Random Truths

[danielpalos]

]
Arrogant and twisted way to suggest a way to judge greed. Poor folks can be greedy and so can hourly workers. Judgement of greed related to accumulated wealth is a simple judgement equated to how much wealth there is and how it is distributed.

Its funny how liberals like you have something wrong with "accumulated wealth." Yet, you want a living wage, but not "accumulated wealth." You want $15 bucks an hour working at a Mickey D's, but not "accumulated wealth." Naturally, those two things will lead to an "accumulation of wealth;" something you view as "greed." What a specious little rationale that is.

You really can't see any distinction between say the working poor struggling to pay rent and feed their family....and hundreds of millions of dollars held generationally in hereditary trust funds?

I think most Americans can.

Just started seeing your posts around here, good to see someone who understands the real issues.

I'm a capitalist, just to be clear. What separates me from most of the wingers is my belief in 1) regulation 2) no one working a 40 hour a week job should have to worry being able to get food, shelter, clothing or medical care. For them or their family.

You should learn to read more carefully.....

....you seem to have missed this earlier in the thread, and it applies to you:

"Many not ideologically Leftist are seduced by the rhetoric that they are helping others. The wise recognize the lie."


Well....the 'wise' part didn't apply to you.

Of course not; some on the left realize private charity only covers multitudes of sins, not official poverty.

 

[danielpalos]

Its funny how liberals like you have something wrong with "accumulated wealth." Yet, you want a living wage, but not "accumulated wealth." You want $15 bucks an hour working at a Mickey D's, but not "accumulated wealth." Naturally, those two things will lead to an "accumulation of wealth;" something you view as "greed." What a specious little rationale that is.

You really can't see any distinction between say the working poor struggling to pay rent and feed their family....and hundreds of millions of dollars held generationally in hereditary trust funds?

I think most Americans can.

Just started seeing your posts around here, good to see someone who understands the real issues.

I'm a capitalist, just to be clear. What separates me from most of the wingers is my belief in 1) regulation 2) no one working a 40 hour a week job should have to worry being able to get food, shelter, clothing or medical care. For them or their family.

You should learn to read more carefully.....

....you seem to have missed this earlier in the thread, and it applies to you:

"Many not ideologically Leftist are seduced by the rhetoric that they are helping others. The wise recognize the lie."


Well....the 'wise' part didn't apply to you.

Oh, I read your gibberish. It just didn't amount to much. The regulation of capitalism is one of practical stability. Look at the 80 or so years before the new deal and compare them with the 80 or so after. And you'll find a dramatic reduction in recession and depression after. A rate about half of what it was in unregulated capitalism.

And the economy thrives on stability.

You may consider a doubling of years in recession and depression to be 'wisdom'. But a rational person wouldn't.

Only the right is that clueless and Causeless; they must be stockholders for the more Capital Right.

 

[Wildman]

...that would be demonization, right?

NO ! it would be an out right fucking lie, although typical of liberscum !!!

 

[PoliticalChic]

Its funny how liberals like you have something wrong with "accumulated wealth." Yet, you want a living wage, but not "accumulated wealth." You want $15 bucks an hour working at a Mickey D's, but not "accumulated wealth." Naturally, those two things will lead to an "accumulation of wealth;" something you view as "greed." What a specious little rationale that is.

You really can't see any distinction between say the working poor struggling to pay rent and feed their family....and hundreds of millions of dollars held generationally in hereditary trust funds?

I think most Americans can.

Just started seeing your posts around here, good to see someone who understands the real issues.

I'm a capitalist, just to be clear. What separates me from most of the wingers is my belief in 1) regulation 2) no one working a 40 hour a week job should have to worry being able to get food, shelter, clothing or medical care. For them or their family.

You should learn to read more carefully.....

....you seem to have missed this earlier in the thread, and it applies to you:

"Many not ideologically Leftist are seduced by the rhetoric that they are helping others. The wise recognize the lie."


Well....the 'wise' part didn't apply to you.

Oh, I read your gibberish. It just didn't amount to much. The regulation of capitalism is one of practical stability. Look at the 80 or so years before the new deal and compare them with the 80 or so after. And you'll find a dramatic reduction in recession and depression after. A rate about half of what it was in unregulated capitalism.

And the economy thrives on stability.

You may consider a doubling of years in recession and depression to be 'wisdom'. But a rational person wouldn't.

1. "Oh, I read your gibberish. It just didn't amount to much."
Actually, the conclusion is that you are not bright enough to incorporate that truth into your decisions.

2. "The regulation of capitalism is one of practical stability."
I said nothing about regulation....you should strive to use the same level of precision in your reading as I do in my posts.

3."Look at the 80 or so years before the new deal..."
"The Roaring Twenties is a phrase used to refer to the 1920s in theUnited States,Canada, and theUnited Kingdom, characterizing the decade's distinctive cultural edge inNew York City,Chicago,Berlin,London,Los Angeles, and many other major cities duringa period of sustained economic prosperity"
Roaring Twenties - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Again? "...a period of sustained economic prosperity"


4. Don't hesitate to request further remedial education.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Its funny how liberals like you have something wrong with "accumulated wealth." Yet, you want a living wage, but not "accumulated wealth." You want $15 bucks an hour working at a Mickey D's, but not "accumulated wealth." Naturally, those two things will lead to an "accumulation of wealth;" something you view as "greed." What a specious little rationale that is.

You really can't see any distinction between say the working poor struggling to pay rent and feed their family....and hundreds of millions of dollars held generationally in hereditary trust funds?

I think most Americans can.

Just started seeing your posts around here, good to see someone who understands the real issues.

I'm a capitalist, just to be clear. What separates me from most of the wingers is my belief in 1) regulation 2) no one working a 40 hour a week job should have to worry being able to get food, shelter, clothing or medical care. For them or their family.

You should learn to read more carefully.....

....you seem to have missed this earlier in the thread, and it applies to you:

"Many not ideologically Leftist are seduced by the rhetoric that they are helping others. The wise recognize the lie."


Well....the 'wise' part didn't apply to you.

Of course not; some on the left realize private charity only covers multitudes of sins, not official poverty.

1. The current usage of 'poverty' is a made up term by the Left. They see to it that the goals will never be met.

2. Actual poverty means no home, no heat, no food.
Know of any such?
Have you had to step over any on your way out of the asylum?

3. "The new Obama poverty measure fails. It flunks the test of political neutrality and is based on misleading statistics that not one American in 100,000 could possibly understand, says columnist Robert J. Samuelson.

That's because the new calculation would measure poverty on a sliding scale. Thus, if the average income of families in the United States increases so too does the poverty threshold. Talk about keeping up with the Jones. This new measure provides the perfect climate for left-leaning politicians to promote equalization of wealth through redistribution. The measure would bump poverty up 30 percent: more poverty equals more political fodder to argue for increased welfare."
For Heritage text:

New Poverty Measure Doesn t Add Up

For Samuelson text:

Robert J. Samuelson - Why Obama s poverty rate measure misleads

 

[Skylar]

1. "Oh, I read your gibberish. It just didn't amount to much."
Actually, the conclusion is that you are not bright enough to incorporate that truth into your decisions.

If the useless idiocy you tell yourself was 'truth', you might have a point. Alas, it isn't. So you don't.

Remember, Chic....and this point is fundamental: you don't know what you're talking about. You recite. You repeat. You quote verbatim. But you don't think. And you rarely if every bother to research.

2. "The regulation of capitalism is one of practical stability."
I said nothing about regulation....you should strive to use the same level of precision in your reading as I do in my posts.

I did. In the very post you responded to. Wait.....you think my posts are bound to whatever rhetorical deuce you spew up?

Um, no.

3."Look at the 80 or so years before the new deal..."
"The Roaring Twenties is a phrase used to refer to the 1920s in theUnited States,Canada, and theUnited Kingdom, characterizing the decade's distinctive cultural edge inNew York City,Chicago,Berlin,London,Los Angeles, and many other major cities duringa period of sustained economic prosperity"
Roaring Twenties - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

With 3 recessions in the 20s (1921, 1923, 1926), followed by the Great Depression. And preceded by the Recession of 1918, the recession of 1913, the Panic of 1910, the Panic of 1907, and the recession of 1902.

Does the word 'unstable' mean anything to you? And this is what you want us to return to?

Laughing....so much for that 'wisdom' you were lauding. It helps if you have the slightest clue what you're talking about. Which, of course, you don't.

4. Don't hesitate to request further remedial education.

Says the poor lass that didn't even know that the 'Roaring 20s' had 3 recessions and was followed by the Great Depression.

You're consistently clueless. I'll give you that.

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. "Oh, I read your gibberish. It just didn't amount to much."
Actually, the conclusion is that you are not bright enough to incorporate that truth into your decisions.

If the useless idiocy you tell yourself was 'truth', you might have a point. Alas, it isn't. So you don't.

Remember, Chic....and this point is fundamental: you don't know what you're talking about. You recite. You repeat. You quote verbatim. But you don't think. And you rarely if every bother to research.

2. "The regulation of capitalism is one of practical stability."
I said nothing about regulation....you should strive to use the same level of precision in your reading as I do in my posts.

I did. In the very post you responded to. Wait.....you think my posts are bound to whatever rhetorical deuce you spew up?

Um, no.

3."Look at the 80 or so years before the new deal..."
"The Roaring Twenties is a phrase used to refer to the 1920s in theUnited States,Canada, and theUnited Kingdom, characterizing the decade's distinctive cultural edge inNew York City,Chicago,Berlin,London,Los Angeles, and many other major cities duringa period of sustained economic prosperity"
Roaring Twenties - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

With 3 recessions in the 20s (1921, 1923, 1926), followed by the Great Depression. And preceded by the Recession of 1918, the recession of 1913, the Panic of 1910, the Panic of 1907, and the recession of 1902.

Does the word 'unstable' mean anything to you? And this is what you want us to return to?

Laughing....so much for that 'wisdom' you were lauding. It helps if you have the slightest clue what you're talking about. Which, of course, you don't.

4. Don't hesitate to request further remedial education.

Says the poor lass that didn't even know that the 'Roaring 20s' had 3 recessions and was followed by the Great Depression.

You're consistently clueless. I'll give you that.

So sad....now I'll have to put you in your place again....

...and that place is the last seat in the dumb row.


"If the useless idiocy you tell yourself was 'truth', you might have a point. Alas, it isn't. So you don't.

Remember, Chic....and this point is fundamental: you don't know what you're talking about. You recite. You repeat. You quote verbatim. But you don't think. And you rarely if every bother to research."

This is the truth under discussion:
Many not ideologically Leftist are seduced by the rhetoric that they are helping others. The wise recognize the lie.

It is very simple to document this statement....almost as simple as you are.

1. "...the U.S. Census Bureau is scheduled to release its annual poverty report. The report will be notable because this year marks the 50th anniversary of the launch of President Lyndon Johnson’s War on Poverty. In his January 1964 State of the Union address, Johnson proclaimed, “This administration today, here and now, declares unconditional war on poverty in America.”[1]

Since that time, U.S. taxpayers have spent over $22 trillion on anti-poverty programs (in constant 2012 dollars). Adjusted for inflation, this spending (which does not include Social Security or Medicare) is three times the cost of all military wars in U.S. history since the American Revolution. Despite this mountain of spending, progress against poverty, at least as measured by the government, has been minimal."
War on Poverty After 50 Years Conditions of the Poor in America


Exactly as I stated in the truth I presented.


2. ‘Welfare’ as a wholly owned subsidiary of the government, and its main result is the incentivizing of a disrespect for oneself, and for the entity that provides the welfare. As more folks in a poor neighborhood languish with little or no work, entire local culture begins to change: daily work is no longer the expected social norm. Extended periods of hanging around the neighborhood, neither working nor going to school becoming more and more socially acceptable.

Since productive activity not making any economic sense because of the work disincentives of the welfare plantation, other kinds of activities proliferate: drug and alcohol abuse, crime, recreational sex, illegitimacy, and family breakup are the new social norms, as does the culture of violence."
Peter Ferrara, “America’s Ticking Bankruptcy Bomb,” chapter five.

Exactly as I stated in the truth I presented.


So, with the best of intentions, dopes like you continue to support a failed and fraudulent system that keeps the poor poor.


Wanna read it again?
Many not ideologically Leftist are seduced by the rhetoric that they are helping others. The wise recognize the lie.

 

[paddymurphy]

1. "Oh, I read your gibberish. It just didn't amount to much."
Actually, the conclusion is that you are not bright enough to incorporate that truth into your decisions.

If the useless idiocy you tell yourself was 'truth', you might have a point. Alas, it isn't. So you don't.

Remember, Chic....and this point is fundamental: you don't know what you're talking about. You recite. You repeat. You quote verbatim. But you don't think. And you rarely if every bother to research.

2. "The regulation of capitalism is one of practical stability."
I said nothing about regulation....you should strive to use the same level of precision in your reading as I do in my posts.

I did. In the very post you responded to. Wait.....you think my posts are bound to whatever rhetorical deuce you spew up?

Um, no.

3."Look at the 80 or so years before the new deal..."
"The Roaring Twenties is a phrase used to refer to the 1920s in theUnited States,Canada, and theUnited Kingdom, characterizing the decade's distinctive cultural edge inNew York City,Chicago,Berlin,London,Los Angeles, and many other major cities duringa period of sustained economic prosperity"
Roaring Twenties - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

With 3 recessions in the 20s (1921, 1923, 1926), followed by the Great Depression. And preceded by the Recession of 1918, the recession of 1913, the Panic of 1910, the Panic of 1907, and the recession of 1902.

Does the word 'unstable' mean anything to you? And this is what you want us to return to?

Laughing....so much for that 'wisdom' you were lauding. It helps if you have the slightest clue what you're talking about. Which, of course, you don't.

4. Don't hesitate to request further remedial education.

Says the poor lass that didn't even know that the 'Roaring 20s' had 3 recessions and was followed by the Great Depression.

You're consistently clueless. I'll give you that.

So sad....now I'll have to put you in your place again....

...and that place is the last seat in the dumb row.


"If the useless idiocy you tell yourself was 'truth', you might have a point. Alas, it isn't. So you don't.

Remember, Chic....and this point is fundamental: you don't know what you're talking about. You recite. You repeat. You quote verbatim. But you don't think. And you rarely if every bother to research."

This is the truth under discussion:
Many not ideologically Leftist are seduced by the rhetoric that they are helping others. The wise recognize the lie.

It is very simple to document this statement....almost as simple as you are.

1. "...the U.S. Census Bureau is scheduled to release its annual poverty report. The report will be notable because this year marks the 50th anniversary of the launch of President Lyndon Johnson’s War on Poverty. In his January 1964 State of the Union address, Johnson proclaimed, “This administration today, here and now, declares unconditional war on poverty in America.”[1]

Since that time, U.S. taxpayers have spent over $22 trillion on anti-poverty programs (in constant 2012 dollars). Adjusted for inflation, this spending (which does not include Social Security or Medicare) is three times the cost of all military wars in U.S. history since the American Revolution. Despite this mountain of spending, progress against poverty, at least as measured by the government, has been minimal."
War on Poverty After 50 Years Conditions of the Poor in America


Exactly as I stated in the truth I presented.


2. ‘Welfare’ as a wholly owned subsidiary of the government, and its main result is the incentivizing of a disrespect for oneself, and for the entity that provides the welfare. As more folks in a poor neighborhood languish with little or no work, entire local culture begins to change: daily work is no longer the expected social norm. Extended periods of hanging around the neighborhood, neither working nor going to school becoming more and more socially acceptable.

Since productive activity not making any economic sense because of the work disincentives of the welfare plantation, other kinds of activities proliferate: drug and alcohol abuse, crime, recreational sex, illegitimacy, and family breakup are the new social norms, as does the culture of violence."
Peter Ferrara, “America’s Ticking Bankruptcy Bomb,” chapter five.

Exactly as I stated in the truth I presented.


So, with the best of intentions, dopes like you continue to support a failed and fraudulent system that keeps the poor poor.


Wanna read it again?
Many not ideologically Leftist are seduced by the rhetoric that they are helping others. The wise recognize the lie.

"A poverty measure that, as most analysts recommend, accounts for (rather than ignores) major non-cash benefits that the official poverty measure leaves out -- namely, SNAP (the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, formerly called food stamps), rent subsidies, and tax credits for working families -- would find that poverty in the United States today is considerably lower than it was throughout the 1960s, despite today's weaker economy.
Similarly, an analysis of average incomes among the poorest one-fifth of Americans that counts non-cash benefits and tax credits also shows important progress. Average household income for the bottom fifth of Americans (counting those benefits and tax credits, adjusted for inflation and changes in household size) was more than 75 percent higher in 2011 than in 1964, the year that President Johnson announced the War on Poverty. Both earnings and government assistance contributed to the increase."

Official Poverty Measure Masks Gains Made Over Last 50 Years Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. "Oh, I read your gibberish. It just didn't amount to much."
Actually, the conclusion is that you are not bright enough to incorporate that truth into your decisions.

If the useless idiocy you tell yourself was 'truth', you might have a point. Alas, it isn't. So you don't.

Remember, Chic....and this point is fundamental: you don't know what you're talking about. You recite. You repeat. You quote verbatim. But you don't think. And you rarely if every bother to research.

2. "The regulation of capitalism is one of practical stability."
I said nothing about regulation....you should strive to use the same level of precision in your reading as I do in my posts.

I did. In the very post you responded to. Wait.....you think my posts are bound to whatever rhetorical deuce you spew up?

Um, no.

3."Look at the 80 or so years before the new deal..."
"The Roaring Twenties is a phrase used to refer to the 1920s in theUnited States,Canada, and theUnited Kingdom, characterizing the decade's distinctive cultural edge inNew York City,Chicago,Berlin,London,Los Angeles, and many other major cities duringa period of sustained economic prosperity"
Roaring Twenties - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

With 3 recessions in the 20s (1921, 1923, 1926), followed by the Great Depression. And preceded by the Recession of 1918, the recession of 1913, the Panic of 1910, the Panic of 1907, and the recession of 1902.

Does the word 'unstable' mean anything to you? And this is what you want us to return to?

Laughing....so much for that 'wisdom' you were lauding. It helps if you have the slightest clue what you're talking about. Which, of course, you don't.

4. Don't hesitate to request further remedial education.

Says the poor lass that didn't even know that the 'Roaring 20s' had 3 recessions and was followed by the Great Depression.

You're consistently clueless. I'll give you that.

"Says the poor lass that didn't even know that the 'Roaring 20s' had 3 recessions and was followed by the Great Depression."

Economics 101: the reason that Hoover's recession became a depression was that Franklin Roosevelt was President.

You didn't know that either, did you.


1. In 1935, the Brookings Institution (left-leaning) delivered a 900-page report on the New Deal and the National Recovery Administration, concluding that “ on the whole it retarded recovery.”
article - AEI


You're dumb enough to remain a Reliable Democrat Voter.

 

[Skylar]

1. "Oh, I read your gibberish. It just didn't amount to much."
Actually, the conclusion is that you are not bright enough to incorporate that truth into your decisions.

If the useless idiocy you tell yourself was 'truth', you might have a point. Alas, it isn't. So you don't.

Remember, Chic....and this point is fundamental: you don't know what you're talking about. You recite. You repeat. You quote verbatim. But you don't think. And you rarely if every bother to research.

2. "The regulation of capitalism is one of practical stability."
I said nothing about regulation....you should strive to use the same level of precision in your reading as I do in my posts.

I did. In the very post you responded to. Wait.....you think my posts are bound to whatever rhetorical deuce you spew up?

Um, no.

3."Look at the 80 or so years before the new deal..."
"The Roaring Twenties is a phrase used to refer to the 1920s in theUnited States,Canada, and theUnited Kingdom, characterizing the decade's distinctive cultural edge inNew York City,Chicago,Berlin,London,Los Angeles, and many other major cities duringa period of sustained economic prosperity"
Roaring Twenties - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

With 3 recessions in the 20s (1921, 1923, 1926), followed by the Great Depression. And preceded by the Recession of 1918, the recession of 1913, the Panic of 1910, the Panic of 1907, and the recession of 1902.

Does the word 'unstable' mean anything to you? And this is what you want us to return to?

Laughing....so much for that 'wisdom' you were lauding. It helps if you have the slightest clue what you're talking about. Which, of course, you don't.

4. Don't hesitate to request further remedial education.

Says the poor lass that didn't even know that the 'Roaring 20s' had 3 recessions and was followed by the Great Depression.

You're consistently clueless. I'll give you that.

So sad....now I'll have to put you in your place again....

...and that place is the last seat in the dumb row.


"If the useless idiocy you tell yourself was 'truth', you might have a point. Alas, it isn't. So you don't.

Remember, Chic....and this point is fundamental: you don't know what you're talking about. You recite. You repeat. You quote verbatim. But you don't think. And you rarely if every bother to research."

This is the truth under discussion:
Many not ideologically Leftist are seduced by the rhetoric that they are helping others. The wise recognize the lie.

It is very simple to document this statement....almost as simple as you are.

1. "...the U.S. Census Bureau is scheduled to release its annual poverty report. The report will be notable because this year marks the 50th anniversary of the launch of President Lyndon Johnson’s War on Poverty. In his January 1964 State of the Union address, Johnson proclaimed, “This administration today, here and now, declares unconditional war on poverty in America.”[1]

Since that time, U.S. taxpayers have spent over $22 trillion on anti-poverty programs (in constant 2012 dollars). Adjusted for inflation, this spending (which does not include Social Security or Medicare) is three times the cost of all military wars in U.S. history since the American Revolution. Despite this mountain of spending, progress against poverty, at least as measured by the government, has been minimal."
War on Poverty After 50 Years Conditions of the Poor in America


Exactly as I stated in the truth I presented.


2. ‘Welfare’ as a wholly owned subsidiary of the government, and its main result is the incentivizing of a disrespect for oneself, and for the entity that provides the welfare. As more folks in a poor neighborhood languish with little or no work, entire local culture begins to change: daily work is no longer the expected social norm. Extended periods of hanging around the neighborhood, neither working nor going to school becoming more and more socially acceptable.

Since productive activity not making any economic sense because of the work disincentives of the welfare plantation, other kinds of activities proliferate: drug and alcohol abuse, crime, recreational sex, illegitimacy, and family breakup are the new social norms, as does the culture of violence."
Peter Ferrara, “America’s Ticking Bankruptcy Bomb,” chapter five.

Exactly as I stated in the truth I presented.


So, with the best of intentions, dopes like you continue to support a failed and fraudulent system that keeps the poor poor.


Wanna read it again?
Many not ideologically Leftist are seduced by the rhetoric that they are helping others. The wise recognize the lie.

And you go into a predictable word salad cut and paste'gasm. Its your tell. Nothing you posted has a thing to do with what you are responding to. Again, Chic.....you're not a thinker. You're a repeater. A regurgetator. You merely recite what you're told to think. And you don't even know why.

Now, back to your lesson:

Your 'Roaring 20s' included 3 recessions in the 20s (1921, 1923, 1926), followed by the Great Depression. And preceded by the Recession of 1918, the recession of 1913, the Panic of 1910, the Panic of 1907, and the recession of 1902.

Does the word 'unstable' mean anything to you? And this is what you want us to return to?

Laughing....so much for that 'wisdom' you were lauding. It helps if you have the slightest clue what you're talking about. Which, of course, you don't.

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. "Oh, I read your gibberish. It just didn't amount to much."
Actually, the conclusion is that you are not bright enough to incorporate that truth into your decisions.

If the useless idiocy you tell yourself was 'truth', you might have a point. Alas, it isn't. So you don't.

Remember, Chic....and this point is fundamental: you don't know what you're talking about. You recite. You repeat. You quote verbatim. But you don't think. And you rarely if every bother to research.

2. "The regulation of capitalism is one of practical stability."
I said nothing about regulation....you should strive to use the same level of precision in your reading as I do in my posts.

I did. In the very post you responded to. Wait.....you think my posts are bound to whatever rhetorical deuce you spew up?

Um, no.

3."Look at the 80 or so years before the new deal..."
"The Roaring Twenties is a phrase used to refer to the 1920s in theUnited States,Canada, and theUnited Kingdom, characterizing the decade's distinctive cultural edge inNew York City,Chicago,Berlin,London,Los Angeles, and many other major cities duringa period of sustained economic prosperity"
Roaring Twenties - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

With 3 recessions in the 20s (1921, 1923, 1926), followed by the Great Depression. And preceded by the Recession of 1918, the recession of 1913, the Panic of 1910, the Panic of 1907, and the recession of 1902.

Does the word 'unstable' mean anything to you? And this is what you want us to return to?

Laughing....so much for that 'wisdom' you were lauding. It helps if you have the slightest clue what you're talking about. Which, of course, you don't.

4. Don't hesitate to request further remedial education.

Says the poor lass that didn't even know that the 'Roaring 20s' had 3 recessions and was followed by the Great Depression.

You're consistently clueless. I'll give you that.

So sad....now I'll have to put you in your place again....

...and that place is the last seat in the dumb row.


"If the useless idiocy you tell yourself was 'truth', you might have a point. Alas, it isn't. So you don't.

Remember, Chic....and this point is fundamental: you don't know what you're talking about. You recite. You repeat. You quote verbatim. But you don't think. And you rarely if every bother to research."

This is the truth under discussion:
Many not ideologically Leftist are seduced by the rhetoric that they are helping others. The wise recognize the lie.

It is very simple to document this statement....almost as simple as you are.

1. "...the U.S. Census Bureau is scheduled to release its annual poverty report. The report will be notable because this year marks the 50th anniversary of the launch of President Lyndon Johnson’s War on Poverty. In his January 1964 State of the Union address, Johnson proclaimed, “This administration today, here and now, declares unconditional war on poverty in America.”[1]

Since that time, U.S. taxpayers have spent over $22 trillion on anti-poverty programs (in constant 2012 dollars). Adjusted for inflation, this spending (which does not include Social Security or Medicare) is three times the cost of all military wars in U.S. history since the American Revolution. Despite this mountain of spending, progress against poverty, at least as measured by the government, has been minimal."
War on Poverty After 50 Years Conditions of the Poor in America


Exactly as I stated in the truth I presented.


2. ‘Welfare’ as a wholly owned subsidiary of the government, and its main result is the incentivizing of a disrespect for oneself, and for the entity that provides the welfare. As more folks in a poor neighborhood languish with little or no work, entire local culture begins to change: daily work is no longer the expected social norm. Extended periods of hanging around the neighborhood, neither working nor going to school becoming more and more socially acceptable.

Since productive activity not making any economic sense because of the work disincentives of the welfare plantation, other kinds of activities proliferate: drug and alcohol abuse, crime, recreational sex, illegitimacy, and family breakup are the new social norms, as does the culture of violence."
Peter Ferrara, “America’s Ticking Bankruptcy Bomb,” chapter five.

Exactly as I stated in the truth I presented.


So, with the best of intentions, dopes like you continue to support a failed and fraudulent system that keeps the poor poor.


Wanna read it again?
Many not ideologically Leftist are seduced by the rhetoric that they are helping others. The wise recognize the lie.

"A poverty measure that, as most analysts recommend, accounts for (rather than ignores) major non-cash benefits that the official poverty measure leaves out -- namely, SNAP (the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, formerly called food stamps), rent subsidies, and tax credits for working families -- would find that poverty in the United States today is considerably lower than it was throughout the 1960s, despite today's weaker economy.
Similarly, an analysis of average incomes among the poorest one-fifth of Americans that counts non-cash benefits and tax credits also shows important progress. Average household income for the bottom fifth of Americans (counting those benefits and tax credits, adjusted for inflation and changes in household size) was more than 75 percent higher in 2011 than in 1964, the year that President Johnson announced the War on Poverty. Both earnings and government assistance contributed to the increase."

Official Poverty Measure Masks Gains Made Over Last 50 Years Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

Another dunce checks in with the Liberal propaganda....

"... would find that poverty in the United States today is considerably lower than it was throughout the 1960s, despite today's weaker economy."

What a crock.

Spin…altering the truth without altering the facts.



"....that the poverty rate has risen to 15.1 percent of Americans, ....
On January 8, 1964, President Lyndon B.

Johnson delivered a State of the Union address to Congress in which he declared an “unconditional war on poverty in America.”
Scribd



At the time, the poverty rate in America was

around 19 percent and falling rapidly.

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. "Oh, I read your gibberish. It just didn't amount to much."
Actually, the conclusion is that you are not bright enough to incorporate that truth into your decisions.

If the useless idiocy you tell yourself was 'truth', you might have a point. Alas, it isn't. So you don't.

Remember, Chic....and this point is fundamental: you don't know what you're talking about. You recite. You repeat. You quote verbatim. But you don't think. And you rarely if every bother to research.

2. "The regulation of capitalism is one of practical stability."
I said nothing about regulation....you should strive to use the same level of precision in your reading as I do in my posts.

I did. In the very post you responded to. Wait.....you think my posts are bound to whatever rhetorical deuce you spew up?

Um, no.

3."Look at the 80 or so years before the new deal..."
"The Roaring Twenties is a phrase used to refer to the 1920s in theUnited States,Canada, and theUnited Kingdom, characterizing the decade's distinctive cultural edge inNew York City,Chicago,Berlin,London,Los Angeles, and many other major cities duringa period of sustained economic prosperity"
Roaring Twenties - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

With 3 recessions in the 20s (1921, 1923, 1926), followed by the Great Depression. And preceded by the Recession of 1918, the recession of 1913, the Panic of 1910, the Panic of 1907, and the recession of 1902.

Does the word 'unstable' mean anything to you? And this is what you want us to return to?

Laughing....so much for that 'wisdom' you were lauding. It helps if you have the slightest clue what you're talking about. Which, of course, you don't.

4. Don't hesitate to request further remedial education.

Says the poor lass that didn't even know that the 'Roaring 20s' had 3 recessions and was followed by the Great Depression.

You're consistently clueless. I'll give you that.

So sad....now I'll have to put you in your place again....

...and that place is the last seat in the dumb row.


"If the useless idiocy you tell yourself was 'truth', you might have a point. Alas, it isn't. So you don't.

Remember, Chic....and this point is fundamental: you don't know what you're talking about. You recite. You repeat. You quote verbatim. But you don't think. And you rarely if every bother to research."

This is the truth under discussion:
Many not ideologically Leftist are seduced by the rhetoric that they are helping others. The wise recognize the lie.

It is very simple to document this statement....almost as simple as you are.

1. "...the U.S. Census Bureau is scheduled to release its annual poverty report. The report will be notable because this year marks the 50th anniversary of the launch of President Lyndon Johnson’s War on Poverty. In his January 1964 State of the Union address, Johnson proclaimed, “This administration today, here and now, declares unconditional war on poverty in America.”[1]

Since that time, U.S. taxpayers have spent over $22 trillion on anti-poverty programs (in constant 2012 dollars). Adjusted for inflation, this spending (which does not include Social Security or Medicare) is three times the cost of all military wars in U.S. history since the American Revolution. Despite this mountain of spending, progress against poverty, at least as measured by the government, has been minimal."
War on Poverty After 50 Years Conditions of the Poor in America


Exactly as I stated in the truth I presented.


2. ‘Welfare’ as a wholly owned subsidiary of the government, and its main result is the incentivizing of a disrespect for oneself, and for the entity that provides the welfare. As more folks in a poor neighborhood languish with little or no work, entire local culture begins to change: daily work is no longer the expected social norm. Extended periods of hanging around the neighborhood, neither working nor going to school becoming more and more socially acceptable.

Since productive activity not making any economic sense because of the work disincentives of the welfare plantation, other kinds of activities proliferate: drug and alcohol abuse, crime, recreational sex, illegitimacy, and family breakup are the new social norms, as does the culture of violence."
Peter Ferrara, “America’s Ticking Bankruptcy Bomb,” chapter five.

Exactly as I stated in the truth I presented.


So, with the best of intentions, dopes like you continue to support a failed and fraudulent system that keeps the poor poor.


Wanna read it again?
Many not ideologically Leftist are seduced by the rhetoric that they are helping others. The wise recognize the lie.

And you go into a predictable word salad cut and paste'gasm. Its your tell. Nothing you posted has a thing to do with what you are responding to. Again, Chic.....you're not a thinker. You're a repeater. A regurgetator. You merely recite what you're told to think. And you don't even know why.

Now, back to your lesson:

Your 'Roaring 20s' included 3 recessions in the 20s (1921, 1923, 1926), followed by the Great Depression. And preceded by the Recession of 1918, the recession of 1913, the Panic of 1910, the Panic of 1907, and the recession of 1902.

Does the word 'unstable' mean anything to you? And this is what you want us to return to?

Laughing....so much for that 'wisdom' you were lauding. It helps if you have the slightest clue what you're talking about. Which, of course, you don't.

Any cowards who try to use 'cut and paste' as an excuse to ignore the material presented are, what you are, losers.

My documented sources proved
a. that your Liberal welfare policies have been unmitigated failues

and

b. you are exactly what I said you are: an easily led dunce.

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. "Oh, I read your gibberish. It just didn't amount to much."
Actually, the conclusion is that you are not bright enough to incorporate that truth into your decisions.

If the useless idiocy you tell yourself was 'truth', you might have a point. Alas, it isn't. So you don't.

Remember, Chic....and this point is fundamental: you don't know what you're talking about. You recite. You repeat. You quote verbatim. But you don't think. And you rarely if every bother to research.

2. "The regulation of capitalism is one of practical stability."
I said nothing about regulation....you should strive to use the same level of precision in your reading as I do in my posts.

I did. In the very post you responded to. Wait.....you think my posts are bound to whatever rhetorical deuce you spew up?

Um, no.

3."Look at the 80 or so years before the new deal..."
"The Roaring Twenties is a phrase used to refer to the 1920s in theUnited States,Canada, and theUnited Kingdom, characterizing the decade's distinctive cultural edge inNew York City,Chicago,Berlin,London,Los Angeles, and many other major cities duringa period of sustained economic prosperity"
Roaring Twenties - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

With 3 recessions in the 20s (1921, 1923, 1926), followed by the Great Depression. And preceded by the Recession of 1918, the recession of 1913, the Panic of 1910, the Panic of 1907, and the recession of 1902.

Does the word 'unstable' mean anything to you? And this is what you want us to return to?

Laughing....so much for that 'wisdom' you were lauding. It helps if you have the slightest clue what you're talking about. Which, of course, you don't.

4. Don't hesitate to request further remedial education.

Says the poor lass that didn't even know that the 'Roaring 20s' had 3 recessions and was followed by the Great Depression.

You're consistently clueless. I'll give you that.

So sad....now I'll have to put you in your place again....

...and that place is the last seat in the dumb row.


"If the useless idiocy you tell yourself was 'truth', you might have a point. Alas, it isn't. So you don't.

Remember, Chic....and this point is fundamental: you don't know what you're talking about. You recite. You repeat. You quote verbatim. But you don't think. And you rarely if every bother to research."

This is the truth under discussion:
Many not ideologically Leftist are seduced by the rhetoric that they are helping others. The wise recognize the lie.

It is very simple to document this statement....almost as simple as you are.

1. "...the U.S. Census Bureau is scheduled to release its annual poverty report. The report will be notable because this year marks the 50th anniversary of the launch of President Lyndon Johnson’s War on Poverty. In his January 1964 State of the Union address, Johnson proclaimed, “This administration today, here and now, declares unconditional war on poverty in America.”[1]

Since that time, U.S. taxpayers have spent over $22 trillion on anti-poverty programs (in constant 2012 dollars). Adjusted for inflation, this spending (which does not include Social Security or Medicare) is three times the cost of all military wars in U.S. history since the American Revolution. Despite this mountain of spending, progress against poverty, at least as measured by the government, has been minimal."
War on Poverty After 50 Years Conditions of the Poor in America


Exactly as I stated in the truth I presented.


2. ‘Welfare’ as a wholly owned subsidiary of the government, and its main result is the incentivizing of a disrespect for oneself, and for the entity that provides the welfare. As more folks in a poor neighborhood languish with little or no work, entire local culture begins to change: daily work is no longer the expected social norm. Extended periods of hanging around the neighborhood, neither working nor going to school becoming more and more socially acceptable.

Since productive activity not making any economic sense because of the work disincentives of the welfare plantation, other kinds of activities proliferate: drug and alcohol abuse, crime, recreational sex, illegitimacy, and family breakup are the new social norms, as does the culture of violence."
Peter Ferrara, “America’s Ticking Bankruptcy Bomb,” chapter five.

Exactly as I stated in the truth I presented.


So, with the best of intentions, dopes like you continue to support a failed and fraudulent system that keeps the poor poor.


Wanna read it again?
Many not ideologically Leftist are seduced by the rhetoric that they are helping others. The wise recognize the lie.

And you go into a predictable word salad cut and paste'gasm. Its your tell. Nothing you posted has a thing to do with what you are responding to. Again, Chic.....you're not a thinker. You're a repeater. A regurgetator. You merely recite what you're told to think. And you don't even know why.

Now, back to your lesson:

Your 'Roaring 20s' included 3 recessions in the 20s (1921, 1923, 1926), followed by the Great Depression. And preceded by the Recession of 1918, the recession of 1913, the Panic of 1910, the Panic of 1907, and the recession of 1902.

Does the word 'unstable' mean anything to you? And this is what you want us to return to?

Laughing....so much for that 'wisdom' you were lauding. It helps if you have the slightest clue what you're talking about. Which, of course, you don't.

Recessions are a part of the business cycle.

Liberals/Democrats turn them into depressions.

Roaring Twenties were both
a. Republican

and

b. a period of sustained economic prosperity"
Roaring Twenties - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 

[Skylar]

1. "Oh, I read your gibberish. It just didn't amount to much."
Actually, the conclusion is that you are not bright enough to incorporate that truth into your decisions.

If the useless idiocy you tell yourself was 'truth', you might have a point. Alas, it isn't. So you don't.

Remember, Chic....and this point is fundamental: you don't know what you're talking about. You recite. You repeat. You quote verbatim. But you don't think. And you rarely if every bother to research.

2. "The regulation of capitalism is one of practical stability."
I said nothing about regulation....you should strive to use the same level of precision in your reading as I do in my posts.

I did. In the very post you responded to. Wait.....you think my posts are bound to whatever rhetorical deuce you spew up?

Um, no.

3."Look at the 80 or so years before the new deal..."
"The Roaring Twenties is a phrase used to refer to the 1920s in theUnited States,Canada, and theUnited Kingdom, characterizing the decade's distinctive cultural edge inNew York City,Chicago,Berlin,London,Los Angeles, and many other major cities duringa period of sustained economic prosperity"
Roaring Twenties - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

With 3 recessions in the 20s (1921, 1923, 1926), followed by the Great Depression. And preceded by the Recession of 1918, the recession of 1913, the Panic of 1910, the Panic of 1907, and the recession of 1902.

Does the word 'unstable' mean anything to you? And this is what you want us to return to?

Laughing....so much for that 'wisdom' you were lauding. It helps if you have the slightest clue what you're talking about. Which, of course, you don't.

4. Don't hesitate to request further remedial education.

Says the poor lass that didn't even know that the 'Roaring 20s' had 3 recessions and was followed by the Great Depression.

You're consistently clueless. I'll give you that.

"Says the poor lass that didn't even know that the 'Roaring 20s' had 3 recessions and was followed by the Great Depression."

Economics 101: the reason that Hoover's recession became a depression was that Franklin Roosevelt was President.

You didn't know that either, did you.

Probably because its complete horseshit. The Great Depression lasted from 1929 to March 1933.

Um, sweetie? Roosevelt took office in March of 1933. Your narrative is not only useless ignorance, its physically impossible. And an economic plummet that lasted 3 years and 7 months shaving more than a quarter of our GDP is not a 'recession'. Its a massive depression.

And it all happened BEFORE Roosevelt took office.

Again, you don't have the slightest clue what you're talking about. Not even an itsy bitsy little bit. You're merely cutting and pasting words you neither understand nor have bothered to research.

Just give us the webpage that's doing your thinking for you. As you clearly don't know enough to carry the argument you're trying to ape.

 

[Skylar]

1. "Oh, I read your gibberish. It just didn't amount to much."
Actually, the conclusion is that you are not bright enough to incorporate that truth into your decisions.

If the useless idiocy you tell yourself was 'truth', you might have a point. Alas, it isn't. So you don't.

Remember, Chic....and this point is fundamental: you don't know what you're talking about. You recite. You repeat. You quote verbatim. But you don't think. And you rarely if every bother to research.

2. "The regulation of capitalism is one of practical stability."
I said nothing about regulation....you should strive to use the same level of precision in your reading as I do in my posts.

I did. In the very post you responded to. Wait.....you think my posts are bound to whatever rhetorical deuce you spew up?

Um, no.

3."Look at the 80 or so years before the new deal..."
"The Roaring Twenties is a phrase used to refer to the 1920s in theUnited States,Canada, and theUnited Kingdom, characterizing the decade's distinctive cultural edge inNew York City,Chicago,Berlin,London,Los Angeles, and many other major cities duringa period of sustained economic prosperity"
Roaring Twenties - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

With 3 recessions in the 20s (1921, 1923, 1926), followed by the Great Depression. And preceded by the Recession of 1918, the recession of 1913, the Panic of 1910, the Panic of 1907, and the recession of 1902.

Does the word 'unstable' mean anything to you? And this is what you want us to return to?

Laughing....so much for that 'wisdom' you were lauding. It helps if you have the slightest clue what you're talking about. Which, of course, you don't.

4. Don't hesitate to request further remedial education.

Says the poor lass that didn't even know that the 'Roaring 20s' had 3 recessions and was followed by the Great Depression.

You're consistently clueless. I'll give you that.

So sad....now I'll have to put you in your place again....

...and that place is the last seat in the dumb row.


"If the useless idiocy you tell yourself was 'truth', you might have a point. Alas, it isn't. So you don't.

Remember, Chic....and this point is fundamental: you don't know what you're talking about. You recite. You repeat. You quote verbatim. But you don't think. And you rarely if every bother to research."

This is the truth under discussion:
Many not ideologically Leftist are seduced by the rhetoric that they are helping others. The wise recognize the lie.

It is very simple to document this statement....almost as simple as you are.

1. "...the U.S. Census Bureau is scheduled to release its annual poverty report. The report will be notable because this year marks the 50th anniversary of the launch of President Lyndon Johnson’s War on Poverty. In his January 1964 State of the Union address, Johnson proclaimed, “This administration today, here and now, declares unconditional war on poverty in America.”[1]

Since that time, U.S. taxpayers have spent over $22 trillion on anti-poverty programs (in constant 2012 dollars). Adjusted for inflation, this spending (which does not include Social Security or Medicare) is three times the cost of all military wars in U.S. history since the American Revolution. Despite this mountain of spending, progress against poverty, at least as measured by the government, has been minimal."
War on Poverty After 50 Years Conditions of the Poor in America


Exactly as I stated in the truth I presented.


2. ‘Welfare’ as a wholly owned subsidiary of the government, and its main result is the incentivizing of a disrespect for oneself, and for the entity that provides the welfare. As more folks in a poor neighborhood languish with little or no work, entire local culture begins to change: daily work is no longer the expected social norm. Extended periods of hanging around the neighborhood, neither working nor going to school becoming more and more socially acceptable.

Since productive activity not making any economic sense because of the work disincentives of the welfare plantation, other kinds of activities proliferate: drug and alcohol abuse, crime, recreational sex, illegitimacy, and family breakup are the new social norms, as does the culture of violence."
Peter Ferrara, “America’s Ticking Bankruptcy Bomb,” chapter five.

Exactly as I stated in the truth I presented.


So, with the best of intentions, dopes like you continue to support a failed and fraudulent system that keeps the poor poor.


Wanna read it again?
Many not ideologically Leftist are seduced by the rhetoric that they are helping others. The wise recognize the lie.

And you go into a predictable word salad cut and paste'gasm. Its your tell. Nothing you posted has a thing to do with what you are responding to. Again, Chic.....you're not a thinker. You're a repeater. A regurgetator. You merely recite what you're told to think. And you don't even know why.

Now, back to your lesson:

Your 'Roaring 20s' included 3 recessions in the 20s (1921, 1923, 1926), followed by the Great Depression. And preceded by the Recession of 1918, the recession of 1913, the Panic of 1910, the Panic of 1907, and the recession of 1902.

Does the word 'unstable' mean anything to you? And this is what you want us to return to?

Laughing....so much for that 'wisdom' you were lauding. It helps if you have the slightest clue what you're talking about. Which, of course, you don't.

Recessions are a part of the business cycle.

8 recessions in 30 years? In the last 30 years we've had 3.

That's less than half, hun. And you want us to return to double the years in recession and depression, to the wild instability of pre-regulated capitalism days?

Um, no. That's just silly. Why would we ever want to do that?

Liberals/Democrats turn them into depressions.

Save of course that we haven't had a depression since we started regulating capitalism. The Depressions came BEFORE we did so. The Great Depression (1929 to 1933), the Depression of 1920-21, and the Long Depression from 1873 to 1879.

And how many depressions have we had since we began regulating the economy Chic? Count them with me:

Zero. Nada. Zilch.

Compared to the 3 in preregulation capitalism. No thank you.

Roaring Twenties were both
a. Republican

and

b. a period of sustained economic prosperity"
Roaring Twenties - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

The 'Roaring Twenties' included 3 recessions and ended in the Great Depression. Which lasted from 1929 to 1933.

If that's a 'republican decade', you can keep it.

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. "Oh, I read your gibberish. It just didn't amount to much."
Actually, the conclusion is that you are not bright enough to incorporate that truth into your decisions.

If the useless idiocy you tell yourself was 'truth', you might have a point. Alas, it isn't. So you don't.

Remember, Chic....and this point is fundamental: you don't know what you're talking about. You recite. You repeat. You quote verbatim. But you don't think. And you rarely if every bother to research.

2. "The regulation of capitalism is one of practical stability."
I said nothing about regulation....you should strive to use the same level of precision in your reading as I do in my posts.

I did. In the very post you responded to. Wait.....you think my posts are bound to whatever rhetorical deuce you spew up?

Um, no.

3."Look at the 80 or so years before the new deal..."
"The Roaring Twenties is a phrase used to refer to the 1920s in theUnited States,Canada, and theUnited Kingdom, characterizing the decade's distinctive cultural edge inNew York City,Chicago,Berlin,London,Los Angeles, and many other major cities duringa period of sustained economic prosperity"
Roaring Twenties - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

With 3 recessions in the 20s (1921, 1923, 1926), followed by the Great Depression. And preceded by the Recession of 1918, the recession of 1913, the Panic of 1910, the Panic of 1907, and the recession of 1902.

Does the word 'unstable' mean anything to you? And this is what you want us to return to?

Laughing....so much for that 'wisdom' you were lauding. It helps if you have the slightest clue what you're talking about. Which, of course, you don't.

4. Don't hesitate to request further remedial education.

Says the poor lass that didn't even know that the 'Roaring 20s' had 3 recessions and was followed by the Great Depression.

You're consistently clueless. I'll give you that.

"Says the poor lass that didn't even know that the 'Roaring 20s' had 3 recessions and was followed by the Great Depression."

Economics 101: the reason that Hoover's recession became a depression was that Franklin Roosevelt was President.

You didn't know that either, did you.

Probably because its complete horseshit. The Great Depression lasted from 1929 to March 1933.

Um, sweetie? Roosevelt took office in March of 1933. Your narrative is not only useless ignorance, its physically impossible. And an economic plummet that lasted 3 years and 7 months shaving more than a quarter of our GDP is not a 'recession'. Its a massive depression.

And it all happened BEFORE Roosevelt took office.

Again, you don't have the slightest clue what you're talking about. Not even an itsy bitsy little bit. You're merely cutting and pasting words you neither understand nor have bothered to research.

Just give us the webpage that's doing your thinking for you. As you clearly don't know enough to carry the argument you're trying to ape.

You don't read carefully,do you.

Again...from the Left-leaning Brookings Institution

1. In 1935, the Brookings Institution (left-leaning) delivered a 900-page report on the New Deal and the National Recovery Administration, concluding that “ on the whole it retarded recovery.”
article - AEI


Need someone to explain that to you?

And this:
2. Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., liberal New Deal historian wrote in The National Experience, in 1963, “Though the policies of the Hundred Days had ended despair, they had not produce recovery…” He also wrote honestly about the devastating crash of 1937- in the midst of the “second New Deal” and Roosevelt’s second term. “The collapse in the months after September 1937 was actually more severe than it had been in the first nine months of the depression: national income fell 13 %, payrolls 35 %, durable goods production 50 %, profits 78% .

 

[paddymurphy]

1. "Oh, I read your gibberish. It just didn't amount to much."
Actually, the conclusion is that you are not bright enough to incorporate that truth into your decisions.

If the useless idiocy you tell yourself was 'truth', you might have a point. Alas, it isn't. So you don't.

Remember, Chic....and this point is fundamental: you don't know what you're talking about. You recite. You repeat. You quote verbatim. But you don't think. And you rarely if every bother to research.

2. "The regulation of capitalism is one of practical stability."
I said nothing about regulation....you should strive to use the same level of precision in your reading as I do in my posts.

I did. In the very post you responded to. Wait.....you think my posts are bound to whatever rhetorical deuce you spew up?

Um, no.

3."Look at the 80 or so years before the new deal..."
"The Roaring Twenties is a phrase used to refer to the 1920s in theUnited States,Canada, and theUnited Kingdom, characterizing the decade's distinctive cultural edge inNew York City,Chicago,Berlin,London,Los Angeles, and many other major cities duringa period of sustained economic prosperity"
Roaring Twenties - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

With 3 recessions in the 20s (1921, 1923, 1926), followed by the Great Depression. And preceded by the Recession of 1918, the recession of 1913, the Panic of 1910, the Panic of 1907, and the recession of 1902.

Does the word 'unstable' mean anything to you? And this is what you want us to return to?

Laughing....so much for that 'wisdom' you were lauding. It helps if you have the slightest clue what you're talking about. Which, of course, you don't.

4. Don't hesitate to request further remedial education.

Says the poor lass that didn't even know that the 'Roaring 20s' had 3 recessions and was followed by the Great Depression.

You're consistently clueless. I'll give you that.

"Says the poor lass that didn't even know that the 'Roaring 20s' had 3 recessions and was followed by the Great Depression."

Economics 101: the reason that Hoover's recession became a depression was that Franklin Roosevelt was President.

You didn't know that either, did you.


1. In 1935, the Brookings Institution (left-leaning) delivered a 900-page report on the New Deal and the National Recovery Administration, concluding that “ on the whole it retarded recovery.”
article - AEI


You're dumb enough to remain a Reliable Democrat Voter.

The stock market crashed in 1929. Roosevelt was sworn in as President three and one half years later, in March 1933. The great depression was already in full swing when Roosevelt became President. The reforms he put in have prevented a repeat of anything close to the devastation of the great depression. There has been stability since then. The reaction of Bush and then Obama to the 2007-2008 crisis prevented it from turning into a depression. They reacted with the government intervention necessary to stave off another depression. Had you actually had a smidgen of understanding of economic principles, you would know these things.

 

[paddymurphy]

1. "Oh, I read your gibberish. It just didn't amount to much."
Actually, the conclusion is that you are not bright enough to incorporate that truth into your decisions.

If the useless idiocy you tell yourself was 'truth', you might have a point. Alas, it isn't. So you don't.

Remember, Chic....and this point is fundamental: you don't know what you're talking about. You recite. You repeat. You quote verbatim. But you don't think. And you rarely if every bother to research.

2. "The regulation of capitalism is one of practical stability."
I said nothing about regulation....you should strive to use the same level of precision in your reading as I do in my posts.

I did. In the very post you responded to. Wait.....you think my posts are bound to whatever rhetorical deuce you spew up?

Um, no.

3."Look at the 80 or so years before the new deal..."
"The Roaring Twenties is a phrase used to refer to the 1920s in theUnited States,Canada, and theUnited Kingdom, characterizing the decade's distinctive cultural edge inNew York City,Chicago,Berlin,London,Los Angeles, and many other major cities duringa period of sustained economic prosperity"
Roaring Twenties - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

With 3 recessions in the 20s (1921, 1923, 1926), followed by the Great Depression. And preceded by the Recession of 1918, the recession of 1913, the Panic of 1910, the Panic of 1907, and the recession of 1902.

Does the word 'unstable' mean anything to you? And this is what you want us to return to?

Laughing....so much for that 'wisdom' you were lauding. It helps if you have the slightest clue what you're talking about. Which, of course, you don't.

4. Don't hesitate to request further remedial education.

Says the poor lass that didn't even know that the 'Roaring 20s' had 3 recessions and was followed by the Great Depression.

You're consistently clueless. I'll give you that.

So sad....now I'll have to put you in your place again....

...and that place is the last seat in the dumb row.


"If the useless idiocy you tell yourself was 'truth', you might have a point. Alas, it isn't. So you don't.

Remember, Chic....and this point is fundamental: you don't know what you're talking about. You recite. You repeat. You quote verbatim. But you don't think. And you rarely if every bother to research."

This is the truth under discussion:
Many not ideologically Leftist are seduced by the rhetoric that they are helping others. The wise recognize the lie.

It is very simple to document this statement....almost as simple as you are.

1. "...the U.S. Census Bureau is scheduled to release its annual poverty report. The report will be notable because this year marks the 50th anniversary of the launch of President Lyndon Johnson’s War on Poverty. In his January 1964 State of the Union address, Johnson proclaimed, “This administration today, here and now, declares unconditional war on poverty in America.”[1]

Since that time, U.S. taxpayers have spent over $22 trillion on anti-poverty programs (in constant 2012 dollars). Adjusted for inflation, this spending (which does not include Social Security or Medicare) is three times the cost of all military wars in U.S. history since the American Revolution. Despite this mountain of spending, progress against poverty, at least as measured by the government, has been minimal."
War on Poverty After 50 Years Conditions of the Poor in America


Exactly as I stated in the truth I presented.


2. ‘Welfare’ as a wholly owned subsidiary of the government, and its main result is the incentivizing of a disrespect for oneself, and for the entity that provides the welfare. As more folks in a poor neighborhood languish with little or no work, entire local culture begins to change: daily work is no longer the expected social norm. Extended periods of hanging around the neighborhood, neither working nor going to school becoming more and more socially acceptable.

Since productive activity not making any economic sense because of the work disincentives of the welfare plantation, other kinds of activities proliferate: drug and alcohol abuse, crime, recreational sex, illegitimacy, and family breakup are the new social norms, as does the culture of violence."
Peter Ferrara, “America’s Ticking Bankruptcy Bomb,” chapter five.

Exactly as I stated in the truth I presented.


So, with the best of intentions, dopes like you continue to support a failed and fraudulent system that keeps the poor poor.


Wanna read it again?
Many not ideologically Leftist are seduced by the rhetoric that they are helping others. The wise recognize the lie.

"A poverty measure that, as most analysts recommend, accounts for (rather than ignores) major non-cash benefits that the official poverty measure leaves out -- namely, SNAP (the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, formerly called food stamps), rent subsidies, and tax credits for working families -- would find that poverty in the United States today is considerably lower than it was throughout the 1960s, despite today's weaker economy.
Similarly, an analysis of average incomes among the poorest one-fifth of Americans that counts non-cash benefits and tax credits also shows important progress. Average household income for the bottom fifth of Americans (counting those benefits and tax credits, adjusted for inflation and changes in household size) was more than 75 percent higher in 2011 than in 1964, the year that President Johnson announced the War on Poverty. Both earnings and government assistance contributed to the increase."

Official Poverty Measure Masks Gains Made Over Last 50 Years Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

Another dunce checks in with the Liberal propaganda....

"... would find that poverty in the United States today is considerably lower than it was throughout the 1960s, despite today's weaker economy."

What a crock.

Spin…altering the truth without altering the facts.



"....that the poverty rate has risen to 15.1 percent of Americans, ....
On January 8, 1964, President Lyndon B.

Johnson delivered a State of the Union address to Congress in which he declared an “unconditional war on poverty in America.”
Scribd



At the time, the poverty rate in America was

around 19 percent and falling rapidly.

So, that went right over your head. The war on poverty lowered it by supplementing the resources of poor people with benefits. When those benefit are counted, the poverty rate is lower by far than it was in 1964.

 

[g5000]

So many straw men, logical fallacies, half truths, and lies of omission, one scarcely knows where to begin.

I guess this is as good as any place to start:

More Random Truths.....

1. The more Left a nation goes, the fewer children are produced

Nope. The more PROSPEROUS a nation, the lower its birth rate goes.

 

[g5000]

The Left survives on demonization of the Right…rather than debating ideas: they teach their drones that the Right is not wrong, but evil…

Did anyone else bust a gut laughing at the irony of an opening post which demonizes the Left?