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.
It's total Pubcrappe, Pubtroll.link?the top 1% pay 40% of all the personal federal income tax and 50% of state budgets in many states including NY and CA. This of course is just another soviet mess wherein we waste our seed corn or investment capital. A liberal will lack the IQ to understand.
the illiterate liberal does not how to use google!!!
Do you think (err, of course not) do you believe attacking others and calling them stupid or illiterate makes you appear intelligent? It doesn't! And, posting ad hominems and never posting anything of substance makes you appear ridiculous.
She keeps making points against "Trickle Down", gotta love Elizabeth Warren.
Elizabeth Warren Fights Back Against the Magical Accounting of Trickle-Down Economics Mother Jones
Elizabeth Warren says "America's middle class is in deep trouble." Although general economic indicators are on the rise, the Massachusetts senator argued in a speech Wednesday morning, pay has stagnated for all but the richest Americans—and trickle-down voodoo economics and loose Wall Street regulation are to blame. And although Warren has given every indication that she's happy to remain in the Senate and pass on liberals' hopes that she'll run for president in 2016, her speech—at an AFL-CIO conference on wages—had the tone of a presidential campaign barnstormer.
Warren kicked off her address by noting that the current economic recovery, while real, hasn't helped most Americans. The stock market's up, but half the country doesn't own any stocks. Inflation is low, but that doesn't matter for millennials burdened by overwhelming student debt. Corporate profits have risen, but that hardly matters to people who work at Walmart and are paid so little that they still need food stamps, Warren said.
<more>
this is the same imbecile who (like Obumbler has maintained) said THIS:There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own. Nobody. You built a factory out there? Good for you. But I want to be clear: you moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for; you hired workers the rest of us paid to educate; you were safe in your factory because of police forces and fire forces that the rest of us paid for. You didn’t have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory, and hire someone to protect against this, because of the work the rest of us did. Now look, you built a factory and it turned into something terrific, or a great idea? God bless. Keep a big hunk of it. But part of the underlying social contract is you take a hunk of that and pay forward for the next kid who comes along.
Such ^ vapid commentary raises an important question.
Why does anybody, even a drooling sycophant lolberal, take that Elizabeth Warren, the mutant dumbshit, seriously?
Some take you seriously, and many, many, many more take her seriously than take you so. Most find you silly and trite. So trite it is not worth commenting on your ridiculous example.
Now THERE'S a "compelling argument," since many many more know her than know me, and there are lots of brain damaged modern American lolberals who lap up the pablum imbecility she spouts as though it was something of value.
And you are wrong and a moron in any event. Some dishrag lightweights such as you find me silly and trite. I will try real hard to give a shit about the opinions of assholes such as you. someday.
But the "ridiculous" example I offered were her own words.
You might want to pretend that you can defend that bullshit, but let's face facts. You couldn't even if you were smart.
And you aren't.
if so why so afriad to tell us?? What are you so afriad of?I know what Obama meant by his comment,
Do you think (err, of course not) do you believe attacking others and calling them stupid or illiterate makes you appear intelligent? It doesn't! And, posting ad hominems and never posting anything of substance makes you appear ridiculous.
dear if you find the 3000 year old conservative intellectual canon lacking please say exactly where or simply admit you lack the IQ to be here. Thanks
Do you think (err, of course not) do you believe attacking others and calling them stupid or illiterate makes you appear intelligent? It doesn't! And, posting ad hominems and never posting anything of substance makes you appear ridiculous.
dear if you find the 3000 year old conservative intellectual canon lacking please say exactly where or simply admit you lack the IQ to be here. Thanks
Oh, Fuck you. I forget, a piece of shit like you doesn't deserve a response other than a very sincere Fuck you. Is that better dear?
"GHW Bush added less than a trillion to the deficit"
President George H.W. Bush.
Jan. 20, 1989*: $2,697,957, 000,000
Jan. 20, 1993 $4,188,092,107,183.60
Sorry, meant to say HWBush only added about 60% in his 4 years, where Reagan had tripled it and HW 's son, Dubya had doubled the debt. Mostly inheriting Ronnie's failed voodooo economics and failed S&L crisis where Ronnie ignored the regulator warnings!!!
YES, IN CON WORLD $1.5 TRILLION IS 'LESS THAN $1 TRILLION!!!
National Debt by President LBJ to Obama - TheStreet
YES, IN CON WORLD $1.5 TRILLION IS 'LESS THAN $1 TRILLION!!!
Historical Tables The White House
According to the White House, table 1.1, it was less than a trillion.
Maybe Obama altered the numbers? LOL!
Perhaps understand the difference of deficits versus debt Bubba? Deficits are ONLY the amounts the yearly budget needs to balance revenues in and payments out. Debt can increase WHEN EXCESS PAYMENTS FROM PAYROLL TAXES COME IN, BUT LEAVE SMALLER DEFICITS!
Excess payroll taxes ARE income to the budget, BUT ADDS INTRA GOV'T debt to the books!
lol
Perhaps understand the difference of deficits versus debt Bubba?
If you add the 4 years of deficits, you'll have the added debt after 4 years, Doofus.
Debt can increase WHEN EXCESS PAYMENTS FROM PAYROLL TAXES COME IN, BUT LEAVE SMALLER DEFICITS!
Of course, we're talking about gross debt. Just like your earlier chart.
Excess payroll taxes ARE income to the budget, BUT ADDS INTRA GOV'T debt to the books!
Of course. Do you imagine you've discovered something new? Maybe new to you. LOL!
"If you add the 4 years of deficits, you'll have the added debt after 4 years, Doofus."
REALLY? REALLY? lol. A deficit is ONLY the difference between what the Gov't spends and ALL monies coming in. Since Reagan increased SS taxes 60% the payroll taxes were HUGE and wiped out much of Ronnie's, Poppy's Clinton AND Dubya's DEFICITS, BUT STILL ADDED TO THE DEBT BECAUSE THEY BECAME INTRA GOV'T LOANS, LOL
GROW A BRAIN BUBBA
Since Reagan increased SS taxes 60%
Social Security History
The Social Security Administration says you're a liar.
OASDI rates went from 5.4% to 6.2%.
Do you think (err, of course not) do you believe attacking others and calling them stupid or illiterate makes you appear intelligent? It doesn't! And, posting ad hominems and never posting anything of substance makes you appear ridiculous.
dear if you find the 3000 year old conservative intellectual canon lacking please say exactly where or simply admit you lack the IQ to be here. Thanks
Oh, Fuck you. I forget, a piece of shit like you doesn't deserve a response other than a very sincere Fuck you. Is that better dear?
translation: as a typical liberal I'm too stupid to debate!. Ever see a conservative afriad to debate? What does that teach you?
BUDGET
$100 A YEAR COMING IN
$101 GOING OUT
Deficit of $1 , BUT if $10 of the money coming in was PAYROLL taxes to pay for SS let's say, you grew your debt by $11 dollars. Have a 5th grader explain it to you Bubba
In your simplistic example, $90 came in thru income, business, import taxes and fees, etc.
$10 came in thru payroll taxes.
Spending was $101.
Your debt increased by $1, because your spending was more than your income.
Get an unrelated 5th grader to explain it to you. Doofus.
And the $10 that went into the budget BUT actually bought US treasury bonds (debt)? lol
And the $10 that went into the budget BUT actually bought US treasury bonds (debt)? lol
Still hilarious that you somehow think the government doesn't spend the money they raise by selling Treasury bonds.
Do you think the proceeds of bonds are simply put in a mattress? What do you think should be the purpose of Treasury Bonds, municipal bonds and private sector bonds?
Do you think the proceeds of bonds are simply put in a mattress?
No I don't. I think the proceeds are spent. Sometimes on useful things. Sometimes on wasteful things.
And do you think bonds are intentionally spent on wasteful things? And if you do, do you believe it is always government who does so? And if so, why?
Do you think (err, of course not) do you believe attacking others and calling them stupid or illiterate makes you appear intelligent? It doesn't! And, posting ad hominems and never posting anything of substance makes you appear ridiculous.
dear if you find the 3000 year old conservative intellectual canon lacking please say exactly where or simply admit you lack the IQ to be here. Thanks
Oh, Fuck you. I forget, a piece of shit like you doesn't deserve a response other than a very sincere Fuck you. Is that better dear?
translation: as a typical liberal I'm too stupid to debate!. Ever see a conservative afriad to debate? What does that teach you?
You're a little slow: "F U C K Y O U"!
And the $10 that went into the budget BUT actually bought US treasury bonds (debt)? lol
And the $10 that went into the budget BUT actually bought US treasury bonds (debt)? lol
Still hilarious that you somehow think the government doesn't spend the money they raise by selling Treasury bonds.
Do you think the proceeds of bonds are simply put in a mattress? What do you think should be the purpose of Treasury Bonds, municipal bonds and private sector bonds?
Do you think the proceeds of bonds are simply put in a mattress?
No I don't. I think the proceeds are spent. Sometimes on useful things. Sometimes on wasteful things.
And do you think bonds are intentionally spent on wasteful things? And if you do, do you believe it is always government who does so? And if so, why?
And do you think bonds are intentionally spent on wasteful things?
Yes, I believe government bonds are intentionally spent on many wasteful things.
And if you do, do you believe it is always government who does so?
Of course not. Many corporations make stupid, wasteful spending decisions.
YES, IN CON WORLD $1.5 TRILLION IS 'LESS THAN $1 TRILLION!!!
Historical Tables The White House
According to the White House, table 1.1, it was less than a trillion.
Maybe Obama altered the numbers? LOL!
Perhaps understand the difference of deficits versus debt Bubba? Deficits are ONLY the amounts the yearly budget needs to balance revenues in and payments out. Debt can increase WHEN EXCESS PAYMENTS FROM PAYROLL TAXES COME IN, BUT LEAVE SMALLER DEFICITS!
Excess payroll taxes ARE income to the budget, BUT ADDS INTRA GOV'T debt to the books!
lol
Perhaps understand the difference of deficits versus debt Bubba?
If you add the 4 years of deficits, you'll have the added debt after 4 years, Doofus.
Debt can increase WHEN EXCESS PAYMENTS FROM PAYROLL TAXES COME IN, BUT LEAVE SMALLER DEFICITS!
Of course, we're talking about gross debt. Just like your earlier chart.
Excess payroll taxes ARE income to the budget, BUT ADDS INTRA GOV'T debt to the books!
Of course. Do you imagine you've discovered something new? Maybe new to you. LOL!
"If you add the 4 years of deficits, you'll have the added debt after 4 years, Doofus."
REALLY? REALLY? lol. A deficit is ONLY the difference between what the Gov't spends and ALL monies coming in. Since Reagan increased SS taxes 60% the payroll taxes were HUGE and wiped out much of Ronnie's, Poppy's Clinton AND Dubya's DEFICITS, BUT STILL ADDED TO THE DEBT BECAUSE THEY BECAME INTRA GOV'T LOANS, LOL
GROW A BRAIN BUBBA
Since Reagan increased SS taxes 60%
Social Security History
The Social Security Administration says you're a liar.
OASDI rates went from 5.4% to 6.2%.
Greenspan commission? lol How about an actual law versus recommendation? lol
Weird I guess when taxes for the self employed doubled THAT didn't count OR the employers side which ALSO went up??lol
Total receipts SS
1982 $147,913 BILLION (PRE Reagan's tax increase on the bottom 90% of US as he cut taxes for the rich)
1989 $ 289,448Billion
Trust Fund Data
And the $10 that went into the budget BUT actually bought US treasury bonds (debt)? lol
Still hilarious that you somehow think the government doesn't spend the money they raise by selling Treasury bonds.
Do you think the proceeds of bonds are simply put in a mattress? What do you think should be the purpose of Treasury Bonds, municipal bonds and private sector bonds?
Do you think the proceeds of bonds are simply put in a mattress?
No I don't. I think the proceeds are spent. Sometimes on useful things. Sometimes on wasteful things.
And do you think bonds are intentionally spent on wasteful things? And if you do, do you believe it is always government who does so? And if so, why?
And do you think bonds are intentionally spent on wasteful things?
Yes, I believe government bonds are intentionally spent on many wasteful things.
And if you do, do you believe it is always government who does so?
Of course not. Many corporations make stupid, wasteful spending decisions.
You weren't clear, you claim corporations, "make stupid, wasteful spending decisions" and government, "intentionally". Can you provide examples? We know Government makes mistakes, it's the nature of the beast.- but intentional?
Envy much? Too bad you're too stupid and too much of a wimp to qualify for Safety Retirement.
We earn what we have, rescuing stupid people like you, and wondering every shift if some asshole with a gun is intent on doing harm to others; or 'cause he's too much a coward to put the gun in his own mouth and wants LE to do it for him.
I'll bet there's a long line of people who would do your job with a much smaller pension and health benefits more in line with the private sector. Most private sector jobs don't even offer a pension.
What makes you think you actually deserve what you are paid?
Yes, how dare the Gov't NOT race to the bottom as fast as the private sector, don't you know we need more money in the hands of the 1%ers
So government leeches are entitled to more than the people who pay their salaries? Is that what you really wanted to admit? I would rather have money go to the 1% who earned it than the 5% who make up the government workforce.
You get what you pay for
Pay for bottom of the barrel employees you get bottom of the barrel employees
Wrong. The most you'll ever get is what you paid for. In the case of government employees, you get much less.
You just insulted all employees in the private sector by calling them "bottom of the barrel." It's no surprise that a tick on the ass of society like you would look down your nose at the people who pay your salary.
I'll bet there's a long line of people who would do your job with a much smaller pension and health benefits more in line with the private sector. Most private sector jobs don't even offer a pension.
What makes you think you actually deserve what you are paid?
Yes, how dare the Gov't NOT race to the bottom as fast as the private sector, don't you know we need more money in the hands of the 1%ers
So government leeches are entitled to more than the people who pay their salaries? Is that what you really wanted to admit? I would rather have money go to the 1% who earned it than the 5% who make up the government workforce.
You get what you pay for
Pay for bottom of the barrel employees you get bottom of the barrel employees
Wrong. The most you'll ever get is what you paid for. In the case of government employees, you get much less.
You just insulted all employees in the private sector by calling them "bottom of the barrel." It's no surprise that a tick on the ass of society like you would look down your nose at the people who pay your salary.
If government can attract the best and the brightest we will have a workforce of the best and the brightest
If private industry slashes wages and benefits, they will get the workforce they deserve. The money is there to pay better wages. The fact that they choose to pocket the profit does not mean the government should choose to meet them at the bottom
She keeps making points against "Trickle Down", gotta love Elizabeth Warren.
Elizabeth Warren Fights Back Against the Magical Accounting of Trickle-Down Economics Mother Jones
Elizabeth Warren says "America's middle class is in deep trouble." Although general economic indicators are on the rise, the Massachusetts senator argued in a speech Wednesday morning, pay has stagnated for all but the richest Americans—and trickle-down voodoo economics and loose Wall Street regulation are to blame. And although Warren has given every indication that she's happy to remain in the Senate and pass on liberals' hopes that she'll run for president in 2016, her speech—at an AFL-CIO conference on wages—had the tone of a presidential campaign barnstormer.
Warren kicked off her address by noting that the current economic recovery, while real, hasn't helped most Americans. The stock market's up, but half the country doesn't own any stocks. Inflation is low, but that doesn't matter for millennials burdened by overwhelming student debt. Corporate profits have risen, but that hardly matters to people who work at Walmart and are paid so little that they still need food stamps, Warren said.
<more>
this is the same imbecile who (like Obumbler has maintained) said THIS:There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own. Nobody. You built a factory out there? Good for you. But I want to be clear: you moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for; you hired workers the rest of us paid to educate; you were safe in your factory because of police forces and fire forces that the rest of us paid for. You didn’t have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory, and hire someone to protect against this, because of the work the rest of us did. Now look, you built a factory and it turned into something terrific, or a great idea? God bless. Keep a big hunk of it. But part of the underlying social contract is you take a hunk of that and pay forward for the next kid who comes along.
Such ^ vapid commentary raises an important question.
Why does anybody, even a drooling sycophant lolberal, take that Elizabeth Warren, the mutant dumbshit, seriously?
Some take you seriously, and many, many, many more take her seriously than take you so. Most find you silly and trite. So trite it is not worth commenting on your ridiculous example.
Now THERE'S a "compelling argument," since many many more know her than know me, and there are lots of brain damaged modern American lolberals who lap up the pablum imbecility she spouts as though it was something of value.
And you are wrong and a moron in any event. Some dishrag lightweights such as you find me silly and trite. I will try real hard to give a shit about the opinions of assholes such as you. someday.
But the "ridiculous" example I offered were her own words.
You might want to pretend that you can defend that bullshit, but let's face facts. You couldn't even if you were smart.
And you aren't.
Your response is mindful of olde Wil: "The lady doth protest too much, methinks".
I ignore the clowns who post ad hominems, you shit your pants and have an emotional meltdown. Pardon me while I clean my screen, I LOL reading your rant and spryed the screen with my iced coffee.
I know what Obama meant by his comment, only morons and partisan hacks spin it the way you did.
Do you think the proceeds of bonds are simply put in a mattress? What do you think should be the purpose of Treasury Bonds, municipal bonds and private sector bonds?
Do you think the proceeds of bonds are simply put in a mattress?
No I don't. I think the proceeds are spent. Sometimes on useful things. Sometimes on wasteful things.
And do you think bonds are intentionally spent on wasteful things? And if you do, do you believe it is always government who does so? And if so, why?
And do you think bonds are intentionally spent on wasteful things?
Yes, I believe government bonds are intentionally spent on many wasteful things.
And if you do, do you believe it is always government who does so?
Of course not. Many corporations make stupid, wasteful spending decisions.
You weren't clear, you claim corporations, "make stupid, wasteful spending decisions" and government, "intentionally". Can you provide examples? We know Government makes mistakes, it's the nature of the beast.- but intentional?
You weren't clear
I think the proceeds are spent. Sometimes on useful things. Sometimes on wasteful things.
I think that was very clear.
you claim corporations, "make stupid, wasteful spending decisions"
Without a doubt.
and government, "intentionally".
All stupid, wasteful government spending was accidental? Mistaken?
That doesn't help the big government cause.
Do you think the proceeds of bonds are simply put in a mattress?
No I don't. I think the proceeds are spent. Sometimes on useful things. Sometimes on wasteful things.
And do you think bonds are intentionally spent on wasteful things? And if you do, do you believe it is always government who does so? And if so, why?
And do you think bonds are intentionally spent on wasteful things?
Yes, I believe government bonds are intentionally spent on many wasteful things.
And if you do, do you believe it is always government who does so?
Of course not. Many corporations make stupid, wasteful spending decisions.
You weren't clear, you claim corporations, "make stupid, wasteful spending decisions" and government, "intentionally". Can you provide examples? We know Government makes mistakes, it's the nature of the beast.- but intentional?
You weren't clear
I think the proceeds are spent. Sometimes on useful things. Sometimes on wasteful things.
I think that was very clear.
you claim corporations, "make stupid, wasteful spending decisions"
Without a doubt.
and government, "intentionally".
All stupid, wasteful government spending was accidental? Mistaken?
That doesn't help the big government cause.
As I said, it's the nature of the best. When the congress decides to build a horse, it always creates a camel (all committees do, as any one who has spent time in management meetings knows). That's true in the private sector too (I spent many management meetings attended by private sector personnel where the one variable which always created controversy and compromise was the profit issue).
She keeps making points against "Trickle Down", gotta love Elizabeth Warren.
Elizabeth Warren Fights Back Against the Magical Accounting of Trickle-Down Economics Mother Jones
Elizabeth Warren says "America's middle class is in deep trouble." Although general economic indicators are on the rise, the Massachusetts senator argued in a speech Wednesday morning, pay has stagnated for all but the richest Americans—and trickle-down voodoo economics and loose Wall Street regulation are to blame. And although Warren has given every indication that she's happy to remain in the Senate and pass on liberals' hopes that she'll run for president in 2016, her speech—at an AFL-CIO conference on wages—had the tone of a presidential campaign barnstormer.
Warren kicked off her address by noting that the current economic recovery, while real, hasn't helped most Americans. The stock market's up, but half the country doesn't own any stocks. Inflation is low, but that doesn't matter for millennials burdened by overwhelming student debt. Corporate profits have risen, but that hardly matters to people who work at Walmart and are paid so little that they still need food stamps, Warren said.
<more>
this is the same imbecile who (like Obumbler has maintained) said THIS:There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own. Nobody. You built a factory out there? Good for you. But I want to be clear: you moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for; you hired workers the rest of us paid to educate; you were safe in your factory because of police forces and fire forces that the rest of us paid for. You didn’t have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory, and hire someone to protect against this, because of the work the rest of us did. Now look, you built a factory and it turned into something terrific, or a great idea? God bless. Keep a big hunk of it. But part of the underlying social contract is you take a hunk of that and pay forward for the next kid who comes along.
Such ^ vapid commentary raises an important question.
Why does anybody, even a drooling sycophant lolberal, take that Elizabeth Warren, the mutant dumbshit, seriously?
Some take you seriously, and many, many, many more take her seriously than take you so. Most find you silly and trite. So trite it is not worth commenting on your ridiculous example.
Now THERE'S a "compelling argument," since many many more know her than know me, and there are lots of brain damaged modern American lolberals who lap up the pablum imbecility she spouts as though it was something of value.
And you are wrong and a moron in any event. Some dishrag lightweights such as you find me silly and trite. I will try real hard to give a shit about the opinions of assholes such as you. someday.
But the "ridiculous" example I offered were her own words.
You might want to pretend that you can defend that bullshit, but let's face facts. You couldn't even if you were smart.
And you aren't.
Your response is mindful of olde Wil: "The lady doth protest too much, methinks".
I ignore the clowns who post ad hominems, you shit your pants and have an emotional meltdown. Pardon me while I clean my screen, I LOL reading your rant and spryed the screen with my iced coffee.
I know what Obama meant by his comment, only morons and partisan hacks spin it the way you did.
I enjoy the fact that you so publicly do the very thing you pretend to identify in my postings.
The fact remains, all your bitching, moaning and hypocritical bleating notwithstanding:
Elizabeth Warren is lauded by you mindless sheep silly lolberals AFTER saying massively ignorant trite stupid shit.
I just chortle when I see your fellow lolberal goons lap up her horseshit.
this is the same imbecile who (like Obumbler has maintained) said THIS: Such ^ vapid commentary raises an important question.
Why does anybody, even a drooling sycophant lolberal, take that Elizabeth Warren, the mutant dumbshit, seriously?
Some take you seriously, and many, many, many more take her seriously than take you so. Most find you silly and trite. So trite it is not worth commenting on your ridiculous example.
Now THERE'S a "compelling argument," since many many more know her than know me, and there are lots of brain damaged modern American lolberals who lap up the pablum imbecility she spouts as though it was something of value.
And you are wrong and a moron in any event. Some dishrag lightweights such as you find me silly and trite. I will try real hard to give a shit about the opinions of assholes such as you. someday.
But the "ridiculous" example I offered were her own words.
You might want to pretend that you can defend that bullshit, but let's face facts. You couldn't even if you were smart.
And you aren't.
Your response is mindful of olde Wil: "The lady doth protest too much, methinks".
I ignore the clowns who post ad hominems, you shit your pants and have an emotional meltdown. Pardon me while I clean my screen, I LOL reading your rant and spryed the screen with my iced coffee.
I know what Obama meant by his comment, only morons and partisan hacks spin it the way you did.
I enjoy the fact that you so publicly do the very thing you pretend to identify in my postings.
The fact remains, all your bitching, moaning and hypocritical bleating notwithstanding:
Elizabeth Warren is lauded by you mindless sheep silly lolberals AFTER saying massively ignorant trite stupid shit.
I just chortle when I see your fellow lolberal goons lap up her horseshit.
I give what you and other *^*$&#$&*%*( deserve. An honest debate is a rare thing on this message board. There are people who promise to leave and never return as a the consequence of losing a bet, and return as a sock. Now I know you would never forgive someone so )&)(^*$* who did so, but that's life.
