Republicans Are Extremely Fearful of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

[hadit]

See, this is why it's obvious that you are clueless. If I quit my job, I cannot go on unemployment because that's not what is for. Only if I am laid off through no fault of my own can I go on unemployment.

Use terminology the way it's meant to be used and stop trying to change the meaning of words.

equality is a social concept not a capital concept. i understand the concept of equal protection of the law.

You most certainly do not.

anybody can talk. you need a valid argument that refutes my contention.

I've educated you on this already. You ignored it and remained ignorant. No more help for you.

vacuums of special pleading may only be right, twice a day.

Your clueless pleading is worthless.

 

[danielpalos]

Only lousy capitalists, say that.

Good capitalists say that. A strong work ethic benefits everyone.

Why? It benefits capitalists more than Labor.

Who generates income to support their family and community? Who creates wealth? NOT the guy sitting on the couch smoking pot.

he has to go buy it, sometimes. he may be willing to put gas in the car and pick up some groceries. all that contributes to a positive multiplier effect. Anyone who knows AnyThing about economics, knows these concepts.

And where does the money come from that he uses? If he is not providing value to someone else, it first must be taken from someone else who earned it, thus lowering the value of his labor and leaving him less to circulate himself. Look this up and study it. You like phrases, try learning this one.

Opportunity cost.

A fable to illustrate. A vandal breaks a window in a shop in a small town. The next day the villagers gather to express dismay. The shop keeper hires a glazier to fix the window and the villagers start to agree that this is a good thing, because now money is being pumped into the local economy and danielpalos will be happy that capital is circulating. The shop keeper speaks up and says, "No! This is not a good thing. Since I had to spend the money to fix the window, I now can't spend it to decorate my storefront to attract more customers. I also have less money now to give my employee a bonus. The more money I have to spend on fixing windows, the less I have to offer benefits."

So you see, taking money out of the economy only to pump it back in incurs a cost that you're ignorant of and ignoring. Giving money away in the hopes that it will generate taxes is as useful as filing a swimming pool by pumping water from the deep end into the shallow end.

why the hangup on learning how to fish, but having only red herrings to show for it?

Only capital has to circulate under capitalism. Capitalism has a natural rate of unemployment. Correcting for that capital inefficiency wll pay for itself, eventually. In the mean time, we could still be lowering costs to the private sector by changing the tax from a direct tax to a general tax.

 

[bendog]

They are fearful because, finally, they have to contend with an unabashed liberal progressive that's fighting for the people. Moreover, she's a woman, so they won't be able to just come out her any type of way.

And the best part is, she know exactly how to counter their foolishness.

Yes Republicans, she's coming, and HELL'S coming with her!!!

Any other thoughts on why Republicans are left quaking in their boots over this. one. little. woman?

So are dems. LOL

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/12/18/ocasio-cortez-hakeem-jeffries-2020-primary-1067
Seriously, she's bad news for dems who traditionally struggle to stay on message and avoid self-immolation. See 2016

 

[ColonelAngus]

They are fearful because, finally, they have to contend with an unabashed liberal progressive that's fighting for the people. Moreover, she's a woman, so they won't be able to just come out her any type of way.

And the best part is, she know exactly how to counter their foolishness.

Yes Republicans, she's coming, and HELL'S coming with her!!!

Any other thoughts on why Republicans are left quaking in their boots over this. one. little. woman?

They should be terrified of her.
She's smart,
she's Hispanic,
she's young and
she's a woman.

Republicans don't understand smart women. Not really. Remember, they thought, and still do, that Sarah Palin was smart:

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Fires Back at Sarah Palin

“If we work our butts off to make sure that we take back all three chambers of Congress—Uh, rather, all three chambers of government: the presidency, the Senate, and the House,” Ocasio-Cortez said in the clip. “We can’t start working in 2020.” (a comment from Ocasio-Cortez that drove Republicans nutz)

“Maybe instead of Republicans drooling over every minute of footage of me in slow-mo, waiting to chop up word slips that I correct in real-time (sic), they actually step up enough to make the argument they want to make: that they don’t believe people deserve a right to healthcare.” (this was her return comment)

Remember this:

Melissa Harris Perry laughs at Sarah Palin's moronic antics

And she said this:

“Now that’s *TWO* fallen GOP Vice Pres candidates going after a freshman Congresswoman that’s not even sworn in yet. Isn’t it a little early to be bringing out the big guns?” (Leiberman, who is now Republican and Sarah Palin)

---------------

When dumb, much older and white Republican gets into an argument with a young and smart minority, the older loses. For one, they get no respect for starting a fight when they are supposed to be a respected elder. Instead, they come across as a doddering old fool and worst of all, they look uncool.

Give her a break. She's young and inexperienced.

There will be more than ample opportunities for hilarity with this one.

That's what they said about Michelle Obama who turned out to be one of the most respected women in the world except to racist Republicans.
Even Trump said she gave the best speech at the Republican Convention.

What about racist Democrats??

The problem with your kind is that you believe since Democrats support diversity, they must be racist. It’s the alt white that are not racist because they see the natural superiority of white Republicans. Especially the ones with no education. They don’t need education because they’re naturally superior. Legends in their own tiny minds.

Your kind.

Nice left wing lunatic stereotyping.

 

[Redfish]

LMAO No ones afraid of her.

Its just that no one can believe the shit that comes out of her mouth.

If she's the best you lefty loons can do then you really are in trouble.

It worked for Scott Walker, who's been in office for over a decade.

That boy hasn't said one sensible thing before or since being elected, and he's now retiring.

You like his dumb ass, don't you?

He beat the dems several times, I understand why you don't like him.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Let's see if we have this right. You want to take money OUT of the economy so you can inject PART of it back INTO the economy because that's somehow superior to leaving it IN the economy to start with?

Basically, you're trying to fill a swimming pool by pumping water from the deep end into the shallow end.

Full employment of resources is the objective.

What merchant in commerce would be worse off, if all adult customers have recourse to a minimum income simply for being unemployed?

If a person wants to make more, they can provide labor input to the economy.

The right wing has problems with the Poor and a Minimum wage.

Handing money to bums results in less than full employment of resources.
Subsidizing sloth results in more sloth and less production.
Your weed fueled idiocy is not economics.

Capital has to circulate under Capitalism. That is why, Man invented money.

Don't be such a lazy, whiney bum.

Only lousy capitalists, say that.

Bum.

 

[danielpalos]

Full employment of resources is the objective.

What merchant in commerce would be worse off, if all adult customers have recourse to a minimum income simply for being unemployed?

If a person wants to make more, they can provide labor input to the economy.

The right wing has problems with the Poor and a Minimum wage.

Handing money to bums results in less than full employment of resources.
Subsidizing sloth results in more sloth and less production.
Your weed fueled idiocy is not economics.

Capital has to circulate under Capitalism. That is why, Man invented money.

Don't be such a lazy, whiney bum.

Only lousy capitalists, say that.

Bum.

floozy.

 

[Papageorgio]

Let's see your proof.

it should be a self-evident truth. means testing is simply more expensive than merely compensating someone for simply being unemployed.

Be honest. You mean choosing not to work.

be honest. Capitalism has a Natural rate of unemployment. Why not work with it instead of blaming Labor.

Be honest, prove your theory, you spout it and still you can’t back it up.

it is no theory; merely a more efficient application.

So you continue to provide no proof. Thanks for confirming my thoughts.

 

[Papageorgio]

Employment relationships are governed by State laws.

Then prove there is no equal protection.

He thinks it's not equal if you get the unemployment compensation your employer has been paying for and you got laid off, but he doesn't because he never held a job.

cheaper than welfare; and, if you don't want to pay more in taxes, employ more people to lower your tax burden.

Those that work are the ones who are hardest hit by taxes, they aren’t employers, they are hired. So you feel it is okay to hurt them financially in order for lazy people to have the ability to sit home and not contribute to the general welfare of the country?

Now, go ahead and parrot your answer which will have nothing to do with what I posted.

special pleading in a vacuum, like usual? The law of large numbers will for us instead of against us when it comes to people paying taxes merely due to circulating more money.

Again, no answer. Thank you.

 

[Papageorgio]

Be honest. You mean choosing not to work.

be honest. Capitalism has a Natural rate of unemployment. Why not work with it instead of blaming Labor.

Be honest, prove your theory, you spout it and still you can’t back it up.

it is no theory; merely a more efficient application.

Got nothing, thanks for admitting you are a fraud, you need to contribute to the general welfare of the country.

just your ignorance. all of the concepts presented by me are valid. You all have no valid rebuttals, only gossip, propaganda, and rhetoric.

How can one rebut pie in the sky thoughts? Please prove your theory with actual data instead of thoughts of a crazy person.

 

[Papageorgio]

That applies to people who would work if they could, not those who can work but won't.

just your hangup. you could quit and go on unemployment. see how equal that is.

See, this is why it's obvious that you are clueless. If I quit my job, I cannot go on unemployment because that's not what is for. Only if I am laid off through no fault of my own can I go on unemployment.

Use terminology the way it's meant to be used and stop trying to change the meaning of words.

equality is a social concept not a capital concept. i understand the concept of equal protection of the law.

You most certainly do not.

anybody can talk. you need a valid argument that refutes my contention.

What the hell is your contention? That you want to sit on your ass and do nothing? You have no proof of your contention, so no valid contention.

 

[iceberg]

yea, fucking stupid is pretty scary.

 

[danielpalos]

it should be a self-evident truth. means testing is simply more expensive than merely compensating someone for simply being unemployed.

Be honest. You mean choosing not to work.

be honest. Capitalism has a Natural rate of unemployment. Why not work with it instead of blaming Labor.

Be honest, prove your theory, you spout it and still you can’t back it up.

it is no theory; merely a more efficient application.

So you continue to provide no proof. Thanks for confirming my thoughts.

it is a self-evident truth. capitalism and self-selection must be more efficient than means testing. we should be decreasing the need for more expensive means testing.

 

[danielpalos]

Then prove there is no equal protection.

He thinks it's not equal if you get the unemployment compensation your employer has been paying for and you got laid off, but he doesn't because he never held a job.

cheaper than welfare; and, if you don't want to pay more in taxes, employ more people to lower your tax burden.

Those that work are the ones who are hardest hit by taxes, they aren’t employers, they are hired. So you feel it is okay to hurt them financially in order for lazy people to have the ability to sit home and not contribute to the general welfare of the country?

Now, go ahead and parrot your answer which will have nothing to do with what I posted.

special pleading in a vacuum, like usual? The law of large numbers will for us instead of against us when it comes to people paying taxes merely due to circulating more money.

Again, no answer. Thank you.

more people circulating more capital means more in local taxes and more in local demand.

 

[danielpalos]

be honest. Capitalism has a Natural rate of unemployment. Why not work with it instead of blaming Labor.

Be honest, prove your theory, you spout it and still you can’t back it up.

it is no theory; merely a more efficient application.

Got nothing, thanks for admitting you are a fraud, you need to contribute to the general welfare of the country.

just your ignorance. all of the concepts presented by me are valid. You all have no valid rebuttals, only gossip, propaganda, and rhetoric.

How can one rebut pie in the sky thoughts? Please prove your theory with actual data instead of thoughts of a crazy person.

by actually having some understanding of economics. anyone can hearsay and soothsay.

 

[danielpalos]

just your hangup. you could quit and go on unemployment. see how equal that is.

See, this is why it's obvious that you are clueless. If I quit my job, I cannot go on unemployment because that's not what is for. Only if I am laid off through no fault of my own can I go on unemployment.

Use terminology the way it's meant to be used and stop trying to change the meaning of words.

equality is a social concept not a capital concept. i understand the concept of equal protection of the law.

You most certainly do not.

anybody can talk. you need a valid argument that refutes my contention.

What the hell is your contention? That you want to sit on your ass and do nothing? You have no proof of your contention, so no valid contention.

Solving simple poverty is as simple and automatic as the current laws of employment at will can make it.

 

[Papageorgio]

Be honest. You mean choosing not to work.

be honest. Capitalism has a Natural rate of unemployment. Why not work with it instead of blaming Labor.

Be honest, prove your theory, you spout it and still you can’t back it up.

it is no theory; merely a more efficient application.

So you continue to provide no proof. Thanks for confirming my thoughts.

it is a self-evident truth. capitalism and self-selection must be more efficient than means testing. we should be decreasing the need for more expensive means testing.

Sorry, I don't understand your jibberish or how it applies to what I posted.

 

[Papageorgio]

He thinks it's not equal if you get the unemployment compensation your employer has been paying for and you got laid off, but he doesn't because he never held a job.

cheaper than welfare; and, if you don't want to pay more in taxes, employ more people to lower your tax burden.

Those that work are the ones who are hardest hit by taxes, they aren’t employers, they are hired. So you feel it is okay to hurt them financially in order for lazy people to have the ability to sit home and not contribute to the general welfare of the country?

Now, go ahead and parrot your answer which will have nothing to do with what I posted.

special pleading in a vacuum, like usual? The law of large numbers will for us instead of against us when it comes to people paying taxes merely due to circulating more money.

Again, no answer. Thank you.

more people circulating more capital means more in local taxes and more in local demand.

So you have a man that makes $50000, and you take $25000 and give it to another man that is not working, so now two men have $25000 how does that circulate more money into the economy?

 

[Papageorgio]

Be honest, prove your theory, you spout it and still you can’t back it up.

it is no theory; merely a more efficient application.

Got nothing, thanks for admitting you are a fraud, you need to contribute to the general welfare of the country.

just your ignorance. all of the concepts presented by me are valid. You all have no valid rebuttals, only gossip, propaganda, and rhetoric.

How can one rebut pie in the sky thoughts? Please prove your theory with actual data instead of thoughts of a crazy person.

by actually having some understanding of economics. anyone can hearsay and soothsay.

Not understanding your theory here or how it relates to my post, it seems you can't understand posts as you never answer them in context.

 

[Papageorgio]

See, this is why it's obvious that you are clueless. If I quit my job, I cannot go on unemployment because that's not what is for. Only if I am laid off through no fault of my own can I go on unemployment.

Use terminology the way it's meant to be used and stop trying to change the meaning of words.

equality is a social concept not a capital concept. i understand the concept of equal protection of the law.

You most certainly do not.

anybody can talk. you need a valid argument that refutes my contention.

What the hell is your contention? That you want to sit on your ass and do nothing? You have no proof of your contention, so no valid contention.

Solving simple poverty is as simple and automatic as the current laws of employment at will can make it.

Still have no clue how you expect it to work, please explain.