Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Obama has said he wants the top tax rate to go from 35% to 39%. What a communist!
you never ever understand do you. Obama had 2 communist parents, voted to the left of Bernie Sanders, supports single payer, is beloved by the CPUSA, his two mentors were communists (Rev. Wright and Frank Marshall Davis). 39% is a mere stepping stone for him!
Norman Thomas quotes:
The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened.
And what makes you think he'll stop there?Obama has said he wants the top tax rate to go from 35% to 39%. What a communist!
you never ever understand do you. Obama had 2 communist parents, voted to the left of Bernie Sanders, supports single payer, is beloved by the CPUSA, his two mentors were communists (Rev. Wright and Frank Marshall Davis). 39% is a mere stepping stone for him!
Norman Thomas quotes:
The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened.
Bernie Sanders is perhaps my favorite politician.
Again, your arguing against your imagination. The only thing obama has said is he wants to raise the top tax rate from 35% to 39%. Everything else is just reverberations in the echo chamber.
But on the whole a company charges as much as it can.
Econ 101: a company in a perfectly competitive market will produce where Marginal Revenue = Marginal Cost. Dont throw out the "econ 101" bullshit when its obvious that youve never taken econ 101. You dont just get to make up shit and call it econ 101. MC=MR is actually textbook econ 101, while your just pulling shit out of your ass.
But, this discussion on prices is pretty much irrelevant, the discussion is labor.
Labor costs are a large portion of a businesses budget. Certainly there is a balance between paying enough to attract workers, and controlling your total labor costs. Which side is favored will probably depend on the industry. google has the money and the market stature to pay its software engineers handsomely to get the best. However, your local factory isnt in the same situation; the auto factory in my town isnt paying extra to attract talented assembly line workers.
So basically your just wrong.
And what makes you think he'll stop there?you never ever understand do you. Obama had 2 communist parents, voted to the left of Bernie Sanders, supports single payer, is beloved by the CPUSA, his two mentors were communists (Rev. Wright and Frank Marshall Davis). 39% is a mere stepping stone for him!
Norman Thomas quotes:
The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened.
Bernie Sanders is perhaps my favorite politician.
Again, your arguing against your imagination. The only thing obama has said is he wants to raise the top tax rate from 35% to 39%. Everything else is just reverberations in the echo chamber.
You remember the stimulus? It was going to save the economy. When it didn't (and it really didn't), he said we need ANOTHER stimulus.
"Oh, sorry, the top rate going to 39% didn't help as much as we thought. We need to raise it again...and again...and again if necessary."
Democrats are addicted to other people's money. They can't get enough.
But on the whole a company charges as much as it can.
if I disagreed I'll pay you $10,000. Bet or run away with your pretend college courses hidden between your legs?? A company will charge as little as it can consistent with what others charge for competitive products and with maintaining a competitive work force.
Econ 101: a company in a perfectly competitive market will produce where Marginal Revenue = Marginal Cost. Dont throw out the "econ 101" bullshit when its obvious that youve never taken econ 101. You dont just get to make up shit and call it econ 101. MC=MR is actually textbook econ 101, while your just pulling shit out of your ass.
no idea what your subject is? Were you dying to copy an Econ 101 book for some reason??
But, this discussion on prices is pretty much irrelevant, the discussion is labor.
Labor costs are a large portion of a businesses budget. Certainly there is a balance between paying enough to attract workers, and controlling your total labor costs. Which side is favored will probably depend on the industry. google has the money and the market stature to pay its software engineers handsomely to get the best. However, your local factory isnt in the same situation; the auto factory in my town isnt paying extra to attract talented assembly line workers.
So basically your just wrong.
they may not be paying extra( whatever that means) but they are paying better than anyone else; if not no one would work there, plus they are paying enough to produce a car as good as the competition. If they pay a penny less the market signals to them that their wages may not be high enough to compete. Now even the liberal can understand how capitalism keeps wages the highest possible as income grows for all, and why capitalism insures American workers are the highest paid in human history.
Lol thats the best you can do? RU.com? Wealthcap.com? Some obscure shit ive never even heard of?
Ok ill make a small concession. I'm sure someone out there is probably talking about it. But anyone that matters? Is it a serious discussion? Is there any chance that the senate or the president will come out and say "No one is going to make more than 100 million a year"? Nope. Its a pointless distraction from what is actually practical.
Again, your argument is just not very convincing. something called RU magazine, whose website looks shotty at best, isnt exactly representative of the substantive policy discussion going on this country. im sure i could find some random right-wing website saying something crazy. does that mean i should act as if boehner said it and spend all my time refuting it? Or is that a waste of time?
Thank you for conceding.
Really? Ever here of "spread the wealth" or "fair share" or listened to any of the OWS talking points? What do you think is the final desiredd outcome of those initial beginnings? You're here on this board where the liberals complain about the 1% stealing all of the wealth from the 99% and you don't think there are people who would like to see a cap on those greedy sonsabitches 1%'ers? Would you be interested in buying a bridge?
I didnt concede shit. Like i said, you can find anyone making any claim, that doesnt mean its a substantive discussion. Its a distraction.
Obama has said he wants the top tax rate to go from 35% to 39%. What a communist!
Another leftist ignorant about how the CBO works.And what makes you think he'll stop there?Bernie Sanders is perhaps my favorite politician.
Again, your arguing against your imagination. The only thing obama has said is he wants to raise the top tax rate from 35% to 39%. Everything else is just reverberations in the echo chamber.
You remember the stimulus? It was going to save the economy. When it didn't (and it really didn't), he said we need ANOTHER stimulus.
"Oh, sorry, the top rate going to 39% didn't help as much as we thought. We need to raise it again...and again...and again if necessary."
Democrats are addicted to other people's money. They can't get enough.
Lol and this is why i say your arguing against your imagination. Hilarious.
And this stimulus bs is hilarious too. CBO says it saved 2 million jobs. To say it did nothing you would have to have something to compare it to. You realize you dont have any stats about what it would have been, right?
I made no comment about any 8%. Meanwhile, you have presented no evidence that Obama would raise the top tax bracket to 39% and leave it there.You realize that unemployment was over 8% when the stimulus was signed, right? So your little quote about unemployment going over 8% is pointless. its said in like 2008 where estimates are being made on projections of projections of incomplete data.
Stimulus stopped the exodus from the jobs market.
Meanwhile, you have presented no evidence that Obama would raise the top tax bracket to 39% and leave it there.
He wouldn't. Guaranteed. Because it wouldn't be enough. Guaranteed.
LMAO! See, conservatives think we live in a perfect economy!
"If they pay a penny less the market signals to them that their wages may not be high enough to compete"
Lol o really? I sort of doubt that theory, and more so when it applies to a labor market. When buying groceries, sure this might be true. But no factory workers is leaving his current $14.99 job for a job somewhere else doing the same thing for $15. Thats impractical. Paying a single penny less doesnt signal that the firm cant compete, its a penny.
Besides, you dont seem to be thinking this through.
The auto factory is paying its workers better than everyone else? Ok so imagine there are three auto factories, and there probably is. Are they all paying their workers higher than the other factories? Hows that mathematically possible? Do they bid eachother up until each factory is paying their workers $10,000 an hour and trying to out-pay the others? No, thats pretty impractical. Your analysis of wages is seriously lacking. Capitalism is not a system in which people pay their workers as much as they can. Labor is just another commodity, you pay the least amount of money for the highest quality you can get.
The only thing obama has said is he wants to raise the top tax rate from 35% to 39%. Everything else is just reverberations in the echo chamber.
Meanwhile, you have presented no evidence that Obama would raise the top tax bracket to 39% and leave it there.
He wouldn't. Guaranteed. Because it wouldn't be enough. Guaranteed.
Why wouldn't it be, if at the same time we pulled out of Iraq and Afghanistan and trimmed slightly more in defense spending? That would put us approximately where we were in the Clinton years. Bush ran up a record deficit only because he cut taxes and increased spending (for the wars and for Medicare prescription drugs). Obama's deficits combined the Bush mistakes with a huge recession. As the economy recovers, if we reverse the Bush mistakes, the deficit should drop to manageable levels.
Thank you for conceding.
Really? Ever here of "spread the wealth" or "fair share" or listened to any of the OWS talking points? What do you think is the final desiredd outcome of those initial beginnings? You're here on this board where the liberals complain about the 1% stealing all of the wealth from the 99% and you don't think there are people who would like to see a cap on those greedy sonsabitches 1%'ers? Would you be interested in buying a bridge?
I didnt concede shit. Like i said, you can find anyone making any claim, that doesnt mean its a substantive discussion. Its a distraction.
Obama has said he wants the top tax rate to go from 35% to 39%. What a communist!
Wow, you're not very good at this are you?
Another leftist ignorant about how the CBO works.And what makes you think he'll stop there?
You remember the stimulus? It was going to save the economy. When it didn't (and it really didn't), he said we need ANOTHER stimulus.
"Oh, sorry, the top rate going to 39% didn't help as much as we thought. We need to raise it again...and again...and again if necessary."
Democrats are addicted to other people's money. They can't get enough.
Lol and this is why i say your arguing against your imagination. Hilarious.
And this stimulus bs is hilarious too. CBO says it saved 2 million jobs. To say it did nothing you would have to have something to compare it to. You realize you dont have any stats about what it would have been, right?
They do analysis, but they don't generate their own data. They use data given to them by those who request the analyses.
The deck is stacked from the beginning. The White House has no interest in providing data that might show it in anything less than a flattering light.
You've been played. Pure and simple.
I made no comment about any 8%. Meanwhile, you have presented no evidence that Obama would raise the top tax bracket to 39% and leave it there.You realize that unemployment was over 8% when the stimulus was signed, right? So your little quote about unemployment going over 8% is pointless. its said in like 2008 where estimates are being made on projections of projections of incomplete data.
Stimulus stopped the exodus from the jobs market.
He wouldn't. Guaranteed. Because it wouldn't be enough. Guaranteed.
You really have no concept of the scale of the numbers involved.
LMAO! See, conservatives think we live in a perfect economy!
perfect????
"If they pay a penny less the market signals to them that their wages may not be high enough to compete"
Lol o really? I sort of doubt that theory, and more so when it applies to a labor market. When buying groceries, sure this might be true. But no factory workers is leaving his current $14.99 job for a job somewhere else doing the same thing for $15. Thats impractical. Paying a single penny less doesnt signal that the firm cant compete, its a penny.
try to think please, the first penny leads to the second until finally it is significant enough to cause reaction or movement!! Price signals are the very heart of capitalism. Wal Mart is pennys cheaper but that makes all the difference. Econ 101
Besides, you dont seem to be thinking this through.
odd thing for a liberal to say?
The auto factory is paying its workers better than everyone else? Ok so imagine there are three auto factories, and there probably is. Are they all paying their workers higher than the other factories? Hows that mathematically possible? Do they bid eachother up until each factory is paying their workers $10,000 an hour and trying to out-pay the others? No, thats pretty impractical. Your analysis of wages is seriously lacking. Capitalism is not a system in which people pay their workers as much as they can. Labor is just another commodity, you pay the least amount of money for the highest quality you can get.
yes but it must always be more and more and be the highest amount possible given the ever expanding weath created by capitalism or you lose your best employees to those who share the wealth more. Econ 101. How old are you? Why still learning the basics???
Given that Krugman is a committed propagandist for a socialistic Euro-weenie state in America, that dreck can be taken with a dump truck load of salt.Here's some more data on why the rich are not the ones we need to pamper in order to create jobs:
The Problem - NYTimes.com
I'm interested here not in Krugman's article (although he's always worth reading) but rather in the graph about halfway down.
The only thing obama has said is he wants to raise the top tax rate from 35% to 39%. Everything else is just reverberations in the echo chamber.
actually BO said he is for single payer!!!!!!!
Obama said, in his biography, he gravitated to Marxist professors in college, he had a Marxist preacher best friend for 20 years, said in his auto biography that when he worked on Wall Street he felt as if "he had parachuted behind enemy lines", was more liberal in the Senate the Bernie Sanders( an open socialist) and now, despite 200 years of gov't growth, his deficits will be bigger than all other American presidents combined, and, he also wants perhaps absolute control over health care (already mostly controlled by gov't), banking, and the auto industry.
Through Frank Marshall Davis,( Communist Party number: 47544) Obama had an admitted deep and prolonged relationship with someone who was publicly identified as a member of the Communist Party USA (CPUSA). The record shows that Obama was in Hawaii from 1971-1979, where, at some point in time, he developed a close relationship, almost like a son, with Davis, listening to his "poetry" and getting advice on his career path.
But Obama, in his book, Dreams From My Father, refers to him repeatedly as just "Frank."
Bernie Saunders is a Democrat and an open socialist. Obama is to the left of Saunders based on his voting record in the Senate.
Oleg Klugian (head of KGB in cold war) said that when he wanted to recruit spies he looked among the liberals. When FDR's liberals went to the USSR they came back on a ship named the "Leviathan" to report, "they had seen the future and it worked."
Then of course BO appointed at least 4 communists: Mark Lloyd (supporter of communist revolution in Venezuela) and Van Jones who said "give them the wealth, give them the wealth," and Annita Dunn who said, "Mao is my favorite philosopher" , and Bloom who said, "free markets are nonsense."
Obama: the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties....... it doesnt say what the federal government [our genius founders forgot?] or the state government must do on your behalf.
I think that there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive [Marxist] change.
Obama: "I think we can say that the Constitution reflected an enormous blind spot in this culture that carries on until this day, and that the Framers had that same blind spot."
Obama: the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties....... it doesn't say what the federal government [our genius founders forgot?] or the state government must do on your behalf.
In an article titled "The Impossible is Now Possible: Assessing the Obama Presidency," executive vice chair of the Communist Party United States, Jarvis Tyner hailed the President's "drive to the left." "The health care bill, the stimulus package, the cap-and-trade bill, the elimination of secret elections for union representation-it's a program we dared not dream possible only a year ago," Tyner wrote. "But now it's on the verge of becoming the new blueprint for a truly socialist America."
A quick visit to the CPUSA website yields:
"In some ways last night's State of the Union address by President Obama was a virtuoso performance. There were stirring moments, memorable turns of phrase, humor, a defense of activist government, and proposals that will be welcomed, and surely help, millions of people in need." Obama State of the Union: He got the ball rolling » cpusa
And, if all that is not enough BO wrote a book called " Dreams From my Father". His father was a drunken suicidal Marxist who dreamed to free the world from American imperialism. His mother married 2 communists and urged BO to follow is communist bio dad.
And lets not forget that BO is openly for single payer socialist health care!!
Given that Krugman is a committed propagandist for a socialistic Euro-weenie state in America, that dreck can be taken with a dump truck load of salt.Here's some more data on why the rich are not the ones we need to pamper in order to create jobs:
The Problem - NYTimes.com
I'm interested here not in Krugman's article (although he's always worth reading) but rather in the graph about halfway down.
His bullshit artistry ceased being even marginally interesting the moment he invoked the broken window fallacy to try and put a positive spin on 9/11™.
