Why are republicans so stupid when it comes to Food Stamps?

[Sun Devil 92]

Agreed since Ronnie "saved" SS the GOPers have used to hide the cost of tax cuts to the rich to the tune of $2.7+ trillion, now that it's due to be paid back, CONservatives/GOPers say SS is "broke". OPM

LOVE that static economic forecasting don't you?

IF what you say was true, how then did REVENUES double in the President Reagan decade?

As for Social Security going broke, simply observe the bottom line. Neutral site and I know how facts and reality are foreign to you. Need I coach you as to the meaning of the red and green numbers?

U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time

DOUBLED? LMAOROG

Bush CEA Chair Mankiw: Claim That Broad-Based Income Tax Cuts Increase Revenue Is Not "Credible," Capital Income Tax Cuts Also Don't Pay For Themselves

Bush-Appointed Federal Reserve Chair Bernanke: "I Don't Think That As A General Rule Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves."


Bush Treasury Secretary Paulson: "As A General Rule, I Don't Believe That Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves."

Bush OMB Director Nussle: "Some Say That [The Tax Cut] Was A Total Loss. Some Say They Totally Pay For Themselves. It's Neither Extreme."


Bush CEA Chairman Lazear: "As A General Rule, We Do Not Think Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves."


Bush Economic Adviser Viard: "Federal Revenue Is Lower Today Than It Would Have Been Without The Tax Cuts."


Bush Treasury Official Carroll: "We Do Not Think Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves."


Reagan Chief Economist Feldstein: "It's Not That You Get More Revenue By Lowering Tax Rates, It Is That You Don't Lose As Much."

Feldstein In 1986: "Hyperbole" That Reagan Tax Cut "Would Actually Increase Tax Revenue."

Conservative Economist Holtz-Eakin: "No Serious Research Evidence" Suggests Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves."

Tax Foundation's Prante: "A Stretch" To Claim "Cutting Capital Gains Taxes Raises Tax Revenues."


Ronald Reagan Myth Doesn't Square with Reality

Meanwhile, following that initial tax cut, Reagan actually ended up raising taxes - eleven times. That's according to former Republican Sen. Alan Simpson, a longtime Reagan friend who co-chaired President Obama's fiscal commission that last year offered a deficit reduction proposal.


"Ronald Reagan was never afraid to raise taxes," historian Douglas Brinkley, who edited Reagan's diaries, told NPR. "He knew that it was necessary at times. And so there's a false mythology out there about Reagan as this conservative president who came in and just cut taxes and trimmed federal spending in a dramatic way. It didn't happen that way. It's false."

Ronald Reagan Myth Doesn't Square with Reality




First of all, revenues as a percentage of gross domestic product (GDP), which is the best way to compare across years, dropped from 19.1 percent in 1981 to a low of 16.9 percent in 1984, before rebounding slightly to 17.8 percent in 1989. One reason the deficit soared during Reagan’s term is because spending went up as a share of the economy and revenues went down.

A Treasury Department study on the impact of tax bills since 1940, first released in 2006 and later updated, found that the 1981 tax cut reduced revenues by $208 billion in its first four years. (These figures are rendered in constant 2012 dollars.) The tax reform act of 1986, which was designed to be revenue neutral, reduced revenues by less than $1 billion four years after enactment.

But Reagan’s tax increases in 1982, 1983, 1984 and 1987 boosted revenue by $137 billion.

Overall, that’s a revenue loss from Reagan’s various tax bills, but it also shows that Moore is crediting to Reagan’s tax cuts revenues generated by Reagan’s tax increases.
Rand Paul’s claim that Reagan’s tax cuts produced ‘more revenue’ and ‘tens of millions of jobs’



KNOW WHAT INFLATION IS BUTTERCUP?

Do Tax Cuts Increase Revenues? No, Tax cuts do not Increase Revenue

Do Tax Cuts Increase Revenues? No, Tax cuts do not Increase Revenue - Fact and Myth

Lost all credibility.

Sorry.....

At least one of those tax increases were to clean up Jimmy Carter's HUGE screw up on Social Security. Carter said he fixed it for 30 years....not realizing they really blew the revenue forcasts....it was headed for the red and would have happened had it not been for one of Reagan's tax increases.

You are good with the talking points.

It's unfortunate you can't think for yourself....cupcake.

IGNORE ALL THOSE QUOTES BUBBA, AND LIE ABOUT CARTER, IT'S ALL YOU CUPCAKES HAVE. Doubled revenues? LMAOROG

You fruitcakes don't have anything.

You are sitting on the sidelines.

Get some popcorn and enjoy......fruitcake.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

What has that got to do with our posts ?

seems like envy, if you care what others make (or don't make).

I could care less what they make, unless they are making it off me.

If you'd care to link your logic to the conversation, I'd be happy to try and understand it.

Right now, you are just deflecting.

Anybody who Pays you, is making money off you.

Why don't you butt out.

The point is that I've seen people abuse food stamps.

End of story.

I've seen MANY more abuse Gov't and Gov't programs via Corporations!

So you fruitcakes want to build a larger support system for corporations.....government.

Morons.

 

[healthmyths]

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Food stamp use increased 70% during the Obama years. Is that good news or bad news to the left?

Because we had a horrible depression brought about after 8 years of GW.

That's fine blame the president before the Masai Obama, but remember this when us Trumpsters blame problems on the last presidents 8 years. Isn't that fair?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You mean a growing economy versus one dumping 9%+ the last quarter of 2008?

DECEMBER 2007


THE ECONOMIC CONSEQUENCES OF MR. BUSH
The next president will have to deal with yet another crippling legacy of George W. Bush: the economy. A Nobel laureate, Joseph E. Stiglitz, sees a generation-long struggle to recoup.

The Economic Consequences of Mr. Bush

By the time Obama was inaugurated in 2009, the unemployment rate had spiked from 5 percent to 7.8 percent, on its way to 10 percent a few months later. A rising tide of middle-class families were losing homes, turning to food stamps and seeking government-sponsored health care for the first time.

Yet Obama handed Trump the reins of an economy with a 4.7 percent unemployment rate; 75 consecutive months of job growth;rising stock prices, home values, corporate profits and consumer confidence; low inflation; and, following several years of sluggish income growth, a record spike in middle-class incomes.

In 2016, increases in hourly earnings accelerated, which, when combined with increased rates of employment, helped boost overall household incomes. Real household debt is lower than it was in 2006.

"As 2016 ends, the U.S. labor market is in its best shape since the recession, with nearly every measure of the market at its most favorable level in years," economist Jed Kolko concluded in his end-of-the-year report for the jobs website Indeed.

In other words, Obama left the economy in much better shape than he inherited it, even if it remains imperfect for every American.

Did Donald Trump inherit 'a mess' from Barack Obama?

Did Trump inherit a mess? 8 charts show otherwise

Did Trump inherit a mess? 8 charts show otherwise


IT'S CALLED CRITICAL THINKING AND REASONING CUPCAKE!

Tax cuts were never the federal government's to begin with... shit for brains

Sorry cupcake, unless you cut spending, you just drive up debt like Ronnie/Dubya did Cupcake

Hey fruitcake......that's a load of crap.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Yes, it was dropping, who said it would continue WITHOUT the LBJ works cupcake?

What proof do you have it wouldn't fruitcake? Seems to me we were on the right track long before he did anything.

YOU made the posit it was going down REGARDLESS cupcake, seems YOU should be able to back it up?

5. Did it reduce poverty, actually?

It did. A recent study from economists at Columbia broke down changes in poverty before and after the government gets involved in the form of taxes and transfers, and found that, when you take government intervention into account, poverty is down considerably from 1967 to 2012, from 26 percent to 16 percent:


WAPO

Everything you need to know about the war on poverty


Indeed, Demos estimates that 40 million Americans were kept out of poverty due to food stamps, the Earned Income Tax Credit, Medicaid, and other programs in 2010.

WAPO

Poverty in the 50 years since ‘The Other America,’ in five charts

An east coast college study.

Now that's funny.

The War on Poverty: 50 years of failure

Do these living conditions mean the War on Poverty was a success? Not really. When President Johnson launched the War on Poverty, he wanted to give the poor a "hand up, not a hand out." He stated that his war would shrink welfare rolls and turn the poor from "taxeaters" into "taxpayers." Johnson's aim was to make poor families self-sufficient - able to rise above poverty through their own earnings without dependence on welfare.

The exact opposite happened. For a decade and a half before the War on Poverty began, self-sufficiency in American improved dramatically. But for the last 45 years, there has been no improvement at all. Many groups are less capable of self-support today than when Johnson's war started.

The culprit is, in part, the welfare system itself, which discourages work and penalizes marriage. When the War on Poverty began, 7 percent of American children were born outside marriage. Today the number is 41 percent. The collapse of marriage is the main cause of child poverty today.

 

[healthmyths]

Yes, it was dropping, who said it would continue WITHOUT the LBJ works cupcake?

What proof do you have it wouldn't fruitcake? Seems to me we were on the right track long before he did anything.

YOU made the posit it was going down REGARDLESS cupcake, seems YOU should be able to back it up?

5. Did it reduce poverty, actually?

It did. A recent study from economists at Columbia broke down changes in poverty before and after the government gets involved in the form of taxes and transfers, and found that, when you take government intervention into account, poverty is down considerably from 1967 to 2012, from 26 percent to 16 percent:


WAPO

Everything you need to know about the war on poverty


Indeed, Demos estimates that 40 million Americans were kept out of poverty due to food stamps, the Earned Income Tax Credit, Medicaid, and other programs in 2010.

WAPO

Poverty in the 50 years since ‘The Other America,’ in five charts

An east coast college study.

Now that's funny.

The War on Poverty: 50 years of failure

Do these living conditions mean the War on Poverty was a success? Not really. When President Johnson launched the War on Poverty, he wanted to give the poor a "hand up, not a hand out." He stated that his war would shrink welfare rolls and turn the poor from "taxeaters" into "taxpayers." Johnson's aim was to make poor families self-sufficient - able to rise above poverty through their own earnings without dependence on welfare.

The exact opposite happened. For a decade and a half before the War on Poverty began, self-sufficiency in American improved dramatically. But for the last 45 years, there has been no improvement at all. Many groups are less capable of self-support today than when Johnson's war started.

The culprit is, in part, the welfare system itself, which discourages work and penalizes marriage. When the War on Poverty began, 7 percent of American children were born outside marriage. Today the number is 41 percent. The collapse of marriage is the main cause of child poverty today.

Black female head of households number is 68 percent
The truth is that black female-headed households were just 18 percent of households in 1950, as opposed to about 68 percent today.
In fact, from 1890 to 1940, the black marriage rate was slightly higher than that of whites.
Even during slavery, when marriage was forbidden for blacks, most black children lived in biological two-parent families.
In New York City, in 1925, 85 percent of black households were two-parent households.
A study of 1880 family structure in Philadelphia shows that three-quarters of black families were two-parent households."
Black female head of households number is 68 percent
By Walter E. Williams is a professor of economics at George Mason University. (Oh by the way in the famous words of Obama..."And did I mention he's black?")

 

[JonKoch]

Agreed since Ronnie "saved" SS the GOPers have used to hide the cost of tax cuts to the rich to the tune of $2.7+ trillion, now that it's due to be paid back, CONservatives/GOPers say SS is "broke". OPM

LOVE that static economic forecasting don't you?

IF what you say was true, how then did REVENUES double in the President Reagan decade?

As for Social Security going broke, simply observe the bottom line. Neutral site and I know how facts and reality are foreign to you. Need I coach you as to the meaning of the red and green numbers?

U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time

DOUBLED? LMAOROG

Bush CEA Chair Mankiw: Claim That Broad-Based Income Tax Cuts Increase Revenue Is Not "Credible," Capital Income Tax Cuts Also Don't Pay For Themselves

Bush-Appointed Federal Reserve Chair Bernanke: "I Don't Think That As A General Rule Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves."


Bush Treasury Secretary Paulson: "As A General Rule, I Don't Believe That Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves."

Bush OMB Director Nussle: "Some Say That [The Tax Cut] Was A Total Loss. Some Say They Totally Pay For Themselves. It's Neither Extreme."


Bush CEA Chairman Lazear: "As A General Rule, We Do Not Think Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves."


Bush Economic Adviser Viard: "Federal Revenue Is Lower Today Than It Would Have Been Without The Tax Cuts."


Bush Treasury Official Carroll: "We Do Not Think Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves."


Reagan Chief Economist Feldstein: "It's Not That You Get More Revenue By Lowering Tax Rates, It Is That You Don't Lose As Much."

Feldstein In 1986: "Hyperbole" That Reagan Tax Cut "Would Actually Increase Tax Revenue."

Conservative Economist Holtz-Eakin: "No Serious Research Evidence" Suggests Tax Cuts Pay For Themselves."

Tax Foundation's Prante: "A Stretch" To Claim "Cutting Capital Gains Taxes Raises Tax Revenues."


Ronald Reagan Myth Doesn't Square with Reality

Meanwhile, following that initial tax cut, Reagan actually ended up raising taxes - eleven times. That's according to former Republican Sen. Alan Simpson, a longtime Reagan friend who co-chaired President Obama's fiscal commission that last year offered a deficit reduction proposal.


"Ronald Reagan was never afraid to raise taxes," historian Douglas Brinkley, who edited Reagan's diaries, told NPR. "He knew that it was necessary at times. And so there's a false mythology out there about Reagan as this conservative president who came in and just cut taxes and trimmed federal spending in a dramatic way. It didn't happen that way. It's false."

Ronald Reagan Myth Doesn't Square with Reality




First of all, revenues as a percentage of gross domestic product (GDP), which is the best way to compare across years, dropped from 19.1 percent in 1981 to a low of 16.9 percent in 1984, before rebounding slightly to 17.8 percent in 1989. One reason the deficit soared during Reagan’s term is because spending went up as a share of the economy and revenues went down.

A Treasury Department study on the impact of tax bills since 1940, first released in 2006 and later updated, found that the 1981 tax cut reduced revenues by $208 billion in its first four years. (These figures are rendered in constant 2012 dollars.) The tax reform act of 1986, which was designed to be revenue neutral, reduced revenues by less than $1 billion four years after enactment.

But Reagan’s tax increases in 1982, 1983, 1984 and 1987 boosted revenue by $137 billion.

Overall, that’s a revenue loss from Reagan’s various tax bills, but it also shows that Moore is crediting to Reagan’s tax cuts revenues generated by Reagan’s tax increases.
Rand Paul’s claim that Reagan’s tax cuts produced ‘more revenue’ and ‘tens of millions of jobs’



KNOW WHAT INFLATION IS BUTTERCUP?

Do Tax Cuts Increase Revenues? No, Tax cuts do not Increase Revenue

Do Tax Cuts Increase Revenues? No, Tax cuts do not Increase Revenue - Fact and Myth

Lost all credibility.

Sorry.....

At least one of those tax increases were to clean up Jimmy Carter's HUGE screw up on Social Security. Carter said he fixed it for 30 years....not realizing they really blew the revenue forcasts....it was headed for the red and would have happened had it not been for one of Reagan's tax increases.

You are good with the talking points.

It's unfortunate you can't think for yourself....cupcake.

IGNORE ALL THOSE QUOTES BUBBA, AND LIE ABOUT CARTER, IT'S ALL YOU CUPCAKES HAVE. Doubled revenues? LMAOROG

You fruitcakes don't have anything.

You are sitting on the sidelines.

Get some popcorn and enjoy......fruitcake.

Right cupcake

 

[JonKoch]

View attachment 129894

 

[JonKoch]

Because we had a horrible depression brought about after 8 years of GW.

That's fine blame the president before the Masai Obama, but remember this when us Trumpsters blame problems on the last presidents 8 years. Isn't that fair?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You mean a growing economy versus one dumping 9%+ the last quarter of 2008?

DECEMBER 2007


THE ECONOMIC CONSEQUENCES OF MR. BUSH
The next president will have to deal with yet another crippling legacy of George W. Bush: the economy. A Nobel laureate, Joseph E. Stiglitz, sees a generation-long struggle to recoup.

The Economic Consequences of Mr. Bush

By the time Obama was inaugurated in 2009, the unemployment rate had spiked from 5 percent to 7.8 percent, on its way to 10 percent a few months later. A rising tide of middle-class families were losing homes, turning to food stamps and seeking government-sponsored health care for the first time.

Yet Obama handed Trump the reins of an economy with a 4.7 percent unemployment rate; 75 consecutive months of job growth;rising stock prices, home values, corporate profits and consumer confidence; low inflation; and, following several years of sluggish income growth, a record spike in middle-class incomes.

In 2016, increases in hourly earnings accelerated, which, when combined with increased rates of employment, helped boost overall household incomes. Real household debt is lower than it was in 2006.

"As 2016 ends, the U.S. labor market is in its best shape since the recession, with nearly every measure of the market at its most favorable level in years," economist Jed Kolko concluded in his end-of-the-year report for the jobs website Indeed.

In other words, Obama left the economy in much better shape than he inherited it, even if it remains imperfect for every American.

Did Donald Trump inherit 'a mess' from Barack Obama?

Did Trump inherit a mess? 8 charts show otherwise

Did Trump inherit a mess? 8 charts show otherwise


IT'S CALLED CRITICAL THINKING AND REASONING CUPCAKE!

Tax cuts were never the federal government's to begin with... shit for brains

Sorry cupcake, unless you cut spending, you just drive up debt like Ronnie/Dubya did Cupcake

Hey fruitcake......that's a load of crap.

Sorry Cupcake what you are doing is called an ad hominem

 

[Uncensored2008]

[


I don't know where you get your info but most of your "info" is not true

Where all fascist get their info, he made it up.

Lying for the party is the greatest virtue that a fascist democrat can posses..

 

[Dragonlady]

I don't give a happy flip about the "mom". I just want those kids to believe they can do anything. I want them to believe they can RISE UP. I want them well fed, well educated, and with access to adequate health care because I know all those things are investments in THEIR FUTURE that will pay dividends in the form of higher earnings and greater tax receipts.

I'm trying to catch up as fast as I can...
there are so many posts I'm dying to reply to,
and didn't know where to begin...until ^

Now, it all makes perfect sense.
Obviously, you reside in the land of Oz!

So, tell me....
will the wizard be getting back to you anytime soon,
about that brain you're in desperate need of?

As much as I'm dying to properly respond,
it'll have to wait until later tonight

Well, when you do "properly respond" make sure you tell me what is wrong with the statement of mine that you quoted. Do well fed children perform better in school? Do healthy children perform better in school? And do better educated children turn into more productive, higher taxpaying adults?

I don't know that they do or don't. To my knowledge, no study has been done on that. But no matter if they do or don't, how is well fed, better educated and more productive taxpaying adults my responsibility?

Ray, there are endless studies on nutrition and health, nutrition and brain growth, nutrition and attention span.

If you want healthier, more productive employees for your working life and care givers for your retirement you have a vested interest in all of the above.

 

[JonKoch]

Yes, it was dropping, who said it would continue WITHOUT the LBJ works cupcake?

What proof do you have it wouldn't fruitcake? Seems to me we were on the right track long before he did anything.

YOU made the posit it was going down REGARDLESS cupcake, seems YOU should be able to back it up?

5. Did it reduce poverty, actually?

It did. A recent study from economists at Columbia broke down changes in poverty before and after the government gets involved in the form of taxes and transfers, and found that, when you take government intervention into account, poverty is down considerably from 1967 to 2012, from 26 percent to 16 percent:


WAPO

Everything you need to know about the war on poverty


Indeed, Demos estimates that 40 million Americans were kept out of poverty due to food stamps, the Earned Income Tax Credit, Medicaid, and other programs in 2010.

WAPO

Poverty in the 50 years since ‘The Other America,’ in five charts

An east coast college study.

Now that's funny.

The War on Poverty: 50 years of failure

Do these living conditions mean the War on Poverty was a success? Not really. When President Johnson launched the War on Poverty, he wanted to give the poor a "hand up, not a hand out." He stated that his war would shrink welfare rolls and turn the poor from "taxeaters" into "taxpayers." Johnson's aim was to make poor families self-sufficient - able to rise above poverty through their own earnings without dependence on welfare.

The exact opposite happened. For a decade and a half before the War on Poverty began, self-sufficiency in American improved dramatically. But for the last 45 years, there has been no improvement at all. Many groups are less capable of self-support today than when Johnson's war started.

The culprit is, in part, the welfare system itself, which discourages work and penalizes marriage. When the War on Poverty began, 7 percent of American children were born outside marriage. Today the number is 41 percent. The collapse of marriage is the main cause of child poverty today.

Too funny cupcake you attack an "East Coast College" study AS you give A right wing think tank "commentary" LMAOROG

 

[Uncensored2008]

Food stamp use increased 70% during the Obama years. Is that good news or bad news to the left?

Because we had a horrible depression brought about after 8 years of GW.

We DID?

Oh, you're a fascist, ergo a total fucking liar..

 

[JonKoch]

Yes, it was dropping, who said it would continue WITHOUT the LBJ works cupcake?

What proof do you have it wouldn't fruitcake? Seems to me we were on the right track long before he did anything.

YOU made the posit it was going down REGARDLESS cupcake, seems YOU should be able to back it up?

5. Did it reduce poverty, actually?

It did. A recent study from economists at Columbia broke down changes in poverty before and after the government gets involved in the form of taxes and transfers, and found that, when you take government intervention into account, poverty is down considerably from 1967 to 2012, from 26 percent to 16 percent:


WAPO

Everything you need to know about the war on poverty


Indeed, Demos estimates that 40 million Americans were kept out of poverty due to food stamps, the Earned Income Tax Credit, Medicaid, and other programs in 2010.

WAPO

Poverty in the 50 years since ‘The Other America,’ in five charts

An east coast college study.

Now that's funny.

The War on Poverty: 50 years of failure

Do these living conditions mean the War on Poverty was a success? Not really. When President Johnson launched the War on Poverty, he wanted to give the poor a "hand up, not a hand out." He stated that his war would shrink welfare rolls and turn the poor from "taxeaters" into "taxpayers." Johnson's aim was to make poor families self-sufficient - able to rise above poverty through their own earnings without dependence on welfare.

The exact opposite happened. For a decade and a half before the War on Poverty began, self-sufficiency in American improved dramatically. But for the last 45 years, there has been no improvement at all. Many groups are less capable of self-support today than when Johnson's war started.

The culprit is, in part, the welfare system itself, which discourages work and penalizes marriage. When the War on Poverty began, 7 percent of American children were born outside marriage. Today the number is 41 percent. The collapse of marriage is the main cause of child poverty today.

Black female head of households number is 68 percent
The truth is that black female-headed households were just 18 percent of households in 1950, as opposed to about 68 percent today.
In fact, from 1890 to 1940, the black marriage rate was slightly higher than that of whites.
Even during slavery, when marriage was forbidden for blacks, most black children lived in biological two-parent families.
In New York City, in 1925, 85 percent of black households were two-parent households.
A study of 1880 family structure in Philadelphia shows that three-quarters of black families were two-parent households."
Black female head of households number is 68 percent
By Walter E. Williams is a professor of economics at George Mason University. (Oh by the way in the famous words of Obama..."And did I mention he's black?")

You advocating slavery then cupcake?

 

[Uncensored2008]

You advocating slavery then cupcake?

Slavery? Like involuntary servitude?

"BAKE THE CAKE CHRISTIAN SCUM"

Like that, Brown Shirt?

 

[JonKoch]

Gosh cupcake, thought YOU had no use for ANY of the guys? LMAOROG

Why'd he have to bail them out again? Oh right 8 years of GOP "job creator" policies

After the 9/11 terrorist attacks, President Bush didn't call for sacrifice. He called for shopping. "Get down to Disney World in Florida," he said.
A Look Back at Bush's Economic Missteps - TIME

Fed Tax Break Encourages SUV Purchases

Thanks to a generous tax credit, Karl Wizinsky is driving a very large vehicle these days — a 2002 Ford Excursion.

"It doesn't hurt to have a larger vehicle, but I wouldn't say it's a requirement of my business," he said on a cell phone while driving the Excursion. "But I ended up saving $32,000."

This year, the perks of buying a large SUV — if you're a small business owner — got even bigger.

Congress recently passed a tax bill, as proposed in President Bush's economic stimulus plan, that offers a $100,000 tax credit for business owners who purchase any vehicle weighing 6,000 pounds or more when fully loaded.

When Wizinsky's accountant told him about the credit last year, the amount was much less, at $75,000, but it was enough to encourage Wizinsky to trade in his Mercury Marquis for the Excursion.

"It sounded too good to be true," said Wizinsky, a health care consultant in Novi, Mich. "But it was true. So I bought the SUV. For a small company like mine it's a significant credit."

Hybrid Earns Smaller Break

Meanwhile, legislation that offers a much smaller tax break — a $2,000 tax deduction — to those who purchase fuel-efficient hybrid cars is on track to be phased out.
Fed Tax Break Encourages SUV Purchases

Fatal Flaws of Keynesian Economics

Sure wish Ronnie/Dubya didn't try just half of Keynes, you know when they both blew up spending AS they gutted revenues

You are so IGNORANT!!!
EXPLAIN Where the $5.2 Trillion Surplus WAS????
EXPLAIN how YOU or your idiots would have responded to the $8T dot.com bust that started under Clinton? Or the Recession that started? Or 9/11 due to the
Gorelick Memo from Clinton trying to hide Chinese payoff, or Try to explain how YOU would have handled the worst Hurricane SEASONs in history?
And yet.. after the 2003 tax cuts LOOK at the receipts- deficits down!
2004 INCREASE in receipts - deficits down!
2005, increase receipts - deficits down!
,2006 increase receipts - deficits down
,2007 increase receipts - NOTE DEFICIT DOWN..

NOTHING in American history equaled the chaos, the economic losses, the people losses that occurred in these 8 years... and idiots like you blame Bush??

View attachment 129870

Yes, we agree, 8 years of Dubya/GOP "job creator" policies SUCKED Cupcake

But instead of being fiscally responsible Dubya GUTTED revenues 25% WHILE blowing up spending 20% with 2 UNFUNDED Tax cuts, 2 UNFUNDED wars, UNFUNDED Medicare expansion and cheering on the Bankster subprime bubble cupcake

OCTOBER 17, 2008

...Notice that in both 2001 and 2002, the US economy continued to grow on an annual basis (the "technical" recession was just a few quarters). Their work suggests that this growth was entirely due to MEWs. In fact, MEWs contributed over 3% to GDP growth in 2004 and 2005, and 2% in 2006. Without US homeowners using their homes as an ATM, the economy would have been very sluggish indeed, averaging much less than 1% for the six years of the Bush presidency. Indeed, as a side observation, without home equity withdrawals the economy would have been so bad it would have been almost impossible for Bush to have won a second term.



The Economic Blue Screen of Death

AND absolutely NO national cataclysmic EVENTS like THESE!
Of course the Idiot Obama made the worst GDP growth in modern history with NOTHING to hold him back except his stupid comments.

View attachment 129892

And so Obama HAD NO problems to face, economy on rebound and what kind of stupid comments did HE MAKE that discouraged businesses?

- Obama wanted to bankrupt 1,400 companies, that pay $100 billion a year in taxes and unemployed
450,000 people that work for these companies! (Obama told us he favored a "single payer health system"... so what happens to the above?)
- " if somebody wants to build a coal plant, they can – it’s just that it will bankrupt them.”
(Pretty easy way of increasing unemployment.)
- "I prefer higher gas prices". (And Obama signed 40% fewer Federal oil lease exploration then Bush).
- Trump will never tell a foreign country such as "Brazil to develop oil and that the USA will be
their best customer"!
- "Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket." (That certainly puts a dent in the pocketbook..._

Obama WANTED unemployment! He wanted businesses to fail!

Sure Cupcake, sure. 8 years of Dubya/GOP "job creator" policies (that Cheeto wants to put on steroids) and ALL you Klowns have are excuses why they failed and left US in the biggest hole since the first GOP great depression

 

[danielpalos]

Food stamp use increased 70% during the Obama years. Is that good news or bad news to the left?

Because we had a horrible depression brought about after 8 years of GW.

We DID?

Oh, you're a fascist, ergo a total fucking liar..

Links, or should we take the word of a, "dopeless wonder"?

President Bush: Bush policies created "Depression Greater than the Great Depression"

 

[Uncensored2008]

Food stamp use increased 70% during the Obama years. Is that good news or bad news to the left?

Because we had a horrible depression brought about after 8 years of GW.

We DID?

Oh, you're a fascist, ergo a total fucking liar..

Links, or should we take the word of a, "dopeless wonder"?

President Bush: Bush policies created "Depression Greater than the Great Depression"

You fascists are such fucking liars.

LMGTFY

KOS? You go for the most vile hate site in existence?

 

[danielpalos]

Food stamp use increased 70% during the Obama years. Is that good news or bad news to the left?

Because we had a horrible depression brought about after 8 years of GW.

We DID?

Oh, you're a fascist, ergo a total fucking liar..

Links, or should we take the word of a, "dopeless wonder"?

President Bush: Bush policies created "Depression Greater than the Great Depression"

You fascists are such fucking liars.

LMGTFY

KOS? You go for the most vile hate site in existence?

We don't have a True capital (third world) economy, like we used to, before 1929.

In modern times, socialism bails out capitalism, much like "Palmolive".

 

[danielpalos]

Food stamp use increased 70% during the Obama years. Is that good news or bad news to the left?

Because we had a horrible depression brought about after 8 years of GW.

We DID?

Oh, you're a fascist, ergo a total fucking liar..

Links, or should we take the word of a, "dopeless wonder"?

President Bush: Bush policies created "Depression Greater than the Great Depression"

You fascists are such fucking liars.

LMGTFY

KOS? You go for the most vile hate site in existence?

Why does the right complain about education?