Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
So if I understand you two correctly, you're advocating an increase to the defense budget as a solution to Obama's failed jobs initiatives?
Interesting
-Geaux
No, we are demonstrating to you that the Government does create jobs......millions of them
Then why don't they create millions more?
Problem solved
-Geaux
So if I understand you two correctly, you're advocating an increase to the defense budget as a solution to Obama's failed jobs initiatives?
Interesting
-Geaux
No, we are demonstrating to you that the Government does create jobs......millions of them
Then why don't they create millions more?
Problem solved
-Geaux
JUST SAY NO TO THE TEA PARTY!!!
This is what the tea party is all about...No regulations and the super rich!
What your post shows is that left-wing turds haven't changed their propaganda memes in over 100 years.
No, we are demonstrating to you that the Government does create jobs......millions of them
Then why don't they create millions more?
Problem solved
-Geaux
Progress eh? Implicit recognition that government does create jobs. Now you are worried about how many jobs they create and why they don't create more. Could it be that there is no money. And that cuts to government spending is the number one priority. Not jobs.
Of course the exact same question could be asked of all the corporations in the country.
Where are the jobs? Corporations have plenty of money with good earnings. So what is the one thing that private corporations DO NOT have that would require them to hire more workers? Demand for their goods or services is the answer.
In the private world, as demand goes up, hiring goes up.
In the government world, when private demand goes down and job growth slows, the government can order military equipment, infrastructure projects or R&D efforts for future needs. None of this is based on "demand for a product or service" but it still creates jobs.
Even though you will say it don't. But you know it does. You said so above.
Then why don't they create millions more?
Problem solved
-Geaux
Progress eh? Implicit recognition that government does create jobs. Now you are worried about how many jobs they create and why they don't create more. Could it be that there is no money. And that cuts to government spending is the number one priority. Not jobs.
Of course the exact same question could be asked of all the corporations in the country.
Where are the jobs? Corporations have plenty of money with good earnings. So what is the one thing that private corporations DO NOT have that would require them to hire more workers? Demand for their goods or services is the answer.
In the private world, as demand goes up, hiring goes up.
In the government world, when private demand goes down and job growth slows, the government can order military equipment, infrastructure projects or R&D efforts for future needs. None of this is based on "demand for a product or service" but it still creates jobs.
Even though you will say it don't. But you know it does. You said so above.
Outstanding. Will any nutter get it?
Progress eh? Implicit recognition that government does create jobs. Now you are worried about how many jobs they create and why they don't create more. Could it be that there is no money. And that cuts to government spending is the number one priority. Not jobs.
Of course the exact same question could be asked of all the corporations in the country.
Where are the jobs? Corporations have plenty of money with good earnings. So what is the one thing that private corporations DO NOT have that would require them to hire more workers? Demand for their goods or services is the answer.
In the private world, as demand goes up, hiring goes up.
In the government world, when private demand goes down and job growth slows, the government can order military equipment, infrastructure projects or R&D efforts for future needs. None of this is based on "demand for a product or service" but it still creates jobs.
Even though you will say it don't. But you know it does. You said so above.
Outstanding. Will any nutter get it?
Why thank you. But none will get it. Hell, goforit won't even come back to the thread to show how government doesn't create jobs. I think his computer blew up. Or his head.
No, we are demonstrating to you that the Government does create jobs......millions of them
Then why don't they create millions more?
Problem solved
-Geaux
Progress eh? Implicit recognition that government does create jobs. Now you are worried about how many jobs they create and why they don't create more. Could it be that there is no money. And that cuts to government spending is the number one priority. Not jobs.
Of course the exact same question could be asked of all the corporations in the country.
Where are the jobs? Corporations have plenty of money with good earnings. So what is the one thing that private corporations DO NOT have that would require them to hire more workers? Demand for their goods or services is the answer.
In the private world, as demand goes up, hiring goes up.
In the government world, when private demand goes down and job growth slows, the government can order military equipment, infrastructure projects or R&D efforts for future needs. None of this is based on "demand for a product or service" but it still creates jobs.
Even though you will say it don't. But you know it does. You said so above.
Then why don't they create millions more?
Problem solved
-Geaux
Progress eh? Implicit recognition that government does create jobs. Now you are worried about how many jobs they create and why they don't create more. Could it be that there is no money. And that cuts to government spending is the number one priority. Not jobs.
Of course the exact same question could be asked of all the corporations in the country.
Where are the jobs? Corporations have plenty of money with good earnings. So what is the one thing that private corporations DO NOT have that would require them to hire more workers? Demand for their goods or services is the answer.
In the private world, as demand goes up, hiring goes up.
In the government world, when private demand goes down and job growth slows, the government can order military equipment, infrastructure projects or R&D efforts for future needs. None of this is based on "demand for a product or service" but it still creates jobs.
Even though you will say it don't. But you know it does. You said so above.
The government creates work, not jobs. It takes someone who is willing to take risk, make sacrifices that result in their ability to manifest jobs.
Yes, I did build that....
-Geaux
Outstanding. Will any nutter get it?
Why thank you. But none will get it. Hell, goforit won't even come back to the thread to show how government doesn't create jobs. I think his computer blew up. Or his head.
You are probably right. He'll be on another thread making someone else explain it to him in another way. What you just told him is not up for dispute.
This economy requires demand. Demand is the only thing short of federal stimulus that can keep people working. If workers do not have money to spend.....there will be little demand. Subsistence level demand is what fuels third world economies. American workers need more than that level of income if this economy is to move forward.
Period.
Profits are up...what should we do?
1. Increase dividends......good idea
2. Raise the salary of the CEO......he deserves it
3. Increase employee pay......fuck em
Become a CEO and change that practice.
Yer smart, what's holding you back?
So CEOs are only looking for the benefits of stockholders and themselves
As usual....the workers are fucked
The reason trickle down never works
I'm for the right sized government and the right amount of taxes
the top 5% are paying 40% of the income taxes, the bottom 50% are paying nothing. Is that "fair" ?
The top 10% own more wealth than the bottom 90% combined, is that fair? They own, 90% of the wealth, seems to me, they should be paying 90% of the taxes.
Become a CEO and change that practice.
Yer smart, what's holding you back?
So CEOs are only looking for the benefits of stockholders and themselves
As usual....the workers are fucked
The reason trickle down never works
Become a CEO and change that practice.
Yer smart, what's holding you back?
Progress eh? Implicit recognition that government does create jobs. Now you are worried about how many jobs they create and why they don't create more. Could it be that there is no money. And that cuts to government spending is the number one priority. Not jobs.
Of course the exact same question could be asked of all the corporations in the country.
Where are the jobs? Corporations have plenty of money with good earnings. So what is the one thing that private corporations DO NOT have that would require them to hire more workers? Demand for their goods or services is the answer.
In the private world, as demand goes up, hiring goes up.
In the government world, when private demand goes down and job growth slows, the government can order military equipment, infrastructure projects or R&D efforts for future needs. None of this is based on "demand for a product or service" but it still creates jobs.
Even though you will say it don't. But you know it does. You said so above.
Outstanding. Will any nutter get it?
Why thank you. But none will get it. Hell, goforit won't even come back to the thread to show how government doesn't create jobs. I think his computer blew up. Or his head.
No, we are demonstrating to you that the Government does create jobs......millions of them
Then why don't they create millions more?
Problem solved
-Geaux
I would like to.....our infrastructure has been ignored for decades, we have not had a major public works job in a generation, our power grid is a disaster, so is our communications infrastructure.
the top 5% are paying 40% of the income taxes, the bottom 50% are paying nothing. Is that "fair" ?
The top 10% own more wealth than the bottom 90% combined, is that fair? They own, 90% of the wealth, seems to me, they should be paying 90% of the taxes.
So, are you in favor of a wealth tax? As in, taxing people based upon their net worth or assets?
Outstanding. Will any nutter get it?
Why thank you. But none will get it. Hell, goforit won't even come back to the thread to show how government doesn't create jobs. I think his computer blew up. Or his head.
You are probably right. He'll be on another thread making someone else explain it to him in another way. What you just told him is not up for dispute.
This economy requires demand. Demand is the only thing short of federal stimulus that can keep people working. If workers do not have money to spend.....there will be little demand. Subsistence level demand is what fuels third world economies. American workers need more than that level of income if this economy is to move forward.
Period.
The top 10% own more wealth than the bottom 90% combined, is that fair? They own, 90% of the wealth, seems to me, they should be paying 90% of the taxes.
So, are you in favor of a wealth tax? As in, taxing people based upon their net worth or assets?
I'm in favor of changing our economy back to a 70% high tax bracket and having a strong middle class with minimum wage once again having the highest spending power in history. That's not gonna happen, we've already shipped too many factories overseas. In fact, if there is a WWIII, we are up a creek. No factories left to be refitted to make war machines. Nothing is made here so everything will be rationed worse than during WWII. Face it, shipping our jobs overseas and lowering taxes on the wealth and the corporations have led to the complete destruction of our country. We've been set up for WWIII and we've been set up to fail, only no one will be coming to our aid like we went to aid Europe.
So why has your state been sitting with their thumbs up their collective asses?Then why don't they create millions more?
Problem solved
-Geaux
I would like to.....our infrastructure has been ignored for decades, we have not had a major public works job in a generation, our power grid is a disaster, so is our communications infrastructure.
Most of the bridges in our state are functionally obsolete, if they are not replaced soon, there will be another disaster.
The top 10% own more wealth than the bottom 90% combined, is that fair? They own, 90% of the wealth, seems to me, they should be paying 90% of the taxes.
So, are you in favor of a wealth tax? As in, taxing people based upon their net worth or assets?
I'm in favor of changing our economy back to a 70% high tax bracket and having a strong middle class with minimum wage once again having the highest spending power in history. That's not gonna happen, we've already shipped too many factories overseas. In fact, if there is a WWIII, we are up a creek. No factories left to be refitted to make war machines. Nothing is made here so everything will be rationed worse than during WWII. Face it, shipping our jobs overseas and lowering taxes on the wealth and the corporations have led to the complete destruction of our country. We've been set up for WWIII and we've been set up to fail, only no one will be coming to our aid like we went to aid Europe.
Shareholders can't get by on less than $5b/yr?
lol.... do you not know how dumb that comment is? There is no "investor" who is getting $5 Billion.
That $5 Billion is divided up over millions of shares.
Each share, only got $1.39.
Shareholders can't get by on less than a $1.39? Well they could.... but they're not going to. I myself am a share holder in Walmart. Nearly all walmart employees are shareholders.
Why should I get paid less for my investment in Walmart? Who are you to say I should get less? Or the employees themselves, who are earning $1.39 for their shares. Why should walmart employees earn less for their shares?
It's not up to you, dude.
And even if it was, how much do you think we should earn from our shares? $5 Billion is only $1 dollar an hour to employees. What do you think it should be?
If you cut investors down to only 27¢ per share ($1 Billion to shareholders), we'll sue, and win. We have part ownership of the company, and we invested hundreds of billions into walmart, which is why they have 2.2 million jobs. We're not going to take only 27¢. Sorry. Not an option.
