Obama Lays-Out $1.5T in New Taxes

[javaguru]

You wouldn't know a socialist or a communist if it bit you on the ass. If you think Alinsky was a socialist, for example, you've been getting your information from some weird sources.

Supply-side economics is a scam.

Would you be happy to return tax rates to what they were during the Reagan Presidency?

How has Keynesian economics faired over the past century when it comes to results?

The United States is facing a real double dip because Keynesian economics is just giving crack to a crackhead to delay the inevitable withdrawal. As a matter of fact, China is facing the same predicament, the invincible 800 pound gorilla in the room, can't continue to pump government money to support a system that needs to correct.

 

[mrplunkey]

Why? Is Santa Claus gonna put my name on the wrong list if I say the wrong thing?

LOL @ the lie of "class warfare".

Cool. Then let's just stick with the status quo.

Perhaps we can re-elect Barry for another four years and go for 15% unemployment. At this point, the US may serve best as an object lesson to future capitalistic societies.

Yes we can!

 

[PICK3]

Cool. Then let's just stick with the status quo.

Perhaps we can re-elect Barry for another four years and go for 15% unemployment. At this point, the US may serve best as an object lesson to future capitalistic societies.

Yes we can!

^^^
you said we were headed there irregardless of who's elected next

 

[mrplunkey]

^^^
you said we were headed there irregardless of who's elected next

I suspect we are. A mean-spirited conservative may slow it down by 4-8 years, but I think we're going to hit a wall either way.

I'm kinda pulling for Barry. If we give him four more years, he won't have any re-election constraints and he can take us off the cliff with style.

 

[Mr. dB]

How has Keynesian economics faired over the past century when it comes to results?

The United States is facing a real double dip because Keynesian economics is just giving crack to a crackhead to delay the inevitable withdrawal. As a matter of fact, China is facing the same predicament, the invincible 800 pound gorilla in the room, can't continue to pump government money to support a system that needs to correct.

And this differentiates between any of the present Presidential hopefuls and incumbent how? Paul is the only one with the nerve or the Libertarian zeal to jump off the Keynsian ship.

 

[mrplunkey]

And this differentiates between any of the present Presidential hopefuls and incumbent how? Paul is the only one with the nerve or the Libertarian zeal to jump off the Keynsian ship.

Ron Paul (who I really like) won't succeed because voters just don't get into esoteric economic arguments.

What voters would understand is the need to starve a wasteful, value-destroying government of money. If all politicians ran on cutting taxes, it would ultimately drive the downsizing of government.

 

[digimon7068]

Ron Paul (who I really like) won't succeed because voters just don't get into esoteric economic arguments.

What voters would understand is the need to starve a wasteful, value-destroying government of money. If all politicians ran on cutting taxes, it would ultimately drive the downsizing of government.

i really need to sit down and peruse the federal budget someday...i really can't make any sort of intelligent argument for or against "downsizing"...everytime i think of downsizing, i think about our military, and i am certain that i am not in favor of downsizing our military budget...i think we need to encourage more people to do their time, train harder and build more planes and bombs and tanks, etc.

 

[redsamurai]

and i am certain that i am not in favor of downsizing our military budget...i think we need to encourage more people to do their time, train harder and build more planes and bombs and tanks, etc.

why are you not in favor of downsizing our military? It's a gigantic money hole, at least social security keeps people buying stuff in the economy. We get nothing for our investment in the military. Zip, nada....it's all ego. We have the biggest guns in the world...so what? means nothing.

 

[digimon7068]

why are you not in favor of downsizing our military? It's a gigantic money hole, at least social security keeps people buying stuff in the economy. We get nothing for our investment in the military. Zip, nada....it's all ego. We have the biggest guns in the world...so what? means nothing.

theodore roosevelt, a very progressive republican, said speak softly and carry a big stick...those words have never rang more true than they do today.

 

[mrplunkey]

why are you not in favor of downsizing our military? It's a gigantic money hole, at least social security keeps people buying stuff in the economy. We get nothing for our investment in the military. Zip, nada....it's all ego. We have the biggest guns in the world...so what? means nothing.

I'm all for dramatically reducing military expense (because broke is broke), but that's a spectacularly bad argument. Military expenditures still go to soldiers, suppliers and technology providers.

I seriously doubt Ma and Pa Kettle perusing Walmart for today's under $10 items fresh-off-the-boat from China is any more or less beneficial to the economy than the military dumping a bunch of cash on a new communications satellite.