3 stupid myths republicans believe

[The Rabbi]

really?

oh good; show me where the BLS says all those people "dont want to work"

you can do it chump!!

and what was your number again? 94% or something?/

go for it!

He can't. He's lying.

Possibly the only good thing about you brain-dead rightards is that there's never a shortage of you imbeciles to make fun of.

Wrong, brain-dead rightie. I proved it in post #132.

You did no such thing. You took the number of people not working, subtracted the number actively looking, and declared the rest of them not interested in working. That's a gross fallacy. But typical for an inferior intellect like you.
Then you have the nerve to claim you did indeed prove it by referring back to your discredited fallacious post. Now you will repeat the same post again in different words and swear up and down we've been over this and the point is made. Watch you.

 

[bedowin62]

obama's "Jobs Czar" is head of one of the largest corporations on the planet; GE.

GE is creating more jobs in Mexico than they are here.

Ergo; according to one LWNJ here now; obama truly is a communnist

ooops; i meant China; but you get the point of the hypocritical; intellectually dishonest liars on the Left

 

[bedowin62]

Left-wing idiots are running around callling RECORD WELFARE AND FOOD STAMPS; and the lowest level pf participation in the Labor Market in 40 years under obama; "forward progress".

LWNJs are running around trying to take credit for imaginary successes; and denying real failures; while projecting their ineptitude on others

you morons have no business commenting on what is myth or reality; given your disconnect from reality

 

[Erand7899]

1) Tax cuts pay for themselves.

Wrong. Every dollar lost in revenue is one more dollar the government needs to borrow to pay their bills. It's so obnoxious when repubs complain of gov spending yet are too ignorant to realize tax cutting leads to more borrowing. You think over spending is the only reason for our debt? No, it is also because of Bush's tax cuts.

2) Liberals are socialists/communists

Also wrong. We are talking about fundamental definitions of words here. Saying liberals are socialists is just as stupid as saying conservatives are liberals.

3) The wealthy are not too wealthy.

95% of income gains have gone to the top 5% of earners despite the fact that the lower classes are responsible for most of the productivity. In fact, productivity has grown exponentially in the lower classes since the 30s yet wages have remained flat.

#4. Liberals are stupid, see 1, 2, 3 above.

And yet you can't explain what makes them stupid.

Not hard to do. Tax cuts do pay for themselves by causing increases in economic activity, a higher GDP, and increased tax revenue from that increased activity. Like investing in your business, you get increased revenue in the future.

Modern Liberals are not liberal. This is evidenced in their political agenda, their rhetoric, and their actions. They are Socialists for the simple reason that they believe in the same things that Socialists believe in. A rose by any other name....

Unless the income and/or wealth of the top 5% affects you personally, your bitch is nothing more than socialist envy of the wealthy and a greedy desire to get some of their wealth. Wealth is not finite, and neither is earnings.

Your failure to understand those simple facts, reflects on your education.

 

[Faun]

He can't. He's lying.

Possibly the only good thing about you brain-dead rightards is that there's never a shortage of you imbeciles to make fun of.

Wrong, brain-dead rightie. I proved it in post #132.

you poor crybaby idiot; ankle-biting like the loser you are.

i asked for you to prove the BLS SAYS PEOPLE DONT WANT TO WORK; not to do a math problem for me..

what a pathetic, lame loser you are

Are you so fucking retarded that you didn't see the data series I posted of those who are not in the work force but want to work?? What the fuck do you think that data series means?

I swear, as unbelievable as it is, you're actually getting dumber.

 

[Faun]

Possibly the only good thing about you brain-dead rightards is that there's never a shortage of you imbeciles to make fun of.

Wrong, brain-dead rightie. I proved it in post #132.

you poor crybaby idiot; ankle-biting like the loser you are.

i asked for you to prove the BLS SAYS PEOPLE DONT WANT TO WORK; not to do a math problem for me..

what a pathetic, lame loser you are

so AGAIN idiot; prove your claim that the BLS says those people "DONT WANT TO WORK" WHICH IS WHAT YOU SAID

You fucking imbecile. People either want to work or they don't. The BLS indicates that in the data series I post.

You should get a frontal lobotomy. It could only be an improvement.

 

[bedowin62]

Possibly the only good thing about you brain-dead rightards is that there's never a shortage of you imbeciles to make fun of.

Wrong, brain-dead rightie. I proved it in post #132.

you poor crybaby idiot; ankle-biting like the loser you are.

i asked for you to prove the BLS SAYS PEOPLE DONT WANT TO WORK; not to do a math problem for me..

what a pathetic, lame loser you are

Are you so fucking retarded that you didn't see the data series I posted of those who are not in the work force but want to work?? What the fuck do you think that data series means?

I swear, as unbelievable as it is, you're actually getting dumber.

you are nothing but a pathetic, angry loser. you made a claim as to WHY those numbers exist; and clearly implied somebody at the BLS came to a conclusion; the one you make; and commented as such.

you cant back it up; all you can do is get angrier and angrier. the statistics arent enough; statistics can be made to look any way; which anybody with a brain stem knows

you're a pathetic little crybaby

 

[bedowin62]

you poor crybaby idiot; ankle-biting like the loser you are.

i asked for you to prove the BLS SAYS PEOPLE DONT WANT TO WORK; not to do a math problem for me..

what a pathetic, lame loser you are

so AGAIN idiot; prove your claim that the BLS says those people "DONT WANT TO WORK" WHICH IS WHAT YOU SAID

You fucking imbecile. People either want to work or they don't. The BLS indicates that in the data series I post.

You should get a frontal lobotomy. It could only be an improvement.

seriously leftard; try decaf

 

[Meister]

Can you please stop making a complete idiot yourself? Or are you simply not capable of stopping yourself?

It's the Bureau of Labor Statistics making that claim. The BLS is not the "left." I'm just repeating their claim.

really?

oh good; show me where the BLS says all those people "dont want to work"

you can do it chump!!

and what was your number again? 94% or something?/

go for it!

You never learn, do you, rightard? Of course I can do it ...

Number of people not in the labor force: 92,534,000

Number of those who want a job now: 6,508,000

6.5 million out of 92.5 million is 93%. Sorry, I was off by 1 percentage point because I hadn't calculated the numbers since the latest figures have been released.

You may now crawl back under your rock, rightie.

My question with these numbers if the government deems a person who is not in the labor force because they dropped off of unemployment as not wanting to work?

I just don't know the criteria as to how they arrive at these numbers.

 

[bedowin62]

so AGAIN idiot; prove your claim that the BLS says those people "DONT WANT TO WORK" WHICH IS WHAT YOU SAID

You fucking imbecile. People either want to work or they don't. The BLS indicates that in the data series I post.

You should get a frontal lobotomy. It could only be an improvement.

seriously leftard; try decaf

some people want to work and cant find a job they are qualified for; others have skills and jobs are available for them but they dont want to work,
you provided statistics; and claim they have to mean what you want them to mean. your flawed logic has already been pointed out to you; but you simply arent man enough to admit it; and too much of an unhinged loser to salvage some shred of dignity and let it go

 

[healthmyths]

1) Tax cuts pay for themselves.

Wrong. Every dollar lost in revenue is one more dollar the government needs to borrow to pay their bills. It's so obnoxious when repubs complain of gov spending yet are too ignorant to realize tax cutting leads to more borrowing. You think over spending is the only reason for our debt? No, it is also because of Bush's tax cuts.

2) Liberals are socialists/communists

Also wrong. We are talking about fundamental definitions of words here. Saying liberals are socialists is just as stupid as saying conservatives are liberals.

3) The wealthy are not too wealthy.

95% of income gains have gone to the top 5% of earners despite the fact that the lower classes are responsible for most of the productivity. In fact, productivity has grown exponentially in the lower classes since the 30s yet wages have remained flat.

By 2003, Mr. Bush grasped this lesson.
In that year, he cut the dividend and capital gains rates to 15 percent each, and the economy responded.
In two years, stocks rose 20 percent.
In three years, $15 trillion of new wealth was created.
The U.S. economy added 8 million new jobs from mid-2003 to early 2007, and the median household increased its wealth by $20,000 in real terms.

But the real jolt for tax-cutting opponents was that the 03 Bush tax cuts also generated a massive increase in federal tax receipts.
From 2004 to 2007, federal tax revenues increased by $785 billion, the largest four-year increase in American history. According to the Treasury Department, individual and corporate income tax receipts were up 40 percent in the three years following the Bush tax cuts. And (bonus) the rich paid an even higher percentage of the total tax burden than they had at any time in at least the previous 40 years. This was news to theNew York Times, whose astonished editorial board could only describe the gains as a “surprise windfall.”

DWYER: Bush tax cuts boosted federal revenue - Washington Times

Now for the substantiation...
Historical Tables | The White House

 

[Faun]

He can't. He's lying.

Possibly the only good thing about you brain-dead rightards is that there's never a shortage of you imbeciles to make fun of.

Wrong, brain-dead rightie. I proved it in post #132.

You did no such thing. You took the number of people not working, subtracted the number actively looking, and declared the rest of them not interested in working. That's a gross fallacy. But typical for an inferior intellect like you.
Then you have the nerve to claim you did indeed prove it by referring back to your discredited fallacious post. Now you will repeat the same post again in different words and swear up and down we've been over this and the point is made. Watch you.

Holyfuckingshit!

Can you please stop with your lunacy? Your ignorance is giving me a headache.

You are a complete fucking retarded imbecile. There's just no other way to describe you. No, rightard, I did not post the number of people "actively looking" for work. Those folks fall into the labor force category. I posted the number of folks who are "not in the labor force" but want to work. Obviously, you simply don't possess the mental abilities required to comprehend that's two different categories.

The BLS breaks down the categories of people who are not in the workforce under various conditions, including whether or not they want to work even though they're no longer looking for work.

 

[candycorn]

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Why'd you lie?

 

[Faun]

you poor crybaby idiot; ankle-biting like the loser you are.

i asked for you to prove the BLS SAYS PEOPLE DONT WANT TO WORK; not to do a math problem for me..

what a pathetic, lame loser you are

Are you so fucking retarded that you didn't see the data series I posted of those who are not in the work force but want to work?? What the fuck do you think that data series means?

I swear, as unbelievable as it is, you're actually getting dumber.

you are nothing but a pathetic, angry loser. you made a claim as to WHY those numbers exist; and clearly implied somebody at the BLS came to a conclusion; the one you make; and commented as such.

you cant back it up; all you can do is get angrier and angrier. the statistics arent enough; statistics can be made to look any way; which anybody with a brain stem knows

you're a pathetic little crybaby

You really can't get any dumber, can you? The BLS takes a poll to determine peoples' labor status. For those who fall into the category of "not in the labor force" they ask questions of the people polled as to whether or not they want to work. For those who do want to work, they break it down even further as to why they've given up looking. For those who don't want to work, they don't specify why.

 

[Listening]

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Why'd you lie?

You first.

 

[Indeependent]

1) Tax cuts pay for themselves.

Wrong. Every dollar lost in revenue is one more dollar the government needs to borrow to pay their bills. It's so obnoxious when repubs complain of gov spending yet are too ignorant to realize tax cutting leads to more borrowing. You think over spending is the only reason for our debt? No, it is also because of Bush's tax cuts.

2) Liberals are socialists/communists

Also wrong. We are talking about fundamental definitions of words here. Saying liberals are socialists is just as stupid as saying conservatives are liberals.

3) The wealthy are not too wealthy.

95% of income gains have gone to the top 5% of earners despite the fact that the lower classes are responsible for most of the productivity. In fact, productivity has grown exponentially in the lower classes since the 30s yet wages have remained flat.

By 2003, Mr. Bush grasped this lesson.
In that year, he cut the dividend and capital gains rates to 15 percent each, and the economy responded.
In two years, stocks rose 20 percent.
In three years, $15 trillion of new wealth was created.
The U.S. economy added 8 million new jobs from mid-2003 to early 2007, and the median household increased its wealth by $20,000 in real terms.

But the real jolt for tax-cutting opponents was that the 03 Bush tax cuts also generated a massive increase in federal tax receipts.
From 2004 to 2007, federal tax revenues increased by $785 billion, the largest four-year increase in American history. According to the Treasury Department, individual and corporate income tax receipts were up 40 percent in the three years following the Bush tax cuts. And (bonus) the rich paid an even higher percentage of the total tax burden than they had at any time in at least the previous 40 years. This was news to theNew York Times, whose astonished editorial board could only describe the gains as a “surprise windfall.”

DWYER: Bush tax cuts boosted federal revenue - Washington Times

Now for the substantiation...
Historical Tables | The White House

2004-2007...
I love the way Conservatives won't state one year at a time.
Of course people were being hired in 2006-2007; under FALSE pretenses created by a HOUSING BUBBLE!

 

[candycorn]

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Why'd you lie?

You first.

counting your chickens before they hatch can set you up for a BIG LET DOWN

but go ahead if you must

I have reached a point where I feel safe enough to make predictions.

I'm actually putting myself on the line with my points.

I'm still leaving a little bit of room to be wrong, but as you can see from the facts and analysis I'm presenting, it's not made up and it's based on reality.

I haven't seen a sensible USMB RW counter to date.

So let's bet.

If Obama wins...I leave the board.

If Romney wins....you do.

What say you ?

Your turn.

 

[Stephanie]

holy smokes

they wail over people getting their own money back with Tax cuts

Let the frikken Government cut an agency to pay for the damn things

what a strange concept huh?

scary these people vote and he got atta boys for this garbage

 

[Faun]

You fucking imbecile. People either want to work or they don't. The BLS indicates that in the data series I post.

You should get a frontal lobotomy. It could only be an improvement.

seriously leftard; try decaf

some people want to work and cant find a job they are qualified for; others have skills and jobs are available for them but they dont want to work,
you provided statistics; and claim they have to mean what you want them to mean. your flawed logic has already been pointed out to you; but you simply arent man enough to admit it; and too much of an unhinged loser to salvage some shred of dignity and let it go

Moron, do you even read what you write? People you describe as those who want to work but choose not to because they can't find a job for which they're qualified -- fall into the "want to work" category. They want a job but have given up looking. People like that are among the 6.5 million who gave up looking but want to work.

Others you describe as qualified and can find work but choose not to, fall into the category of not looking and don't want to work. Folks like that are among the other 86 million people.

It's a binary question ... do you want to work? Yes or no.

 

[eflatminor]

1) Tax cuts pay for themselves.

Wrong. Every dollar lost in revenue is one more dollar the government needs to borrow to pay their bills. It's so obnoxious when repubs complain of gov spending yet are too ignorant to realize tax cutting leads to more borrowing. You think over spending is the only reason for our debt? No, it is also because of Bush's tax cuts.

Dr Art Laffer, who has written extensively on the subject, would disagree. He and plenty of others have shown how many times in history, tax cuts have led to economic growth and more tax revenues. Of course, that doesn't mean it's always the case. Sometimes tax cuts lead to less revenue. Point is, you're believing your own stupid myth.

Oh the irony!

2) Liberals are socialists/communists

Also wrong. We are talking about fundamental definitions of words here. Saying liberals are socialists is just as stupid as saying conservatives are liberals.

Nobody really believes that and you saying so doesn't make it so. Modern liberals are certainly socialistic in their collectivist approach to society and government, but full on socialists? Some, yes. All, no.

Are you really this simplistic in your thinking?

3) The wealthy are not too wealthy.

95% of income gains have gone to the top 5% of earners despite the fact that the lower classes are responsible for most of the productivity. In fact, productivity has grown exponentially in the lower classes since the 30s yet wages have remained flat.

You seem to think wealth is a finite pile of cash from which we all must draw. Sorry, doesn't work that way. Just because a fat man is standing next to skinny man doesn't mean the fat guy took the skinny guy's food.

Get thee a book on economics...101.