Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
the math supports my contention and not yours.The right wing has no understanding of economics. Capital just needs to be used; it doesn't care about ethics.Only if we "roll all those other social services" into one simpler social service.Approximately 95 million Americans over the age of 16 are unemployed. That means you would pay 95 million people close to $30,000 a year. That comes to approximately $2.7 trillion, which would double government spending. Now, your rules say anyone can get unemployment, so take a person $15 and hour, who pays into Social Security, pays into Medicaid, and you might as well take them out of the work force as they won’t work for less than they could sitting home. Now, since you said anyone, you have children under the age of 16 can also be paid for unemployment.
So if you cut ALL government spending, we would still be spending more.
Again, your numbers don’t work.
Rolling all those services into one will not trim back the budget the $2.7. Overall it would increase government spending.
Government was never designed or intended to pay a person for not working. Even during the Great Depression the government didn’t just hand people money for not having a job. They recruited men to work for the TVA and paid them for working. Now, if you had a government program that would hire person to help them through a tough time, I’m all for it.
You idea supports failure and excuses.
Mathematics doesn't care about politics. You don't dare about math. Math obliterates your argument, but you don't care. You just keep repeating the same failed excuses over and over again.
sure they do. just end our wasteful and alleged, wars on crime, drugs, and terror.You simply don't understand economics. Why the need for rightwing socialism?The right wing has no understanding of economics. Capital just needs to be used; it doesn't care about ethics.Only if we "roll all those other social services" into one simpler social service.
Rolling all those services into one will not trim back the budget the $2.7. Overall it would increase government spending.
Government was never designed or intended to pay a person for not working. Even during the Great Depression the government didn’t just hand people money for not having a job. They recruited men to work for the TVA and paid them for working. Now, if you had a government program that would hire person to help them through a tough time, I’m all for it.
You idea supports failure and excuses.
All you have is failure and excuses.
The numbers don’t add up, all you have is failure and excuses.
yes, they do; all You have is, conjured up, right wing fantasy.the math supports my contention and not yours.The right wing has no understanding of economics. Capital just needs to be used; it doesn't care about ethics.Only if we "roll all those other social services" into one simpler social service.
Rolling all those services into one will not trim back the budget the $2.7. Overall it would increase government spending.
Government was never designed or intended to pay a person for not working. Even during the Great Depression the government didn’t just hand people money for not having a job. They recruited men to work for the TVA and paid them for working. Now, if you had a government program that would hire person to help them through a tough time, I’m all for it.
You idea supports failure and excuses.
Mathematics doesn't care about politics. You don't dare about math. Math obliterates your argument, but you don't care. You just keep repeating the same failed excuses over and over again.
No it doesn’t and we proved it over and over again as you try to change the numbers for it to work and you can’t. Our 95 million unemployed over 16 years of age proves the plan will fail, and you set the criteria as anyone, that doesn’t include those under the age of 16 who are part of your anyone. Again, failure and excuses are all you have.
No, it doesn't. All it proves is you understand nothing about economics or positive multiplier effects or even, growing the size of the pie.the math supports my contention and not yours.The right wing has no understanding of economics. Capital just needs to be used; it doesn't care about ethics.Only if we "roll all those other social services" into one simpler social service.
Rolling all those services into one will not trim back the budget the $2.7. Overall it would increase government spending.
Government was never designed or intended to pay a person for not working. Even during the Great Depression the government didn’t just hand people money for not having a job. They recruited men to work for the TVA and paid them for working. Now, if you had a government program that would hire person to help them through a tough time, I’m all for it.
You idea supports failure and excuses.
Mathematics doesn't care about politics. You don't dare about math. Math obliterates your argument, but you don't care. You just keep repeating the same failed excuses over and over again.
No it doesn’t and we proved it over and over again as you try to change the numbers for it to work and you can’t. Our 95 million unemployed over 16 years of age proves the plan will fail, and you set the criteria as anyone, that doesn’t include those under the age of 16 who are part of your anyone. Again, failure and excuses are all you have.
Election strategy. Keep em down, keep a vote.
No, it doesn't. All it proves is you understand nothing about economics or positive multiplier effects or even, growing the size of the pie.the math supports my contention and not yours.The right wing has no understanding of economics. Capital just needs to be used; it doesn't care about ethics.Rolling all those services into one will not trim back the budget the $2.7. Overall it would increase government spending.
Government was never designed or intended to pay a person for not working. Even during the Great Depression the government didn’t just hand people money for not having a job. They recruited men to work for the TVA and paid them for working. Now, if you had a government program that would hire person to help them through a tough time, I’m all for it.
You idea supports failure and excuses.
Mathematics doesn't care about politics. You don't dare about math. Math obliterates your argument, but you don't care. You just keep repeating the same failed excuses over and over again.
No it doesn’t and we proved it over and over again as you try to change the numbers for it to work and you can’t. Our 95 million unemployed over 16 years of age proves the plan will fail, and you set the criteria as anyone, that doesn’t include those under the age of 16 who are part of your anyone. Again, failure and excuses are all you have.
Unlike creating the "hellish conditions of warfare on Earth", on a for-profit basis.
sure they do. just end our wasteful and alleged, wars on crime, drugs, and terror.You simply don't understand economics. Why the need for rightwing socialism?The right wing has no understanding of economics. Capital just needs to be used; it doesn't care about ethics.Rolling all those services into one will not trim back the budget the $2.7. Overall it would increase government spending.
Government was never designed or intended to pay a person for not working. Even during the Great Depression the government didn’t just hand people money for not having a job. They recruited men to work for the TVA and paid them for working. Now, if you had a government program that would hire person to help them through a tough time, I’m all for it.
You idea supports failure and excuses.
All you have is failure and excuses.
The numbers don’t add up, all you have is failure and excuses.
why finance tax cuts, right wingers? nobody takes the right wing seriously about economics.No, it doesn't. All it proves is you understand nothing about economics or positive multiplier effects or even, growing the size of the pie.the math supports my contention and not yours.The right wing has no understanding of economics. Capital just needs to be used; it doesn't care about ethics.
Mathematics doesn't care about politics. You don't dare about math. Math obliterates your argument, but you don't care. You just keep repeating the same failed excuses over and over again.
No it doesn’t and we proved it over and over again as you try to change the numbers for it to work and you can’t. Our 95 million unemployed over 16 years of age proves the plan will fail, and you set the criteria as anyone, that doesn’t include those under the age of 16 who are part of your anyone. Again, failure and excuses are all you have.
Redistribution doesn't increase the size of the pie, bub.
I'll also note what a freaking hypocrite Zuckerburg and the other NewTechTitans are. As someone who works in Silicon Vallye, I'm appalled by the streets lined with campers in which the underclass workers live. If Zucker really cared about such workers, he'd pay them a living wage for the work they do serving food and cleaning up after his employees. Instead, he wants the rest of us to be taxed so subsidize his business.
No thank you.
yes, they do; all You have is, conjured up, right wing fantasy.the math supports my contention and not yours.The right wing has no understanding of economics. Capital just needs to be used; it doesn't care about ethics.Rolling all those services into one will not trim back the budget the $2.7. Overall it would increase government spending.
Government was never designed or intended to pay a person for not working. Even during the Great Depression the government didn’t just hand people money for not having a job. They recruited men to work for the TVA and paid them for working. Now, if you had a government program that would hire person to help them through a tough time, I’m all for it.
You idea supports failure and excuses.
Mathematics doesn't care about politics. You don't dare about math. Math obliterates your argument, but you don't care. You just keep repeating the same failed excuses over and over again.
No it doesn’t and we proved it over and over again as you try to change the numbers for it to work and you can’t. Our 95 million unemployed over 16 years of age proves the plan will fail, and you set the criteria as anyone, that doesn’t include those under the age of 16 who are part of your anyone. Again, failure and excuses are all you have.
Unlike creating the "hellish conditions of warfare on Earth", on a for-profit basis.
And exactly who does that, bub?
nope; less than half a trillion.sure they do. just end our wasteful and alleged, wars on crime, drugs, and terror.You simply don't understand economics. Why the need for rightwing socialism?The right wing has no understanding of economics. Capital just needs to be used; it doesn't care about ethics.
All you have is failure and excuses.
The numbers don’t add up, all you have is failure and excuses.
How dense are you? We have been over this, even ending all spending, you would need $2.7 trillion. Quit repeating your failed ideas over and over, it doesn’t make them more viable.
all you have is, nothing but the fallacy of repeal.yes, they do; all You have is, conjured up, right wing fantasy.the math supports my contention and not yours.The right wing has no understanding of economics. Capital just needs to be used; it doesn't care about ethics.
Mathematics doesn't care about politics. You don't dare about math. Math obliterates your argument, but you don't care. You just keep repeating the same failed excuses over and over again.
No it doesn’t and we proved it over and over again as you try to change the numbers for it to work and you can’t. Our 95 million unemployed over 16 years of age proves the plan will fail, and you set the criteria as anyone, that doesn’t include those under the age of 16 who are part of your anyone. Again, failure and excuses are all you have.
All you have is failure and more excuses.
Unlike creating the "hellish conditions of warfare on Earth", on a for-profit basis.
And exactly who does that, bub?
the right wing with their alleged wars on, fill in the blank, they eventually refuse to pay for with appropriate tax rates.
No, it doesn't. All it proves is you understand nothing about economics or positive multiplier effects or even, growing the size of the pie.the math supports my contention and not yours.The right wing has no understanding of economics. Capital just needs to be used; it doesn't care about ethics.Rolling all those services into one will not trim back the budget the $2.7. Overall it would increase government spending.
Government was never designed or intended to pay a person for not working. Even during the Great Depression the government didn’t just hand people money for not having a job. They recruited men to work for the TVA and paid them for working. Now, if you had a government program that would hire person to help them through a tough time, I’m all for it.
You idea supports failure and excuses.
Mathematics doesn't care about politics. You don't dare about math. Math obliterates your argument, but you don't care. You just keep repeating the same failed excuses over and over again.
No it doesn’t and we proved it over and over again as you try to change the numbers for it to work and you can’t. Our 95 million unemployed over 16 years of age proves the plan will fail, and you set the criteria as anyone, that doesn’t include those under the age of 16 who are part of your anyone. Again, failure and excuses are all you have.
Unlike creating the "hellish conditions of warfare on Earth", on a for-profit basis.
And exactly who does that, bub?
the right wing with their alleged wars on, fill in the blank, they eventually refuse to pay for with appropriate tax rates.
You are sorely misguided. The parties promoting perpetual war are neither left nor right. They are unaligned Globalists.
Your opinion demonstrates that you are their pawn.
nope; less than half a trillion.sure they do. just end our wasteful and alleged, wars on crime, drugs, and terror.You simply don't understand economics. Why the need for rightwing socialism?All you have is failure and excuses.
The numbers don’t add up, all you have is failure and excuses.
How dense are you? We have been over this, even ending all spending, you would need $2.7 trillion. Quit repeating your failed ideas over and over, it doesn’t make them more viable.
Not sure what you mean. QE was no problem; why do you believe actually solving a socioeconomic dilemma will be worse.No, it doesn't. All it proves is you understand nothing about economics or positive multiplier effects or even, growing the size of the pie.the math supports my contention and not yours.The right wing has no understanding of economics. Capital just needs to be used; it doesn't care about ethics.
Mathematics doesn't care about politics. You don't dare about math. Math obliterates your argument, but you don't care. You just keep repeating the same failed excuses over and over again.
No it doesn’t and we proved it over and over again as you try to change the numbers for it to work and you can’t. Our 95 million unemployed over 16 years of age proves the plan will fail, and you set the criteria as anyone, that doesn’t include those under the age of 16 who are part of your anyone. Again, failure and excuses are all you have.
You fail to refute the numbers, nothing but failure and excuses. When the numbers don’t add up, it doesn’t matter if you are left or right, socialist or capitalist, the numbers don’t add up.
Why do you keep offering more failure and excuses?
