Trump Tells Team to Target 10% Spending, 20% Fed Workers Cuts

[kaz]

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 ...

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

What MUST I be doing if responding to you?

Probably reading everything out loud so you can adore the sound of your voice. The Dozens is a verbal contest, totally different

 

[kaz]

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 didn't compare it to one recession, I compared it to every recession since WWII.

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

Read this question again.....

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

first describe what you see (paying particular attention to the red things, cause I'm gonna follow up on that)....apparently I have to do this

now list the components of the GDP (consumption) equation...

Is this triggering anything?

Anything at all?

Put it in CDZ, mention me, and we'll discuss

 

[IcebergSlim]

Sez who?

the people of the country?

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.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-23/the-u-s-economic-policy-debate-is-a-sham.html
​

92%

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?

Sez who?

the people of the country?

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.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-23/the-u-s-economic-policy-debate-is-a-sham.html
​

92%

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?

92% of economists from the U of Chicago business school agreed with something that isn't in contention, unemployment went down. The discussion is what that means. With historical lows of labor participation, it doesn't mean shit.

Damn you're dumb. You didn't read your own link or grasp the discussion. That is so classic you.

On the other hand, you did record your voice and play it back so you could whack off to it

The discussion is what that means. With historical lows of labor participation, it doesn't mean shit.

This was the first statement put to them...

Because of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, the U.S. unemployment rate was lower at the end of 2010 than it would have been without the stimulus bill.


See the "BECAUSE" thingy?

With what part of it are you struggling?

Do you see ANY mention of LFPR?

With historical lows of labor participation, it doesn't mean shit.


There's a guy who calls himself Corvet (named himself after his favorite car - I kid you not.......you should seek him out.....he is all that stands between you and the honorific "The Dumbest MBA Ever"...)

 

[danielpalos]

If he cuts 10% of real spending, good for him! If he cuts 5%, good to. If he cuts 1%, that is even a hurray! Why? Because the annual budget has a raise in spending of at least 3% a year, so any cut, is better than no cut at all. And even if he cuts it from some departments, anything is better than nothing, since getting the size and spending of government under control is paramount.

ending our drug war, saves more, sooner.

Maybe, but we can end our drug war once we close the border and drugs can't get in. We don't want to deport our cash to other countries for drugs, do we-)

ending our drug war is more of a priority since it is not Constitutional.

 

[IcebergSlim]

I didn't compare it to one recession, I compared it to every recession since WWII.

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

here's one that didn't

To start with, percent of change of what? GDP growth? Stock Market? What?

Are you fucking blind, or just this kind of Stupid?

What does it say at the top?

how the fuck did you get out of GRADE school?

Ah, as I figured, it was addressing an ambiguous point not in contention.

Unemployment rates again only show those looking for a job. With historical lows in labor participation, it's meaningless. Obama has spread hopelessness to lower unemployment, yeah, what a great record.

You can't ignore labor participation, it's the key employment number. John Adams, facts are pesky things

You can't ignore labor participation, it's the key employment number.


Please stop....you're a fucking idiot.....

You think LFPR is more "key" than NOMINAL employment data?

What is the cure for "low LFPR"?

 

[jc456]

The stimulus Obama signed?

Kaz,

You KNOW this will end with you in tears.....
Yes....that was the Stimulus Obama signed.....w
Forums > US Discussion > Politics >

• Forums
  • Mark Forums Read
  • Search Forums
  • Watched Forums
  • Watched Threads
  • New Posts
• Writers Corner
• Active Topics
• Gallery
• Groups
• Help

Forum Foundry - Thanks

• Contact Us
• Help
• Home
• RSS

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?

it failed?

Sez who?

the people of the country?

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.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-23/the-u-s-economic-policy-debate-is-a-sham.html
​

92%

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

Well, here you go:

Stimulus Money for 'Shovel Ready' Projects; Where Did It Go?

"Remember when Obama got his trillion-odd dollars of "stimulus money" which he and the Democrats breathlessly said we needed for "shovel ready" jobs to re-build roads and infrastructure? Please e-mail me if anything of the sort got built in your town. Nothing got built in the cities where I spend time.

Roads are bad in Atlanta. I recently drove though Buckhead with its bone-jarring potholes. Folks have to have SUVs there to survive the roads, some with potholes so big that you can bass fish in them after a good rain.

When the stimulus bill (or as lobbyists for graft-grabbing special interests called it, "The Show") was proposed, it was made to sound urgent. Politicians said it would bring "rigor" to the economy. It turns out it also brought mortis.

So where did all that sweet stimulus money go? Of the money spent in swing state Wisconsin, 80 percent went to public sector unions-those with already locked-in jobs. In fact, right-to-work states got $266 less per person in stimulus money than heavily unionized states. Where Democrats had a vast majority of representatives, their states got $460 per person more."


Read more at Stimulus Money for 'Shovel Ready' Projects; Where Did It Go?

 

[danielpalos]

Yes, they all recovered faster than Obama did

here's one that didn't

To start with, percent of change of what? GDP growth? Stock Market? What?

Are you fucking blind, or just this kind of Stupid?

What does it say at the top?

how the fuck did you get out of GRADE school?

Ah, as I figured, it was addressing an ambiguous point not in contention.

Unemployment rates again only show those looking for a job. With historical lows in labor participation, it's meaningless. Obama has spread hopelessness to lower unemployment, yeah, what a great record.

You can't ignore labor participation, it's the key employment number. John Adams, facts are pesky things

You can't ignore labor participation, it's the key employment number.


Please stop....you're a fucking idiot.....

You think LFPR is more "key" than NOMINAL employment data?

What is the cure for "low LFPR"?

equal protection of the law regarding the concept of employment at will, for unemployment compensation purposes.

 

[jc456]

the people of the country?

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.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-23/the-u-s-economic-policy-debate-is-a-sham.html
​

92%

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?

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.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-23/the-u-s-economic-policy-debate-is-a-sham.html
​

92%

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?

92% of economists from the U of Chicago business school agreed with something that isn't in contention, unemployment went down. The discussion is what that means. With historical lows of labor participation, it doesn't mean shit.

Damn you're dumb. You didn't read your own link or grasp the discussion. That is so classic you.

On the other hand, you did record your voice and play it back so you could whack off to it

The discussion is what that means. With historical lows of labor participation, it doesn't mean shit.

This was the first statement put to them...

Because of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, the U.S. unemployment rate was lower at the end of 2010 than it would have been without the stimulus bill.


See the "BECAUSE" thingy?

With what part of it are you struggling?

Do you see ANY mention of LFPR?

With historical lows of labor participation, it doesn't mean shit.


There's a guy who calls himself Corvet (named himself after his favorite car - I kid you not.......you should seek him out.....he is all that stands between you and the honorific "The Dumbest MBA Ever"...)

well no shit sherlock. What it doesn't say is if it gave recovery. all it states is that some people got jobs. Whether or not they kept them past that money is another thing altogether.

 

[IcebergSlim]

I didn't compare it to one recession, I compared it to every recession since WWII.

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

Read this question again.....

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

first describe what you see (paying particular attention to the red things, cause I'm gonna follow up on that)....apparently I have to do this

now list the components of the GDP (consumption) equation...

Is this triggering anything?

Anything at all?

Put it in CDZ, mention me, and we'll discuss

Why the conditions?

Just answer the question.

 

[IcebergSlim]

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.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-23/the-u-s-economic-policy-debate-is-a-sham.html
​

92%

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?

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.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-23/the-u-s-economic-policy-debate-is-a-sham.html
​

92%

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?

92% of economists from the U of Chicago business school agreed with something that isn't in contention, unemployment went down. The discussion is what that means. With historical lows of labor participation, it doesn't mean shit.

Damn you're dumb. You didn't read your own link or grasp the discussion. That is so classic you.

On the other hand, you did record your voice and play it back so you could whack off to it

The discussion is what that means. With historical lows of labor participation, it doesn't mean shit.

This was the first statement put to them...

Because of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, the U.S. unemployment rate was lower at the end of 2010 than it would have been without the stimulus bill.


See the "BECAUSE" thingy?

With what part of it are you struggling?

Do you see ANY mention of LFPR?

With historical lows of labor participation, it doesn't mean shit.


There's a guy who calls himself Corvet (named himself after his favorite car - I kid you not.......you should seek him out.....he is all that stands between you and the honorific "The Dumbest MBA Ever"...)

well no shit sherlock. What it doesn't say is it gave recovery. all it states is that some people got jobs. Whether or not they kept them past that money is another thing altogether.

Take us from conjecture to certainty....

Show me what makes you believe they didn't.

 

[danielpalos]

Kaz,

You KNOW this will end with you in tears.....
Yes....that was the Stimulus Obama signed.....w
Forums > US Discussion > Politics >

• Forums
  • Mark Forums Read
  • Search Forums
  • Watched Forums
  • Watched Threads
  • New Posts
• Writers Corner
• Active Topics
• Gallery
• Groups
• Help

Forum Foundry - Thanks

• Contact Us
• Help
• Home
• RSS

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?

it failed?

Sez who?

the people of the country?

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.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-23/the-u-s-economic-policy-debate-is-a-sham.html
​

92%

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

Well, here you go:

Stimulus Money for 'Shovel Ready' Projects; Where Did It Go?

"Remember when Obama got his trillion-odd dollars of "stimulus money" which he and the Democrats breathlessly said we needed for "shovel ready" jobs to re-build roads and infrastructure? Please e-mail me if anything of the sort got built in your town. Nothing got built in the cities where I spend time.

Roads are bad in Atlanta. I recently drove though Buckhead with its bone-jarring potholes. Folks have to have SUVs there to survive the roads, some with potholes so big that you can bass fish in them after a good rain.

When the stimulus bill (or as lobbyists for graft-grabbing special interests called it, "The Show") was proposed, it was made to sound urgent. Politicians said it would bring "rigor" to the economy. It turns out it also brought mortis.

So where did all that sweet stimulus money go? Of the money spent in swing state Wisconsin, 80 percent went to public sector unions-those with already locked-in jobs. In fact, right-to-work states got $266 less per person in stimulus money than heavily unionized states. Where Democrats had a vast majority of representatives, their states got $460 per person more."


Read more at Stimulus Money for 'Shovel Ready' Projects; Where Did It Go?

The rich "get rewarded" to create Jobs Booms; where have all the capital gains tax preferences gone?

The distribution of household incomes has become more unequal during the post-2008 economic recovery as the effects of the recession reversed.[66][67][68] CBO reported in November 2014 that the share of pre-tax income received by the top 1% had risen from 13.3% in 2009 to 14.6% in 2011.[1] During 2012 alone, incomes of the wealthiest 1 percent rose nearly 20%, whereas the income of the remaining 99 percent rose 1% in comparison.--https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_United_States

 

[IcebergSlim]

here's one that didn't

To start with, percent of change of what? GDP growth? Stock Market? What?

Are you fucking blind, or just this kind of Stupid?

What does it say at the top?

how the fuck did you get out of GRADE school?

Ah, as I figured, it was addressing an ambiguous point not in contention.

Unemployment rates again only show those looking for a job. With historical lows in labor participation, it's meaningless. Obama has spread hopelessness to lower unemployment, yeah, what a great record.

You can't ignore labor participation, it's the key employment number. John Adams, facts are pesky things

You can't ignore labor participation, it's the key employment number.


Please stop....you're a fucking idiot.....

You think LFPR is more "key" than NOMINAL employment data?

What is the cure for "low LFPR"?

equal protection of the law regarding the concept of employment at will, for unemployment compensation purposes.

Indisputably

 

[LoneLaugher]

We'll see I guess. Sounds like a good start, but we'll only know for sure after time has past and we can actually see less, or more, overall spending/debt and whether government grows or shrinks. I sure as hell am hoping for the latter, but again, we'll see.

Under which POTUS did we see the lowest annual rate of growth of federal spending since 1960?

That's a toughie!

 

[jc456]

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?

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?

92% of economists from the U of Chicago business school agreed with something that isn't in contention, unemployment went down. The discussion is what that means. With historical lows of labor participation, it doesn't mean shit.

Damn you're dumb. You didn't read your own link or grasp the discussion. That is so classic you.

On the other hand, you did record your voice and play it back so you could whack off to it

The discussion is what that means. With historical lows of labor participation, it doesn't mean shit.

This was the first statement put to them...

Because of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, the U.S. unemployment rate was lower at the end of 2010 than it would have been without the stimulus bill.


See the "BECAUSE" thingy?

With what part of it are you struggling?

Do you see ANY mention of LFPR?

With historical lows of labor participation, it doesn't mean shit.


There's a guy who calls himself Corvet (named himself after his favorite car - I kid you not.......you should seek him out.....he is all that stands between you and the honorific "The Dumbest MBA Ever"...)

well no shit sherlock. What it doesn't say is it gave recovery. all it states is that some people got jobs. Whether or not they kept them past that money is another thing altogether.

Take us from conjecture to certainty....

Show me what makes you believe they didn't.

It simple, did the money run out? yes it did. Cause all of the jobs made no investment for future money. It was spend only. when the well dries up, the jobs go away. Come on man economics 101.

 

[jc456]

it failed?

Sez who?

the people of the country?

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.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-23/the-u-s-economic-policy-debate-is-a-sham.html
​

92%

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

Well, here you go:

Stimulus Money for 'Shovel Ready' Projects; Where Did It Go?

"Remember when Obama got his trillion-odd dollars of "stimulus money" which he and the Democrats breathlessly said we needed for "shovel ready" jobs to re-build roads and infrastructure? Please e-mail me if anything of the sort got built in your town. Nothing got built in the cities where I spend time.

Roads are bad in Atlanta. I recently drove though Buckhead with its bone-jarring potholes. Folks have to have SUVs there to survive the roads, some with potholes so big that you can bass fish in them after a good rain.

When the stimulus bill (or as lobbyists for graft-grabbing special interests called it, "The Show") was proposed, it was made to sound urgent. Politicians said it would bring "rigor" to the economy. It turns out it also brought mortis.

So where did all that sweet stimulus money go? Of the money spent in swing state Wisconsin, 80 percent went to public sector unions-those with already locked-in jobs. In fact, right-to-work states got $266 less per person in stimulus money than heavily unionized states. Where Democrats had a vast majority of representatives, their states got $460 per person more."


Read more at Stimulus Money for 'Shovel Ready' Projects; Where Did It Go?

The rich "get rewarded" to create Jobs Booms; where have all the capital gains tax preferences gone?

The distribution of household incomes has become more unequal during the post-2008 economic recovery as the effects of the recession reversed.[66][67][68] CBO reported in November 2014 that the share of pre-tax income received by the top 1% had risen from 13.3% in 2009 to 14.6% in 2011.[1] During 2012 alone, incomes of the wealthiest 1 percent rose nearly 20%, whereas the income of the remaining 99 percent rose 1% in comparison.--https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_United_States

Again, the jobs left due to obummercare, regulations, and jobs going overseas. No 1% was going to waste money on jobs. it was a no rewards economy. Fk, the entire climate fiasco fked with jobs.

 

[danielpalos]

Sez who?

the people of the country?

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.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-23/the-u-s-economic-policy-debate-is-a-sham.html
​

92%

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

Well, here you go:

Stimulus Money for 'Shovel Ready' Projects; Where Did It Go?

"Remember when Obama got his trillion-odd dollars of "stimulus money" which he and the Democrats breathlessly said we needed for "shovel ready" jobs to re-build roads and infrastructure? Please e-mail me if anything of the sort got built in your town. Nothing got built in the cities where I spend time.

Roads are bad in Atlanta. I recently drove though Buckhead with its bone-jarring potholes. Folks have to have SUVs there to survive the roads, some with potholes so big that you can bass fish in them after a good rain.

When the stimulus bill (or as lobbyists for graft-grabbing special interests called it, "The Show") was proposed, it was made to sound urgent. Politicians said it would bring "rigor" to the economy. It turns out it also brought mortis.

So where did all that sweet stimulus money go? Of the money spent in swing state Wisconsin, 80 percent went to public sector unions-those with already locked-in jobs. In fact, right-to-work states got $266 less per person in stimulus money than heavily unionized states. Where Democrats had a vast majority of representatives, their states got $460 per person more."


Read more at Stimulus Money for 'Shovel Ready' Projects; Where Did It Go?

The rich "get rewarded" to create Jobs Booms; where have all the capital gains tax preferences gone?

The distribution of household incomes has become more unequal during the post-2008 economic recovery as the effects of the recession reversed.[66][67][68] CBO reported in November 2014 that the share of pre-tax income received by the top 1% had risen from 13.3% in 2009 to 14.6% in 2011.[1] During 2012 alone, incomes of the wealthiest 1 percent rose nearly 20%, whereas the income of the remaining 99 percent rose 1% in comparison.--https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_United_States

Again, the jobs left due to obummercare, regulations, and jobs going overseas. No 1% was going to waste money on jobs. it was a no rewards economy. Fk, the entire climate fiasco fked with jobs.

like i am going to believe, simply coddling Persons of wealth works any better than coddling the poor. why not end the capital gains preference, if there is no Jobs Boom.

 

[jc456]

the people of the country?

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.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-23/the-u-s-economic-policy-debate-is-a-sham.html
​

92%

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

Well, here you go:

Stimulus Money for 'Shovel Ready' Projects; Where Did It Go?

"Remember when Obama got his trillion-odd dollars of "stimulus money" which he and the Democrats breathlessly said we needed for "shovel ready" jobs to re-build roads and infrastructure? Please e-mail me if anything of the sort got built in your town. Nothing got built in the cities where I spend time.

Roads are bad in Atlanta. I recently drove though Buckhead with its bone-jarring potholes. Folks have to have SUVs there to survive the roads, some with potholes so big that you can bass fish in them after a good rain.

When the stimulus bill (or as lobbyists for graft-grabbing special interests called it, "The Show") was proposed, it was made to sound urgent. Politicians said it would bring "rigor" to the economy. It turns out it also brought mortis.

So where did all that sweet stimulus money go? Of the money spent in swing state Wisconsin, 80 percent went to public sector unions-those with already locked-in jobs. In fact, right-to-work states got $266 less per person in stimulus money than heavily unionized states. Where Democrats had a vast majority of representatives, their states got $460 per person more."


Read more at Stimulus Money for 'Shovel Ready' Projects; Where Did It Go?

The rich "get rewarded" to create Jobs Booms; where have all the capital gains tax preferences gone?

The distribution of household incomes has become more unequal during the post-2008 economic recovery as the effects of the recession reversed.[66][67][68] CBO reported in November 2014 that the share of pre-tax income received by the top 1% had risen from 13.3% in 2009 to 14.6% in 2011.[1] During 2012 alone, incomes of the wealthiest 1 percent rose nearly 20%, whereas the income of the remaining 99 percent rose 1% in comparison.--https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_United_States

Again, the jobs left due to obummercare, regulations, and jobs going overseas. No 1% was going to waste money on jobs. it was a no rewards economy. Fk, the entire climate fiasco fked with jobs.

like i am going to believe, simply coddling Persons of wealth works any better than coddling the poor. why not end the capital gains preference, if there is no Jobs Boom.

dude all of their money went off to another fking country. How are you going to get at that money? Come on, you know the regulations and obummercare affected jobs.

BTW, you know what I want? I want a fking libturd to be fking honest once in a lifetime.

 

[danielpalos]

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.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-23/the-u-s-economic-policy-debate-is-a-sham.html
​

92%

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

Well, here you go:

Stimulus Money for 'Shovel Ready' Projects; Where Did It Go?

"Remember when Obama got his trillion-odd dollars of "stimulus money" which he and the Democrats breathlessly said we needed for "shovel ready" jobs to re-build roads and infrastructure? Please e-mail me if anything of the sort got built in your town. Nothing got built in the cities where I spend time.

Roads are bad in Atlanta. I recently drove though Buckhead with its bone-jarring potholes. Folks have to have SUVs there to survive the roads, some with potholes so big that you can bass fish in them after a good rain.

When the stimulus bill (or as lobbyists for graft-grabbing special interests called it, "The Show") was proposed, it was made to sound urgent. Politicians said it would bring "rigor" to the economy. It turns out it also brought mortis.

So where did all that sweet stimulus money go? Of the money spent in swing state Wisconsin, 80 percent went to public sector unions-those with already locked-in jobs. In fact, right-to-work states got $266 less per person in stimulus money than heavily unionized states. Where Democrats had a vast majority of representatives, their states got $460 per person more."


Read more at Stimulus Money for 'Shovel Ready' Projects; Where Did It Go?

The rich "get rewarded" to create Jobs Booms; where have all the capital gains tax preferences gone?

The distribution of household incomes has become more unequal during the post-2008 economic recovery as the effects of the recession reversed.[66][67][68] CBO reported in November 2014 that the share of pre-tax income received by the top 1% had risen from 13.3% in 2009 to 14.6% in 2011.[1] During 2012 alone, incomes of the wealthiest 1 percent rose nearly 20%, whereas the income of the remaining 99 percent rose 1% in comparison.--https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_United_States

Again, the jobs left due to obummercare, regulations, and jobs going overseas. No 1% was going to waste money on jobs. it was a no rewards economy. Fk, the entire climate fiasco fked with jobs.

like i am going to believe, simply coddling Persons of wealth works any better than coddling the poor. why not end the capital gains preference, if there is no Jobs Boom.

dude all of their money went off to another fking country. How are you going to get at that money? Come on, you know the regulations and obummercare affected jobs.

BTW, you know what I want? I want a fking libturd to be fking honest once in a lifetime.

you get it all the time; you just don't recognize it due to all of your right wing fantasy.

The distribution of household incomes has become more unequal during the post-2008 economic recovery as the effects of the recession reversed.[66][67][68] CBO reported in November 2014 that the share of pre-tax income received by the top 1% had risen from 13.3% in 2009 to 14.6% in 2011.[1] During 2012 alone, incomes of the wealthiest 1 percent rose nearly 20%, whereas the income of the remaining 99 percent rose 1% in comparison.--https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_United_States

Why is there no Jobs Boom?

 

[jc456]

Well, here you go:

Stimulus Money for 'Shovel Ready' Projects; Where Did It Go?

"Remember when Obama got his trillion-odd dollars of "stimulus money" which he and the Democrats breathlessly said we needed for "shovel ready" jobs to re-build roads and infrastructure? Please e-mail me if anything of the sort got built in your town. Nothing got built in the cities where I spend time.

Roads are bad in Atlanta. I recently drove though Buckhead with its bone-jarring potholes. Folks have to have SUVs there to survive the roads, some with potholes so big that you can bass fish in them after a good rain.

When the stimulus bill (or as lobbyists for graft-grabbing special interests called it, "The Show") was proposed, it was made to sound urgent. Politicians said it would bring "rigor" to the economy. It turns out it also brought mortis.

So where did all that sweet stimulus money go? Of the money spent in swing state Wisconsin, 80 percent went to public sector unions-those with already locked-in jobs. In fact, right-to-work states got $266 less per person in stimulus money than heavily unionized states. Where Democrats had a vast majority of representatives, their states got $460 per person more."


Read more at Stimulus Money for 'Shovel Ready' Projects; Where Did It Go?

The rich "get rewarded" to create Jobs Booms; where have all the capital gains tax preferences gone?

The distribution of household incomes has become more unequal during the post-2008 economic recovery as the effects of the recession reversed.[66][67][68] CBO reported in November 2014 that the share of pre-tax income received by the top 1% had risen from 13.3% in 2009 to 14.6% in 2011.[1] During 2012 alone, incomes of the wealthiest 1 percent rose nearly 20%, whereas the income of the remaining 99 percent rose 1% in comparison.--https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_United_States

Again, the jobs left due to obummercare, regulations, and jobs going overseas. No 1% was going to waste money on jobs. it was a no rewards economy. Fk, the entire climate fiasco fked with jobs.

like i am going to believe, simply coddling Persons of wealth works any better than coddling the poor. why not end the capital gains preference, if there is no Jobs Boom.

dude all of their money went off to another fking country. How are you going to get at that money? Come on, you know the regulations and obummercare affected jobs.

BTW, you know what I want? I want a fking libturd to be fking honest once in a lifetime.

you get it all the time; you just don't recognize it due to all of your right wing fantasy.

The distribution of household incomes has become more unequal during the post-2008 economic recovery as the effects of the recession reversed.[66][67][68] CBO reported in November 2014 that the share of pre-tax income received by the top 1% had risen from 13.3% in 2009 to 14.6% in 2011.[1] During 2012 alone, incomes of the wealthiest 1 percent rose nearly 20%, whereas the income of the remaining 99 percent rose 1% in comparison.--https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_United_States

Why is there no Jobs Boom?

 

[IcebergSlim]

Sez who?

the people of the country?

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.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-23/the-u-s-economic-policy-debate-is-a-sham.html
​

92%

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

Well, here you go:

Stimulus Money for 'Shovel Ready' Projects; Where Did It Go?

"Remember when Obama got his trillion-odd dollars of "stimulus money" which he and the Democrats breathlessly said we needed for "shovel ready" jobs to re-build roads and infrastructure? Please e-mail me if anything of the sort got built in your town. Nothing got built in the cities where I spend time.

Roads are bad in Atlanta. I recently drove though Buckhead with its bone-jarring potholes. Folks have to have SUVs there to survive the roads, some with potholes so big that you can bass fish in them after a good rain.

When the stimulus bill (or as lobbyists for graft-grabbing special interests called it, "The Show") was proposed, it was made to sound urgent. Politicians said it would bring "rigor" to the economy. It turns out it also brought mortis.

So where did all that sweet stimulus money go? Of the money spent in swing state Wisconsin, 80 percent went to public sector unions-those with already locked-in jobs. In fact, right-to-work states got $266 less per person in stimulus money than heavily unionized states. Where Democrats had a vast majority of representatives, their states got $460 per person more."


Read more at Stimulus Money for 'Shovel Ready' Projects; Where Did It Go?

The rich "get rewarded" to create Jobs Booms; where have all the capital gains tax preferences gone?

The distribution of household incomes has become more unequal during the post-2008 economic recovery as the effects of the recession reversed.[66][67][68] CBO reported in November 2014 that the share of pre-tax income received by the top 1% had risen from 13.3% in 2009 to 14.6% in 2011.[1] During 2012 alone, incomes of the wealthiest 1 percent rose nearly 20%, whereas the income of the remaining 99 percent rose 1% in comparison.--https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_United_States

Again, the jobs left due to obummercare, regulations, and jobs going overseas. No 1% was going to waste money on jobs. it was a no rewards economy. Fk, the entire climate fiasco fked with jobs.

Are you actually citing the gripes of some random idiot in Atlanta?

With a sample of 1, what's your standard deviation?