What the Left Needs to Start (Really)

[Wry Catcher]

So, if Bush92 had read the above post, even he might have to admit that any redistribution of the wealth policy is the one in which the Republicans hope to accomplish.

What would the very rich do with this money? Would this largess they hope to garner recirculate throughout the local economy, as say an increase in the minimum wage? Would they donate it to St Judes or to the Heritage Society or a conservative SuperPac? Is greed ever satisfied?

Progressive/liberal ideas have traction in all but he most extreme conservative citizens. Most Americans agree women should be paid the same as men for the same work; seperate but equal is never equal and that the wealth of our nation is too much in the hands of the 1% for the long term good of our nation.

Most agree that having a child is a personal matter and one which a government should not impose; that a town, city, county or parish and state ought to be governed by political bodies which represent the demographics of the political subdivision, and that the rule of law must be applied equally and fairly to citizens and non citizens alike.

Yet the right seems to win the propaganda battle as reactionary forces work everyday to 'defrock' our democratic institutions and traditions. Why?

You certainly win the award for most vapid post.
Because at the same time most Americans would agree that allowing lawsuits against employers on spurious grounds is wrong, killing children is wrong, and confiscating wealth from hard working people is wrong.
Which are all other ways to word what you wrote.

"Which are all other ways to word what you wrote", when one wants to build a straw man and create a Red Herring. My post above Rabbit's logical fallacies and non sequitur asked a question, one Rabbi(t) ignored. Why, because on some level he knows he cannot defend his beliefs.

I proffered this: An increase in the minium wage recycles throughout the local economy; what would the very rich do with the money resultant from a flat tax, repeal of the death tax and cut to capital gain's taxes?

 

[The Rabbi]

So, if Bush92 had read the above post, even he might have to admit that any redistribution of the wealth policy is the one in which the Republicans hope to accomplish.

What would the very rich do with this money? Would this largess they hope to garner recirculate throughout the local economy, as say an increase in the minimum wage? Would they donate it to St Judes or to the Heritage Society or a conservative SuperPac? Is greed ever satisfied?

Progressive/liberal ideas have traction in all but he most extreme conservative citizens. Most Americans agree women should be paid the same as men for the same work; seperate but equal is never equal and that the wealth of our nation is too much in the hands of the 1% for the long term good of our nation.

Most agree that having a child is a personal matter and one which a government should not impose; that a town, city, county or parish and state ought to be governed by political bodies which represent the demographics of the political subdivision, and that the rule of law must be applied equally and fairly to citizens and non citizens alike.

Yet the right seems to win the propaganda battle as reactionary forces work everyday to 'defrock' our democratic institutions and traditions. Why?

You certainly win the award for most vapid post.
Because at the same time most Americans would agree that allowing lawsuits against employers on spurious grounds is wrong, killing children is wrong, and confiscating wealth from hard working people is wrong.
Which are all other ways to word what you wrote.

"Which are all other ways to word what you wrote", when one wants to build a straw man and create a Red Herring. My post above Rabbit's logical fallacies and non sequitur asked a question, one Rabbi(t) ignored. Why, because on some level he knows he cannot defend his beliefs.

I proffered this: An increase in the minium wage recycles throughout the local economy; what would the very rich do with the money resultant from a flat tax, repeal of the death tax and cut to capital gain's taxes?

It doesnt "recycle". That's idiotic. It betrays your ignorance of economics, liek that's news.
What do the high income earners do with the money they dont pay in taxes? Stats say they invest it, which grows the economy. What did you think? They put it under the mattress?

 

[Wry Catcher]

So, if Bush92 had read the above post, even he might have to admit that any redistribution of the wealth policy is the one in which the Republicans hope to accomplish.

What would the very rich do with this money? Would this largess they hope to garner recirculate throughout the local economy, as say an increase in the minimum wage? Would they donate it to St Judes or to the Heritage Society or a conservative SuperPac? Is greed ever satisfied?

Progressive/liberal ideas have traction in all but he most extreme conservative citizens. Most Americans agree women should be paid the same as men for the same work; seperate but equal is never equal and that the wealth of our nation is too much in the hands of the 1% for the long term good of our nation.

Most agree that having a child is a personal matter and one which a government should not impose; that a town, city, county or parish and state ought to be governed by political bodies which represent the demographics of the political subdivision, and that the rule of law must be applied equally and fairly to citizens and non citizens alike.

Yet the right seems to win the propaganda battle as reactionary forces work everyday to 'defrock' our democratic institutions and traditions. Why?

You certainly win the award for most vapid post.
Because at the same time most Americans would agree that allowing lawsuits against employers on spurious grounds is wrong, killing children is wrong, and confiscating wealth from hard working people is wrong.
Which are all other ways to word what you wrote.

"Which are all other ways to word what you wrote", when one wants to build a straw man and create a Red Herring. My post above Rabbit's logical fallacies and non sequitur asked a question, one Rabbi(t) ignored. Why, because on some level he knows he cannot defend his beliefs.

I proffered this: An increase in the minium wage recycles throughout the local economy; what would the very rich do with the money resultant from a flat tax, repeal of the death tax and cut to capital gain's taxes?

It doesnt "recycle". That's idiotic. It betrays your ignorance of economics, liek that's news.
What do the high income earners do with the money they dont pay in taxes? Stats say they invest it, which grows the economy. What did you think? They put it under the mattress?

Invest it; where? Some invest it in the Cayman Islands, others in gold, silver or art. Maybe the financial services industry will benefit, but not the butcher, baker or eyeglass maker.

A clerk at McDonalds will spend their minimum wage income mostly in the local community, buying food, clothing and shelter. How much more will a wealthy man or women spend at the butchers, at the bakery or at another small business than they do now?

Stats say? What stats? And keep in mind the sage words of Mark Twain, "there are liars, damn liars and statistics". BTW, local and state government invests retirement money in stocks, bonds, real estate, etc.

CALPERS, for example, invests billions of dollars of public employee contributions to grow the economy. What say you about that?

 

[The Rabbi]

So, if Bush92 had read the above post, even he might have to admit that any redistribution of the wealth policy is the one in which the Republicans hope to accomplish.

What would the very rich do with this money? Would this largess they hope to garner recirculate throughout the local economy, as say an increase in the minimum wage? Would they donate it to St Judes or to the Heritage Society or a conservative SuperPac? Is greed ever satisfied?

Progressive/liberal ideas have traction in all but he most extreme conservative citizens. Most Americans agree women should be paid the same as men for the same work; seperate but equal is never equal and that the wealth of our nation is too much in the hands of the 1% for the long term good of our nation.

Most agree that having a child is a personal matter and one which a government should not impose; that a town, city, county or parish and state ought to be governed by political bodies which represent the demographics of the political subdivision, and that the rule of law must be applied equally and fairly to citizens and non citizens alike.

Yet the right seems to win the propaganda battle as reactionary forces work everyday to 'defrock' our democratic institutions and traditions. Why?

You certainly win the award for most vapid post.
Because at the same time most Americans would agree that allowing lawsuits against employers on spurious grounds is wrong, killing children is wrong, and confiscating wealth from hard working people is wrong.
Which are all other ways to word what you wrote.

"Which are all other ways to word what you wrote", when one wants to build a straw man and create a Red Herring. My post above Rabbit's logical fallacies and non sequitur asked a question, one Rabbi(t) ignored. Why, because on some level he knows he cannot defend his beliefs.

I proffered this: An increase in the minium wage recycles throughout the local economy; what would the very rich do with the money resultant from a flat tax, repeal of the death tax and cut to capital gain's taxes?

It doesnt "recycle". That's idiotic. It betrays your ignorance of economics, liek that's news.
What do the high income earners do with the money they dont pay in taxes? Stats say they invest it, which grows the economy. What did you think? They put it under the mattress?

Invest it; where? Some invest it in the Cayman Islands, others in gold, silver or art. Maybe the financial services industry will benefit, but not the butcher, baker or eyeglass maker.

A clerk at McDonalds will spend their minimum wage income mostly in the local community, buying food, clothing and shelter. How much more will a wealthy man or women spend at the butchers, at the bakery or at another small business than they do now?

Stats say? What stats? And keep in mind the sage words of Mark Twain, "there are liars, damn liars and statistics". BTW, local and state government invests retirement money in stocks, bonds, real estate, etc.

CALPERS, for example, invests billions of dollars of public employee contributions to grow the economy. What say you about that?

No wonder a cocksucker like yourself has no idea.
Companies invest money every day. They need inventory. They need equipment. They need buildings. They borrow this money from others for the most part. That is the investment. Gold etc make up a tiny fraction of money invested.
SPending money buying dildoes like you do may help an economy slightly but building the factory that makes dildoes and employs people, or the import company that buys and sells them, creates much more prosperity.

 

[Wry Catcher]

So, if Bush92 had read the above post, even he might have to admit that any redistribution of the wealth policy is the one in which the Republicans hope to accomplish.

What would the very rich do with this money? Would this largess they hope to garner recirculate throughout the local economy, as say an increase in the minimum wage? Would they donate it to St Judes or to the Heritage Society or a conservative SuperPac? Is greed ever satisfied?

Progressive/liberal ideas have traction in all but he most extreme conservative citizens. Most Americans agree women should be paid the same as men for the same work; seperate but equal is never equal and that the wealth of our nation is too much in the hands of the 1% for the long term good of our nation.

Most agree that having a child is a personal matter and one which a government should not impose; that a town, city, county or parish and state ought to be governed by political bodies which represent the demographics of the political subdivision, and that the rule of law must be applied equally and fairly to citizens and non citizens alike.

Yet the right seems to win the propaganda battle as reactionary forces work everyday to 'defrock' our democratic institutions and traditions. Why?

You certainly win the award for most vapid post.
Because at the same time most Americans would agree that allowing lawsuits against employers on spurious grounds is wrong, killing children is wrong, and confiscating wealth from hard working people is wrong.
Which are all other ways to word what you wrote.

"Which are all other ways to word what you wrote", when one wants to build a straw man and create a Red Herring. My post above Rabbit's logical fallacies and non sequitur asked a question, one Rabbi(t) ignored. Why, because on some level he knows he cannot defend his beliefs.

I proffered this: An increase in the minium wage recycles throughout the local economy; what would the very rich do with the money resultant from a flat tax, repeal of the death tax and cut to capital gain's taxes?

It doesnt "recycle". That's idiotic. It betrays your ignorance of economics, liek that's news.
What do the high income earners do with the money they dont pay in taxes? Stats say they invest it, which grows the economy. What did you think? They put it under the mattress?

Invest it; where? Some invest it in the Cayman Islands, others in gold, silver or art. Maybe the financial services industry will benefit, but not the butcher, baker or eyeglass maker.

A clerk at McDonalds will spend their minimum wage income mostly in the local community, buying food, clothing and shelter. How much more will a wealthy man or women spend at the butchers, at the bakery or at another small business than they do now?

Stats say? What stats? And keep in mind the sage words of Mark Twain, "there are liars, damn liars and statistics". BTW, local and state government invests retirement money in stocks, bonds, real estate, etc.

CALPERS, for example, invests billions of dollars of public employee contributions to grow the economy. What say you about that?

No wonder a cocksucker like yourself has no idea.
Companies invest money every day. They need inventory. They need equipment. They need buildings. They borrow this money from others for the most part. That is the investment. Gold etc make up a tiny fraction of money invested.
SPending money buying dildoes like you do may help an economy slightly but building the factory that makes dildoes and employs people, or the import company that buys and sells them, creates much more prosperity.

Yeah, sure, it trickles down. In fact the working man who buys his lunch puts more into the economy than than your pal Romney whose corporation buys a business, fires the employees, sells the assets and leaves the property to be a homeless hotel. Then taking their profits overseas, since they've hung their shingle in a four unit apt. house in Georgetown, Grand Cayman Island, along with a couple of dozen other hedge funds.

I'm not a cocksucker you candy ass piece of shit. You're not only stupid, an asshole, a liar and coward, you're likely a closeted homosexual to afraid to engage in your sexaul desires. But I digress, everyone knows that.

 

[The Rabbi]

So, if Bush92 had read the above post, even he might have to admit that any redistribution of the wealth policy is the one in which the Republicans hope to accomplish.

What would the very rich do with this money? Would this largess they hope to garner recirculate throughout the local economy, as say an increase in the minimum wage? Would they donate it to St Judes or to the Heritage Society or a conservative SuperPac? Is greed ever satisfied?

Progressive/liberal ideas have traction in all but he most extreme conservative citizens. Most Americans agree women should be paid the same as men for the same work; seperate but equal is never equal and that the wealth of our nation is too much in the hands of the 1% for the long term good of our nation.

Most agree that having a child is a personal matter and one which a government should not impose; that a town, city, county or parish and state ought to be governed by political bodies which represent the demographics of the political subdivision, and that the rule of law must be applied equally and fairly to citizens and non citizens alike.

Yet the right seems to win the propaganda battle as reactionary forces work everyday to 'defrock' our democratic institutions and traditions. Why?

You certainly win the award for most vapid post.
Because at the same time most Americans would agree that allowing lawsuits against employers on spurious grounds is wrong, killing children is wrong, and confiscating wealth from hard working people is wrong.
Which are all other ways to word what you wrote.

"Which are all other ways to word what you wrote", when one wants to build a straw man and create a Red Herring. My post above Rabbit's logical fallacies and non sequitur asked a question, one Rabbi(t) ignored. Why, because on some level he knows he cannot defend his beliefs.

I proffered this: An increase in the minium wage recycles throughout the local economy; what would the very rich do with the money resultant from a flat tax, repeal of the death tax and cut to capital gain's taxes?

It doesnt "recycle". That's idiotic. It betrays your ignorance of economics, liek that's news.
What do the high income earners do with the money they dont pay in taxes? Stats say they invest it, which grows the economy. What did you think? They put it under the mattress?

Invest it; where? Some invest it in the Cayman Islands, others in gold, silver or art. Maybe the financial services industry will benefit, but not the butcher, baker or eyeglass maker.

A clerk at McDonalds will spend their minimum wage income mostly in the local community, buying food, clothing and shelter. How much more will a wealthy man or women spend at the butchers, at the bakery or at another small business than they do now?

Stats say? What stats? And keep in mind the sage words of Mark Twain, "there are liars, damn liars and statistics". BTW, local and state government invests retirement money in stocks, bonds, real estate, etc.

CALPERS, for example, invests billions of dollars of public employee contributions to grow the economy. What say you about that?

No wonder a cocksucker like yourself has no idea.
Companies invest money every day. They need inventory. They need equipment. They need buildings. They borrow this money from others for the most part. That is the investment. Gold etc make up a tiny fraction of money invested.
SPending money buying dildoes like you do may help an economy slightly but building the factory that makes dildoes and employs people, or the import company that buys and sells them, creates much more prosperity.

Yeah, sure, it trickles down. In fact the working man who buys his lunch puts more into the economy than than your pal Romney whose corporation buys a business, fires the employees, sells the assets and leaves the property to be a homeless hotel. Then taking their profits overseas, since they've hung their shingle in a four unit apt. house in Georgetown, Grand Cayman Island, along with a couple of dozen other hedge funds.

I'm not a cocksucker you candy ass piece of shit. You're not only stupid, an asshole, a liar and coward, you're likely a closeted homosexual to afraid to engage in your sexaul desires. But I digress, everyone knows that.

You ignorant cock sucking crap taster. The businessman puts more money into the economy by investing. I realize your fantasies preclude you from understanding the truth. BUt that's it. Your buying butt plugs has minimal impact. Except on your asshole.

 

[Wry Catcher]

So, if Bush92 had read the above post, even he might have to admit that any redistribution of the wealth policy is the one in which the Republicans hope to accomplish.

What would the very rich do with this money? Would this largess they hope to garner recirculate throughout the local economy, as say an increase in the minimum wage? Would they donate it to St Judes or to the Heritage Society or a conservative SuperPac? Is greed ever satisfied?

Progressive/liberal ideas have traction in all but he most extreme conservative citizens. Most Americans agree women should be paid the same as men for the same work; seperate but equal is never equal and that the wealth of our nation is too much in the hands of the 1% for the long term good of our nation.

Most agree that having a child is a personal matter and one which a government should not impose; that a town, city, county or parish and state ought to be governed by political bodies which represent the demographics of the political subdivision, and that the rule of law must be applied equally and fairly to citizens and non citizens alike.

Yet the right seems to win the propaganda battle as reactionary forces work everyday to 'defrock' our democratic institutions and traditions. Why?

You certainly win the award for most vapid post.
Because at the same time most Americans would agree that allowing lawsuits against employers on spurious grounds is wrong, killing children is wrong, and confiscating wealth from hard working people is wrong.
Which are all other ways to word what you wrote.

"Which are all other ways to word what you wrote", when one wants to build a straw man and create a Red Herring. My post above Rabbit's logical fallacies and non sequitur asked a question, one Rabbi(t) ignored. Why, because on some level he knows he cannot defend his beliefs.

I proffered this: An increase in the minium wage recycles throughout the local economy; what would the very rich do with the money resultant from a flat tax, repeal of the death tax and cut to capital gain's taxes?

It doesnt "recycle". That's idiotic. It betrays your ignorance of economics, liek that's news.
What do the high income earners do with the money they dont pay in taxes? Stats say they invest it, which grows the economy. What did you think? They put it under the mattress?

Invest it; where? Some invest it in the Cayman Islands, others in gold, silver or art. Maybe the financial services industry will benefit, but not the butcher, baker or eyeglass maker.

A clerk at McDonalds will spend their minimum wage income mostly in the local community, buying food, clothing and shelter. How much more will a wealthy man or women spend at the butchers, at the bakery or at another small business than they do now?

Stats say? What stats? And keep in mind the sage words of Mark Twain, "there are liars, damn liars and statistics". BTW, local and state government invests retirement money in stocks, bonds, real estate, etc.

CALPERS, for example, invests billions of dollars of public employee contributions to grow the economy. What say you about that?

No wonder a cocksucker like yourself has no idea.
Companies invest money every day. They need inventory. They need equipment. They need buildings. They borrow this money from others for the most part. That is the investment. Gold etc make up a tiny fraction of money invested.
SPending money buying dildoes like you do may help an economy slightly but building the factory that makes dildoes and employs people, or the import company that buys and sells them, creates much more prosperity.

Yeah, sure, it trickles down. In fact the working man who buys his lunch puts more into the economy than than your pal Romney whose corporation buys a business, fires the employees, sells the assets and leaves the property to be a homeless hotel. Then taking their profits overseas, since they've hung their shingle in a four unit apt. house in Georgetown, Grand Cayman Island, along with a couple of dozen other hedge funds.

I'm not a cocksucker you candy ass piece of shit. You're not only stupid, an asshole, a liar and coward, you're likely a closeted homosexual to afraid to engage in your sexaul desires. But I digress, everyone knows that.

You ignorant cock sucking crap taster. The businessman puts more money into the economy by investing. I realize your fantasies preclude you from understanding the truth. BUt that's it. Your buying butt plugs has minimal impact. Except on your asshole.

Prove your statement, prove middleclass spending isn't the engine which moves our economy, prove you're not a closeted homosexual, prove you're not stupid (that may not be possible), Prove hedge funds - like Bane Captial - are good for the American Economy and not only for the 'Romney's'. Prove you're not an asshole (which is impossible) and be honest (it's not hard, try it for once in your life).

 

[Rikurzhen]

Progressive/liberal ideas have traction in all but he most extreme conservative citizens. Most Americans agree women should be paid the same as men for the same work; seperate but equal is never equal and that the wealth of our nation is too much in the hands of the 1% for the long term good of our nation.

Most agree that having a child is a personal matter and one which a government should not impose; that a town, city, county or parish and state ought to be governed by political bodies which represent the demographics of the political subdivision, and that the rule of law must be applied equally and fairly to citizens and non citizens alike.

Yet the right seems to win the propaganda battle as reactionary forces work everyday to 'defrock' our democratic institutions and traditions. Why?

Because you fundamentally misunderstand reality. I'm not being snarky here. You seem genuinely puzzled by what's going on. It's very likely that what you think is going on is not something that is actually going on.

 

[Rikurzhen]

Why We Need a Left Wing Tea Party - The Daily Beast

If the left can get moving on this front and the Tea Party branch off on the right, we could possibly have a 4 party system in US. That would be a good thing. (I'm serious on this point)

The Left Wing already has a "tea party". It's called Occupy Wall Street.

The article fawns over Elizabeth Warren. Well, Warren would not be where she is today if not for the OWS movement. Her whole schtick revolves around Wall Street.

The Left already has their version of the TEA Party, it is called the Coffee Party:

The Coffee Party USA is an American political movement that was initially formed in January, 2010, as an alternative to the Tea Party movement.[1][2][3][4][5] Co-founder Annabel Park said that the group initially had significant appeal among those opposed to the Tea Party. It has since grown into an increasingly diverse organization with members from across the political spectrum​

 

[The Rabbi]

So, if Bush92 had read the above post, even he might have to admit that any redistribution of the wealth policy is the one in which the Republicans hope to accomplish.

What would the very rich do with this money? Would this largess they hope to garner recirculate throughout the local economy, as say an increase in the minimum wage? Would they donate it to St Judes or to the Heritage Society or a conservative SuperPac? Is greed ever satisfied?

Progressive/liberal ideas have traction in all but he most extreme conservative citizens. Most Americans agree women should be paid the same as men for the same work; seperate but equal is never equal and that the wealth of our nation is too much in the hands of the 1% for the long term good of our nation.

Most agree that having a child is a personal matter and one which a government should not impose; that a town, city, county or parish and state ought to be governed by political bodies which represent the demographics of the political subdivision, and that the rule of law must be applied equally and fairly to citizens and non citizens alike.

Yet the right seems to win the propaganda battle as reactionary forces work everyday to 'defrock' our democratic institutions and traditions. Why?

You certainly win the award for most vapid post.
Because at the same time most Americans would agree that allowing lawsuits against employers on spurious grounds is wrong, killing children is wrong, and confiscating wealth from hard working people is wrong.
Which are all other ways to word what you wrote.

"Which are all other ways to word what you wrote", when one wants to build a straw man and create a Red Herring. My post above Rabbit's logical fallacies and non sequitur asked a question, one Rabbi(t) ignored. Why, because on some level he knows he cannot defend his beliefs.

I proffered this: An increase in the minium wage recycles throughout the local economy; what would the very rich do with the money resultant from a flat tax, repeal of the death tax and cut to capital gain's taxes?

It doesnt "recycle". That's idiotic. It betrays your ignorance of economics, liek that's news.
What do the high income earners do with the money they dont pay in taxes? Stats say they invest it, which grows the economy. What did you think? They put it under the mattress?

Invest it; where? Some invest it in the Cayman Islands, others in gold, silver or art. Maybe the financial services industry will benefit, but not the butcher, baker or eyeglass maker.

A clerk at McDonalds will spend their minimum wage income mostly in the local community, buying food, clothing and shelter. How much more will a wealthy man or women spend at the butchers, at the bakery or at another small business than they do now?

Stats say? What stats? And keep in mind the sage words of Mark Twain, "there are liars, damn liars and statistics". BTW, local and state government invests retirement money in stocks, bonds, real estate, etc.

CALPERS, for example, invests billions of dollars of public employee contributions to grow the economy. What say you about that?

No wonder a cocksucker like yourself has no idea.
Companies invest money every day. They need inventory. They need equipment. They need buildings. They borrow this money from others for the most part. That is the investment. Gold etc make up a tiny fraction of money invested.
SPending money buying dildoes like you do may help an economy slightly but building the factory that makes dildoes and employs people, or the import company that buys and sells them, creates much more prosperity.

Yeah, sure, it trickles down. In fact the working man who buys his lunch puts more into the economy than than your pal Romney whose corporation buys a business, fires the employees, sells the assets and leaves the property to be a homeless hotel. Then taking their profits overseas, since they've hung their shingle in a four unit apt. house in Georgetown, Grand Cayman Island, along with a couple of dozen other hedge funds.

I'm not a cocksucker you candy ass piece of shit. You're not only stupid, an asshole, a liar and coward, you're likely a closeted homosexual to afraid to engage in your sexaul desires. But I digress, everyone knows that.

You ignorant cock sucking crap taster. The businessman puts more money into the economy by investing. I realize your fantasies preclude you from understanding the truth. BUt that's it. Your buying butt plugs has minimal impact. Except on your asshole.

Prove your statement, prove middleclass spending isn't the engine which moves our economy, prove you're not a closeted homosexual, prove you're not stupid (that may not be possible), Prove hedge funds - like Bane Captial - are good for the American Economy and not only for the 'Romney's'. Prove you're not an asshole (which is impossible) and be honest (it's not hard, try it for once in your life).

You're an ignorant foul mouthed cocksucker so you wont get any of this. If you had spent your career reading instead of sucking off suspects you wouldn't look like such an idiot.
Consumer Spending Doesn t Drive the Economy The Freeman Foundation for Economic Education
The Myth of Consumer Spending - Civitas Review
Think Consumption Is The Engine Of Our Economy Think Again. - Forbes

 

[Wry Catcher]

Empirical evidence suggest differently, and Rabbit's sources are clearly partisan and defy the evidence of any of us who have walked Main St. in America in the past few years.

Here are some links which contradict Rabbits:

Components of GDP

US GDP is 70 Percent Personal Consumption Inside the Numbers - Mic

Growth in U.S. Slows as Consumers Restrain Spending - Bloomberg

Now Rabbit, try and post a response witout being vulgar or a bigot (odds are you can't).

 

[The Rabbi]

Empirical evidence suggest differently, and Rabbit's sources are clearly partisan and defy the evidence of any of us who have walked Main St. in America in the past few years.

Here are some links which contradict Rabbits:

Components of GDP

US GDP is 70 Percent Personal Consumption Inside the Numbers - Mic

Growth in U.S. Slows as Consumers Restrain Spending - Bloomberg

Now Rabbit, try and post a response witout being vulgar or a bigot (odds are you can't).

You're an idiot.
No one claimed consumer spending wasn't 70% of GDP. The claim was consumer spending drove the economy, which is not the same thing for anyone remotely paying attention.
None of your links contradict anything I posted.

 

[Wry Catcher]

As posted by me, the empirical evidence - empty stores and a depressed Main St. - strongly suggested less money was being circulated throughout the economy. Of course the stock market is now booming and the rich get richer, but they are not making the economic engine purr.

But what is true, the economy is in much better shape then it was during the 07-09 Great Recession. Too bad people like Rabbit continue their dishonest diatribes and try to pin the slow recovery on Obama. Doing so is both stupid and dishonest - two of the primary characteristics of Rabbit.

 

[The Rabbi]

As posted by me, the empirical evidence - empty stores and a depressed Main St. - strongly suggested less money was being circulated throughout the economy. Of course the stock market is now booming and the rich get richer, but they are not making the economic engine purr.

But what is true, the economy is in much better shape then it was during the 07-09 Great Recession. Too bad people like Rabbit continue their dishonest diatribes and try to pin the slow recovery on Obama. Doing so is both stupid and dishonest - two of the primary characteristics of Rabbit.

So the economy sucks even though we've had 4 years of "recovery", the rich are getting richer, and somehow none of this is Obama's fault, even though the recession was Bush's.
DO you ever read your posts before you hit "Post Reply"?

 

[frigidweirdo]

Anything that breaks the strangle hold the Democrats and Republicans have on our political system is a good thing in my eyes.

Theoretically, yeah.

But any Intro to Political Science 101 professor (or any good one, that is) will tell you that the two-party system in a representative democracy works best.

It may lend itself to marginalization and polarization and even aid and/ or abet the creation of an underclass, but the two-party system does theoretically ensure that everyone is represented, as everyone has to lay aside minor philosophical differences and choose a side that represents him/ her best overall, intrinsically speaking.

What does "works best" mean? Works best for who?

I like the German system, it usually has 4-5 parties. Have these professors ever bothered to look at other systems?

They probably looked at Weimar and saw that it didn't work so well, so clearly a 2 party system works "best".

 

[Skylar]

Anything that breaks the strangle hold the Democrats and Republicans have on our political system is a good thing in my eyes.

Theoretically, yeah.

But any Intro to Political Science 101 professor (or any good one, that is) will tell you that the two-party system in a representative democracy works best.

It may lend itself to marginalization and polarization and even aid and/ or abet the creation of an underclass, but the two-party system does theoretically ensure that everyone is represented, as everyone has to lay aside minor philosophical differences and choose a side that represents him/ her best overall, intrinsically speaking.

I don't think any of that is true. Your assessment of political scientists is just the old 'true scotsman' fallacy. I don't have any national polls or anything, but I've never met a political science professor who agreed with anything you just said.

Logically, it makes no sense. How would two monolithic opposing parties offer the best representation to an individual....who in all likelihood doesn't fully agree with either? It would make far more sense that more parties, with more diverse views would increase the likelihood of an individual finding representation that more fully matches their beliefs. I'd also see two party systems as more corruptible. As there are fewer hands that need greasing. There would also be the polarization and marginalization issues you mentioned.

Two party systems would have only one advantage as far as I can see: stability.

 

[Skylar]

Progressive/liberal ideas have traction in all but he most extreme conservative citizens. Most Americans agree women should be paid the same as men for the same work; seperate but equal is never equal and that the wealth of our nation is too much in the hands of the 1% for the long term good of our nation.

Most agree that having a child is a personal matter and one which a government should not impose; that a town, city, county or parish and state ought to be governed by political bodies which represent the demographics of the political subdivision, and that the rule of law must be applied equally and fairly to citizens and non citizens alike.

Yet the right seems to win the propaganda battle as reactionary forces work everyday to 'defrock' our democratic institutions and traditions. Why?

You certainly win the award for most vapid post.
Because at the same time most Americans would agree that allowing lawsuits against employers on spurious grounds is wrong, killing children is wrong, and confiscating wealth from hard working people is wrong.
Which are all other ways to word what you wrote.

The right is on the opposite side of the majority on most major issues. Abortion, immigration, wealth distribution, healthcare, background checks for gun purchases, gay marriage, even tax cuts for the rich.

 

[Skylar]

I think it would be a good thing. Give people a place. Far left , left, swing right, far right.

Nope!

Already have way too many partisans on the left and the right.

What We the People need is a Center Party. Fiscally sane and socially moderate. People are what are important. Keep it simple and straightforward. Support politicians that do what is right for the people and oppose politicians who are in it for power, special interests, partisan politics, etc.

What we don't need are extremists, crazy one issue people and parties who lack the intellectual ability and education to have panoptic vision; the far left and far right are myoptic at best.

Which is what you have with the Democrats right now. Democrats are for redistribution of the wealth, treating society and the economy as if it s about class consciousness and class struggle. The Democrats are FAR left. But the have those hangers on...the Clinton's, Gores, Kerry's, and Bidens that are wealthy White people, and that is a sin unto damnation in the Democratic Party. So this nonsense that somehow Democrats are centrist is bunk!

Not particularly. Most measures of political polarization have congressional republicans about twice as polarized toward the political extreme as Obama. Congressional republicans getting about 0.71 with Obama at about a -0.33.

Putting Obama as the least liberal Democratic President in the post war era. While GW was the most conservative Republican President in the post war era. More so than Reagan, and nearly twice as conservative as Ike. While Bush was more than twice as conservative as Obama is liberal. With republican polarization as a whole far higher than democratic polarization as a whole.

Democrats in the house are now are about as politically extreme as republicans were in the late 70s, early 80s. I think its comforting to many republicans to believe that everyone is as ideologically extreme as they are. Its not true, but I think it soothing for them to believe it, as it provides a sense of balance.

Alas, the evidence isn't there to support that idea. The level of political polarization among the overwhelming majority of House democrats has remained about the same since the last 60s. While the degree of political polarization among House republicans has steadily climbing since the last 70s. Even among the minority of both parties, Republicans have been getting more conservative than democrats have been getting liberal.

Republicans are now more conservative than they have been any time in nearly the last 150 years.

 

[The Rabbi]

Progressive/liberal ideas have traction in all but he most extreme conservative citizens. Most Americans agree women should be paid the same as men for the same work; seperate but equal is never equal and that the wealth of our nation is too much in the hands of the 1% for the long term good of our nation.

Most agree that having a child is a personal matter and one which a government should not impose; that a town, city, county or parish and state ought to be governed by political bodies which represent the demographics of the political subdivision, and that the rule of law must be applied equally and fairly to citizens and non citizens alike.

Yet the right seems to win the propaganda battle as reactionary forces work everyday to 'defrock' our democratic institutions and traditions. Why?

You certainly win the award for most vapid post.
Because at the same time most Americans would agree that allowing lawsuits against employers on spurious grounds is wrong, killing children is wrong, and confiscating wealth from hard working people is wrong.
Which are all other ways to word what you wrote.

The right is on the opposite side of the majority on most major issues. Abortion, immigration, wealth distribution, healthcare, background checks for gun purchases, gay marriage, even tax cuts for the rich.

That's why 2010 saw the biggest turnover in the House in history? Why the majority of state legislatures and governors are GOP?
Yeah, smoke some more.

 

[Skylar]

Progressive/liberal ideas have traction in all but he most extreme conservative citizens. Most Americans agree women should be paid the same as men for the same work; seperate but equal is never equal and that the wealth of our nation is too much in the hands of the 1% for the long term good of our nation.

Most agree that having a child is a personal matter and one which a government should not impose; that a town, city, county or parish and state ought to be governed by political bodies which represent the demographics of the political subdivision, and that the rule of law must be applied equally and fairly to citizens and non citizens alike.

Yet the right seems to win the propaganda battle as reactionary forces work everyday to 'defrock' our democratic institutions and traditions. Why?

You certainly win the award for most vapid post.
Because at the same time most Americans would agree that allowing lawsuits against employers on spurious grounds is wrong, killing children is wrong, and confiscating wealth from hard working people is wrong.
Which are all other ways to word what you wrote.

The right is on the opposite side of the majority on most major issues. Abortion, immigration, wealth distribution, healthcare, background checks for gun purchases, gay marriage, even tax cuts for the rich.

That's why 2010 saw the biggest turnover in the House in history? Why the majority of state legislatures and governors are GOP?
Yeah, smoke some more.

Republicans have won the popular vote in a national election exactly once since 1988. And note you don't actually disagree with me on any point I've raised.