Why Liberalism Must Be Expunged.

[PoliticalChic]

Would you like to see the actual national debt figures?

1993

4,351,044

2000

5,628,700
end of FY 2001, which was President Clinton's last budget.

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

(5,628,700 - 4,351,044) / 4.351.044= 29%

What's that???

You need help with math,. toooo?????


OK....just this once:

From post #466:

5,628,700
end of FY 2001, which was President Clinton's last budget.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals/ (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!



5,628,700 when he left....4 trillion at the start....= 1,628,700 divided by 4 000000=

40.7%


Now....say "Duhhhhhh...."

 

[PoliticalChic]

Whatever I say is correct, accurate and true.
So true....

(5,628,700 - 4,351,044) / 4.351.044= 29%

You said it was 41%

And, as usual, I am correct.


Should I await your apology, or are you a Liberal?

 

[RASTAMEN]

".... calculating how much the debt increased during Obama's two terms. On January 20, 2009, when he was sworn in, the debt was $10.626 trillion. On January 20, 2017, it was $19.947 trillion. That's why most people say Obama added $9 trillion to the debt, more than any other president."
How Much Did Obama Add to the Nation's Debt?


In your face, boyyyyyeeeeeee!!!!

Go fly your broom!!!!

I can fly my broom and utterly destroy your juvenile posts at the same time, Ramen.

Okay......whatever you SAY conservative witch!!!

Whatever I say is correct, accurate and true.
So true....

So when does your drug rehab begin under Trump Care????

 

[PoliticalChic]

Leftwing propaganda based on bogus economic theories. Credit inflation by the federal reserve was responsible for the "speculation" of the 1920s. Inequality has never been established as a cause of recessions. Margin trading had been around for decades before the Great Depression. Farm price supports have never worked and they never will. I could go on and on deconstructing your propaganda, but that should be enough to establish the fact that it simply isn't credible.

Here is the zinger: The term "overproduction" is from Marxism.

And, yes, government actions usually do take time to manifest themselves in the economy, like the creation of the Federal Reserve, which took 15 years to cause an economic collapse. The CRA also took about 15 years before it caused an economic collapse.

".... calculating how much the debt increased during Obama's two terms. On January 20, 2009, when he was sworn in, the debt was $10.626 trillion. On January 20, 2017, it was $19.947 trillion. That's why most people say Obama added $9 trillion to the debt, more than any other president."
How Much Did Obama Add to the Nation's Debt?


In your face, boyyyyyeeeeeee!!!!

Obama had to save the U.S. Economy!!! You know the economy that Bush and the GOP tried to DESTROY!!!!!

Democrat policies brought on the mortgage meltdown.

Lesson coming up:

1. Democrat FDR shredded the Constitution....ignoring article I, section 8, the enumerated powers.

He created GSE's Fannie, and his drones followed with Freddie, to do something the Constitution didn't authorize: meddle in housing.


2. Democrat Carter....the CRA, constraining banking policy


3. Democrat Clinton....strengthened the CRA

Under Clinton, HUD threatened banks, again, to give unrequited loans.

Henchmen: Democrats Cisneros and Cuomo.


4. Democrats Frank and Dodd barred any governmental discipline in this area.

It was Democrats and Democrat policies that caused the Mortgage Meltdown


That's the CliffNotes version.

I don't believe you can handle the details.

Post and link to back up your lies.

I never lie, RamenNoodle.....

Learn some history.....or, just learn.



That post of mine is totally correct.

 

[RASTAMEN]

Whatever I say is correct, accurate and true.
So true....

(5,628,700 - 4,351,044) / 4.351.044= 29%

You said it was 41%

And, as usual, I am correct.


Should I await your apology, or are you a Liberal?

NEVER apologize to a Red State Conservative who flies around on a broom.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Whatever I say is correct, accurate and true.
So true....

(5,628,700 - 4,351,044) / 4.351.044= 29%

You said it was 41%

And, as usual, I am correct.


Should I await your apology, or are you a Liberal?

NEVER apologize to a Red State Conservative who flies around on a broom.

And that is the level of class one can expect from low-lives.

True, Noodle?

 

[RASTAMEN]

".... calculating how much the debt increased during Obama's two terms. On January 20, 2009, when he was sworn in, the debt was $10.626 trillion. On January 20, 2017, it was $19.947 trillion. That's why most people say Obama added $9 trillion to the debt, more than any other president."
How Much Did Obama Add to the Nation's Debt?


In your face, boyyyyyeeeeeee!!!!

Obama had to save the U.S. Economy!!! You know the economy that Bush and the GOP tried to DESTROY!!!!!

Democrat policies brought on the mortgage meltdown.

Lesson coming up:

1. Democrat FDR shredded the Constitution....ignoring article I, section 8, the enumerated powers.

He created GSE's Fannie, and his drones followed with Freddie, to do something the Constitution didn't authorize: meddle in housing.


2. Democrat Carter....the CRA, constraining banking policy


3. Democrat Clinton....strengthened the CRA

Under Clinton, HUD threatened banks, again, to give unrequited loans.

Henchmen: Democrats Cisneros and Cuomo.


4. Democrats Frank and Dodd barred any governmental discipline in this area.

It was Democrats and Democrat policies that caused the Mortgage Meltdown


That's the CliffNotes version.

I don't believe you can handle the details.

Post and link to back up your lies.

I never lie, RamenNoodle.....

Learn some history.....or, just learn.



That post of mine is totally correct.

 

[RASTAMEN]

Whatever I say is correct, accurate and true.
So true....

(5,628,700 - 4,351,044) / 4.351.044= 29%

You said it was 41%

And, as usual, I am correct.


Should I await your apology, or are you a Liberal?

NEVER apologize to a Red State Conservative who flies around on a broom.

And that is the level of class one can expect from low-lives.

True, Noodle?

What are talking about? You sound like Melania Trump!!!!!

 

[radical right]

5,628,700 when he left....4 trillion at the start....= 1,628,700 divided by 4 000000=

40.7%


Now....say "Duhhhhhh...."

You posted 4,351,044 when Clinton took office 1993.

Which makes it 29%, using your own numbers

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Liberal <> Leftwinger

Can you help the world to understand that.

It's the left wing that needs to be given it's own state in the norther part of Alaska.

WHOA! Fuck off man.

Don't dump your shitty trash on our oil fields. Dump that crap in Hawaii, let the volcano take care of it...

Means nothing.

There is no correlation that can be proven. Carter handed Reagan a mess. It took him three years to clean it up.

Bush handed President Obama an even greater MEES!!!!!

Uh...no he didn't.

Your book of Fairy Tales is not helping you connect to reality.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

It would be unfair to blame Coolidge for sharing the prevalent optimism of his time. In retrospect, however, it became apparent that his policies contributed to the stock market crash of 1929 and the Great Depression that followed. His fiscal policy encouraged speculation and ignored inequality, as the flow of dollars into the pockets of the wealthy helped tip the healthy investment of the mid-1920s into the gambling that followed. His hands-off regulatory policy took its toll especially in the financial arena, where the dangerous practice of margin trading was allowed to flourish unrestrained. And for all the heady growth of the 1920s, Coolidge's policies exacerbated the uneven distribution of income and buying power, which led to the overproduction of goods for which there were not enough affluent consumers.

Making matters worse, Coolidge failed to address the worsening economic plight of farmers. Many farm-state progressives embraced a panacea known as McNary-Haugenism, based on a proposal dating back to 1921 that would have established a government corporation to buy surplus crops at artificially set prices (to be held or sold abroad when market prices rose). Although the scheme might have shored up the depressed farm economy, it would have encouraged overproduction, hurt consumers, and posed dangers to the international system. Congress passed versions of the McNary-Haugen bill twice, but Coolidge vetoed them. Still he failed to champion any alternative legislation, thus worsening the farm crisis when the Great Depression struck.
Calvin Coolidge: Domestic Affairs | Miller Center

I know you Trump lovers think that govt. actions have immediate results, but they don't..It takes time for a system to be implemented and the reaction to occur...

Leftwing propaganda based on bogus economic theories. Credit inflation by the federal reserve was responsible for the "speculation" of the 1920s. Inequality has never been established as a cause of recessions. Margin trading had been around for decades before the Great Depression. Farm price supports have never worked and they never will. I could go on and on deconstructing your propaganda, but that should be enough to establish the fact that it simply isn't credible.

Here is the zinger: The term "overproduction" is from Marxism.

And, yes, government actions usually do take time to manifest themselves in the economy, like the creation of the Federal Reserve, which took 15 years to cause an economic collapse. The CRA also took about 15 years before it caused an economic collapse.

".... calculating how much the debt increased during Obama's two terms. On January 20, 2009, when he was sworn in, the debt was $10.626 trillion. On January 20, 2017, it was $19.947 trillion. That's why most people say Obama added $9 trillion to the debt, more than any other president."
How Much Did Obama Add to the Nation's Debt?


In your face, boyyyyyeeeeeee!!!!

Go fly your broom!!!!

I can fly my broom and utterly destroy your juvenile posts at the same time, Ramen.

While sleeping....probably.

 

[radical right]

I never lie, RamenNoodle.....

Learn some history.....or, just learn.



That post of mine is totally correct.

You just did when you claimed it was 41% using numbers you never got from the debt record. You posted the debt in 1993 thru FY 2001

Take the difference, divide it by the original, and it's 29%

 

[RASTAMEN]

Would you like to see the actual national debt figures?

1993

4,351,044

2000

5,628,700
end of FY 2001, which was President Clinton's last budget.

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

(5,628,700 - 4,351,044) / 4.351.044= 29%

What's that???

You need help with math,. toooo?????


OK....just this once:

From post #466:

5,628,700
end of FY 2001, which was President Clinton's last budget.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals/ (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!



5,628,700 when he left....4 trillion at the start....= 1,628,700 divided by 4 000000=

40.7%


Now....say "Duhhhhhh...."

 

[radical right]

1993

4,351,044

Your own figures.

 

[bripat9643]

Hoover's programs were the start of all of FDR's counter productive government interference.

Coolidge decided to ignore the first warning signs of the depression, falling prices for farm products..Yet, it got him no where also..

So now another Republican is to blame?

Farm prices were low all through the 1920s, dumbass. In fact, food prices have declined steadily ever since the country began. They were abnormally high during WW I because all the warring powers were buying American farm products.

You know zip about American economic history, so you should stop pontificating on the subject.

It would be unfair to blame Coolidge for sharing the prevalent optimism of his time. In retrospect, however, it became apparent that his policies contributed to the stock market crash of 1929 and the Great Depression that followed. His fiscal policy encouraged speculation and ignored inequality, as the flow of dollars into the pockets of the wealthy helped tip the healthy investment of the mid-1920s into the gambling that followed. His hands-off regulatory policy took its toll especially in the financial arena, where the dangerous practice of margin trading was allowed to flourish unrestrained. And for all the heady growth of the 1920s, Coolidge's policies exacerbated the uneven distribution of income and buying power, which led to the overproduction of goods for which there were not enough affluent consumers.

Making matters worse, Coolidge failed to address the worsening economic plight of farmers. Many farm-state progressives embraced a panacea known as McNary-Haugenism, based on a proposal dating back to 1921 that would have established a government corporation to buy surplus crops at artificially set prices (to be held or sold abroad when market prices rose). Although the scheme might have shored up the depressed farm economy, it would have encouraged overproduction, hurt consumers, and posed dangers to the international system. Congress passed versions of the McNary-Haugen bill twice, but Coolidge vetoed them. Still he failed to champion any alternative legislation, thus worsening the farm crisis when the Great Depression struck.
Calvin Coolidge: Domestic Affairs | Miller Center

I know you Trump lovers think that govt. actions have immediate results, but they don't..It takes time for a system to be implemented and the reaction to occur...

Leftwing propaganda based on bogus economic theories. Credit inflation by the federal reserve was responsible for the "speculation" of the 1920s. Inequality has never been established as a cause of recessions. Margin trading had been around for decades before the Great Depression. Farm price supports have never worked and they never will. I could go on and on deconstructing your propaganda, but that should be enough to establish the fact that it simply isn't credible.

Here is the zinger: The term "overproduction" is from Marxism.

And, yes, government actions usually do take time to manifest themselves in the economy, like the creation of the Federal Reserve, which took 15 years to cause an economic collapse. The CRA also took about 15 years before it caused an economic collapse.

Precisely the opposite Is the case if your conception of "liberal" is being used.

 

[radical right]

The table 7.1 will also show that he inherited a $4 trillion debt.
Government - Historical Debt Outstanding - Annual 1950 - 1999

09/30/1993 4,411,488,883,139.38
09/30/1992 4,064,620,655,521.66
09/30/1991 3,665,303,351,697.03
09/28/1990 3,233,313,451,777.25
09/29/1989 2,857,430,960,187.32
09/30/1988 2,602,337,712,041.16
09/30/1987 2,350,276,890,953.00
09/30/1986 2,125,302,616,658.42
09/30/1985 * 1,823,103,000,000.00
09/30/1984 * 1,572,266,000,000.00
09/30/1983 * 1,377,210,000,000.00
09/30/1982 * 1,142,034,000,000.00
09/30/1981 * 997,855,000,000.00

1992 was above the $4 trillion you claimed, and that's september, Clinton started in January, if you extrapolate 1992 to 1993 you get 4,15 trillion. not the 4.0 you claimed.

 

[regent]

Here is a rule which is the hermeneutical key to understanding how the Left differs, in a most deleterious way, from the right:

The Left does not value prosperity....it values equality.



1. Every Leftist is, essentially, a Marxist…even though most eschew the title since the fall of the Soviet Union. Even so, Left-wing ideas are predicated on Marx’s materialist view. Philosophically, the term implies that only material things are real.

The Left’s concept of materialism broadens into the overarching desire to see every individual materially equal. The Left is less interested in creating wealth than in distributing it, and has been far more interested in fighting material inequality than tyranny, which is why Lenin, Mao, Pol Pot, Ho Chi Minh, Castro, etc., tend to have the support of Leftists around the world.

Leftists believe that an end to social and economic inequality and one will have Utopia! Dennis Prager, ”Still The Best Hope”



2. Claims of 'racism' are linked to demands for increased minimum wage laws by this view of the world.
No matter that it has been tried, and not only failed, failed miserably, but resulted in well over 100 million human beings slaughtered.




3. And, more bad news for the Left from the LA Times:
"Leaving for Las Vegas: California's minimum wage law leaves businesses no choice

California’s minimum wage jumped to $10.50 an hour at the start of the new year. As the founder of a small fashion design house and clothing manufacturer in San Fernando, I’m not a disinterested observer in this change.

After two years in business, my company now has more than 150 clients from all over the world and 18 employees. It’s what’s known as a cut-and-sew house, part of the garment industry that generates about $17 billion in annual economic activity in Los Angeles County, including $6.9 billion in payroll, according to a 2016 industry report by the California Fashion Assn. This is the epicenter of apparel design and manufacturing in the United States; domestically manufactured clothing is more expensive, but retail and wholesale customers who care about quality and working conditions have historically been willing to pay for it.

Unfortunately, the industry is on a downward trend. Los Angeles County used to have more than 5,000 apparel factories; today, my company is one of roughly 2,000 — and many (e.g. American Apparel) are looking for a way out. One Los Angeles Times headline, quoting a California State University economist, warned that “the exodus has begun."


If not for the $15 minimum wage, I’d have zero interest in leaving California."
Leaving for Las Vegas: California's minimum wage law leaves businesses no choice



Did I mention that the Left does not value prosperity....it values equality.

Think about that.

So conservatives are allowed to value only one thing?
So how come Marx's dialectical materialism never came to pass in the USA?

 

[PoliticalChic]

5,628,700 when he left....4 trillion at the start....= 1,628,700 divided by 4 000000=

40.7%


Now....say "Duhhhhhh...."

You posted 4,351,044 when Clinton took office 1993.

Which makes it 29%, using your own numbers

No, you lying low life, I posted this in post #466


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!



Proving you both a lying low-life and math challenged was just that simple.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Here is a rule which is the hermeneutical key to understanding how the Left differs, in a most deleterious way, from the right:

The Left does not value prosperity....it values equality.



1. Every Leftist is, essentially, a Marxist…even though most eschew the title since the fall of the Soviet Union. Even so, Left-wing ideas are predicated on Marx’s materialist view. Philosophically, the term implies that only material things are real.

The Left’s concept of materialism broadens into the overarching desire to see every individual materially equal. The Left is less interested in creating wealth than in distributing it, and has been far more interested in fighting material inequality than tyranny, which is why Lenin, Mao, Pol Pot, Ho Chi Minh, Castro, etc., tend to have the support of Leftists around the world.

Leftists believe that an end to social and economic inequality and one will have Utopia! Dennis Prager, ”Still The Best Hope”



2. Claims of 'racism' are linked to demands for increased minimum wage laws by this view of the world.
No matter that it has been tried, and not only failed, failed miserably, but resulted in well over 100 million human beings slaughtered.




3. And, more bad news for the Left from the LA Times:
"Leaving for Las Vegas: California's minimum wage law leaves businesses no choice

California’s minimum wage jumped to $10.50 an hour at the start of the new year. As the founder of a small fashion design house and clothing manufacturer in San Fernando, I’m not a disinterested observer in this change.

After two years in business, my company now has more than 150 clients from all over the world and 18 employees. It’s what’s known as a cut-and-sew house, part of the garment industry that generates about $17 billion in annual economic activity in Los Angeles County, including $6.9 billion in payroll, according to a 2016 industry report by the California Fashion Assn. This is the epicenter of apparel design and manufacturing in the United States; domestically manufactured clothing is more expensive, but retail and wholesale customers who care about quality and working conditions have historically been willing to pay for it.

Unfortunately, the industry is on a downward trend. Los Angeles County used to have more than 5,000 apparel factories; today, my company is one of roughly 2,000 — and many (e.g. American Apparel) are looking for a way out. One Los Angeles Times headline, quoting a California State University economist, warned that “the exodus has begun."


If not for the $15 minimum wage, I’d have zero interest in leaving California."
Leaving for Las Vegas: California's minimum wage law leaves businesses no choice



Did I mention that the Left does not value prosperity....it values equality.

Think about that.

So conservatives are allowed to value only one thing?
So how come Marx's dialectical materialism never came to pass in the USA?

Seems you're afraid to comment on my post, directed to you...about your god, Franklin Roosevelt.
This:
Soooo.....why are you unable to dispute fact I post such as
1. he extended the recession into a depression
2. he turned over military control of US strategy in WWII to Joseph Stalin
3. he despised minorities
4. he despised the Constitution
5. he kept WWII going an extra 2-3 years with concomitant casualties.


and...you wouldn't answer the query 'Was FDR a socialist or a communist?'


Sounds like you're nothing but a shill.
True?



You'd rather change the subject.

Care to explain your pusillanimity (better look that up).

 

[PoliticalChic]

I never lie, RamenNoodle.....

Learn some history.....or, just learn.



That post of mine is totally correct.

You just did when you claimed it was 41% using numbers you never got from the debt record. You posted the debt in 1993 thru FY 2001

Take the difference, divide it by the original, and it's 29%

He inherited $4 trillion.....left the nation with this: $5,628,700
end of FY 2001, which was President Clinton's last budget.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals/ (table 7.1)


Do the math, you imbecile.



Oh...and there was never an 'Clinton Surplus.'