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.
Wow, PhD's got a Walmart job and the left proclaim all is good.here's one that didn'tI didn't compare it to one recession, I compared it to every recession since WWII.Sez that we had the weakest recovery from a recession since WWII
You mean Great Depression...to which Great Recession is second only to?
We didn't have same recessions, why should they have same recovery?
Is there some knowledge on how long 4-6 Trillion dollars of real estate value lost takes to recover from that you are operating from?
Is there some good reason to compare this recovery to one in early 2000 that was lifted by huge real estate bubble growth? Or maybe the one Reagan had for completely different economic reasons?
I didn't compare it to one recession, I compared it to every recession since WWII. That covers all those variables. Obama is an abysmal failure. Will Trump do better? Maybe, maybe not. But we sure need to try something different
I would expect you to......you're a moron.....
Have you considered the fiscal response in each instance?
Yes, they all recovered faster than Obama did
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!Knowing that you are a cretin, I will point out that the net effect on spending will be ZERO....Now we get to hear from the left that millions of orphans will be dying of starvation in the streets.
Good to see him working on what got him the job.
Making good on a promise to slash government, President-elect Trump has asked his incoming team to pursue spending and staffing cuts.
Insiders said that the spending reductions in some departments could go as high as 10 percent and staff cuts to 20 percent, numbers that would rock Washington if he follows through.
At least two so-called “landing teams” in Cabinet agencies have relayed the call for cuts as part of their marching orders to shrink the flab in government.
The cuts would target discretionary spending, not mandated programs such as Medicare or Social Security, the sources said.
The spending reductions are expected to be used to help pay for Trump’s plan to boost the Pentagon’s budget, tax cuts and some pet projects, potentially including the anti-immigration wall on the nation’s southern border.
The teams also are looking at staffing cuts over four years through attrition, a hiring freeze and reorganization.
Keep reading…
also, switching discretionary spending from social support to lard the Pentagon slop bucket will result in LOWER macroeconomic multipliers....
Don't ask......I can't hope to live long enough to teach you...
Yes, multipliers are an economists guess.
While waiting for you to answer the first question put to you, which question of yours did I fail to address?your one or 2 sentence reply does nothing. You know who you are, and I am not engaging a gaslighter again. Come back when you and your Dems have some power-)Why not just try to answer the question? It has NOTHING to do with Bush.....
notice how gaslighting has conditioned you to reflexively reject the facts....
I've made my point..
You know who you are, and I am not engaging a gaslighter again.
I'm the guy who recently disabused you of a bunch of other ignorance you held dear and directed you to the Source of Truth....
Nope, you cherry picked------>
Asserting is easy......now comes the hard part......WHAT did I "cherry pick"?
which President has had the worst GDP growth over his term in the last 75 years ICE-) Oh, that has got to hurt-)
That would be Obama's predecessor....if you go by the numbers.......with which you are entirely unfamiliar, of course.
See what I mean about the victims of gaslighting being too....how to put this......stu......no....that would be cruel........naive......yeah.....that's it....naive?
Tell us ICE, what is the AVERAGE GDP growth of ALL Presidents, and what was Obamas? Oh my, see gaslighter, I can cherry pick too!
I don't know that we have reliable numbers for those prior to 1930.......Obama will probably come in around 2%.......which, given the circumstances, is as much as could be expected....
Scrub came in at around 1.6...will you be requiring a quick primer on The Ordinal Property?
You are just a gaslighter, and when you and yours get a little power, come back and talk to us. Till then, "go away kid, ya bother me!
Again....you assert......I demonstrate....need I labor the critical distinction?
Nope, you cherry picked------>
Asserting is easy......now comes the hard part......WHAT did I "cherry pick"?
which President has had the worst GDP growth over his term in the last 75 years ICE-) Oh, that has got to hurt-)
That would be Obama's predecessor....if you go by the numbers.......with which you are entirely unfamiliar, of course.
See what I mean about the victims of gaslighting being too....how to put this......stu......no....that would be cruel........naive......yeah.....that's it....naive?
Tell us ICE, what is the AVERAGE GDP growth of ALL Presidents, and what was Obamas? Oh my, see gaslighter, I can cherry pick too!
I don't know that we have reliable numbers for those prior to 1930, when people refer to such an average, they are usually talking about the post WW2 period PRE-Supply Side Idiocy, Part Deux.....that number is around 3.4%.......Obama will probably come in around 2%.......which, given the circumstances, is as much as could be expected....
Scrub came in at around 1.6...will you be requiring a quick primer on The Ordinal Property?
You are just a gaslighter, and when you and yours get a little power, come back and talk to us. Till then, "go away kid, ya bother me!
Again....you assert......I demonstrate....need I labor the critical distinction?
So you refuse to answer, fine, then no need to debate any longer GASLIGHTER-) Like I said, you and the dumbocrats get some power, then come back. We are to busy to change your didies right now-) I heard a new political party with 20 or 25 people were starting to cause a ruckus, and since they have more cred than you, we gotta take care of them, lol!
Enjoy political Siberia GASLIGHTER, and I will block you since your power is so irrelevant, no need to worry for 18 months. I know, I know, you will try and scream how relevant you are as a party, but really..........all your lies and cherry picking no longer works. Go sing to the choir which is getting smaller, and smaller, cause we are all laughing. CYA Slim........maybe in 18 months-)
I'm not the one eagerly denying RealityI see that has already happened to you!You are free to argue with the numbers til your head explodes......they aren't going anywhere...a libturd is never wrong or incorrect about any fking thing. It's why they won't negotiate.And both the House and Senate who passed it were Democrat and Obama signed the Tarp that ballooned it. Man up, Bruce. You and the Republicans did all that together. Put the finger away
But BOOOOOOOOSH was an innocent bystander? Ridiculous.
2009 budget was in the works for a long while, to give Bush a full pass on it and dump it on incoming Obama is disingenuous to say the least.
Um ... what? Read the blue, moron
TARP signed by - W and Obama
Senate - Democrat
House - Democrat
You, I can't believe you think they are both at fault, it was the Republicans, you are so partisan
LOL, what an idiot
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!Knowing that you are a cretin, I will point out that the net effect on spending will be ZERO....Now we get to hear from the left that millions of orphans will be dying of starvation in the streets.
Good to see him working on what got him the job.
Making good on a promise to slash government, President-elect Trump has asked his incoming team to pursue spending and staffing cuts.
Insiders said that the spending reductions in some departments could go as high as 10 percent and staff cuts to 20 percent, numbers that would rock Washington if he follows through.
At least two so-called “landing teams” in Cabinet agencies have relayed the call for cuts as part of their marching orders to shrink the flab in government.
The cuts would target discretionary spending, not mandated programs such as Medicare or Social Security, the sources said.
The spending reductions are expected to be used to help pay for Trump’s plan to boost the Pentagon’s budget, tax cuts and some pet projects, potentially including the anti-immigration wall on the nation’s southern border.
The teams also are looking at staffing cuts over four years through attrition, a hiring freeze and reorganization.
Keep reading…
also, switching discretionary spending from social support to lard the Pentagon slop bucket will result in LOWER macroeconomic multipliers....
Don't ask......I can't hope to live long enough to teach you...
Yes, multipliers are an economists guess.
WHY?
WHAT HAVE WE DONE TO DESERVE THIS? WHO WILL SAVE THE CHILDREN?
Economist argue about their magnitude, but the debate over their existence is only heard on the frontier of the Lunatic Fringe.
For evidence, just listen for the cries of "Pivot to Fiscal!"
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!Knowing that you are a cretin, I will point out that the net effect on spending will be ZERO....Now we get to hear from the left that millions of orphans will be dying of starvation in the streets.
Good to see him working on what got him the job.
Making good on a promise to slash government, President-elect Trump has asked his incoming team to pursue spending and staffing cuts.
Insiders said that the spending reductions in some departments could go as high as 10 percent and staff cuts to 20 percent, numbers that would rock Washington if he follows through.
At least two so-called “landing teams” in Cabinet agencies have relayed the call for cuts as part of their marching orders to shrink the flab in government.
The cuts would target discretionary spending, not mandated programs such as Medicare or Social Security, the sources said.
The spending reductions are expected to be used to help pay for Trump’s plan to boost the Pentagon’s budget, tax cuts and some pet projects, potentially including the anti-immigration wall on the nation’s southern border.
The teams also are looking at staffing cuts over four years through attrition, a hiring freeze and reorganization.
Keep reading…
also, switching discretionary spending from social support to lard the Pentagon slop bucket will result in LOWER macroeconomic multipliers....
Don't ask......I can't hope to live long enough to teach you...
Yes, multipliers are an economists guess.
WHY?
WHAT HAVE WE DONE TO DESERVE THIS? WHO WILL SAVE THE CHILDREN?
Economist argue about their magnitude, but the debate over their existence is only heard on the frontier of the Lunatic Fringe.
For evidence, just listen for the cries of "Pivot to Fiscal!"
It's good you can post while drinking.
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!Knowing that you are a cretin, I will point out that the net effect on spending will be ZERO....Now we get to hear from the left that millions of orphans will be dying of starvation in the streets.
Good to see him working on what got him the job.
Making good on a promise to slash government, President-elect Trump has asked his incoming team to pursue spending and staffing cuts.
Insiders said that the spending reductions in some departments could go as high as 10 percent and staff cuts to 20 percent, numbers that would rock Washington if he follows through.
At least two so-called “landing teams” in Cabinet agencies have relayed the call for cuts as part of their marching orders to shrink the flab in government.
The cuts would target discretionary spending, not mandated programs such as Medicare or Social Security, the sources said.
The spending reductions are expected to be used to help pay for Trump’s plan to boost the Pentagon’s budget, tax cuts and some pet projects, potentially including the anti-immigration wall on the nation’s southern border.
The teams also are looking at staffing cuts over four years through attrition, a hiring freeze and reorganization.
Keep reading…
also, switching discretionary spending from social support to lard the Pentagon slop bucket will result in LOWER macroeconomic multipliers....
Don't ask......I can't hope to live long enough to teach you...
Yes, multipliers are an economists guess.
WHY?
WHAT HAVE WE DONE TO DESERVE THIS? WHO WILL SAVE THE CHILDREN?
Economist argue about their magnitude, but the debate over their existence is only heard on the frontier of the Lunatic Fringe.
For evidence, just listen for the cries of "Pivot to Fiscal!"
It's good you can post while drinking.
I've actually studied the subject........it's a curse, I tell ya.......I can appreciate why you don't......
Can you get a refund?NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!Knowing that you are a cretin, I will point out that the net effect on spending will be ZERO....Now we get to hear from the left that millions of orphans will be dying of starvation in the streets.
Good to see him working on what got him the job.
Making good on a promise to slash government, President-elect Trump has asked his incoming team to pursue spending and staffing cuts.
Insiders said that the spending reductions in some departments could go as high as 10 percent and staff cuts to 20 percent, numbers that would rock Washington if he follows through.
At least two so-called “landing teams” in Cabinet agencies have relayed the call for cuts as part of their marching orders to shrink the flab in government.
The cuts would target discretionary spending, not mandated programs such as Medicare or Social Security, the sources said.
The spending reductions are expected to be used to help pay for Trump’s plan to boost the Pentagon’s budget, tax cuts and some pet projects, potentially including the anti-immigration wall on the nation’s southern border.
The teams also are looking at staffing cuts over four years through attrition, a hiring freeze and reorganization.
Keep reading…
also, switching discretionary spending from social support to lard the Pentagon slop bucket will result in LOWER macroeconomic multipliers....
Don't ask......I can't hope to live long enough to teach you...
Yes, multipliers are an economists guess.
WHY?
WHAT HAVE WE DONE TO DESERVE THIS? WHO WILL SAVE THE CHILDREN?
Economist argue about their magnitude, but the debate over their existence is only heard on the frontier of the Lunatic Fringe.
For evidence, just listen for the cries of "Pivot to Fiscal!"
It's good you can post while drinking.
I've actually studied the subject........it's a curse, I tell ya.......I can appreciate why you don't......
Read this question again.....I didn't compare it to one recession, I compared it to every recession since WWII.Sez that we had the weakest recovery from a recession since WWII
You mean Great Depression...to which Great Recession is second only to?
We didn't have same recessions, why should they have same recovery?
Is there some knowledge on how long 4-6 Trillion dollars of real estate value lost takes to recover from that you are operating from?
Is there some good reason to compare this recovery to one in early 2000 that was lifted by huge real estate bubble growth? Or maybe the one Reagan had for completely different economic reasons?
I didn't compare it to one recession, I compared it to every recession since WWII. That covers all those variables. Obama is an abysmal failure. Will Trump do better? Maybe, maybe not. But we sure need to try something different
I would expect you to......you're a moron.....
Have you considered the fiscal response in each instance?
Yes, they all recovered faster than Obama did
Have you considered the fiscal response in each instance?
When you are through demonstrating, once again, that you are blessed with all the insight of a nematode, I'll lead you to the source of the answer....
Kazzing again, Kazzie?So basically what this stupid fk is saying is that obummer went in and did absolutely nothing. Wow betcha he's proud of that eh?
Uh.....that's Weatherman you're addressing.......if you are taking HIS word for it, you gotta be just as fucking stupid....
Well, since you were trained to pump financial products and you use that to free the elderly from big chunks of their retirement in exchange for self interested mediocre investment advice, one is better off not listening to you, either
Insult me all you want, but come up with your own material. You will go on ignore for circle jerking with Faun, Syriusly and Dot Com
Well, since you were trained to pump financial products and you use that to free the elderly from big chunks of their retirement in exchange for self interested mediocre investment advice, one is better off not listening to you, either
Kazzie,
If you wanna go The Dozens, don't start crying when you're the one left bleeding.....
You're really the very worst kind of mewling pussy, you know that?
the people of the country?Sez who?it failed?Kaz,The stimulus Obama signed?
You KNOW this will end with you in tears.....
Yes....that was the Stimulus Obama signed.....w
Forums > US Discussion > Politics >
Forum Foundry - Thanks
About USMessageBoard.com
USMessageBoard.com was founded in 2003 with the intent of allowing all voices to be heard. With a wildly diverse community from all sides of the political spectrum, USMessageBoard.com continues to build on that tradition. We welcome everyone despite political and/or religious beliefs, and we continue to encourage the right to free speech.
hat about it?
Show me.....
Meanwhile..
Let’s start with Obama’s stimulus. The standard Republican talking point is that it failed, meaning it didn’t reduce unemployment. Yet in a survey of leading economists conducted by the University of Chicago’s Booth School of Business, 92 percent agreed that the stimulus succeeded in reducing the jobless rate. On the harder question of whether the benefit exceeded the cost, more than half thought it did, one in three was uncertain, and fewer than one in six disagreed.92%
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-23/the-u-s-economic-policy-debate-is-a-sham.html
Do you know how often you find that kind of consensus among economists?
Actually, now that I think of it.......
What economists think about Donald Trump’s 100-day plan
Yes, your eight year old insults backed up with contentless bluster would certainly do well in an insult contest ... if you're up against a seven year old ...Kazzing again, Kazzie?Uh.....that's Weatherman you're addressing.......if you are taking HIS word for it, you gotta be just as fucking stupid....
Well, since you were trained to pump financial products and you use that to free the elderly from big chunks of their retirement in exchange for self interested mediocre investment advice, one is better off not listening to you, either
Insult me all you want, but come up with your own material. You will go on ignore for circle jerking with Faun, Syriusly and Dot Com
Well, since you were trained to pump financial products and you use that to free the elderly from big chunks of their retirement in exchange for self interested mediocre investment advice, one is better off not listening to you, either
Kazzie,
If you wanna go The Dozens, don't start crying when you're the one left bleeding.....
You're really the very worst kind of mewling pussy, you know that?
Yes, your eight year old insults backed up with contentless bluster would certainly do well in an insult contest ... if you're up against a seven year old ...
here's one that didn'tI didn't compare it to one recession, I compared it to every recession since WWII.Sez that we had the weakest recovery from a recession since WWII
You mean Great Depression...to which Great Recession is second only to?
We didn't have same recessions, why should they have same recovery?
Is there some knowledge on how long 4-6 Trillion dollars of real estate value lost takes to recover from that you are operating from?
Is there some good reason to compare this recovery to one in early 2000 that was lifted by huge real estate bubble growth? Or maybe the one Reagan had for completely different economic reasons?
I didn't compare it to one recession, I compared it to every recession since WWII. That covers all those variables. Obama is an abysmal failure. Will Trump do better? Maybe, maybe not. But we sure need to try something different
I would expect you to......you're a moron.....
Have you considered the fiscal response in each instance?
Yes, they all recovered faster than Obama did
the people of the country?Sez who?it failed?Kaz,
You KNOW this will end with you in tears.....
Yes....that was the Stimulus Obama signed.....w
Forums > US Discussion > Politics >
Forum Foundry - Thanks
About USMessageBoard.com
USMessageBoard.com was founded in 2003 with the intent of allowing all voices to be heard. With a wildly diverse community from all sides of the political spectrum, USMessageBoard.com continues to build on that tradition. We welcome everyone despite political and/or religious beliefs, and we continue to encourage the right to free speech.
hat about it?
Show me.....
Meanwhile..
Let’s start with Obama’s stimulus. The standard Republican talking point is that it failed, meaning it didn’t reduce unemployment. Yet in a survey of leading economists conducted by the University of Chicago’s Booth School of Business, 92 percent agreed that the stimulus succeeded in reducing the jobless rate. On the harder question of whether the benefit exceeded the cost, more than half thought it did, one in three was uncertain, and fewer than one in six disagreed.92%
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-23/the-u-s-economic-policy-debate-is-a-sham.html
Do you know how often you find that kind of consensus among economists?
Actually, now that I think of it.......
What economists think about Donald Trump’s 100-day plan
Yes, the stimulus certainly did reduce unemployment. It convinced enough people that a job is hopeless and they should give up. What a rousing success
Yes, your eight year old insults backed up with contentless bluster would certainly do well in an insult contest ... if you're up against a seven year old ...Kazzing again, Kazzie?Well, since you were trained to pump financial products and you use that to free the elderly from big chunks of their retirement in exchange for self interested mediocre investment advice, one is better off not listening to you, either
Insult me all you want, but come up with your own material. You will go on ignore for circle jerking with Faun, Syriusly and Dot Com
Well, since you were trained to pump financial products and you use that to free the elderly from big chunks of their retirement in exchange for self interested mediocre investment advice, one is better off not listening to you, either
Kazzie,
If you wanna go The Dozens, don't start crying when you're the one left bleeding.....
You're really the very worst kind of mewling pussy, you know that?
Yes, your eight year old insults backed up with contentless bluster would certainly do well in an insult contest ... if you're up against a seven year old ...
I'm sure this SEEMED really clever when you first thought of it....like much of what you bleat, it contains the seed of its own invalidation.....
Are you fucking blind, or just this kind of Stupid?here's one that didn'tI didn't compare it to one recession, I compared it to every recession since WWII.You mean Great Depression...to which Great Recession is second only to?
We didn't have same recessions, why should they have same recovery?
Is there some knowledge on how long 4-6 Trillion dollars of real estate value lost takes to recover from that you are operating from?
Is there some good reason to compare this recovery to one in early 2000 that was lifted by huge real estate bubble growth? Or maybe the one Reagan had for completely different economic reasons?
I didn't compare it to one recession, I compared it to every recession since WWII. That covers all those variables. Obama is an abysmal failure. Will Trump do better? Maybe, maybe not. But we sure need to try something different
I would expect you to......you're a moron.....
Have you considered the fiscal response in each instance?
Yes, they all recovered faster than Obama did
To start with, percent of change of what? GDP growth? Stock Market? What?
What MUST I be doing if responding to you?Yes, your eight year old insults backed up with contentless bluster would certainly do well in an insult contest ... if you're up against a seven year old ...Kazzing again, Kazzie?
Insult me all you want, but come up with your own material. You will go on ignore for circle jerking with Faun, Syriusly and Dot Com
Well, since you were trained to pump financial products and you use that to free the elderly from big chunks of their retirement in exchange for self interested mediocre investment advice, one is better off not listening to you, either
Kazzie,
If you wanna go The Dozens, don't start crying when you're the one left bleeding.....
You're really the very worst kind of mewling pussy, you know that?
Yes, your eight year old insults backed up with contentless bluster would certainly do well in an insult contest ... if you're up against a seven year old ...
I'm sure this SEEMED really clever when you first thought of it....like much of what you bleat, it contains the seed of its own invalidation.....
You're just in love with the sound of your own voice. You'd hate The Dozens, it requires you to listen to someone else half the time
the people of the country?Sez who?it failed?
Show me.....
Meanwhile..
Let’s start with Obama’s stimulus. The standard Republican talking point is that it failed, meaning it didn’t reduce unemployment. Yet in a survey of leading economists conducted by the University of Chicago’s Booth School of Business, 92 percent agreed that the stimulus succeeded in reducing the jobless rate. On the harder question of whether the benefit exceeded the cost, more than half thought it did, one in three was uncertain, and fewer than one in six disagreed.92%
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-23/the-u-s-economic-policy-debate-is-a-sham.html
Do you know how often you find that kind of consensus among economists?
Actually, now that I think of it.......
What economists think about Donald Trump’s 100-day plan
Yes, the stimulus certainly did reduce unemployment. It convinced enough people that a job is hopeless and they should give up. What a rousing success
More Bold Assertions, Kazzie?
92% of ECONOMISTS polled by the U of Chicago business school......
It convinced enough people that a job is hopeless and they should give up.
Kazzie,
You suffer all the pathologies of your crowd......you a Rush fan?
the people of the country?Sez who?it failed?
Show me.....
Meanwhile..
Let’s start with Obama’s stimulus. The standard Republican talking point is that it failed, meaning it didn’t reduce unemployment. Yet in a survey of leading economists conducted by the University of Chicago’s Booth School of Business, 92 percent agreed that the stimulus succeeded in reducing the jobless rate. On the harder question of whether the benefit exceeded the cost, more than half thought it did, one in three was uncertain, and fewer than one in six disagreed.92%
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-23/the-u-s-economic-policy-debate-is-a-sham.html
Do you know how often you find that kind of consensus among economists?
Actually, now that I think of it.......
What economists think about Donald Trump’s 100-day plan
Yes, the stimulus certainly did reduce unemployment. It convinced enough people that a job is hopeless and they should give up. What a rousing success
More Bold Assertions, Kazzie?
92% of ECONOMISTS polled by the U of Chicago business school......
It convinced enough people that a job is hopeless and they should give up.
Kazzie,
You suffer all the pathologies of your crowd......you a Rush fan?
Read this question again.....I didn't compare it to one recession, I compared it to every recession since WWII.You mean Great Depression...to which Great Recession is second only to?
We didn't have same recessions, why should they have same recovery?
Is there some knowledge on how long 4-6 Trillion dollars of real estate value lost takes to recover from that you are operating from?
Is there some good reason to compare this recovery to one in early 2000 that was lifted by huge real estate bubble growth? Or maybe the one Reagan had for completely different economic reasons?
I didn't compare it to one recession, I compared it to every recession since WWII. That covers all those variables. Obama is an abysmal failure. Will Trump do better? Maybe, maybe not. But we sure need to try something different
I would expect you to......you're a moron.....
Have you considered the fiscal response in each instance?
Yes, they all recovered faster than Obama did
Have you considered the fiscal response in each instance?
When you are through demonstrating, once again, that you are blessed with all the insight of a nematode, I'll lead you to the source of the answer....
When I want more contentless bluster, I'll let you know. Hold your breath, it will be any second now
Are you fucking blind, or just this kind of Stupid?here's one that didn'tI didn't compare it to one recession, I compared it to every recession since WWII.I didn't compare it to one recession, I compared it to every recession since WWII. That covers all those variables. Obama is an abysmal failure. Will Trump do better? Maybe, maybe not. But we sure need to try something different
I would expect you to......you're a moron.....
Have you considered the fiscal response in each instance?
Yes, they all recovered faster than Obama did
To start with, percent of change of what? GDP growth? Stock Market? What?
What does it say at the top?
how the fuck did you get out of GRADE school?
