![]() |
[quote="Cpl. Eames":b8969]
Quote:
WTF??? Are you serious? You think charging people to exercise their given right is constitutional? You think that making literacy a requirement to have a minimal say in how their lives should be governed is acceptable? You probably think the 'grandfather clause' was a great way to keep vagrants from ruining our country, dont you? Eames just sit the fuck down and shut the fuck up, boon. Youre acting stupid again. |
Quote:
|
GG me for assuming you people comprehend basic economics. I keep forgetting you're a bunch of high schoolers (although I was getting published in National Economics when I was a senior.. wtf are you n00bs doing - February/March issue of 2001, article is under last name Doss.. before any of you n00bs start trying to cry BS. Go to your library and look it up).
Anyway. There are short-term and long-term affects to the economy. Like I said, a lot of the instability we are seeing right now is a result of careless economic policies that are characteristic of the Democratic party. They pump socialist programs in the US full of money, and as we all know (or don't in what seems to be a large number of cases) socialist programs don't even break even on spending, but rather devour resources. Then the big bad Republicans come along and have to give the entire establishment a kick in the ass on the way back to capitalism, only to have the 'crats fuck it up next term. Long story short: Presidents love to talk about how great the economy is while they're in office. But let's look and see who is warranted: Bill Clinton takes office from George Bush, Sr. Bill Clinton immediately begins pumping cash into several socialist programs and increases the size of the government. These are both cash whores. So Bill Clinton introduces a bill that magically creates more jobs and brings unemployment to an all-time low. But uh oh.. reserves are getting a bit low. Better raise the taxes, but we'll deflect negative public opinion by heralding the elimination of defecit in the budget, which most uneducated citizens think means we've alleviate the national debt. Yeah right. In truth we've only managed to cut costs by a few billion dollars with the help of hiked taxes. Of course closing down half the military bases in the country and swooping through the military budget and personnel like the fucking Angel of Death - scythe in hand - helped just a bit. But the timing is just right, so the unemployment polls don't reflect the massive influx of unemployed persons just yet. Then George Bush, Jr. takes office. A month later, the economy is recessing and unemployment is skyrocketing. CNN is already pinning this on Bush, but the poor man hasn't even had the opportunity to have a bill pass through the House, let alone the Senate or be signed into law. The Bush team decides the bite the bullet and really starts aggressively addressing the economy issue, although the media keeps this off the airwaves (Open congressional transcripts are usually available through the library of any major university. Not sure if you can find them online). And then 9/11 happens. Everyone backs off for a couple of months. Then, one day we all wake up and a Democrat is BLAMING THE STOCK MARKET CRASH ON BUSH. For fuck's sake. This alone should always and forever illegitimize their party, since it came from their majority leader. Now, despite the most horrific attack on the United States since the attack on Pearl Harbor, Bush is still managing to produce great signs for a rebound in the economy. Now - fuck CNN - listen to me. The stock market is short-term. The stock market is short-term. The stock market is always fucking short-term. It's down? Sorry for you, but in the long-term that means jack shit. What does matter? Corporations are becoming more efficient and increasing productivity. Does that mean higher unemployment right now? Yes. But instead of Bush dumping cash into some stupid ass program to give these people meaningless jobs, he is instead giving the money to consumers in the form of tax cuts. Haven't connected the dots yet? Companies are more efficient and increasing productivity. This means more availability at much lower costs. Consumers have more money in their pockets from tax returns and go out and are more likely to buy these products being offered at a lower price with better quality. This in turn increases revenue for the company who begins producing more to meet the demand and in turn hires more workers and further stimulates the economy. Now, if you didn't read this, fine. You either knew it already, or you're choosing to remain an ignorant fuck. Either way, Bush should get credit for what he's done with the economy, not bashing. Clinton fucked it up, but used the leftovers from Bush, Sr. and some crooked accounting to make it look like he was a savior. The Bush, Jr. team is turning that around, though. I'd like to see them have the chance to show the people the economic strength of a capitalist country not being held back by ignorant socialists. Vote for Bush 2004. |
You say "n00bs" a lot.... nice insult, I bet it makes a lot of poeple cry eh?
I'd vote for bush in 2004, caz of the lack of better canadiates sleeping: |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Ever conside that? |
Quote:
Here's the credit Bush can take on his part in the economy. http://www.senate.gov/~budget/democrati ... 102003.pdf |
A) We are not a Socialist country. The Nazis were Socialist. We are Capitalists.
B) The United States Military has had a policy that predates WWII of being able to fight a full scale war simultaneously on two fronts. Any analyst will tell you this is not possible today. In addition, we had to call up reserves just to go to Afghanistan, which should be enough by itself to tell you the military is hurting. Clinton broke the military's back, end of story. Be glad there was a Republican in office this term. Gore would have slapped the Taliban on the wrist and walked away with a sore asshole. C) Way to not even address the issue at hand, which would be that tax cuts are also going to the lower classes. The biggest consumers are the middle class, and they've had one tax cut already with another one coming. And as far as all the complaints about the rich getting tax cuts... Number one, who do you think puts up the money for new companies and ideas to be realized? Who gives loans or invests in small businesses that need some help? And for God's sake, why is it fair for them to lose nearly half their money to taxes when you only lose 20%? The media talks all these big numbers that make it seem way unfair, but the people in the highest tax bracket in the US still pay more than double what we do percentage-wise in taxes, and probably pay more in taxes each year than you'll make in your lifetime. So stop being ignorant and come off that. As I've said, the stability of the stock market both has to do with the backlash from reckless expenditures from the Clinton Administration catching up, and most importantly the worst act of terrorism this country has seen. D) See above. Linking to senate.gov does not make you smart. Please try again post-education. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
You make some reasonable economic statements and some very large assumptions, then beat over everyones head and if we choose not to believe we are ignorant fucks. Politics by sledgehammer, huh. Thats always been my biggest gripe with Bush and with his little brother. |
Quote:
I don't like Socialism (Soviet style) but the government needs to take steps to protect the average joe from capitalists who want to increase their profits by gouging prices or paying unfair wages. I suggest you read up on your turn of the (last) century history, n00b. PS. no I don't like people taking my money and paying it as welfare to lazy mexicans, but I equally hate assholes who take my money and keep most of it as profit rather than giving fair wage increases to their workers (at least enough to cover cost of living increases) PPS. funny how you call everyone "ignorant fucks", because the only thing that cutting education funding will get you is more "ignorant fucks", but that's what they want: a large pool of unskilled labor. |
There is NO FRIGGIN' WAY I'm voting for Bush in 2004. Nossir, you can't make me and I won't give in!!!
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Your found words for what I wanted to say. ownage rock: |
[quote="SW-14":cc041]
Quote:
You know the reason WHY, right? |
[quote=Zoner]
Quote:
your canadian? As for all those Clark posters I told you guys about. they have been replaced with half as many JOe Lieberman posters. its discusting. I hate living in a rich town....no I dont :P |
[quote="Unknown_Sniper":e2d13]your canadian?[/quote:e2d13]
The man wins a cookie. biggrin: |
YAY I want this one.[img]http://www.collegehumor.com/image.php?id=30239&height=1500&width=492[/img]
|
[quote="Unknown_Sniper":a0149]YAY I want this one.[img]http://www.collegehumor.com/image.php?id=30239&height=1500&width=492[/img][/quote:a0149]
LMAO! |
Quote:
Third rate? It's a journal published across the entire nation and can be found in most major university libraries. Mmmmkay. And of course it's right if I post it. |
I thought the Nazis were fascists? cool:
|
[quote="Cpt. Zapotoski":e003c]I thought the Nazis were fascists? cool:[/quote:e003c]
Yes they were. The Nazi party, or NSDAP, stands for the National Socialist German Workers Party. They are both socialists and fascists. |
[quote=Madmartagen]
Quote:
Aye. Kind of funny how the Germans called themselves "Socialists" yet Hitler HATED the Russians... "socialism" is a Russian theory. |
[quote="Cpt. Zapotoski":fd88e][quote=Madmartagen]
Quote:
Aye. Kind of funny how the Germans called themselves "Socialists" yet Hitler HATED the Russians... "socialism" is a Russian theory.[/quote:fd88e] Socialism is a German-French theory actually, Karl Marx was a kraut and I think Engels lived in France. I understand that to have "true" socialism you need to have the means of production be owned by the government (suposedly in the interest of the people). I understood from reading WWII books that Germany still had privately owned companies before and during WWII, so they were not really socialists. So even with progressive taxes we are not "spiralling into socialism" |
Engels was a kraut too. And the germans were "national socialist" which is a far right version of socialism also known as "facism" . The german state controled everything, every aspect of peoples life. The germans did not hate socialist, they hated communist, because they felt that world bolshevism and world judiasm went hand in hand.
and btw i havent been reading the other pages how the hell did a topic on bush geting elected turn to what govt the nazis had?? |
[quote:e251e]because they felt that world bolshevism and world judiasm went hand in hand. [/quote:e251e]
How are they alike? I believe the Bolshevik party were athiests and actually stripped religion from the culture... unless Stalin did that, not really sure. |
[quote="Cpt. Zapotoski":551ce][quote:551ce]because they felt that world bolshevism and world judiasm went hand in hand. [/quote:551ce]
How are they alike? I believe the Bolshevik party were athiests and actually stripped religion from the culture... unless Stalin did that, not really sure.[/quote:551ce] its called propaganda, sort of like the more extremeist Mid East countries say that the US government (both Republicans and Democrats) are really working for the Jews rolleyes: |
[quote=Zoner]
Quote:
Yes, that's why I thought it was funny. |
Quote:
Where to start....lets see.. Sure, the rich do much of the investing, but retirement plans, 401k and other related investments are now mostly funded thru employee plans, meaning the middle class. And even when its the rich investing directly instead of thru the markets, they get tax breaks. THATS why they invest in this sector, trust me, its not out of philantropic tendencies. Nice attempt to deflect the truth there. And income on investments is taxed at a fixed cap gains percentage, lower than the "upper classes" base rate. Lose half their money to taxes???? This is the worst statement you have made. The highest tax bracket is nowhere near 50%, its closer to 35%. And its not half their money, its half there taxable income. So someone can never lose the principle to taxes. No riches to rags scenario there, unless the riches are plain dumb. You also conveniently left out the part about progressive taxation. The rich are taxed for their first 100,000 income exactly the same rate as the guy that only makes 100k. They are taxed at higher rates on only the amounts over that particular bracket. Good attempt to deflect the real issues and good use of very exagerated numbers. Now to address the accusations that everyone but you is ignorant. Economics is ALL theory. And there are lots of theories out there. Just because someone doenst subscribe to the same one as some random bellhop, doesnt mean they are ignorant, especially when the theories are mixed with politics. The excessive use of name calling in your threads takes away from any credibility you may or may not have. |
Well,
I can't vote yet but i would if i could. He has ade a huge diffrence unlike bill.
He is anti-terroism which is the best thing you can be and Fight it for our freedom, He did something right after sept 11 to protect us and if you don't like him. Think what he did for the american people protecting you ass so you can live not talk bad things about this great guy. I would think you have no heart if you don't like him. Bush is like regan to great guys |
Re: Well,
Quote:
|
Ralph Nader 4 life
|
Quote:
|
Once again the people of American must choose from duche bag #1 or duche bag #2. I for one am not gonna bother until there are some REAL people on the ballot worth voting for. I cant bitch so I don't. I don't vote because why vote for either one when I know they are just a bunch of arrogant pompus jackasses that sucked mommas titty too long so they think everyone owes them something? All they do is throw around their weight and never solve a fucking thing.
As for waiting for the REAL people to show up on the ballot.... let's just say I prob won't be voting for the rest of my life on Presidential Elections. |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:22 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.12 by ScriptzBin
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
© 1998 - 2007 by Rudedog Productions | All trademarks used are properties of their respective owners. All rights reserved.