Who's In Charge: A Reminder

[PoliticalChic]

1. The historic GDP for our nation is about 3.5....

And coming out of a deep recession, one should realistically expect 4.5 or so....


2. BUT....as Liberals have insisted on saddling the nation with this inept, incompetent ideologue....this is required reading, from the Atlanta Fed.....

"The GDPNow model forecast for real GDP growth (seasonally adjusted annual rate) in the fourth quarter of 2015 is 0.8 percent on January 8, down from 1.0 percent on January 6.

The forecast for the contribution of inventory investment to fourth-quarter real GDP growth declined 0.2 percentage points to -0.8 percentage points after this morning's wholesale trade report from the U.S. Census Bureau."
GDPNow


Never forget who did this to America.



3. For purposes of comparison....under a real President, the finest in a hundred years...

"Ronald Reagan’s economic plan saw GDP surge at a 3.5% clip – 4.9% after the recession. That’s a 32% bump."
OBAMA vs. REAGAN on GDP GROWTH - NOT EVEN CLOSE - The Gateway Pundit

a. "How about overall growth? GDP under Reagan was turbocharged compared to the Obama years. The Reagan years brought annual real GDP growth of 3.5 percent – 4.9 percent after the recession. In inflation-adjusted 2009 dollars, GDP jumped from 6.5 trillion at the end of 1980 to 8.61 trillion at the end of 1988. That’s a 32 percent bump. As Peter Ferrara pointed out on Forbes, it was the equivalent of adding the West German economy to the U.S. one."
Sorry, Obama Fans: Reagan Did Better on Jobs and Growth

 

[S.J.]

Don't insult Ronald Reagan by comparing him to that dog eating jihadist currently soiling the Oval Office.

 

[Moonglow]

And the economy under Clinton did best, yet that was yesterday and today, well it's gonna be tomorrow...

 

[Penelope]

1. The historic GDP for our nation is about 3.5....

And coming out of a deep recession, one should realistically expect 4.5 or so....


2. BUT....as Liberals have insisted on saddling the nation with this inept, incompetent ideologue....this is required reading, from the Atlanta Fed.....

"The GDPNow model forecast for real GDP growth (seasonally adjusted annual rate) in the fourth quarter of 2015 is 0.8 percent on January 8, down from 1.0 percent on January 6.

The forecast for the contribution of inventory investment to fourth-quarter real GDP growth declined 0.2 percentage points to -0.8 percentage points after this morning's wholesale trade report from the U.S. Census Bureau."
GDPNow


Never forget who did this to America.



3. For purposes of comparison....under a real President, the finest in a hundred years...

"Ronald Reagan’s economic plan saw GDP surge at a 3.5% clip – 4.9% after the recession. That’s a 32% bump."
OBAMA vs. REAGAN on GDP GROWTH - NOT EVEN CLOSE - The Gateway Pundit

a. "How about overall growth? GDP under Reagan was turbocharged compared to the Obama years. The Reagan years brought annual real GDP growth of 3.5 percent – 4.9 percent after the recession. In inflation-adjusted 2009 dollars, GDP jumped from 6.5 trillion at the end of 1980 to 8.61 trillion at the end of 1988. That’s a 32 percent bump. As Peter Ferrara pointed out on Forbes, it was the equivalent of adding the West German economy to the U.S. one."
Sorry, Obama Fans: Reagan Did Better on Jobs and Growth

Things are much different now, comparing oranges to apples, or its like applying the OT to todays life. We have 100 mil plus more people now, have outsourced jobs since the 80's , and now have imported workers, also we have a global society. 1979 was a second depression and the 70's oil embargo also depreciated the US economy. Reagan had no where to go but up. Did he raise the min. wage , can't remember , he didn't want a min wage. He also lowered taxes on everyone , then raise the lower income tax bracket up , forgetting to raise the higher bracket up.

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. The historic GDP for our nation is about 3.5....

And coming out of a deep recession, one should realistically expect 4.5 or so....


2. BUT....as Liberals have insisted on saddling the nation with this inept, incompetent ideologue....this is required reading, from the Atlanta Fed.....

"The GDPNow model forecast for real GDP growth (seasonally adjusted annual rate) in the fourth quarter of 2015 is 0.8 percent on January 8, down from 1.0 percent on January 6.

The forecast for the contribution of inventory investment to fourth-quarter real GDP growth declined 0.2 percentage points to -0.8 percentage points after this morning's wholesale trade report from the U.S. Census Bureau."
GDPNow


Never forget who did this to America.



3. For purposes of comparison....under a real President, the finest in a hundred years...

"Ronald Reagan’s economic plan saw GDP surge at a 3.5% clip – 4.9% after the recession. That’s a 32% bump."
OBAMA vs. REAGAN on GDP GROWTH - NOT EVEN CLOSE - The Gateway Pundit

a. "How about overall growth? GDP under Reagan was turbocharged compared to the Obama years. The Reagan years brought annual real GDP growth of 3.5 percent – 4.9 percent after the recession. In inflation-adjusted 2009 dollars, GDP jumped from 6.5 trillion at the end of 1980 to 8.61 trillion at the end of 1988. That’s a 32 percent bump. As Peter Ferrara pointed out on Forbes, it was the equivalent of adding the West German economy to the U.S. one."
Sorry, Obama Fans: Reagan Did Better on Jobs and Growth

Things are much different now, comparing oranges to apples, or its like applying the OT to todays life. We have 100 mil plus more people now, have outsourced jobs since the 80's , and now have imported workers, also we have a global society. 1979 was a second depression and the 70's oil embargo also depreciated the US economy. Reagan had no where to go but up. Did he raise the min. wage , can't remember , he didn't want a min wage. He also lowered taxes on everyone , then raise the lower income tax bracket up , forgetting to raise the higher bracket up.

One would hope to find a modicum of understanding in posts that are a voluntary subscription to a thread.

Clearly, that was expectation too much when judging your post.

Are you actually trying to say that one cannot compare this dolt in the White House with a truly competent President???

Answer that and I'll give you 3 or 4 dozen blunders by Obama.

 

[PoliticalChic]

And the economy under Clinton did best, yet that was yesterday and today, well it's gonna be tomorrow...

Do you not understand the great boost Reagan gave Clinton by taking the USSR out of the equation???

It's called the 'Peace Dividend."

Even with no Russia to contend with, Clinton increased the national debt by 41%.

Would you like to see the actual national debt figures?

1993

4,351,044

1994

4,643,307

1995

4,920,586

1996

5,181,465

1997

5,369,206

1998

5,478,189

1999

5,605,523

2000

5,628,700



Historical Tables (table 7.1)

The table 7.1 will also show that he inherited a $4 trillion debt.

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt_histo4.htm

That means the debt increased 41% under Clinton.
And no wars or military build up to blame it on!

 

[Moonglow]

And the economy under Clinton did best, yet that was yesterday and today, well it's gonna be tomorrow...

Do you not understand the great boost Reagan gave Clinton by taking the USSR out of the equation???

It's called the 'Peace Dividend."

Even with no Russia to contend with, Clinton increased the national debt by 41%.

Would you like to see the actual national debt figures?

1993

4,351,044

1994

4,643,307

1995

4,920,586

1996

5,181,465

1997

5,369,206

1998

5,478,189

1999

5,605,523

2000

5,628,700



Historical Tables (table 7.1)

The table 7.1 will also show that he inherited a $4 trillion debt.

Government - Historical Debt Outstanding - Annual 1950 - 1999

That means the debt increased 41% under Clinton.
And no wars or military build up to blame it on!

But you are afraid to show wage earning and employment stats like you did for Dutch...

 

[PoliticalChic]

And the economy under Clinton did best, yet that was yesterday and today, well it's gonna be tomorrow...

Do you not understand the great boost Reagan gave Clinton by taking the USSR out of the equation???

It's called the 'Peace Dividend."

Even with no Russia to contend with, Clinton increased the national debt by 41%.

Would you like to see the actual national debt figures?

1993

4,351,044

1994

4,643,307

1995

4,920,586

1996

5,181,465

1997

5,369,206

1998

5,478,189

1999

5,605,523

2000

5,628,700



Historical Tables (table 7.1)

The table 7.1 will also show that he inherited a $4 trillion debt.

Government - Historical Debt Outstanding - Annual 1950 - 1999

That means the debt increased 41% under Clinton.
And no wars or military build up to blame it on!

But you are afraid to show wage earning and employment stats like you did for Dutch...

1. So....we agree that you cannot disagree with anything in the post.
Great.

2. You'd like wage earning and employment stats?
These are pertinent:

a. "....US hourly wages have not only not increased for the past 7 years, but for thevast majority of the labor force continue to decline,....just the month of August will be enough to provide the Trump - and every other - campaign with enough soundbites and pivot points to last it for weeks on end: namely, that in August a whopping 698,000 native-born Americans lost their job. This drop was offset by 204,000 foreign-born Americans, who got a job in the month of August. .... since December 2007, according to the Household Survey,only 790,000 native born Americanjobs have been added. Contrast that withthe 2.1 million foreign-born Americanswho have found a job over the same time period..." 698K Native-Born Americans Lost Their Job In August: Why This Suddenly Is The Most Important Jobs Chart | Zero Hedge

b. "...take-home pay for many American workers has effectively fallen since the economic recovery began in 2009, according to a new study by an advocacy group that is to be released on Thursday.

The declines were greatest for the lowest-paid workers in sectors where hiring has been strong — home health care, food preparation and retailing — even though wages were already below average to begin with in those service industries.

“Stagnant wages are a problem for everyone at this point, but the imbalance in the economy has become more pronounced since the recession,”..." http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/03/b...rkers-see-biggest-drop-in-paychecks.html?_r=0


c. "(CNSNews.com) - A record 94,031,000 Americans were not in the American labor force last month -- 261,000 more than July ---- The number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks or more) held at 2.2 million in August and accounted for 27.7 percent of the unemployed..." Record 94,031,000 Americans Not in Labor Force; Participation Rate Stuck at 38-Year Low for 3rd Straight Month


d. In a stunning Tuesday report, Gallup CEO and Chairman Jim Clifton revealed that “for the first time in 35 years, American business deaths now outnumber business births.”Clifton says for the past six years since 2008, employer business startups have fallen below the business failure rate, spurring what he calls“an underground earthquake” that only stands to worsen as lagging U.S. Census data becomes available.
“Let’s get one thing clear: This economy is never truly coming back unless we reverse the birth and death trends of American businesses,” writes Clifton." Economic Death Spiral: More American Businesses Dying Than Starting - Breitbart


e. "Incomes Have Dropped Twice as Much During the 'Recovery' as During the Recession
. ...the Census Bureau's Current Population Survey ....indicate that the real (inflation-adjusted)median annual household income in America has fallen by 4.4 percent during the "recovery," after having fallen by 1.8 during the recession.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs...-during-recovery-during-recession_750068.html


When ever you’re ready just yell “check please.”

 

[Penelope]

1. The historic GDP for our nation is about 3.5....

And coming out of a deep recession, one should realistically expect 4.5 or so....


2. BUT....as Liberals have insisted on saddling the nation with this inept, incompetent ideologue....this is required reading, from the Atlanta Fed.....

"The GDPNow model forecast for real GDP growth (seasonally adjusted annual rate) in the fourth quarter of 2015 is 0.8 percent on January 8, down from 1.0 percent on January 6.

The forecast for the contribution of inventory investment to fourth-quarter real GDP growth declined 0.2 percentage points to -0.8 percentage points after this morning's wholesale trade report from the U.S. Census Bureau."
GDPNow


Never forget who did this to America.



3. For purposes of comparison....under a real President, the finest in a hundred years...

"Ronald Reagan’s economic plan saw GDP surge at a 3.5% clip – 4.9% after the recession. That’s a 32% bump."
OBAMA vs. REAGAN on GDP GROWTH - NOT EVEN CLOSE - The Gateway Pundit

a. "How about overall growth? GDP under Reagan was turbocharged compared to the Obama years. The Reagan years brought annual real GDP growth of 3.5 percent – 4.9 percent after the recession. In inflation-adjusted 2009 dollars, GDP jumped from 6.5 trillion at the end of 1980 to 8.61 trillion at the end of 1988. That’s a 32 percent bump. As Peter Ferrara pointed out on Forbes, it was the equivalent of adding the West German economy to the U.S. one."
Sorry, Obama Fans: Reagan Did Better on Jobs and Growth

Things are much different now, comparing oranges to apples, or its like applying the OT to todays life. We have 100 mil plus more people now, have outsourced jobs since the 80's , and now have imported workers, also we have a global society. 1979 was a second depression and the 70's oil embargo also depreciated the US economy. Reagan had no where to go but up. Did he raise the min. wage , can't remember , he didn't want a min wage. He also lowered taxes on everyone , then raise the lower income tax bracket up , forgetting to raise the higher bracket up.

One would hope to find a modicum of understanding in posts that are a voluntary subscription to a thread.

Clearly, that was expectation too much when judging your post.

Are you actually trying to say that one cannot compare this dolt in the White House with a truly competent President???

Answer that and I'll give you 3 or 4 dozen blunders by Obama.

Do you not understand the difference from the 80's to now. Nafta didn't even exist. We didn't have the internet. Min wage was kept at 3.35. You can't compare what Obama is doing to the 80's. We are not a manufacturing country anymore. Its a totally different world today.

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. The historic GDP for our nation is about 3.5....

And coming out of a deep recession, one should realistically expect 4.5 or so....


2. BUT....as Liberals have insisted on saddling the nation with this inept, incompetent ideologue....this is required reading, from the Atlanta Fed.....

"The GDPNow model forecast for real GDP growth (seasonally adjusted annual rate) in the fourth quarter of 2015 is 0.8 percent on January 8, down from 1.0 percent on January 6.

The forecast for the contribution of inventory investment to fourth-quarter real GDP growth declined 0.2 percentage points to -0.8 percentage points after this morning's wholesale trade report from the U.S. Census Bureau."
GDPNow


Never forget who did this to America.



3. For purposes of comparison....under a real President, the finest in a hundred years...

"Ronald Reagan’s economic plan saw GDP surge at a 3.5% clip – 4.9% after the recession. That’s a 32% bump."
OBAMA vs. REAGAN on GDP GROWTH - NOT EVEN CLOSE - The Gateway Pundit

a. "How about overall growth? GDP under Reagan was turbocharged compared to the Obama years. The Reagan years brought annual real GDP growth of 3.5 percent – 4.9 percent after the recession. In inflation-adjusted 2009 dollars, GDP jumped from 6.5 trillion at the end of 1980 to 8.61 trillion at the end of 1988. That’s a 32 percent bump. As Peter Ferrara pointed out on Forbes, it was the equivalent of adding the West German economy to the U.S. one."
Sorry, Obama Fans: Reagan Did Better on Jobs and Growth

Things are much different now, comparing oranges to apples, or its like applying the OT to todays life. We have 100 mil plus more people now, have outsourced jobs since the 80's , and now have imported workers, also we have a global society. 1979 was a second depression and the 70's oil embargo also depreciated the US economy. Reagan had no where to go but up. Did he raise the min. wage , can't remember , he didn't want a min wage. He also lowered taxes on everyone , then raise the lower income tax bracket up , forgetting to raise the higher bracket up.

One would hope to find a modicum of understanding in posts that are a voluntary subscription to a thread.

Clearly, that was expectation too much when judging your post.

Are you actually trying to say that one cannot compare this dolt in the White House with a truly competent President???

Answer that and I'll give you 3 or 4 dozen blunders by Obama.

Do you not understand the difference from the 80's to now. Nafta didn't even exist. We didn't have the internet. Min wage was kept at 3.35. You can't compare what Obama is doing to the 80's. We are not a manufacturing country anymore. Its a totally different world today.

1. The historic GDP for our nation is about 3.5....

And coming out of a deep recession, one should realistically expect 4.5 or so....


2. BUT....as Liberals have insisted on saddling the nation with this inept, incompetent ideologue....this is required reading, from the Atlanta Fed.....

"The GDPNow model forecast for real GDP growth (seasonally adjusted annual rate) in the fourth quarter of 2015 is 0.8 percent on January 8, down from 1.0 percent on January 6.

The forecast for the contribution of inventory investment to fourth-quarter real GDP growth declined 0.2 percentage points to -0.8 percentage points after this morning's wholesale trade report from the U.S. Census Bureau."
GDPNow


Never forget who did this to America.



3. For purposes of comparison....under a real President, the finest in a hundred years...

"Ronald Reagan’s economic plan saw GDP surge at a 3.5% clip – 4.9% after the recession. That’s a 32% bump."
OBAMA vs. REAGAN on GDP GROWTH - NOT EVEN CLOSE - The Gateway Pundit

a. "How about overall growth? GDP under Reagan was turbocharged compared to the Obama years. The Reagan years brought annual real GDP growth of 3.5 percent – 4.9 percent after the recession. In inflation-adjusted 2009 dollars, GDP jumped from 6.5 trillion at the end of 1980 to 8.61 trillion at the end of 1988. That’s a 32 percent bump. As Peter Ferrara pointed out on Forbes, it was the equivalent of adding the West German economy to the U.S. one."
Sorry, Obama Fans: Reagan Did Better on Jobs and Growth

Things are much different now, comparing oranges to apples, or its like applying the OT to todays life. We have 100 mil plus more people now, have outsourced jobs since the 80's , and now have imported workers, also we have a global society. 1979 was a second depression and the 70's oil embargo also depreciated the US economy. Reagan had no where to go but up. Did he raise the min. wage , can't remember , he didn't want a min wage. He also lowered taxes on everyone , then raise the lower income tax bracket up , forgetting to raise the higher bracket up.

One would hope to find a modicum of understanding in posts that are a voluntary subscription to a thread.

Clearly, that was expectation too much when judging your post.

Are you actually trying to say that one cannot compare this dolt in the White House with a truly competent President???

Answer that and I'll give you 3 or 4 dozen blunders by Obama.

Do you not understand the difference from the 80's to now. Nafta didn't even exist. We didn't have the internet. Min wage was kept at 3.35. You can't compare what Obama is doing to the 80's. We are not a manufacturing country anymore. Its a totally different world today.

This was the question:

Are you actually trying to say that one cannot compare this dolt in the White House with a truly competent President???

Care to answer?

 

[Penelope]

Your comparing the economy , which you can't do. I do not believe there is a dolt in the white house, nor do I believe Reagan was a truly competent President. In what aspect are you trying to compare them, as I don't think you can compare them. I'm not sure why your trying.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Your comparing the economy , which you can't do. I do not believe there is a dolt in the white house, nor do I believe Reagan was a truly competent President. In what aspect are you trying to compare them, as I don't think you can compare them. I'm not sure why your trying.

You can't compare them because you haven't the knowledge.

Everyone who does.....can.

"If you really want to light the fuse of a liberal Democrat, compare Barack Obama's economic performance after 30 months in office with that of Ronald Reagan. It's not at all flattering for Mr. Obama.

The two presidents have a lot in common. Both inherited an American economy in collapse. And both applied daring, expensive remedies. Mr. Reagan passed the biggest tax cut ever, combined with an agenda of deregulation, monetary restraint and spending controls. Mr. Obama, of course, has given us a $1 trillion spending stimulus.

By the end of the summer of Reagan's third year in office, the economy was soaring. The GDP growth rate was 5% and racing toward 7%, even 8% growth. In 1983 and '84 output was growing so fast the biggest worry was that the economy would "overheat." In the summer of 2011 we have an economy limping along at barely 1% growth and by some indications headed toward a "double-dip" recession. By the end of Reagan's first term, it was Morning in America. Today there is gloomy talk of America in its twilight.

My purpose here is not more Reagan idolatry, but to point out an incontrovertible truth: One program for recovery worked, and the other hasn't.

The Reagan philosophy was to incentivize production—i.e., the "supply side" of the economy—by lowering restraints on business expansion and investment. This was done by slashing marginal income tax rates, eliminating regulatory high hurdles, and reining in inflation with a tighter monetary policy.

In any case, what Reagan inherited was arguably a more severe financial crisis than what was dropped in Mr. Obama's lap. You don't believe it? From 1967 to 1982 stocks lost two-thirds of their value relative to inflation, according to a new report from Laffer Associates. That mass liquidation of wealth was a first-rate financial calamity. And tell me that 20% mortgage interest rates, as we saw in the 1970s, aren't indicative of a monetary-policy meltdown.

There is something that is genuinely different this time. It isn't the nature of the crisis Mr. Obama inherited, but the nature of his policy prescriptions. Reagan applied tax cuts and other policies that, yes, took the deficit to unchartered peacetime highs.

But that borrowing financed a remarkable and prolonged economic expansion and a victory against the Evil Empire in the Cold War. What exactly have Mr. Obama's deficits gotten us?"

Obamanonics vs. Reaganomics



Get an education, and....possibly....you won't appear so stupid.

 

[Penelope]

Your comparing the economy , which you can't do. I do not believe there is a dolt in the white house, nor do I believe Reagan was a truly competent President. In what aspect are you trying to compare them, as I don't think you can compare them. I'm not sure why your trying.

You can't compare them because you haven't the knowledge.

Everyone who does.....can.

"If you really want to light the fuse of a liberal Democrat, compare Barack Obama's economic performance after 30 months in office with that of Ronald Reagan. It's not at all flattering for Mr. Obama.

The two presidents have a lot in common. Both inherited an American economy in collapse. And both applied daring, expensive remedies. Mr. Reagan passed the biggest tax cut ever, combined with an agenda of deregulation, monetary restraint and spending controls. Mr. Obama, of course, has given us a $1 trillion spending stimulus.

By the end of the summer of Reagan's third year in office, the economy was soaring. The GDP growth rate was 5% and racing toward 7%, even 8% growth. In 1983 and '84 output was growing so fast the biggest worry was that the economy would "overheat." In the summer of 2011 we have an economy limping along at barely 1% growth and by some indications headed toward a "double-dip" recession. By the end of Reagan's first term, it was Morning in America. Today there is gloomy talk of America in its twilight.

My purpose here is not more Reagan idolatry, but to point out an incontrovertible truth: One program for recovery worked, and the other hasn't.

The Reagan philosophy was to incentivize production—i.e., the "supply side" of the economy—by lowering restraints on business expansion and investment. This was done by slashing marginal income tax rates, eliminating regulatory high hurdles, and reining in inflation with a tighter monetary policy.

In any case, what Reagan inherited was arguably a more severe financial crisis than what was dropped in Mr. Obama's lap. You don't believe it? From 1967 to 1982 stocks lost two-thirds of their value relative to inflation, according to a new report from Laffer Associates. That mass liquidation of wealth was a first-rate financial calamity. And tell me that 20% mortgage interest rates, as we saw in the 1970s, aren't indicative of a monetary-policy meltdown.

There is something that is genuinely different this time. It isn't the nature of the crisis Mr. Obama inherited, but the nature of his policy prescriptions. Reagan applied tax cuts and other policies that, yes, took the deficit to unchartered peacetime highs.

But that borrowing financed a remarkable and prolonged economic expansion and a victory against the Evil Empire in the Cold War. What exactly have Mr. Obama's deficits gotten us?"

Obamanonics vs. Reaganomics



Get an education, and....possibly....you won't appear so stupid.

Well many do not see it your way. Reagan really hit the lower class and took away many needed programs, and lets not mention what happened to how prisons grew due to first offenders of drugs.

Obams has done a lot, aren't you keeping up with the news. Since we didn't have NAFTA in the 80's a president in that decade would easily lower unemployment.

There was a huge class difference before he lowered the top income tax level to 50 from 70%, so even at 70% highest tax bracket the rich were getting richer (in the 70's). One can't compare a Pres without what came before him or after him.

I think you need a bit more history. Also your comparing a Rep to Dem President, how about comparing apples to apples, and not apples to oranges. Two different ideologies, that is why there are two parties.

I think you need to understand the fundamentals behind all this and the people involved.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Your comparing the economy , which you can't do. I do not believe there is a dolt in the white house, nor do I believe Reagan was a truly competent President. In what aspect are you trying to compare them, as I don't think you can compare them. I'm not sure why your trying.

You can't compare them because you haven't the knowledge.

Everyone who does.....can.

"If you really want to light the fuse of a liberal Democrat, compare Barack Obama's economic performance after 30 months in office with that of Ronald Reagan. It's not at all flattering for Mr. Obama.

The two presidents have a lot in common. Both inherited an American economy in collapse. And both applied daring, expensive remedies. Mr. Reagan passed the biggest tax cut ever, combined with an agenda of deregulation, monetary restraint and spending controls. Mr. Obama, of course, has given us a $1 trillion spending stimulus.

By the end of the summer of Reagan's third year in office, the economy was soaring. The GDP growth rate was 5% and racing toward 7%, even 8% growth. In 1983 and '84 output was growing so fast the biggest worry was that the economy would "overheat." In the summer of 2011 we have an economy limping along at barely 1% growth and by some indications headed toward a "double-dip" recession. By the end of Reagan's first term, it was Morning in America. Today there is gloomy talk of America in its twilight.

My purpose here is not more Reagan idolatry, but to point out an incontrovertible truth: One program for recovery worked, and the other hasn't.

The Reagan philosophy was to incentivize production—i.e., the "supply side" of the economy—by lowering restraints on business expansion and investment. This was done by slashing marginal income tax rates, eliminating regulatory high hurdles, and reining in inflation with a tighter monetary policy.

In any case, what Reagan inherited was arguably a more severe financial crisis than what was dropped in Mr. Obama's lap. You don't believe it? From 1967 to 1982 stocks lost two-thirds of their value relative to inflation, according to a new report from Laffer Associates. That mass liquidation of wealth was a first-rate financial calamity. And tell me that 20% mortgage interest rates, as we saw in the 1970s, aren't indicative of a monetary-policy meltdown.

There is something that is genuinely different this time. It isn't the nature of the crisis Mr. Obama inherited, but the nature of his policy prescriptions. Reagan applied tax cuts and other policies that, yes, took the deficit to unchartered peacetime highs.

But that borrowing financed a remarkable and prolonged economic expansion and a victory against the Evil Empire in the Cold War. What exactly have Mr. Obama's deficits gotten us?"

Obamanonics vs. Reaganomics



Get an education, and....possibly....you won't appear so stupid.

Well many do not see it your way. Reagan really hit the lower class and took away many needed programs, and lets not mention what happened to how prisons grew due to first offenders of drugs.

Obams has done a lot, aren't you keeping up with the news. Since we didn't have NAFTA in the 80's a president in that decade would easily lower unemployment.

There was a huge class difference before he lowered the top income tax level to 50 from 70%, so even at 70% highest tax bracket the rich were getting richer (in the 70's). One can't compare a Pres without what came before him or after him.

I think you need a bit more history. Also your comparing a Rep to Dem President, how about comparing apples to apples, and not apples to oranges. Two different ideologies, that is why there are two parties.

I think you need to understand the fundamentals behind all this and the people involved.

"Obams has done a lot, aren't you keeping up with the news."

I'm always amazed at how you morons haven't learned that you're best served by keeping quiet and not letting everyone know how truly stupid you are.


The Obama Economic Hit-Parade!


1.More than 6.7 million more Americans have been plunged into poverty since Obama became President.

2.Real household income is down 5%

3. Consumer prices are up 10.2%


4. When Obama took office on Jan. 20, 2009, the debt was $10,626,877,048,913.08. Since then, it has increased $7,514,567,086,650.22--which is $65,443 per household, $70,985 per full-time worker and $84,266 per full-time private-sector worker. Under Obama: Federal Debt Up $84,266 Per Full-Time Private-Sector Worker

5. (CNSNews.com) - The federal government drove $789,473,350,613.20 deeper into debt in calendar year 2014, an increase that equaled $6,875 per household, $7,458 per full-time year-round worker, and $8,853 per full-time year-round private-sector worker. According tothe Treasury, the debt started calendar year 2014 at $17,351,970,784,950.10 and ended it at $18,141,444,135,563.30. Under Obama: Federal Debt Up $84,266 Per Full-Time Private-Sector Worker

6. Food stamp recipients up 49%


7. Debt held by the public is up 89%


However, the Obama administrationrecently projected an annual deficit of $750 billion in the fiscal year that began Oct. 1, and $626 billion the year after. At that rate, the debt owed to the public will more than double during the Obama presidency.

As of 2012, according to the most recent figures reported by the Census Bureau, median (midpoint) income for all U.S. households was $51,017, which was 4.9 percent lower (in inflation-adjusted dollars) than it was in 2008, the year before Obama took office.

The same story applies to family income, which includes many families with two earners. (The “household” figure includes single persons living alone, as well as families.) Median family income in 2012 was $62,241, or 5.1 percent below the inflation-adjusted 2008 level.

The number of persons living in poverty also worsened again in 2012, according to the most recent Census figures.


8. As of last year, 46,496,000 persons lived in households with income below the official poverty line, an increase of nearly 6.7 million since 2008 and 249,000 since 2011. The total poverty rate remained unchanged in 2012 at 15 percent of the total U.S. population. So for the second straight year, the poverty rate was 1.8 points higher than it was in 2008.

Obama’s Numbers, October Update


9...in today’s recovery — the slowest in the modern era going back to 1947 — private capital investment has lagged badly. ... so has the jobs situation, with 92 million dropping out of the workforce altogether. A labor-participation rate of 62.8% and an employment-to-population rate of 58% are historic lows indicative of the anemic jobs recovery.Big Business Swings Behind a Mantra of Growth - The New York Sun


10. Tavis Smiley: 'Black People Will Have Lost Ground in Every Single Economic Indicator' Under Obama

Tavis Smiley: 'Black People Will Have Lost Ground in Every Single Economic Indicator' Under Obama


11. . ".... the... [dollar] has today a value of barely a 1,250th of an ounce of gold, a staggering plunge from an 853rd of an ounce on the day Mr. Obama took office...." Fiat Wages - The New York Sun



12. "CBO says deficits slated to shrink in coming years, but will soar again if spending or tax changes are not made


Federal deficits have soared between 2009 and 2012, bring the total long-term debt to a level equal to 73 percent of the nation’s GDP. “Between 2009 and 2012, the federal government recorded the largest budget deficits relative to the size of the economy since 1946, causing federal debt to soar.”

CBO says deficits slated to shrink in coming years, but will soar again if spending or tax changes are not made


13. "Incomes Have Dropped Twice as Much During the 'Recovery' as During the Recession
. ...the Census Bureau's Current Population Survey ....indicate that the real (inflation-adjusted)median annual household income in America has fallen by 4.4 percent during the "recovery," after having fallen by 1.8 during the recession.

Incomes Have Dropped Twice as Much During the 'Recovery' as During the Recession

14. "(CNSNews.com) - The real median income of American women dropped a little more than four percent in the first three full years after the end of the last recession,..... Census Bureau income data, the median income of American women was $21,520 in constant 2012 dollars. That was down $914 dollars—or about 4.1 percent—from 2009." Median Income of Women Dropped 4%--In First 3 Years of Recovery


15. "US economy slowed to 0.1 percent growth rate in Q1

WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. economy slowed drastically in the first three months of the year...to a barely discernible 0.1 percent annual rate in the January-March quarter, the Commerce Department said Wednesday. That was the weakest pace since the end of 2012 and was down from a 2.6 percent rate in the previous quarter.... the anemic growth last quarter is surely a topic for discussion at the Federal Reserve's latest policy meeting,..."

My Way News - US economy slowed to 0.1 percent growth rate in Q1


16. "More Than 92 Million Americans Remain Out Of Labor Force
The unemployment rate dropped to 6.3 percent in April from 6.7 percent in March, the lowest it has been since September 2008 when it was 6.1 percent. The sharp drop, though, occurred because the number of people working or seeking work fell. The Bureau of Labor Statistics does not count people not looking for a job as unemployed.

The bureau noted that the civilian labor force dropped by 806,000 last month, following an increase of 503,000 in March."

Report: More Than 92 Million Americans Remain Out Of Labor Force

The amount (not seasonally adjusted) of Americans not in thelabor force in April rose to 92,594,000, almost 1 million more than the previous month.


17. "The U.S. economy contractedat a much steeper pace than previously estimated in the firstquarter, but there are indications that growth has sincerebounded strongly.

The Commerce Department said on Wednesday gross domesticproduct fell at a 2.9 percent annual rate, the economy's worstperformance in five years, instead of the 1.0 percent pace ithad reported last month." Shrink wrapped: US economy contracted sharply in Q1

18. (CNSNews.com) - The number of Americans 16 and older who did not participate in the labor force climbed to a record high of 92,120,000 in June, according to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS)..... the labor force participation rate for Americans was 62.8 percent, matching a 36-year low. Record Number of Americans Not in Labor Force in June

19. (CNSNews.com)– The unemployment rate for black Americans is more than double that of white Americans, according to the latest data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS).... In the numbers released today, covering the month of June, the seasonally adjusted unemployment rate for black Americans age 16 and over was 10.7%, reported the BLS. The unemployment rate for white Americans in the same age group and time-frame was 5.3%, said the BLS. Black Unemployment 10.7%, More Than Double White Unemployment 5.3%

20. (CNSNews.com) - 11.4 million Americans age 16 and over have left the workforce since President Obama took office in January 2009, according to data released today from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS).
In July 2014, there were 92,001,000 Americans, 16 and over, who were classified as “not in the labor force,” meaning they not only did not have a job, but they didn’t actively seek one in the last four weeks

11,472,000 Americans Have Left Workforce Since Obama Took Office

21. "The 35.4 Percent: 109,631,000 on Welfare
109,631,000 Americans lived in households that received benefits from one or more federally funded "means-tested programs" — also known as welfare — as of the fourth quarter of 2012,according to data released Tuesdayby the Census Bureau. When those receiving benefits from non-means-tested federal programs — such as Social Security, Medicare, unemployment and veterans benefits — were added to those taking welfare benefits, it turned out that 153,323,000 people were getting federal benefits of some type at the end of 2012.

Subtract the 3,297,000 who were receiving veterans' benefits from the total, and that leaves 150,026,000 people receiving non-veterans' benefits."

The 35.4 Percent: 109,631,000 on Welfare

22. "(CNSNews.com)-- In June 2014, there were 46,496,145 recipients of the food stamp program, which is enough to fill the Yankee Stadium 925 times, according todata fromthe Department of Agriculture " 46,496,145: Food Stamp Recipients Can Fill Yankee Stadium 925 Times

23. In a stunning Tuesday report, Gallup CEO and Chairman Jim Clifton revealed that “for the first time in 35 years, American business deaths now outnumber business births.”Clifton says for the past six years since 2008, employer business startups have fallen below the business failure rate, spurring what he calls“an underground earthquake” that only stands to worsen as lagging U.S. Census data becomes available.
“Let’s get one thing clear: This economy is never truly coming back unless we reverse the birth and death trends of American businesses,” writes Clifton." Economic Death Spiral: More American Businesses Dying Than Starting - Breitbart

24. "Disability insurance entitlement explodes under Obama
Those of you paying attention have noticed that the Obama administration is actually doing what it promised: transforming America into a gigantic welfare state." Disability insurance entitlement explodes under Obama

25. Washington, D.C.- An unabated influx of illegal aliens along the southern border of the United States is causing a health crisis in the border region. Actions by the Obama Administration to disperse illegals across America while providing an incentive for more illegals to come could lead to a nationwide health crisis that is likely to manifest itself first within our public schools.....It has spread as far north as southern Mexico and south into Panama. Diseases such as this could be carried across our border by illegal immigrants and could create a nationwide health crisis. Chicken pox, measles, mumps and tuberculosis are already causing problems." — Project 21 member Michael Dozier, Ph.D., an expert in homeland security issues and talk radio host who has worked with humanitarian aid missions in Africa, Asia, the Balkans and the United States

Public Schools Face Health Threat from Illegal Aliens


26. "Despite the improving economy, most Americans continue to say that they are falling behind the cost of living. Overall, 55% said in theJan. 7-11 surveythat their family’s income is falling behind the cost of living,.... Views on this question have shown no improvement over the course of the last year..." Public opinion on the economy and Obama’s handling of it


27. "But with February’s slow down the 12-month wage growth rate ticked down to 2%....[Under Reagan: 'In 1984 alone real economic growth boomed by 6.8%, the highest in 50 years.Reaganomics Vs. Obamanomics: Facts And Figures ] Totalemployment gains in December and January were therefore 18,000 lower than what BLS previously reported. The labor force participation rate ticked lower to 62.8% from 62.9%, ..." Jobs Report: U.S. Economy Added 295,000 Jobs In February, Unemployment Down To 5.5%

a. "But wage gains continued to lag, rising only 0.1 percent in February for private-sector workers after a reported 0.5 increase in January.... .“We hear we’re on the road to recovery, but people aren’t convinced of that.”http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/07/business/economy/jobs-report-unemployment-february.html?_r=0

b. "White youths saw their rate decrease 1.4 percent to 15 percent, but young African-Americans saw theirs reach 30 percent, a 0.3 percent increase.... For the population as a whole, participation rates are still hovering around their 1978 lows at 62.8 percent,..." Unemployment Down To 5.5 Percent In February

c. "92,898,000 Americans were not in the labor force in February, according todatareleased from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) on Friday. ...The 157,002,000 who participated in the labor force was 62.8 percent of the 249,899,000 civilian noninsttutional population, which matches the 62.8 percent rate in April, May, June, and October of 2014 as well as the participation rate in March of 1978. The participation rate hit its lowest level since February 1978 (62.7 percent) in September and December of 2014. 62.8%: Labor Force Participation Has Hovered Near 37-Year-Low for 11 Months

(CNSNews.com) - A record 56,023,000 women, age 16 years and over, were not in the labor force in February.,,, According to the BLS, 56.7 percent of women were participating in the labor force in February, a drop from 56.8 percent in January. 56,023,000: Record Number of Women Not in Labor Force

28. "Surprise: U.S. Economic Data Have Been the World's Most Disappointing
It's not only the just-released University of Michigan consumer confidence report and February retail sales on Thursday that surprised economists and investors with another dose of underwhelming news. Overall, U.S. economic data have been falling short of prognosticators' expectations by the most in six years." Surprise: U.S. Economic Data Have Been the World's Most Disappointing

29. "More Businesses Shutting Down than Starting Up
'Business deaths now exceed business births for the first time' in decades.
The American economy is less entrepreneurial now than at any point in the last three decades. That's the conclusion of anew study out from the Brookings Institution, which looks at the rates of new business creation and destruction since 1978.

Not only that, but during the most recent three years of the study -- 2009, 2010 and 2011 -- businesses were collapsing faster than they were being formed, a first. Overall, new businesses creation (measured as the share of all businesses less than one year old) declined by about half from 1978 to 2011." More Businesses Shutting Down than Starting Up

30. Americans Not in Labor Force Exceed 93 Million for First Time; 62.7% Labor Force Participation Matches 37-Year Low
Americans Not in Labor Force Exceed 93 Million for First Time; 62.7% Labor Force Participation Matches 37-Year Low

31. Except for rich, Americans' incomes fell last year
In fresh data that adds fire to a growing debate over income inequality, the department said that Americans on average saw income decline for the second straight year in the 12 months to June 2014.

The average pre-tax income fell 0.9 percent from the same period a year earlier, to $64,432. Except for rich, Americans' incomes fell last year

32. "The Big Lie: 5.6% Unemployment
The official unemployment rate, as reported by the U.S. Department of Labor, is extremely misleading.

Right now, we're hearing much celebrating from the media, the White House and Wall Street about how unemployment is "down" to 5.6%. The cheerleading for this number is deafening. The media loves a comeback story, the White House wants to score political points and Wall Street would like you to stay in the market.

While you are as unemployed as one can possibly be, and tragically may never find work again, you arenotcounted in the figure we see relentlessly in the news -- currently 5.6%. Right now, as many as 30 million Americans are either out of work or severely underemployed. Trust me, the vast majority of them aren't throwing parties to toast "falling" unemployment.

Right now, the U.S. is delivering at a staggeringlylow rate of 44%, which is the number of full-time jobs as a percent of the adult population,..." http://www.gallup.com/opinion/chairman/181469/big-lie-unemployment.aspx

a. "....the number of Americans not in the labor force rose once again, this time to 93,194K from 93,175K, with the result being a participation rate of 69.45 or just above the lowest percentage since 1977, will merely catalyze even more upside to the so called "market" which continues to reflect nothing but central bank liquidity, and thus - the accelerating deterioration of the broader economy." http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-05-08/americans-not-labor-force-rise-record-93194000

33. "Even if you leave out the first quarter of 2009—when the recession that started in December 2007 was still ongoing--President Barack Obama has presided over the lowest average first-quarter GDP growth of any president who has served since 1947, which is the earliest year for which the Bureau of Economic Analysis has calculated quarterly GDP growth. " http://www.cnsnews.com/blog/terence...-obama-has-lowest-average-1stq-gdp-growth-any

34. After 6 1/2 years of Obama, 47% of Americans could not handle a $400 expense:

"The survey results reveal a lack of economic preparedness among many adults. Only 53 percent of respondents indicate that they could cover a hypothetical emergency expense costing $400 without selling something or borrowing money. Thirty-one percent of respondents report going without some form of medical care in the past year because they could not afford it." http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/press/other/20150527a.htm


35. "The share of North America in the global high-income population decreased from 54% in 2001 to 46% in 2011,.... several countries in Western Europe had higher shares of high-income populations than the U.S. in 2011...the U.S. had the unfortunate distinction of slipping backwards as the share of its high-income population decreased from 58% in 2001 to 56% in 2011....The proportion of Americans who are upper-middle income barely moved from 31% in 2001 to 32% in 2011, and the share that is high income actually fell, as noted, from 58% to 56%....The median annual household income in the U.S. fell from $53,646 in 2001 to $50,054 in 2011 (U.S. Census Bureau)..... Unlike in the U.S., Canadian residents progressed from upper-middle income to the high-income standard of living...."http://www.pewglobal.org/2015/07/08...e-class-status-remains-out-of-reach-for-many/

36. The Obama Administration is aggressively exploiting regulation to achieve its policy agenda, issuing 157 new major rules at a cost to Americans approaching $73 billion annually....twice the annual average of his predecessor George W. Bush.And much more regulation is on the way, with another 125 major rules on the Administration’s to-do list, including dozens linked to the Dodd–Frank financial regulation law and the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, known as Obamacare. http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2014/03/red-tape-rising-five-years-of-regulatory-expansion

37. The number of people not in the labor force reached another record high in July, according to new jobs data released Friday by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
TheBLS reportsthat 93,770,000 people (16 and older) were neither employed last month nor had made specific efforts to find work in the prior four weeks.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/08/07/record-93770000-americans-not-in-labor-force/

.... a 38-year low, the Labor Department reported on Friday.... -- The number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks or more) was little changed at 2,180,000 in July (up from 2,121,000 in June). These individuals accounted for 26.9 percent of the unemployed. http://cnsnews.com/news/article/sus...not-labor-force-participation-rate-matches-38

According to the BLS,56,209,000 women aged 16 and older were not participating in the workforce in July, besting April’srecordof 56,167,000 http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/08/07/record-56209000-women-not-in-labor-force/


38. Average unemployment rate under Bush: 5.31

Average unemployment rate under Obama: 8.46 http://historyinpieces.com/research/us-unemployment-rates-president (thru 2014)

39. "(CNSNews.com) - A record 94,031,000 Americans were not in the American labor force last month -- 261,000 more than July ---- The number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks or more) held at 2.2 million in August and accounted for 27.7 percent of the unemployed..." http://cnsnews.com/news/article/sus...-labor-force-participation-rate-stuck-38-year

40. "...take-home pay for many American workers has effectively fallen since the economic recovery began in 2009, according to a new study by an advocacy group that is to be released on Thursday.

The declines were greatest for the lowest-paid workers in sectors where hiring has been strong — home health care, food preparation and retailing — even though wages were already below average to begin with in those service industries.

“Stagnant wages are a problem for everyone at this point, but the imbalance in the economy has become more pronounced since the recession,”..." http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/03/b...rkers-see-biggest-drop-in-paychecks.html?_r=0

41. "....US hourly wages have not only not increased for the past 7 years, but for thevast majority of the labor force continue to decline,....just the month of August will be enough to provide the Trump - and every other - campaign with enough soundbites and pivot points to last it for weeks on end: namely, that in August a whopping 698,000 native-born Americans lost their job. This drop was offset by 204,000 foreign-born Americans, who got a job in the month of August. .... since December 2007, according to the Household Survey,only 790,000 native born Americanjobs have been added. Contrast that withthe 2.1 million foreign-born Americanswho have found a job over the same time period..." http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-...ob-august-why-suddenly-most-important-jobs-ch

42. October 2015: "Payrolls Disaster: Only 142K Jobs Added In September With Zero Wage Growth; August Revised Much Lower" http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-...september-zero-wage-growth-august-revised-muc

43. "Obamacare health insurance co-ops surged past the $1 billion mark in losses this week, making history of sorts.The insolvencies, totaling $1.36 billion, mean that the co-ops have burned through more than half of theoriginal $2 billion appropriated in 2010 for the program under the Affordable Care Act. The funds were loaned to the start-up co-ops in 2012 and were to be repaid in 15 years, according to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which manages Obamacare.

...13 of the 23 federally-financed Obamacare co-ops have officially failed in only two years. Most are in the process of default as insurance regulators attempt to pay customer’s medical bills, cover medical providers and pay other creditors.
http://dailycaller.com/2015/11/04/obamacare-co-op-mess-causes-1-3-billion-in-losses/#ixzz3qilfNWEW

44. "Obama Administration Announces 144 Big Regulations Right Before Thanksgiving
This is a new record, beating the previous high of 136 set by President Obama this spring."
Obama Administration Announces 144 Big Regulations Right Before Thanksgiving


45. "...ObamaCare experiment costing taxpayers $2.4 billionis failing. The co-ops were founded on the idealistic belief that community members could band together to create health insurance companies that would be member-driven, service-oriented, and would not have to answer to shareholders or turn a profit."

http://www.forbes.com/sites/gracema...ce-again-because-of-obamacare-co-op-failures/


46. "The U.S. expanded at a 2.2% rate through the first nine months of the year, and the economy is projected to grow at a similar pace in the fourth quarter that ends on Dec. 31. If so, the economy will have failed to reach 3% growth for the 10th straight year, marking the slowest stretch since the end of World War II.

Historically the economy has expanded at a 3.3% rate." http://www.marketwatch.com/story/third-quarter-gdp-growth-trimmed-to-2-2015-12-22

47. "Congress has now cleared the way for federal debt to pass$20 trillionby the end of the president’s second term. President Obama said the new budget deal will be paid for in a “balanced” and “responsible” way, but on the day the deal was signed, the federal debt jumped $339 billion—a third of a trillion dollars in one day." https://www.thetrumpet.com/article/13317.24.180.0/economy/societywatch?preview

48. The GDPNow model forecast for real GDP growth (seasonally adjusted annual rate) in the fourth quarter of 2015 is 0.8 percent on January 8, down from 1.0 percent on January 6. The forecast for the contribution of inventory investment to fourth-quarter real GDP growth declined 0.2 percentage points to -0.8 percentage points after this morning's wholesale trade report from the U.S. Census Bureau. https://www.frbatlanta.org/cqer/research/gdpnow.aspx?panel=1

Excellent link showing the economy http://www.deptofnumbers.com/income/us/



Now....what did you say about keeping up with the news?????

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Obama hated the American Dream and tried his best to destroy it

Fuck him. He can go back to his Chicago bath houses

 

[Moonglow]

The corporate elite have us right where they want us......I hope you enjoyed employing illegals...

 

[PoliticalChic]

The corporate elite have us right where they want us......I hope you enjoyed employing illegals...

Don't you worry!

Bill's wife will take care of everything.




And now....for a peek at the truth. Former NYKnick, Michael Ray Richardson once gave an interview, and what he said about the Knicks applies to the United States under these two parties.....

Reporter:What do you think is happening to the team?

Michael Ray Richardson:The ship be sinking.

Reporter: How far can it sink?

Richardson: Sky's the limit.

And that, my friends, is out future in a nutshell.

 

[Moonglow]

The corporate elite have us right where they want us......I hope you enjoyed employing illegals...

Don't you worry!

Bill's wife will take care of everything.




And now....for a peek at the truth. Former NYKnick, Michael Ray Richardson once gave an interview, and what he said about the Knicks applies to the United States under these two parties.....

Reporter:What do you think is happening to the team?

Michael Ray Richardson:The ship be sinking.

Reporter: How far can it sink?

Richardson: Sky's the limit.

And that, my friends, is out future in a nutshell.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The corporate elite have us right where they want us......I hope you enjoyed employing illegals...

Don't you worry!

Bill's wife will take care of everything.




And now....for a peek at the truth. Former NYKnick, Michael Ray Richardson once gave an interview, and what he said about the Knicks applies to the United States under these two parties.....

Reporter:What do you think is happening to the team?

Michael Ray Richardson:The ship be sinking.

Reporter: How far can it sink?

Richardson: Sky's the limit.

And that, my friends, is out future in a nutshell.

I notice the booth charges 25 cents.....but, as you've learned in our post-exchanges....

...I give no quarter.





I have this response to your cartoon:

“Mankind faces a crossroads.
One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness.
The other, to total extinction.
Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly.”
Woody Allen

 

[Moonglow]

The corporate elite have us right where they want us......I hope you enjoyed employing illegals...

Don't you worry!

Bill's wife will take care of everything.




And now....for a peek at the truth. Former NYKnick, Michael Ray Richardson once gave an interview, and what he said about the Knicks applies to the United States under these two parties.....

Reporter:What do you think is happening to the team?

Michael Ray Richardson:The ship be sinking.

Reporter: How far can it sink?

Richardson: Sky's the limit.

And that, my friends, is out future in a nutshell.

I notice the booth charges 25 cents.....but, as you've learned in our post-exchanges....

...I give no quarter.





I have this response to your cartoon:

“Mankind faces a crossroads.
One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness.
The other, to total extinction.
Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly.”
Woody Allen

It takes nickles and dimes...