Democrats have nothing to offer Americans but division; race and class warfare

[WelfareQueen]

They have lots of taxable income, dumbshit. Because there are lots of them. Again you confuse income and wealth, because you're an ignoramus. They dont pay ANY taxes. In fact they get back more than they pay in. If they're going to benefit from this country and all it offers shouldnt they be paying something? You scream about big corporations not paying their fair share, what about the freeloading bottom 40% of wage earners?

How much income do they take in compared to the other 60%?
Do some basic math.
An Economic Cancer: The Top 1% Earns More Than the Bottom 50%
Income Inequality | Inequality.org
The U.S. ranks around the 30th percentile in income inequality globally, meaning 70% of countries have a more equal income distribution.[4] U.S. federal tax and transfer policies are progressive and therefore reduce income inequality measured after taxes and transfers.[5] Tax and transfer policies together reduced income inequality slightly more in 2011 than in 1979.[1]
The top 1% of income earners received approximately 20% of the pre-tax income in 2013,[22] versus approximately 10% from 1950 to 1980.[2][23][24] The top 1% is not homogeneous, with the very top income households pulling away from others in the top 1%. For example, the top 0.1% of households received approximately 10% of the pre-tax income in 2013, versus approximately 3-4% between 1951-1981.[22][25] Most of the growth in income inequality has been between the middle class and top earners, with the disparity widening the further one goes up in the income distribution.[26] According to IRS data, adjusted gross income (AGI) of $388,900 was required to be in the top 1% in 2011.[27]

To put this change into perspective, if the US had the same income distribution it had in 1979, each family in the bottom 80% of the income distribution would have $11,000 more per year in income on average, or $916 per month.[28] Half of the U.S. population lives in poverty or is low-income, according to U.S. Census data.[29]
The top 1% of income earners received approximately 20% of the pre-tax income in 2013,[22] versus approximately 10% from 1950 to 1980.[2][23][24] The top 1% is not homogeneous, with the very top income households pulling away from others in the top 1%. For example, the top 0.1% of households received approximately 10% of the pre-tax income in 2013, versus approximately 3-4% between 1951-1981.[22][25] Most of the growth in income inequality has been between the middle class and top earners, with the disparity widening the further one goes up in the income distribution.[26] According to IRS data, adjusted gross income (AGI) of $388,900 was required to be in the top 1% in 2011.[27]

To put this change into perspective, if the US had the same income distribution it had in 1979, each family in the bottom 80% of the income distribution would have $11,000 more per year in income on average, or $916 per month.[28] Half of the U.S. population lives in poverty or is low-income, according to U.S. Census data.[29]
U.S. income inequality, on rise for decades, is now highest since 1928
"
In 1928, the top 1% of families received 23.9% of all pretax income, while the bottom 90% received 50.7%. But the Depression and World War II dramatically reshaped the nation’s income distribution: By 1944 the top 1%’s share was down to 11.3%, while the bottom 90% were receiving 67.5%, levels that would remain more or less constant for the next three decades.

But starting in the mid- to late 1970s, the uppermost tier’s income share began rising dramatically, while that of the bottom 90% started to fall. The top 1% took heavy hits from the dot-com crash and the Great Recession but recovered fairly quickly: Saez’s preliminary estimates for 2012 (which will be updated next month) have that group receiving nearly 22.5% of all pretax income, while the bottom 90%’s share is below 50% for the first time ever (49.6%, to be precise).
"

Maybe learn to not resent successful people so much.

This has nothing to do with resenting successful people, these are facts that you are free to look at. Trickle down garbage doesn't work, never has.
"But starting in the mid- to late 1970s, the uppermost tier’s income share began rising dramatically, while that of the bottom 90% started to fall. The top 1% took heavy hits from the dot-com crash and the Great Recession but recovered fairly quickly: Saez’s preliminary estimates for 2012 (which will be updated next month) have that group receiving nearly 22.5% of all pretax income, while the bottom 90%’s share is below 50% for the first time ever (49.6%, to be precise)."
Suck on that.

You realize the problems you mention have accelerated under Obama and his policies? You know that right? Now you are saying the problem is a result of "trickle down" economics. Funny.....but that is a term from the 1980's.

Are you saying Obama's economic policies are "trickle down" economics? What exactly are you saying and why has the problem accelerated under Obama?

You do realize, that bush took office in 2008, almost right when bush dumped the recession on him. We are recovering better then most countries, Obama has tried to raise taxes to alleviate inequality, he has tried to help small businesses, conservatives aren't letting him, or forcing him to make ridiculous compromises. Conservatives don't want to bring home jobs, they don't want to help veterans. His policies aren't trickle down economics, but great job trying to spew idiocy.

In other words.....Obama and his policies have completely failed and the problem mentioned in the OP has greatly accelerated under Obama's watch.

Got it.

 

[rdean]

Take the worse thing about the 90% white Republicans and try to turn it into something Democrat.

 

[David_42]

How much income do they take in compared to the other 60%?
Do some basic math.
An Economic Cancer: The Top 1% Earns More Than the Bottom 50%
Income Inequality | Inequality.org
The U.S. ranks around the 30th percentile in income inequality globally, meaning 70% of countries have a more equal income distribution.[4] U.S. federal tax and transfer policies are progressive and therefore reduce income inequality measured after taxes and transfers.[5] Tax and transfer policies together reduced income inequality slightly more in 2011 than in 1979.[1]
The top 1% of income earners received approximately 20% of the pre-tax income in 2013,[22] versus approximately 10% from 1950 to 1980.[2][23][24] The top 1% is not homogeneous, with the very top income households pulling away from others in the top 1%. For example, the top 0.1% of households received approximately 10% of the pre-tax income in 2013, versus approximately 3-4% between 1951-1981.[22][25] Most of the growth in income inequality has been between the middle class and top earners, with the disparity widening the further one goes up in the income distribution.[26] According to IRS data, adjusted gross income (AGI) of $388,900 was required to be in the top 1% in 2011.[27]

To put this change into perspective, if the US had the same income distribution it had in 1979, each family in the bottom 80% of the income distribution would have $11,000 more per year in income on average, or $916 per month.[28] Half of the U.S. population lives in poverty or is low-income, according to U.S. Census data.[29]
The top 1% of income earners received approximately 20% of the pre-tax income in 2013,[22] versus approximately 10% from 1950 to 1980.[2][23][24] The top 1% is not homogeneous, with the very top income households pulling away from others in the top 1%. For example, the top 0.1% of households received approximately 10% of the pre-tax income in 2013, versus approximately 3-4% between 1951-1981.[22][25] Most of the growth in income inequality has been between the middle class and top earners, with the disparity widening the further one goes up in the income distribution.[26] According to IRS data, adjusted gross income (AGI) of $388,900 was required to be in the top 1% in 2011.[27]

To put this change into perspective, if the US had the same income distribution it had in 1979, each family in the bottom 80% of the income distribution would have $11,000 more per year in income on average, or $916 per month.[28] Half of the U.S. population lives in poverty or is low-income, according to U.S. Census data.[29]
U.S. income inequality, on rise for decades, is now highest since 1928
"
In 1928, the top 1% of families received 23.9% of all pretax income, while the bottom 90% received 50.7%. But the Depression and World War II dramatically reshaped the nation’s income distribution: By 1944 the top 1%’s share was down to 11.3%, while the bottom 90% were receiving 67.5%, levels that would remain more or less constant for the next three decades.

But starting in the mid- to late 1970s, the uppermost tier’s income share began rising dramatically, while that of the bottom 90% started to fall. The top 1% took heavy hits from the dot-com crash and the Great Recession but recovered fairly quickly: Saez’s preliminary estimates for 2012 (which will be updated next month) have that group receiving nearly 22.5% of all pretax income, while the bottom 90%’s share is below 50% for the first time ever (49.6%, to be precise).
"

Maybe learn to not resent successful people so much.

This has nothing to do with resenting successful people, these are facts that you are free to look at. Trickle down garbage doesn't work, never has.
"But starting in the mid- to late 1970s, the uppermost tier’s income share began rising dramatically, while that of the bottom 90% started to fall. The top 1% took heavy hits from the dot-com crash and the Great Recession but recovered fairly quickly: Saez’s preliminary estimates for 2012 (which will be updated next month) have that group receiving nearly 22.5% of all pretax income, while the bottom 90%’s share is below 50% for the first time ever (49.6%, to be precise)."
Suck on that.

You realize the problems you mention have accelerated under Obama and his policies? You know that right? Now you are saying the problem is a result of "trickle down" economics. Funny.....but that is a term from the 1980's.

Are you saying Obama's economic policies are "trickle down" economics? What exactly are you saying and why has the problem accelerated under Obama?

You do realize, that bush took office in 2008, almost right when bush dumped the recession on him. We are recovering better then most countries, Obama has tried to raise taxes to alleviate inequality, he has tried to help small businesses, conservatives aren't letting him, or forcing him to make ridiculous compromises. Conservatives don't want to bring home jobs, they don't want to help veterans. His policies aren't trickle down economics, but great job trying to spew idiocy.

In other words.....Obama and his policies have completely failed and the problem mentioned in the OP has greatly accelerated under Obama's watch.

Got it.

How can you judge Obama based on policies republicans wouldn't let him pass? Fucking idiot,

 

[David_42]

How much income do they take in compared to the other 60%?
Do some basic math.
An Economic Cancer: The Top 1% Earns More Than the Bottom 50%
Income Inequality | Inequality.org
The U.S. ranks around the 30th percentile in income inequality globally, meaning 70% of countries have a more equal income distribution.[4] U.S. federal tax and transfer policies are progressive and therefore reduce income inequality measured after taxes and transfers.[5] Tax and transfer policies together reduced income inequality slightly more in 2011 than in 1979.[1]
The top 1% of income earners received approximately 20% of the pre-tax income in 2013,[22] versus approximately 10% from 1950 to 1980.[2][23][24] The top 1% is not homogeneous, with the very top income households pulling away from others in the top 1%. For example, the top 0.1% of households received approximately 10% of the pre-tax income in 2013, versus approximately 3-4% between 1951-1981.[22][25] Most of the growth in income inequality has been between the middle class and top earners, with the disparity widening the further one goes up in the income distribution.[26] According to IRS data, adjusted gross income (AGI) of $388,900 was required to be in the top 1% in 2011.[27]

To put this change into perspective, if the US had the same income distribution it had in 1979, each family in the bottom 80% of the income distribution would have $11,000 more per year in income on average, or $916 per month.[28] Half of the U.S. population lives in poverty or is low-income, according to U.S. Census data.[29]
The top 1% of income earners received approximately 20% of the pre-tax income in 2013,[22] versus approximately 10% from 1950 to 1980.[2][23][24] The top 1% is not homogeneous, with the very top income households pulling away from others in the top 1%. For example, the top 0.1% of households received approximately 10% of the pre-tax income in 2013, versus approximately 3-4% between 1951-1981.[22][25] Most of the growth in income inequality has been between the middle class and top earners, with the disparity widening the further one goes up in the income distribution.[26] According to IRS data, adjusted gross income (AGI) of $388,900 was required to be in the top 1% in 2011.[27]

To put this change into perspective, if the US had the same income distribution it had in 1979, each family in the bottom 80% of the income distribution would have $11,000 more per year in income on average, or $916 per month.[28] Half of the U.S. population lives in poverty or is low-income, according to U.S. Census data.[29]
U.S. income inequality, on rise for decades, is now highest since 1928
"
In 1928, the top 1% of families received 23.9% of all pretax income, while the bottom 90% received 50.7%. But the Depression and World War II dramatically reshaped the nation’s income distribution: By 1944 the top 1%’s share was down to 11.3%, while the bottom 90% were receiving 67.5%, levels that would remain more or less constant for the next three decades.

But starting in the mid- to late 1970s, the uppermost tier’s income share began rising dramatically, while that of the bottom 90% started to fall. The top 1% took heavy hits from the dot-com crash and the Great Recession but recovered fairly quickly: Saez’s preliminary estimates for 2012 (which will be updated next month) have that group receiving nearly 22.5% of all pretax income, while the bottom 90%’s share is below 50% for the first time ever (49.6%, to be precise).
"

Maybe learn to not resent successful people so much.

This has nothing to do with resenting successful people, these are facts that you are free to look at. Trickle down garbage doesn't work, never has.
"But starting in the mid- to late 1970s, the uppermost tier’s income share began rising dramatically, while that of the bottom 90% started to fall. The top 1% took heavy hits from the dot-com crash and the Great Recession but recovered fairly quickly: Saez’s preliminary estimates for 2012 (which will be updated next month) have that group receiving nearly 22.5% of all pretax income, while the bottom 90%’s share is below 50% for the first time ever (49.6%, to be precise)."
Suck on that.

You realize the problems you mention have accelerated under Obama and his policies? You know that right? Now you are saying the problem is a result of "trickle down" economics. Funny.....but that is a term from the 1980's.

Are you saying Obama's economic policies are "trickle down" economics? What exactly are you saying and why has the problem accelerated under Obama?

You do realize, that bush took office in 2008, almost right when bush dumped the recession on him. We are recovering better then most countries, Obama has tried to raise taxes to alleviate inequality, he has tried to help small businesses, conservatives aren't letting him, or forcing him to make ridiculous compromises. Conservatives don't want to bring home jobs, they don't want to help veterans. His policies aren't trickle down economics, but great job trying to spew idiocy.

Wow, blind much?
Household income was higher the day Bush left office than it is today after 8 years of Democrat policies. Teh debt is 80% higher today than the day Bush left office. Dependence on gov't programs is higher today than the day Bush left office. No, we arent recovering better than other countries. The opposite in fact.
There is no such thing as "trickle down economics." You couldnt even define it.

Bush left office right after the recession started, one of the worst since the Great Depression. Obama has made our recovery better then many countries who were affected.

 

[bedowin62]

Take the worse thing about the 90% white Republicans and try to turn it into something Democrat.

the whiteness in the Republican Party didnt cause welfare and food stamps to reach record levels under obama leftard

white republicans arent to blame for obama PERSONALLY delaying his own signature healthcare law a dozen times and making FIFTY-TWO changes to it

libs are losers who lie to themselves

 

[bedowin62]

Maybe learn to not resent successful people so much.

This has nothing to do with resenting successful people, these are facts that you are free to look at. Trickle down garbage doesn't work, never has.
"But starting in the mid- to late 1970s, the uppermost tier’s income share began rising dramatically, while that of the bottom 90% started to fall. The top 1% took heavy hits from the dot-com crash and the Great Recession but recovered fairly quickly: Saez’s preliminary estimates for 2012 (which will be updated next month) have that group receiving nearly 22.5% of all pretax income, while the bottom 90%’s share is below 50% for the first time ever (49.6%, to be precise)."
Suck on that.

You realize the problems you mention have accelerated under Obama and his policies? You know that right? Now you are saying the problem is a result of "trickle down" economics. Funny.....but that is a term from the 1980's.

Are you saying Obama's economic policies are "trickle down" economics? What exactly are you saying and why has the problem accelerated under Obama?

You do realize, that bush took office in 2008, almost right when bush dumped the recession on him. We are recovering better then most countries, Obama has tried to raise taxes to alleviate inequality, he has tried to help small businesses, conservatives aren't letting him, or forcing him to make ridiculous compromises. Conservatives don't want to bring home jobs, they don't want to help veterans. His policies aren't trickle down economics, but great job trying to spew idiocy.

Wow, blind much?
Household income was higher the day Bush left office than it is today after 8 years of Democrat policies. Teh debt is 80% higher today than the day Bush left office. Dependence on gov't programs is higher today than the day Bush left office. No, we arent recovering better than other countries. The opposite in fact.
There is no such thing as "trickle down economics." You couldnt even define it.

Bush left office right after the recession started, one of the worst since the Great Depression. Obama has made our recovery better then many countries who were affected.

good point idiot; i wish you people would remember what you just said the next time you're ranting about "trickle-down" or Republican "obstructionism" and bragging how great the European socialist democracies are. our economy recovered IN SPITE OF OBAMA NOT BECAUSE OF HIM; or people like you that see the "other countries who were affected" as having a better system than ours.

thanks for playing

 

[The Rabbi]

Maybe learn to not resent successful people so much.

This has nothing to do with resenting successful people, these are facts that you are free to look at. Trickle down garbage doesn't work, never has.
"But starting in the mid- to late 1970s, the uppermost tier’s income share began rising dramatically, while that of the bottom 90% started to fall. The top 1% took heavy hits from the dot-com crash and the Great Recession but recovered fairly quickly: Saez’s preliminary estimates for 2012 (which will be updated next month) have that group receiving nearly 22.5% of all pretax income, while the bottom 90%’s share is below 50% for the first time ever (49.6%, to be precise)."
Suck on that.

You realize the problems you mention have accelerated under Obama and his policies? You know that right? Now you are saying the problem is a result of "trickle down" economics. Funny.....but that is a term from the 1980's.

Are you saying Obama's economic policies are "trickle down" economics? What exactly are you saying and why has the problem accelerated under Obama?

You do realize, that bush took office in 2008, almost right when bush dumped the recession on him. We are recovering better then most countries, Obama has tried to raise taxes to alleviate inequality, he has tried to help small businesses, conservatives aren't letting him, or forcing him to make ridiculous compromises. Conservatives don't want to bring home jobs, they don't want to help veterans. His policies aren't trickle down economics, but great job trying to spew idiocy.

In other words.....Obama and his policies have completely failed and the problem mentioned in the OP has greatly accelerated under Obama's watch.

Got it.

How can you judge Obama based on policies republicans wouldn't let him pass? Fucking idiot,

So Obama has spent nearly 8 years in the White House doing nothing?
It is hysterical: When people point out that Dem policies have failed libs scream they were blocked by the gOP. When people point out Obama and the Dems havent been effective libs point to a laundy list of laws and policies enacted by Dems.
Cant have it both ways.

 

[Statistikhengst]

This has nothing to do with resenting successful people, these are facts that you are free to look at. Trickle down garbage doesn't work, never has.
"But starting in the mid- to late 1970s, the uppermost tier’s income share began rising dramatically, while that of the bottom 90% started to fall. The top 1% took heavy hits from the dot-com crash and the Great Recession but recovered fairly quickly: Saez’s preliminary estimates for 2012 (which will be updated next month) have that group receiving nearly 22.5% of all pretax income, while the bottom 90%’s share is below 50% for the first time ever (49.6%, to be precise)."
Suck on that.

You realize the problems you mention have accelerated under Obama and his policies? You know that right? Now you are saying the problem is a result of "trickle down" economics. Funny.....but that is a term from the 1980's.

Are you saying Obama's economic policies are "trickle down" economics? What exactly are you saying and why has the problem accelerated under Obama?

You do realize, that bush took office in 2008, almost right when bush dumped the recession on him. We are recovering better then most countries, Obama has tried to raise taxes to alleviate inequality, he has tried to help small businesses, conservatives aren't letting him, or forcing him to make ridiculous compromises. Conservatives don't want to bring home jobs, they don't want to help veterans. His policies aren't trickle down economics, but great job trying to spew idiocy.

Wow, blind much?
Household income was higher the day Bush left office than it is today after 8 years of Democrat policies. Teh debt is 80% higher today than the day Bush left office. Dependence on gov't programs is higher today than the day Bush left office. No, we arent recovering better than other countries. The opposite in fact.
There is no such thing as "trickle down economics." You couldnt even define it.

Bush left office right after the recession started, one of the worst since the Great Depression. Obama has made our recovery better then many countries who were affected.

good point idiot; i wish you people would remember what you just said the next time you're ranting about "trickle-down" or Republican "obstructionism" and bragging how great the European socialist democracies are. our economy recovered IN SPITE OF OBAMA NOT BECAUSE OF HIM; or people like you that see the "other countries who were affected" as having a better system than ours.

thanks for playing

You always write such comically obtuse, yet totally false bullshit.

Fun.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

 

[The Rabbi]

Maybe learn to not resent successful people so much.

This has nothing to do with resenting successful people, these are facts that you are free to look at. Trickle down garbage doesn't work, never has.
"But starting in the mid- to late 1970s, the uppermost tier’s income share began rising dramatically, while that of the bottom 90% started to fall. The top 1% took heavy hits from the dot-com crash and the Great Recession but recovered fairly quickly: Saez’s preliminary estimates for 2012 (which will be updated next month) have that group receiving nearly 22.5% of all pretax income, while the bottom 90%’s share is below 50% for the first time ever (49.6%, to be precise)."
Suck on that.

You realize the problems you mention have accelerated under Obama and his policies? You know that right? Now you are saying the problem is a result of "trickle down" economics. Funny.....but that is a term from the 1980's.

Are you saying Obama's economic policies are "trickle down" economics? What exactly are you saying and why has the problem accelerated under Obama?

You do realize, that bush took office in 2008, almost right when bush dumped the recession on him. We are recovering better then most countries, Obama has tried to raise taxes to alleviate inequality, he has tried to help small businesses, conservatives aren't letting him, or forcing him to make ridiculous compromises. Conservatives don't want to bring home jobs, they don't want to help veterans. His policies aren't trickle down economics, but great job trying to spew idiocy.

Wow, blind much?
Household income was higher the day Bush left office than it is today after 8 years of Democrat policies. Teh debt is 80% higher today than the day Bush left office. Dependence on gov't programs is higher today than the day Bush left office. No, we arent recovering better than other countries. The opposite in fact.
There is no such thing as "trickle down economics." You couldnt even define it.

Bush left office right after the recession started, one of the worst since the Great Depression. Obama has made our recovery better then many countries who were affected.

This is wrong. Our recovery has lagged both other countries' and our own historical record.

 

[The Rabbi]

You realize the problems you mention have accelerated under Obama and his policies? You know that right? Now you are saying the problem is a result of "trickle down" economics. Funny.....but that is a term from the 1980's.

Are you saying Obama's economic policies are "trickle down" economics? What exactly are you saying and why has the problem accelerated under Obama?

You do realize, that bush took office in 2008, almost right when bush dumped the recession on him. We are recovering better then most countries, Obama has tried to raise taxes to alleviate inequality, he has tried to help small businesses, conservatives aren't letting him, or forcing him to make ridiculous compromises. Conservatives don't want to bring home jobs, they don't want to help veterans. His policies aren't trickle down economics, but great job trying to spew idiocy.

Wow, blind much?
Household income was higher the day Bush left office than it is today after 8 years of Democrat policies. Teh debt is 80% higher today than the day Bush left office. Dependence on gov't programs is higher today than the day Bush left office. No, we arent recovering better than other countries. The opposite in fact.
There is no such thing as "trickle down economics." You couldnt even define it.

Bush left office right after the recession started, one of the worst since the Great Depression. Obama has made our recovery better then many countries who were affected.

good point idiot; i wish you people would remember what you just said the next time you're ranting about "trickle-down" or Republican "obstructionism" and bragging how great the European socialist democracies are. our economy recovered IN SPITE OF OBAMA NOT BECAUSE OF HIM; or people like you that see the "other countries who were affected" as having a better system than ours.

thanks for playing

You always write such comically obtuse, yet totally false bullshit.

Fun.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

You always write such content free mindless invective. Whether you're writing as "David" or as "Statistheilhitler."

 

[bedowin62]

You realize the problems you mention have accelerated under Obama and his policies? You know that right? Now you are saying the problem is a result of "trickle down" economics. Funny.....but that is a term from the 1980's.

Are you saying Obama's economic policies are "trickle down" economics? What exactly are you saying and why has the problem accelerated under Obama?

You do realize, that bush took office in 2008, almost right when bush dumped the recession on him. We are recovering better then most countries, Obama has tried to raise taxes to alleviate inequality, he has tried to help small businesses, conservatives aren't letting him, or forcing him to make ridiculous compromises. Conservatives don't want to bring home jobs, they don't want to help veterans. His policies aren't trickle down economics, but great job trying to spew idiocy.

Wow, blind much?
Household income was higher the day Bush left office than it is today after 8 years of Democrat policies. Teh debt is 80% higher today than the day Bush left office. Dependence on gov't programs is higher today than the day Bush left office. No, we arent recovering better than other countries. The opposite in fact.
There is no such thing as "trickle down economics." You couldnt even define it.

Bush left office right after the recession started, one of the worst since the Great Depression. Obama has made our recovery better then many countries who were affected.

good point idiot; i wish you people would remember what you just said the next time you're ranting about "trickle-down" or Republican "obstructionism" and bragging how great the European socialist democracies are. our economy recovered IN SPITE OF OBAMA NOT BECAUSE OF HIM; or people like you that see the "other countries who were affected" as having a better system than ours.

thanks for playing

You always write such comically obtuse, yet totally false bullshit.

Fun.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

you always insult what you cant rebut. it's a sign of surrender to me, idiot. what part of what i posted isnt true????

 

[David_42]

This has nothing to do with resenting successful people, these are facts that you are free to look at. Trickle down garbage doesn't work, never has.
"But starting in the mid- to late 1970s, the uppermost tier’s income share began rising dramatically, while that of the bottom 90% started to fall. The top 1% took heavy hits from the dot-com crash and the Great Recession but recovered fairly quickly: Saez’s preliminary estimates for 2012 (which will be updated next month) have that group receiving nearly 22.5% of all pretax income, while the bottom 90%’s share is below 50% for the first time ever (49.6%, to be precise)."
Suck on that.

You realize the problems you mention have accelerated under Obama and his policies? You know that right? Now you are saying the problem is a result of "trickle down" economics. Funny.....but that is a term from the 1980's.

Are you saying Obama's economic policies are "trickle down" economics? What exactly are you saying and why has the problem accelerated under Obama?

You do realize, that bush took office in 2008, almost right when bush dumped the recession on him. We are recovering better then most countries, Obama has tried to raise taxes to alleviate inequality, he has tried to help small businesses, conservatives aren't letting him, or forcing him to make ridiculous compromises. Conservatives don't want to bring home jobs, they don't want to help veterans. His policies aren't trickle down economics, but great job trying to spew idiocy.

In other words.....Obama and his policies have completely failed and the problem mentioned in the OP has greatly accelerated under Obama's watch.

Got it.

How can you judge Obama based on policies republicans wouldn't let him pass? Fucking idiot,

So Obama has spent nearly 8 years in the White House doing nothing?
It is hysterical: When people point out that Dem policies have failed libs scream they were blocked by the gOP. When people point out Obama and the Dems havent been effective libs point to a laundy list of laws and policies enacted by Dems.
Cant have it both ways.

Oh, he's done plenty, it's why we haven't tripled our debt like Ronnie Reagan.

 

[Esmeralda]

The left also uses selective morality. Example: The global warming shit is a moral outrage, but "crunching" babies and selling their organs is "a woman's right to choose."

Funny they're too stupid to see the idiocy of argument.

I have a question for you. When you see a neighbor lady take a strange man into her house. Do you worry as much about that as you seem to worry about other people's business here? Get A Life And STFU!!

 

[bedowin62]

stop trying to hurl insults and be a man for once.
it isnt rocket science loser
is it your position that America under obama is in better shape then the european socialist democracies both you and obama say we still need to make changes to be more like??

YES OR NO??

 

[bedowin62]

You realize the problems you mention have accelerated under Obama and his policies? You know that right? Now you are saying the problem is a result of "trickle down" economics. Funny.....but that is a term from the 1980's.

Are you saying Obama's economic policies are "trickle down" economics? What exactly are you saying and why has the problem accelerated under Obama?

You do realize, that bush took office in 2008, almost right when bush dumped the recession on him. We are recovering better then most countries, Obama has tried to raise taxes to alleviate inequality, he has tried to help small businesses, conservatives aren't letting him, or forcing him to make ridiculous compromises. Conservatives don't want to bring home jobs, they don't want to help veterans. His policies aren't trickle down economics, but great job trying to spew idiocy.

In other words.....Obama and his policies have completely failed and the problem mentioned in the OP has greatly accelerated under Obama's watch.

Got it.

How can you judge Obama based on policies republicans wouldn't let him pass? Fucking idiot,

So Obama has spent nearly 8 years in the White House doing nothing?
It is hysterical: When people point out that Dem policies have failed libs scream they were blocked by the gOP. When people point out Obama and the Dems havent been effective libs point to a laundy list of laws and policies enacted by Dems.
Cant have it both ways.

Oh, he's done plenty, it's why we haven't tripled our debt like Ronnie Reagan.

it's so boring reminding you Democrats voted for every one of Reagan's polices;; W Bush's too!

lmao

 

[NYcarbineer]

Take the worse thing about the 90% white Republicans and try to turn it into something Democrat.

the whiteness in the Republican Party didnt cause welfare and food stamps to reach record levels under obama leftard

white republicans arent to blame for obama PERSONALLY delaying his own signature healthcare law a dozen times and making FIFTY-TWO changes to it

libs are losers who lie to themselves

Why didn't the Republicans repeal Obamacare like they promised?

 

[The Rabbi]

You realize the problems you mention have accelerated under Obama and his policies? You know that right? Now you are saying the problem is a result of "trickle down" economics. Funny.....but that is a term from the 1980's.

Are you saying Obama's economic policies are "trickle down" economics? What exactly are you saying and why has the problem accelerated under Obama?

You do realize, that bush took office in 2008, almost right when bush dumped the recession on him. We are recovering better then most countries, Obama has tried to raise taxes to alleviate inequality, he has tried to help small businesses, conservatives aren't letting him, or forcing him to make ridiculous compromises. Conservatives don't want to bring home jobs, they don't want to help veterans. His policies aren't trickle down economics, but great job trying to spew idiocy.

In other words.....Obama and his policies have completely failed and the problem mentioned in the OP has greatly accelerated under Obama's watch.

Got it.

How can you judge Obama based on policies republicans wouldn't let him pass? Fucking idiot,

So Obama has spent nearly 8 years in the White House doing nothing?
It is hysterical: When people point out that Dem policies have failed libs scream they were blocked by the gOP. When people point out Obama and the Dems havent been effective libs point to a laundy list of laws and policies enacted by Dems.
Cant have it both ways.

Oh, he's done plenty, it's why we haven't tripled our debt like Ronnie Reagan.

We increased our debt by more than Reagan's entire 8 years of budgets.

 

[David_42]

You do realize, that bush took office in 2008, almost right when bush dumped the recession on him. We are recovering better then most countries, Obama has tried to raise taxes to alleviate inequality, he has tried to help small businesses, conservatives aren't letting him, or forcing him to make ridiculous compromises. Conservatives don't want to bring home jobs, they don't want to help veterans. His policies aren't trickle down economics, but great job trying to spew idiocy.

In other words.....Obama and his policies have completely failed and the problem mentioned in the OP has greatly accelerated under Obama's watch.

Got it.

How can you judge Obama based on policies republicans wouldn't let him pass? Fucking idiot,

So Obama has spent nearly 8 years in the White House doing nothing?
It is hysterical: When people point out that Dem policies have failed libs scream they were blocked by the gOP. When people point out Obama and the Dems havent been effective libs point to a laundy list of laws and policies enacted by Dems.
Cant have it both ways.

Oh, he's done plenty, it's why we haven't tripled our debt like Ronnie Reagan.

We increased our debt by more than Reagan's entire 8 years of budgets.

Yeah, it's not the 80s anymore buddy, care to mention how much bush increased the debt?

 

[The Rabbi]

In other words.....Obama and his policies have completely failed and the problem mentioned in the OP has greatly accelerated under Obama's watch.

Got it.

How can you judge Obama based on policies republicans wouldn't let him pass? Fucking idiot,

So Obama has spent nearly 8 years in the White House doing nothing?
It is hysterical: When people point out that Dem policies have failed libs scream they were blocked by the gOP. When people point out Obama and the Dems havent been effective libs point to a laundy list of laws and policies enacted by Dems.
Cant have it both ways.

Oh, he's done plenty, it's why we haven't tripled our debt like Ronnie Reagan.

We increased our debt by more than Reagan's entire 8 years of budgets.

Yeah, it's not the 80s anymore buddy, care to mention how much bush increased the debt?

Not by nearly as much as Obama did.

 

[Campbell]

there are record amounts of WORKING-AGE and ABLE-BODIED Americans not participating in the labor market
obama's unemployment number is a JOKE; and the most disgusting losers are people too brainwashed and ignorant to think for themselve and admit the truth

libs are losers who lie to themselves

66 consecutive months of job growth....'course coming off a near depression leaves a lot of room for improvement. If George W. Bush had not handed nearly $800 billion dollars to the banks he would have left another great depression. When Obama took the helm this great country was bleeding off more than 750,000 jobs a month.