Republicans Are Extremely Fearful of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

[danielpalos]

the right wing is economically clueless and economically Causeless. in what manner is it unsustainable, with a positive multiplier and automatic stabilization of the economy?

Because it costs more than it generates. That's always the way it works when you first have to take money out to spend it.

it depends on how you spend it. more people spending more money means a positive multiplier effect.

We've tried that with stimulus packages before. There's a slight boost to the economy, followed by debt that never gets paid. It doesn't pay for itself. I know you passionately believe this, but take a serious look at the numbers before you start spouting it again. And get a more recent number of unemployed.

how will that happen with unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed?

It's never worked, and won't now.

only because the right wing is clueless and Causeless. it will work now.

 

[danielpalos]

even women can gossip. Men have arguments.

I am sorry then that I called you male. I will remember your gender if I bother to talk with you again.

nothing but gossip, dear? wo-men are equal to You.

Men have arguments.

Women are equal to you. Think about that for a bit.

I have arguments, not gossip.

Women are your equal.

i have more than gossip; unlike yourself.

 

[Papageorgio]

Can you answer his question? If your are as superior in economics as you claim then explai it to us in plain simple English instead of just claiming superiority.

What part of compensation for Capitalism's natural rate of unemployment, do you not understand?

The actual numbers. Going from 465 billion to 3.1 trillion, I don’t see it sustainable, you would need to sustain 1.5 trillion that won’t return, you are claiming over 3.1 trillion for a 465 billion cost, you according to my figures are short by about 1.6 trillion. Show me your figures.

it must be sustainable with any positive multiplier effect. a positive multiplier of 2, is the least we can expect.

You are then short of the sustainability, that is my concern. My issue is the rich don’t pay taxes, they pass it on to the middle class. Obviously you realize that, that would raise the cost of living for those that already support America.

means what? if labor is making fifteen an hour or being compensated for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment.

It means it is unsustainable, you would be better off putting them on welfare, it is cheaper as you already know by your own numbers.

 

[hadit]

Because it costs more than it generates. That's always the way it works when you first have to take money out to spend it.

it depends on how you spend it. more people spending more money means a positive multiplier effect.

We've tried that with stimulus packages before. There's a slight boost to the economy, followed by debt that never gets paid. It doesn't pay for itself. I know you passionately believe this, but take a serious look at the numbers before you start spouting it again. And get a more recent number of unemployed.

how will that happen with unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed?

It's never worked, and won't now.

only because the right wing is clueless and Causeless. it will work now.

You've given no reason why it should.

 

[hadit]

I am sorry then that I called you male. I will remember your gender if I bother to talk with you again.

nothing but gossip, dear? wo-men are equal to You.

Men have arguments.

Women are equal to you. Think about that for a bit.

I have arguments, not gossip.

Women are your equal.

i have more than gossip; unlike yourself.

In fact, many women are superior to you.

 

[rightwinger]

only right wing fantasy doesn't have to obey the laws of demand and supply. a positive multiplier effect and automatic stabilization of our local economies, is what we can expect.

Again, you need to prove your numbers are correct, so far you have showed your idea is unsustainable, I am open to your idea however you give us nothing but theory without facts.

the right wing is economically clueless and economically Causeless. in what manner is it unsustainable, with a positive multiplier and automatic stabilization of the economy?

Because it costs more than it generates. That's always the way it works when you first have to take money out to spend it.

it depends on how you spend it. more people spending more money means a positive multiplier effect.

We've tried that with stimulus packages before. There's a slight boost to the economy, followed by debt that never gets paid. It doesn't pay for itself. I know you passionately believe this, but take a serious look at the numbers before you start spouting it again. And get a more recent number of unemployed.

Same thing happens with tax cuts

 

[danielpalos]

What part of compensation for Capitalism's natural rate of unemployment, do you not understand?

The actual numbers. Going from 465 billion to 3.1 trillion, I don’t see it sustainable, you would need to sustain 1.5 trillion that won’t return, you are claiming over 3.1 trillion for a 465 billion cost, you according to my figures are short by about 1.6 trillion. Show me your figures.

it must be sustainable with any positive multiplier effect. a positive multiplier of 2, is the least we can expect.

You are then short of the sustainability, that is my concern. My issue is the rich don’t pay taxes, they pass it on to the middle class. Obviously you realize that, that would raise the cost of living for those that already support America.

means what? if labor is making fifteen an hour or being compensated for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment.

It means it is unsustainable, you would be better off putting them on welfare, it is cheaper as you already know by your own numbers.

no, they wouldn't. means testing limits mobility and is more expensive. you simply make up your own special pleading in a vacuum and proclaim it to be the alleged, "gospel Truth".

 

[danielpalos]

it depends on how you spend it. more people spending more money means a positive multiplier effect.

We've tried that with stimulus packages before. There's a slight boost to the economy, followed by debt that never gets paid. It doesn't pay for itself. I know you passionately believe this, but take a serious look at the numbers before you start spouting it again. And get a more recent number of unemployed.

how will that happen with unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed?

It's never worked, and won't now.

only because the right wing is clueless and Causeless. it will work now.

You've given no reason why it should.

you have given no reason why it wouldn't.

 

[Papageorgio]

We've tried that with stimulus packages before. There's a slight boost to the economy, followed by debt that never gets paid. It doesn't pay for itself. I know you passionately believe this, but take a serious look at the numbers before you start spouting it again. And get a more recent number of unemployed.

how will that happen with unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed?

It's never worked, and won't now.

only because the right wing is clueless and Causeless. it will work now.

You've given no reason why it should.

you have given no reason why it wouldn't.

Lots of reasons given you just don’t give a damn. Cliches are what you have.

 

[Papageorgio]

The actual numbers. Going from 465 billion to 3.1 trillion, I don’t see it sustainable, you would need to sustain 1.5 trillion that won’t return, you are claiming over 3.1 trillion for a 465 billion cost, you according to my figures are short by about 1.6 trillion. Show me your figures.

it must be sustainable with any positive multiplier effect. a positive multiplier of 2, is the least we can expect.

You are then short of the sustainability, that is my concern. My issue is the rich don’t pay taxes, they pass it on to the middle class. Obviously you realize that, that would raise the cost of living for those that already support America.

means what? if labor is making fifteen an hour or being compensated for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment.

It means it is unsustainable, you would be better off putting them on welfare, it is cheaper as you already know by your own numbers.

no, they wouldn't. means testing limits mobility and is more expensive. you simply make up your own special pleading in a vacuum and proclaim it to be the alleged, "gospel Truth".

Always a cause and never a cure, the reason the left isn’t taken seriously.

 

[hadit]

We've tried that with stimulus packages before. There's a slight boost to the economy, followed by debt that never gets paid. It doesn't pay for itself. I know you passionately believe this, but take a serious look at the numbers before you start spouting it again. And get a more recent number of unemployed.

how will that happen with unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed?

It's never worked, and won't now.

only because the right wing is clueless and Causeless. it will work now.

You've given no reason why it should.

you have given no reason why it wouldn't.

Yes I did. You're just repeating back what I say, a truly childish tactic. Let me know when you have more than fallacies, excuses and gossip. Until then, you have nothing.

 

[danielpalos]

how will that happen with unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed?

It's never worked, and won't now.

only because the right wing is clueless and Causeless. it will work now.

You've given no reason why it should.

you have given no reason why it wouldn't.

Lots of reasons given you just don’t give a damn. Cliches are what you have.

you don't even have cliches and i have more reasons than you do.

 

[danielpalos]

it must be sustainable with any positive multiplier effect. a positive multiplier of 2, is the least we can expect.

You are then short of the sustainability, that is my concern. My issue is the rich don’t pay taxes, they pass it on to the middle class. Obviously you realize that, that would raise the cost of living for those that already support America.

means what? if labor is making fifteen an hour or being compensated for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment.

It means it is unsustainable, you would be better off putting them on welfare, it is cheaper as you already know by your own numbers.

no, they wouldn't. means testing limits mobility and is more expensive. you simply make up your own special pleading in a vacuum and proclaim it to be the alleged, "gospel Truth".

Always a cause and never a cure, the reason the left isn’t taken seriously.

compensation for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment must work since it is market friendly.

 

[danielpalos]

how will that happen with unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed?

It's never worked, and won't now.

only because the right wing is clueless and Causeless. it will work now.

You've given no reason why it should.

you have given no reason why it wouldn't.

Yes I did. You're just repeating back what I say, a truly childish tactic. Let me know when you have more than fallacies, excuses and gossip. Until then, you have nothing.

no, you didn't. and, I have one more reason than You, why it would.

 

[Papageorgio]

It's never worked, and won't now.

only because the right wing is clueless and Causeless. it will work now.

You've given no reason why it should.

you have given no reason why it wouldn't.

Lots of reasons given you just don’t give a damn. Cliches are what you have.

you don't even have cliches and i have more reasons that you do.

I don’t need cliches I have facts for most people that suffices, you aren’t smart enough to know the difference between fact and cliches.

 

[Papageorgio]

You are then short of the sustainability, that is my concern. My issue is the rich don’t pay taxes, they pass it on to the middle class. Obviously you realize that, that would raise the cost of living for those that already support America.

means what? if labor is making fifteen an hour or being compensated for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment.

It means it is unsustainable, you would be better off putting them on welfare, it is cheaper as you already know by your own numbers.

no, they wouldn't. means testing limits mobility and is more expensive. you simply make up your own special pleading in a vacuum and proclaim it to be the alleged, "gospel Truth".

Always a cause and never a cure, the reason the left isn’t taken seriously.

compensation for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment must work since it is market friendly.

As was cliches and no cure, no wonder the left isn’t taken seriously.

 

[danielpalos]

only because the right wing is clueless and Causeless. it will work now.

You've given no reason why it should.

you have given no reason why it wouldn't.

Lots of reasons given you just don’t give a damn. Cliches are what you have.

you don't even have cliches and i have more reasons that you do.

I don’t need cliches I have facts for most people that suffices, you aren’t smart enough to know the difference between fact and cliches.

why do you believe compensation for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment would not work under any form of Capitalism?

 

[hadit]

It's never worked, and won't now.

only because the right wing is clueless and Causeless. it will work now.

You've given no reason why it should.

you have given no reason why it wouldn't.

Yes I did. You're just repeating back what I say, a truly childish tactic. Let me know when you have more than fallacies, excuses and gossip. Until then, you have nothing.

no, you didn't. and, I have one more reason than You, why it would.

I gave you the numbers and history. You gave me nothing more than, "it'll work this time".

You're in denial and can't acknowledge that you're simply wrong. I can only assume it's because you don't have any arguments beyond the trite phrases and if you had to give them up you wouldn't have anything at all.

 

[danielpalos]

only because the right wing is clueless and Causeless. it will work now.

You've given no reason why it should.

you have given no reason why it wouldn't.

Yes I did. You're just repeating back what I say, a truly childish tactic. Let me know when you have more than fallacies, excuses and gossip. Until then, you have nothing.

no, you didn't. and, I have one more reason than You, why it would.

I gave you the numbers and history. You gave me nothing more than, "it'll work this time".

You're in denial and can't acknowledge that you're simply wrong. I can only assume it's because you don't have any arguments beyond the trite phrases and if you had to give them up you wouldn't have anything at all.

the history got it wrong. we understand economics better now. Capitalism has a natural rate of unemployment for the capital bottom line. Solving for that improves the efficiency of our market based economy.

 

[hadit]

You've given no reason why it should.

you have given no reason why it wouldn't.

Yes I did. You're just repeating back what I say, a truly childish tactic. Let me know when you have more than fallacies, excuses and gossip. Until then, you have nothing.

no, you didn't. and, I have one more reason than You, why it would.

I gave you the numbers and history. You gave me nothing more than, "it'll work this time".

You're in denial and can't acknowledge that you're simply wrong. I can only assume it's because you don't have any arguments beyond the trite phrases and if you had to give them up you wouldn't have anything at all.

the history got it wrong. we understand economics better now. Capitalism has a natural rate of unemployment for the capital bottom line. Solving for that improves the efficiency of our market based economy.

That's the common bleat from socialists the world over when it's pointed out to them that socialism and communism have ended up enslaving and destroying the people everywhere and every time they've been tried, "We just haven't done it quite right yet". How many times are you going to subject millions of people to enforced poverty? How many times must they languish under totalitarian governments and economic systems that rob them of hope, dignity and self determination? How many times does it have to be proven to you before you will finally say, "okay, enough, it won't work"?

You think it will work in the US because you think it's rich, there's plenty of money that will last forever. Here's reality. There's NEVER enough money to account for greed and selfishness. When given the opportunity, many will opt out of struggling to provide for themselves and take that which is forced from others. Only later will they realize what it did to their self esteem, but by then it's too late. There are no opportunities left because Socialism destroyed them all.