Republicans say they want to "save" money, but Democrats actually "make" money

[Wyatt earp]

It's no secret that America is funded by the urban areas that republicans so despise.

Yes, the inner city of Chicago is a massive funder.

Chicago has the 8th highest GDP of all the cities in the world.

Repeat after me can you say the words "mercantile exchange"

Ya know Chicago's wall street...

 

[Wyatt earp]

I'll be honest, I didn't read past this idiots claim that the government makes money.

yes, as a typical and stupid liberal he has no understanding of economics at all. We have a huge tax paying economy because of the private inventions that got us from the stone age to here. Govt doesn't invent a thing (USSR: not one single consumer product) so does not contribute one penny to economic growth, tax paying, or "making money".

Seems simple but it is way way over a liberal's head.

NASA

You do know the military's space budget is twice as large as NASA correct?

Well almost, I had to recheck we spend 40 billion in space the next country China just spends 11 billion

So what's your problem?



$40 billion: US space budget still exceeds rest of world's combined

 

[Two Thumbs]

I'll be honest, I didn't read past this idiots claim that the government makes money.

yes, as a typical and stupid liberal he has no understanding of economics at all. We have a huge tax paying economy because of the private inventions that got us from the stone age to here. Govt doesn't invent a thing (USSR: not one single consumer product) so does not contribute one penny to economic growth, tax paying, or "making money".

Seems simple but it is way way over a liberal's head.

NASA

nasa doesn't make money

true story

 

[hortysir]

Democrats make money
They make it their own by taking it from others

That's not making money
That's theft

 

[Jomama]

Democrats know you need to make money to pay off debt and that requires investment. Investment in R&D, infrastructure, education and so on.

The difference between spending and investment is lost on many. My wife does not invest in dresses, she spends our limited resources on dresses. Investment requires a stated and measured investment thesis before funding and tough accountability in pursuit of that return. $10M in tuition vouchers can create an above average return, $10M to the Chicago teachers union is a proven waste.

R&D? I believe the OP would consider R&D on clean coal or better mining practices to be corporate welfare but R&D on carbon free unicorns would be an 'investment'. An investor would consider the impact of each dollar and realize that cleaner coal is going to have a much faster payoff for our environment. Infrastructure is similar; a massive dam in California is a far better investment than a highspeed rail but politics gets in the way.

An investment means taking money from a proven failure or bad idea and investing it on new ideas which make more sense - and then re-adjusting regularly based on results. Government does this poorly.

 

[sealybobo]

but Democrats actually "make" money

On Solyndra, for example.

How many chances did trump take and how many times did he fail? Yet you want that loser to lead?

 

[sealybobo]

Follow GOP and Democratic Policies and the difference between the two parties is startling when it comes to economics.

Democrats know you need to make money to pay off debt and that requires investment. Investment in R&D, infrastructure, education and so on. We know that companies with minimum wage jobs have moved to Texas, but companies that require the highly skilled or modern technology have move to Silicon Valley or other expensive places with high tech workers.

Republicans think you can pay off the debt that came from the Bush Tax Cuts and the unpaid for wars and the tens of thousands of wounded from Iraq simply by not spending. Companies have found out that simply moving someplace where they don't pay taxes isn't enough.

For instance, Republicans say that poor people in their states support Democrats. Well, poor people in Democratic states support Democrats. But those states not only support their own poor people, but also Red States, rich and poor.

When the Bush Tax Cuts took effect, it prove that just shoveling money to the rich didn't create jobs. We have over 5 million jobs going unfilled because people don't have the skills to do them. A smart person would invest in education for those people to fill jobs requiring skilled workers. But Republicans don't want to "waste" the money.

If 1% make all the money and pay no taxes the debt can't be paid off. But share the wealth and if the masses are working and paying taxes, maybe.

The rich are right they can't do it alone. They need our help.

 

[Wyatt earp]

but Democrats actually "make" money

On Solyndra, for example.

How many chances did trump take and how many times did he fail? Yet you want that loser to lead?

What are you talking about silly boo boo?

Trump is worth billions and you are worth 43 cents....

 

[sealybobo]

but Democrats actually "make" money

On Solyndra, for example.

How many chances did trump take and how many times did he fail? Yet you want that loser to lead?

What are you talking about silly boo boo?

Trump is worth billions and you are worth 43 cents....

Solondra was an investment that didn't work out. Get over it! Going green isn't easy. If it were we would have already done it.

The dude acts like making better batteries is easy.

I just hate when dumb phuck bring up solyndra.

 

[sealybobo]

but Democrats actually "make" money

On Solyndra, for example.

How many chances did trump take and how many times did he fail? Yet you want that loser to lead?

What are you talking about silly boo boo?

Trump is worth billions and you are worth 43 cents....

That proves I make cents and you make no sense.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

but Democrats actually "make" money

On Solyndra, for example.

How many chances did trump take and how many times did he fail? Yet you want that loser to lead?

How many chances did trump take and how many times did he fail?

I could explain the difference between taking chances with your own money and taking chances with taxpayer money, but most left-wingers won't understand the distinction.

 

[sealybobo]

but Democrats actually "make" money

On Solyndra, for example.

How many chances did trump take and how many times did he fail? Yet you want that loser to lead?

How many chances did trump take and how many times did he fail?

I could explain the difference between taking chances with your own money and taking chances with taxpayer money, but most left-wingers won't understand the distinction.

No, because you don't realize how many cures and inventions our government made because business didn't see a profit motive yet. Then they take over. Great example is al Gore's internet.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Follow GOP and Democratic Policies and the difference between the two parties is startling when it comes to economics.

Democrats know you need to make money to pay off debt and that requires investment. Investment in R&D, infrastructure, education and so on. We know that companies with minimum wage jobs have moved to Texas, but companies that require the highly skilled or modern technology have move to Silicon Valley or other expensive places with high tech workers.

Republicans think you can pay off the debt that came from the Bush Tax Cuts and the unpaid for wars and the tens of thousands of wounded from Iraq simply by not spending. Companies have found out that simply moving someplace where they don't pay taxes isn't enough.

For instance, Republicans say that poor people in their states support Democrats. Well, poor people in Democratic states support Democrats. But those states not only support their own poor people, but also Red States, rich and poor.

When the Bush Tax Cuts took effect, it prove that just shoveling money to the rich didn't create jobs. We have over 5 million jobs going unfilled because people don't have the skills to do them. A smart person would invest in education for those people to fill jobs requiring skilled workers. But Republicans don't want to "waste" the money.

If 1% make all the money and pay no taxes the debt can't be paid off. But share the wealth and if the masses are working and paying taxes, maybe.

The rich are right they can't do it alone. They need our help.

If 1% make all the money and pay no taxes the debt can't be paid off.

They don't make all the money and they pay LOTS of taxes.
If we cut spending back to 2007 levels, now that Obama fixed the Bush economy, we'd
have a $300-$400 billion surplus.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

but Democrats actually "make" money

On Solyndra, for example.

How many chances did trump take and how many times did he fail? Yet you want that loser to lead?

What are you talking about silly boo boo?

Trump is worth billions and you are worth 43 cents....

Solondra was an investment that didn't work out. Get over it! Going green isn't easy. If it were we would have already done it.

The dude acts like making better batteries is easy.

I just hate when dumb phuck bring up solyndra.

Going green isn't easy.

Or cheap, when you give our money to political cronies.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

but Democrats actually "make" money

On Solyndra, for example.

How many chances did trump take and how many times did he fail? Yet you want that loser to lead?

How many chances did trump take and how many times did he fail?

I could explain the difference between taking chances with your own money and taking chances with taxpayer money, but most left-wingers won't understand the distinction.

No, because you don't realize how many cures and inventions our government made because business didn't see a profit motive yet. Then they take over. Great example is al Gore's internet.

No, because you don't realize how many cures and inventions our government made

Perhaps you'd like to provide a list?

Great example is al Gore's internet

LOL!
30 years ago you'd have been whining about wasteful military spending on ARPANET.

 

[sealybobo]

but Democrats actually "make" money

On Solyndra, for example.

How many chances did trump take and how many times did he fail? Yet you want that loser to lead?

How many chances did trump take and how many times did he fail?

I could explain the difference between taking chances with your own money and taking chances with taxpayer money, but most left-wingers won't understand the distinction.

No, because you don't realize how many cures and inventions our government made because business didn't see a profit motive yet. Then they take over. Great example is al Gore's internet.

No, because you don't realize how many cures and inventions our government made

Perhaps you'd like to provide a list?

Great example is al Gore's internet

LOL!
30 years ago you'd have been whining about wasteful military spending on ARPANET.

Military is government spending.

Haloburton might be a private company but it sucking on the government tit so hard it seems like socialism relying on gov jobs??

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

but Democrats actually "make" money

On Solyndra, for example.

How many chances did trump take and how many times did he fail? Yet you want that loser to lead?

How many chances did trump take and how many times did he fail?

I could explain the difference between taking chances with your own money and taking chances with taxpayer money, but most left-wingers won't understand the distinction.

No, because you don't realize how many cures and inventions our government made because business didn't see a profit motive yet. Then they take over. Great example is al Gore's internet.

No, because you don't realize how many cures and inventions our government made

Perhaps you'd like to provide a list?

Great example is al Gore's internet

LOL!
30 years ago you'd have been whining about wasteful military spending on ARPANET.

Military is government spending.

Haloburton might be a private company but it sucking on the government tit so hard it seems like socialism relying on gov jobs??

Military is government spending.

Who said it wasn't? Where?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

If 1% make all the money and pay no taxes the debt can't be paid off..

this very very stupid liberal has learned 123 times that the the top 1% pay 40% of all federal income taxes and that no country gets more from the top 1% than the USA.

 

[rdean]

Follow GOP and Democratic Policies and the difference between the two parties is startling when it comes to economics.

Democrats know you need to make money to pay off debt and that requires investment. Investment in R&D, infrastructure, education and so on. We know that companies with minimum wage jobs have moved to Texas, but companies that require the highly skilled or modern technology have move to Silicon Valley or other expensive places with high tech workers.

Republicans think you can pay off the debt that came from the Bush Tax Cuts and the unpaid for wars and the tens of thousands of wounded from Iraq simply by not spending. Companies have found out that simply moving someplace where they don't pay taxes isn't enough.

For instance, Republicans say that poor people in their states support Democrats. Well, poor people in Democratic states support Democrats. But those states not only support their own poor people, but also Red States, rich and poor.

When the Bush Tax Cuts took effect, it prove that just shoveling money to the rich didn't create jobs. We have over 5 million jobs going unfilled because people don't have the skills to do them. A smart person would invest in education for those people to fill jobs requiring skilled workers. But Republicans don't want to "waste" the money.

When the Bush Tax Cuts took effect, it prove that just shoveling money to the rich didn't create jobs.

Bush only cut taxes on the rich? I'm pretty sure he cut taxes for everyone.
Maybe you can find the actual bracket info?

We have over 5 million jobs going unfilled because people don't have the skills to do them. A smart person would invest in education for those people to fill jobs requiring skilled workers.

That might require uninvesting in stupid liberal grievance classes and concentrating on math and science.

Republicans think science is a faith.

That's what the white man wants you to think.

That's what Republicans really think. They already have a religion. Which is why they don't believe in science.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Follow GOP and Democratic Policies and the difference between the two parties is startling when it comes to economics.

Democrats know you need to make money to pay off debt and that requires investment. Investment in R&D, infrastructure, education and so on. We know that companies with minimum wage jobs have moved to Texas, but companies that require the highly skilled or modern technology have move to Silicon Valley or other expensive places with high tech workers.

Republicans think you can pay off the debt that came from the Bush Tax Cuts and the unpaid for wars and the tens of thousands of wounded from Iraq simply by not spending. Companies have found out that simply moving someplace where they don't pay taxes isn't enough.

For instance, Republicans say that poor people in their states support Democrats. Well, poor people in Democratic states support Democrats. But those states not only support their own poor people, but also Red States, rich and poor.

When the Bush Tax Cuts took effect, it prove that just shoveling money to the rich didn't create jobs. We have over 5 million jobs going unfilled because people don't have the skills to do them. A smart person would invest in education for those people to fill jobs requiring skilled workers. But Republicans don't want to "waste" the money.

When the Bush Tax Cuts took effect, it prove that just shoveling money to the rich didn't create jobs.

Bush only cut taxes on the rich? I'm pretty sure he cut taxes for everyone.
Maybe you can find the actual bracket info?

We have over 5 million jobs going unfilled because people don't have the skills to do them. A smart person would invest in education for those people to fill jobs requiring skilled workers.

That might require uninvesting in stupid liberal grievance classes and concentrating on math and science.

Republicans think science is a faith.

That's what the white man wants you to think.

That's what Republicans really think. They already have a religion. Which is why they don't believe in science.

I believe in science and economics. That's why I think it's a bad idea to cripple our economy and spend $76 trillion to reduce temps in 2080 by 0.1 degrees.

Why does your religious faith in AGW make you feel that's a good idea?