years...and they cut deficit....clinton had no plans to do anything about it.....

The historical myth that Reagan raised $1 of taxes in exchange for $3 of spending cuts





The Facts

Despite Reagan’s claim that he made a deal with the Democrats, the Senate at the time was controlled by Republicans. Sen. Bob Dole of Kansas — then chairman of the Finance Committee and later the majority leader and Republican nominee for president — was a driving force behind a big tax increase because he was concerned about soaring deficits after Reagan had boosted defense spending and slashed taxes.

Dole warned the White House that the final year of Reagan’s three-year tax cut was at risk unless revenue could be raised in other ways. Under Dole’s leadership, the Senate Finance Committee led the way in crafting a big tax bill, fending off efforts by Democrats to halt Reagan’s tax cut. Key people on Reagan’s team — especially budget director David Stockman and White House Chief of Staff James A. Baker III — were eager to rein in the deficit. But others, such a Treasury Secretary Donald Regan, were skeptical of a deal. Regan, in his memoir “For the Record,” proudly notes that he demanded a ratio of $1 in tax increases for $3 in spending cuts.

Stockman, in an interview, acknowledged that “we needed a 3-to-1 ratio to get the deal accepted by Reagan and the Adam Smith tie boys (e.g. Ed Meese, et al).” But it appears that Reagan and Regan did not actually understand the mechanics of the agreement. It turns out that much of the savings were not from spending cuts — and many of the savings were dependent on actions by the Reagan administration.


....The Pinocchio Test


It is time to abandon this myth. Reagan may have convinced himself he had been snookered, but that belief is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the deal he had reached.

Congress was never expected to match the tax increases with spending cuts on a 3-to-1 basis. Reagan appeared to acknowledge this in his speech when he referred to outlays (which would include interest expenses), rather than spending cuts. In the end, lawmakers apparently did a better job of living up to the bargain than the administration did.

If people want to cite the lessons of history, they need to get the history right in the first place.



Four Pinocchios

WAPO
The historical myth that Reagan raised $1 of taxes in exchange for $3 of spending cuts


BJ BILL HAD 4 SURPLUSES CUPCAKE, 3 AFTER VETOING THE GOP'S $792+ BILLION TAX CUT


Take President Clinton’s 1993 budget bill (THAT NOT A SINGLE GOPer VOTED FOR)—officially known as the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993. OBRA, which mainly raised taxes on wealthy people but also raised the gas tax, extended limits on discretionary spending and cut back on some mandatory spending, was signed into law on August 10, 1993. Just five months prior, the Congressional Budget Office projected a 1998 deficit of $360 billion. One month after the bill passed, the CBO’s new estimate of the 1988 deficit was down to $200 billion. The CBO explained the dramatic improvement this way: “For the first time in two and one-half years, the deficit projections have taken a decided turn for the better… The reconciliation act deserves most of the credit for the improvement over the long run.” Indeed, of the $160 billion improvement from March to September of that year, CBO directly credited OBRA with $143 billion. In fact, OBRA turns out to have been the single largest contributor to the 1998 surplus.

Not So Fast, Newt - Center for American Progress


NEXT

 

[JonKoch]

Without false premises, distortions and lies what would right wingers EVER have?




All Property, indeed, except the Savage's temporary Cabin, his Bow, his Matchcoat, and other little Acquisitions, absolutely necessary for his Subsistence, seems to me to be the Creature of public Convention. Hence the Public has the Right of Regulating Descents, and all other Conveyances of Property, and even of limiting the Quantity and the Uses of it. All the Property that is necessary to a Man, for the Conservation of the Individual and the Propagation of the Species, is his natural Right, which none can justly deprive him of: But all Property superfluous to such purposes is the Property of the Publick, who, by their Laws, have created it, and who may therefore by other Laws dispose of it, whenever the Welfare of the Publick shall demand such Disposition. He that does not like civil Society on these Terms, let him retire and live among Savages. He can have no right to the benefits of Society, who will not pay his Club towards the Support of it. Ben
Franklin

Ya mean, like dee way you Dems keeps dem Darkies on dee Inner City Plantations wif dee Welfare Moneys and keeps da good Nigras votin' Democrat, dont'cha?

^^^AND THE RIGHT WONDERS WHY THE DEMS GET 90%+ OF THE BLACK VOTE^^^

Wrong again, buffalo breath...

I voted for Bernie in the Illinois Primaries...

I voted (extremely reluctantly) for Shrillary in the General on November 8, 2016...

And all your rock-throwing and all your whiny-bitch blathering about systemic racism fails to dilute the power of the Percentages approach outlined in Post #39...

http://www.usmessageboard.com/posts/17419822/

Gawd another farrr right racist prick who was a Bernie supporter AND hated Cheeto so much he voted Hil

Your attempts at deflection have failed.

You are unable to counter the data presented in Post #39 1 in 6 Draw Welfare in Predominantly Red States

You do nothing but make excuses for 152 years (or 53 years, if you like) of Chronic Under-Performing.

Sucks to be you.

But it does nothing to detract from the Inconvenient Truth about your beloved Perpetual Victim buddies.

They're losers.

Rather like you.

Don't look now, Twinkle-Toes, but vast numbers of Americans have stopped listening to your (collective) Bull$hit.

Got it Cupcake, you decided to put your pointy white hat back on

 

[JonKoch]

Republicans will do nothing for the poor.

Trying to create a positive pro growth business environment has everything to do with helping the poor. More jobs.

What does not help the poor is flooding the country with no-skill workers that compete for entry level jobs.

HOW THE FUCK IS GUTTING THE LOWEST SUSTAINED EFFECTIVE TAXES ON THOSE "JOB CREATORS", GOING TO CREATE "PRO GROWTH" POLICIES CUPCAKE? Another excuse to gut taxes for the rich, take safety nets away from the WORKING poor and blow up the debt like EVERY TIME trickle down is tried!!

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

What we only made cars with our industry Cupcake? IF that's all it was why is Germany 40% the size of US and yet they export as much as US Cupcake? OH RIGHT, THEY HAVE GOOD GOV'T POLICIES!


Reagan GUTTED taxes on the richest AND his and the CONServatives policies REWARDED those (Chinese/Mexico) "job creators" to off shore US jobs

What bullshit. Companies didn't leave because of any permission by the government. The only tax breaks companies get when they leave is writing off their moving expenses. That's it. The rest is a liberal lie. Need the FactCheck article? I have it in my folder, just ask.

Unions and government are responsible for the jobs leaving this country. The American consumer buys whatever items are the cheapest. That's how Walmart became our number one store. That's why brick and mortar stores are closing up all the time, because people get cheaper products through the internet.

In order for a company to sell products to the American consumer, they have to produce those products as cheap as possible. It had nothing to do with Reagan.

Hey dumbfuck, think the US Gov't could set the rules for who sells in the worlds largest economy, if it wanted too?


You know like stopping the ability to write off shipping jobs oversea? Having strong policy on creating FAIR trade vs CONservatives "free trade" BS?

I warned you:

FULL ANSWER

Do companies get a tax break for shipping U.S. jobs overseas? Several readers asked us that question after it came up during the first debate between President Obama and Mitt Romney.

Obama claimed that “companies that are shipping jobs overseas” get tax breaks, saying that they “can actually take a deduction for moving a plant overseas.” But Mitt Romney said that he had “no idea” what the president was talking about, adding that “the idea that you get a break for shipping jobs overseas is simply not the case.” And both men are right, in a way.

There is no specific tax break for the sole purpose of relocating a U.S. job to another country, as Romney said. But the tax code does allow companies to deduct business expenses when calculating their tax liability. And those expenses can include the costs of moving a job to another state or even to another country, according to tax experts with whom we spoke. The White House confirmed in an email that that is what Obama was referring to in the debate.

“Firms can generally deduct business expenses,” said Kimberly Clausing, the Thormund A. Miller and Walter Mintz Professor of Economics at Reed College. “Thus, of course, if firms incurred expenses in moving abroad, they would be able to deduct those expenses.”

“My interpretation is that the President’s statement was accurate,” she said in an email to FactCheck.org

William McBride, chief economist for the pro-business Tax Foundation, agreed with her point about the ability of companies to deduct moving costs as a business expense.

“There are no special tax provisions that provide incentives to move overseas, but, of course, in general, the IRS allows companies to deduct business expenses, one of which is moving expenses, whether within the U.S. or abroad,” he said.

Talking Tax Breaks for Offshoring - FactCheck.org

 

[JonKoch]

Oh, sorry, man, it just seems like you are a loser, most of the people in your life seem to be losers. And you keep blaming the black guy for you being a loser..

You mean like you keep blaming white people for blacks being losers?

Right. White people welfare given to people whose families have the means to take care of them. That's the point. You'll whine all day about the pittance given to poor people, but then you'll totally give a pass to White People Welfare which is actually bankrupting us.

Show me one program that only has white people in it. Welfare people do not get a pittance. Some of them are living in the burbs with middle-class people and living it up. In fact, the US has the most well-to-do poor people in the world. People who use all programs available to them make out better than those who earn the median income. In New York, the benefits given to the poor are more than a starting teacher makes.

But you keep missing the point.

A white person on social security and medicare for 10-20 years after they decide to stop working you are totally fine with.

A poor person of color getting food stamps and an ObamaPhone, and you guys totally lose your shit.

You're the one with the race problem, not me.

The idiot next door to me decided to rent to HUD people. When I leave for work in the morning, their cars are parked in the lot not moving. If I drive by my house during work, the cars are still there. They are there when I come home from work too.

I had to complain to the landlord about them coming home a 3:00am on work nights waking me and my tenants up. They're drunk, slamming car doors and setting of their car alarms without even a concern about us white working people that pay taxes to support them here.

So I work all my life, pay into the system, and when I retire, that's white welfare to you. Yet the people that never worked you're okay with. They are living in the same suburb as me, eating better than me, don't have to pay into the school system like me.

So in the world of Joe, when a person works all of their life and finally gets to retire, that's wrong because it's white welfare. But when a black retires after he drops out of school and doesn't work, it's wrong to criticize him or her.

"about us white working people that pay taxes to support them here. "

 

[whitehall]

Why not blame the guy who was responsible? Obama vowed to replace oil energy with expensive so-called renewable energy that never worked and American factories couldn't compete. Both Obama and Hillary vowed to shut down the coal industry which was the only source of income in some Red States. During the Obama eight (long, long ) years the GDP barely nudged over 1% while Obama invested millions of taxpayer dollars in dying solar companies like Solyndra that were obviously on the verge of bankruptcy to pay off campaign supporters. God only knows why the Obama administration shipped boxcars loaded with a billion dollars of American taxpayer cash to Iran. Red States could have used the money but Hussein and Hillary only cared about Wall Street bankers. Why is it a surprise to lefties that Red States want a better life after the stagnation of the Hussein years? It's going to be a long haul but Trump took a step in the right direction by getting the U.S. out of that extortion scam called "Paris climate treaty" and plans to re-negotiate NAFTA which was a ludicrous mess designed to bring the U.S. down on a level playing ground with 3rd world countries. Meanwhile lefties on the forum seem to rely on cartoons to speak for them rather than words just like they did during the good old days in the 3rd grade.

 

[JonKoch]

What we only made cars with our industry Cupcake? IF that's all it was why is Germany 40% the size of US and yet they export as much as US Cupcake? OH RIGHT, THEY HAVE GOOD GOV'T POLICIES!


Reagan GUTTED taxes on the richest AND his and the CONServatives policies REWARDED those (Chinese/Mexico) "job creators" to off shore US jobs

What bullshit. Companies didn't leave because of any permission by the government. The only tax breaks companies get when they leave is writing off their moving expenses. That's it. The rest is a liberal lie. Need the FactCheck article? I have it in my folder, just ask.

Unions and government are responsible for the jobs leaving this country. The American consumer buys whatever items are the cheapest. That's how Walmart became our number one store. That's why brick and mortar stores are closing up all the time, because people get cheaper products through the internet.

In order for a company to sell products to the American consumer, they have to produce those products as cheap as possible. It had nothing to do with Reagan.

Hey dumbfuck, think the US Gov't could set the rules for who sells in the worlds largest economy, if it wanted too?


You know like stopping the ability to write off shipping jobs oversea? Having strong policy on creating FAIR trade vs CONservatives "free trade" BS?

I warned you:

FULL ANSWER

Do companies get a tax break for shipping U.S. jobs overseas? Several readers asked us that question after it came up during the first debate between President Obama and Mitt Romney.

Obama claimed that “companies that are shipping jobs overseas” get tax breaks, saying that they “can actually take a deduction for moving a plant overseas.” But Mitt Romney said that he had “no idea” what the president was talking about, adding that “the idea that you get a break for shipping jobs overseas is simply not the case.” And both men are right, in a way.

There is no specific tax break for the sole purpose of relocating a U.S. job to another country, as Romney said. But the tax code does allow companies to deduct business expenses when calculating their tax liability. And those expenses can include the costs of moving a job to another state or even to another country, according to tax experts with whom we spoke. The White House confirmed in an email that that is what Obama was referring to in the debate.

“Firms can generally deduct business expenses,” said Kimberly Clausing, the Thormund A. Miller and Walter Mintz Professor of Economics at Reed College. “Thus, of course, if firms incurred expenses in moving abroad, they would be able to deduct those expenses.”

“My interpretation is that the President’s statement was accurate,” she said in an email to FactCheck.org

William McBride, chief economist for the pro-business Tax Foundation, agreed with her point about the ability of companies to deduct moving costs as a business expense.

“There are no special tax provisions that provide incentives to move overseas, but, of course, in general, the IRS allows companies to deduct business expenses, one of which is moving expenses, whether within the U.S. or abroad,” he said.

Talking Tax Breaks for Offshoring - FactCheck.org

Senate Republicans block bill to end tax breaks for outsourcing


Senate Republicans blocked a Democratic bill on Tuesday to end tax deductions enjoyed by companies that close their U.S. plants and move overseas.

Republicans block ending offshore jobs tax breaks

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Blue States are from Scandinavia, Red States are from Guatemala
A theory of a divided nation


...In the red states, government is cheaper, which means the people who live there pay lower taxes. But they also get a lot less in return. The unemployment checks run out more quickly and the schools generally aren’t as good. Assistance with health care, child care, and housing is skimpier, if it exists at all. The result of this divergence is that one half of the country looks more and more like Scandinavia, while the other increasingly resembles a social Darwinist’s paradise.
Blue States are from Scandinavia, Red States are from Guatemala

You're a retard. You post one inane thing after the other and it's all based on the goodness of big government. Less government automatically is bad, the bigger the better.

You can enjoy big government and the dependency it creates but you don't get to decide values for others. All you are doing it beating your meat and strutting around like you actually did something.

As opposed to CONservative policies which ONLY benefit the richest Cupcake?

Closer to the truth "This is a list of things I don't want to pay for."

 

[JonKoch]

Why not blame the guy who was responsible? Obama vowed to replace oil energy with expensive so-called renewable energy that never worked and American factories couldn't compete. Both Obama and Hillary vowed to shut down the coal industry which was the only source of income in some Red States. During the Obama eight (long, long ) years the GDP barely nudged over 1% while Obama invested millions of taxpayer dollars in dying solar companies like Solyndra that were obviously on the verge of bankruptcy to pay off campaign supporters. God only knows why the Obama administration shipped boxcars loaded with a billion dollars of American taxpayer cash to Iran. Red States could have used the money but Hussein and Hillary only cared about Wall Street bankers. Why is it a surprise to lefties that Red States want a better life after the stagnation of the Hussein years? It's going to be a long haul but Trump took a step in the right direction by getting the U.S. out of that extortion scam called "Paris climate treaty" and plans to re-negotiate NAFTA which was a ludicrous mess designed to bring the U.S. down on a level playing ground with 3rd world countries. Meanwhile lefties on the forum seem to rely on cartoons to speak for them rather than words just like they did during the good old days in the 3rd grade.

Weird almost like Dubya/GOP 8 years never existed in right wing world Cupcake?

I mean Solndra WAS under the program started by a GOP Prez and GOP Congress right?

Obama DID try to get a few GOP votes for the stimulus which keep US out of GOP great depression 2.0, by including 40% tax breaks in his stimulus right?

Solyndra MORE CONservative nonsense!

Bush Admin. Advanced16 Projects, Including Solyndra, Out Of 143 Submissions
http://energycommerce.house.gov/hearings/hearingdetail.aspx?NewsID=8897

DOE Under Bush Admin. Set Out Timeline For Completing Solyndra Review
http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/Solar Background Document 1.pdf

In March, The Same Credit Committee Of Career Civil Servants recommended Approval
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/20...-bush-administration-solyndra-loan-guarantee/


Solyndra=1% of DOE energy money


Reuters: Venture Capitalists Point To Solyndra As One Of The Top 10 Companies "Ripest" To Go Public. Reuters reported in August 2009:
Investors eye top startups as IPO market awakens - Aug. 19, 2009


Market Conditions Shifted Significantly from 2009 to 2011


"advantages that were more important in 2009 when it received a $535 million U.S. loan guarantee to build a factory" than they are now, noting that the price of the silicon-based panels with which Solyndra was competing "has fallen 46 percent since then."
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-...-solopower-cut-costs-to-avoid-bankruptcy.html


After Solyndra Loss, U.S. Energy Loan Program Turning A Profit
After Solyndra Loss, U.S. Energy Loan Program Turning A Profit

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

What we only made cars with our industry Cupcake? IF that's all it was why is Germany 40% the size of US and yet they export as much as US Cupcake? OH RIGHT, THEY HAVE GOOD GOV'T POLICIES!


Reagan GUTTED taxes on the richest AND his and the CONServatives policies REWARDED those (Chinese/Mexico) "job creators" to off shore US jobs

What bullshit. Companies didn't leave because of any permission by the government. The only tax breaks companies get when they leave is writing off their moving expenses. That's it. The rest is a liberal lie. Need the FactCheck article? I have it in my folder, just ask.

Unions and government are responsible for the jobs leaving this country. The American consumer buys whatever items are the cheapest. That's how Walmart became our number one store. That's why brick and mortar stores are closing up all the time, because people get cheaper products through the internet.

In order for a company to sell products to the American consumer, they have to produce those products as cheap as possible. It had nothing to do with Reagan.

Hey dumbfuck, think the US Gov't could set the rules for who sells in the worlds largest economy, if it wanted too?


You know like stopping the ability to write off shipping jobs oversea? Having strong policy on creating FAIR trade vs CONservatives "free trade" BS?

I warned you:

FULL ANSWER

Do companies get a tax break for shipping U.S. jobs overseas? Several readers asked us that question after it came up during the first debate between President Obama and Mitt Romney.

Obama claimed that “companies that are shipping jobs overseas” get tax breaks, saying that they “can actually take a deduction for moving a plant overseas.” But Mitt Romney said that he had “no idea” what the president was talking about, adding that “the idea that you get a break for shipping jobs overseas is simply not the case.” And both men are right, in a way.

There is no specific tax break for the sole purpose of relocating a U.S. job to another country, as Romney said. But the tax code does allow companies to deduct business expenses when calculating their tax liability. And those expenses can include the costs of moving a job to another state or even to another country, according to tax experts with whom we spoke. The White House confirmed in an email that that is what Obama was referring to in the debate.

“Firms can generally deduct business expenses,” said Kimberly Clausing, the Thormund A. Miller and Walter Mintz Professor of Economics at Reed College. “Thus, of course, if firms incurred expenses in moving abroad, they would be able to deduct those expenses.”

“My interpretation is that the President’s statement was accurate,” she said in an email to FactCheck.org

William McBride, chief economist for the pro-business Tax Foundation, agreed with her point about the ability of companies to deduct moving costs as a business expense.

“There are no special tax provisions that provide incentives to move overseas, but, of course, in general, the IRS allows companies to deduct business expenses, one of which is moving expenses, whether within the U.S. or abroad,” he said.

Talking Tax Breaks for Offshoring - FactCheck.org

Senate Republicans block bill to end tax breaks for outsourcing


Senate Republicans blocked a Democratic bill on Tuesday to end tax deductions enjoyed by companies that close their U.S. plants and move overseas.

Republicans block ending offshore jobs tax breaks

And it's Democrats lying as usual. Again, from FactCheck: THERE ARE NO TAX INCENTIVES TO MOVE JOBS OVERSEAS! Nobody moves to get a moving tax deduction. And as another FactCheck article points out, even left-wing economists agree that taking that moving expense away will not save one job. God you liberals are thick.