Consideration required
 

On Wed, 27 Jan 2010 20:52:13 -0700, Canuck57
wrote:

On 27/01/2010 7:04 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Wed, 27 Jan 2010 18:17:41 -0700,
wrote:

On 27/01/2010 8:57 AM, jps wrote:
On Wed, 27 Jan 2010 10:46:28 -0500, wrote:


" Promotes saving by eliminating taxes on interest, capital gains, and
dividends; also
eliminates the death tax."

Republican wet dream. Interest and unemployment go through the roof
and the economy collapses in a worse disaster than 1929.

Who knows, might happen. Obama will appologise and make excuses tonight
and then promise a lot more and try to quell what we already know.

which, if the GOP did this and owned up to their mistakes, we'd be
hunting them with dogs

Ok, I had it backwards. He promised a lot and then made excuses with
more promises.

I would hate to think what they do to liberals once they have trashed
the US economy.

guess he thinks obama's been president for 8 years. guess he forgot
about bush, who developed the giveaway to the banks, who held the
economy hostage to their mistakes, courtesy of the right wing.


Obama talks a lot and no results but feeding democrat corruption engine.

and the GOP doesn't talk at all. they just take their orders from
their rich masters and enact them into law

Obama was so full of sh1t tonight... you could see it dripping from the
walls. I did see the democrat people turned hecklers were expidiciously
being moved out. Yet many just sat there in disgust.

telling the truth to people generally does cause them to become
mentally ill.

you're living proof


Obama should have read up on why Hitler failed to win WW II, too many
fronts and not one done right. Will be interesting to see how the
market reacts.


GODWIN'S LAW!!! PPHWWWWEEET!!!

Consideration required
 

On Wed, 27 Jan 2010 21:00:11 -0700, Canuck57
wrote:

On 27/01/2010 8:05 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Wed, 27 Jan 2010 18:20:40 -0700,
wrote:



Because more people are starting to realize what democrat health care
is. An attempt to skim health care revenue for government excesses in
spending and corruption

uh what?

we have the most expensive healthcare in the world. sounds like you
crybabies are worrying about the horse that's already left the barn

. Including the democrat need to fund
dysfunctional private corporations with taxpayers taxes.

that's why we need socialized medicine

Yep, the best services around if you are approved and live long enough
in line.

as opposed to what we have now, where, if you lose your job because
the right wants wages held low, you get nothing

no wonder you love right wing medicine. it whips the undeserving
middle class in line

Consideration required
 

On Wed, 27 Jan 2010 21:09:02 -0700, Canuck57
wrote:

On 27/01/2010 7:05 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Wed, 27 Jan 2010 18:15:50 -0700,
wrote:


yeah he has a vision

no taxes for the rich

all taxes paid for by the middle class


How is that different than today? After taxes, it would take the
_entire_ wealth of someone like Bill Gates to keep Obama in debt spend
for just one week.

right now at least they pay 15%. the middle class pays about double
that.


The wealth destruction is mind boggling. Only thing you know for sure
is it will not continue. Sooner of later even the US government will be
broke. Pretty much already is, but no one wants to go to the world to
say hey, these American welchers are not going to pay.

yeah the right wing destroyed the middle class. i agree. too bad the
right is too stupid to see it

Consideration required
 

On Wed, 27 Jan 2010 20:08:44 -0500, Eisboch wrote:


His roadmap isn't perfect ... or maybe even feasible ... but band-aid
approaches to each crisis isn't going to work either. It's really time
to re-think economics in this global economy and then plan and act
accordingly. The programs and solutions being beaten to death in D.C.
aren't going to solve anything, long term.

Yeah, but, is it the government's job to rethink the economics?
Governments are for tweaking, perhaps giving direction, and, if
necessary, saving our economic asses. More than that, would scare the
hell out of me. I'll give you, tax code simplification would be a good
thing, but an overhaul, is very unlikely. I'd like to see more support
for our small business engine, as opposed to the multinationals. Obama
seems to support this, and, I'd like to see health care untied from
business. The competitive disadvantage it puts on our businesses is
considerable, but, other than those things, I think we are quite
resilient, and will recover nicely. Not as fast as I would like, or
those who are hurting would like, but there is no magic wand.

Consideration required
 

In article ,
says...

I'd like to see more support
for our small business engine, as opposed to the multinationals. Obama
seems to support this,

What makes you say that? Because he *said* so? Come on, small business
is going to get eaten up by the government union machine...


Scotty

Consideration required
 

On 1/28/10 7:58 AM, I am Tosk wrote:
In inet,
says...

I'd like to see more support
for our small business engine, as opposed to the multinationals. Obama
seems to support this,

What makes you say that? Because he *said* so? Come on, small business
is going to get eaten up by the government union machine...


Scotty


I'm sorry, I misplaced my secret decoder ring. Would you please repost
that, and this time in standard English?

Consideration required
 

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 27 Jan 2010 20:08:44 -0500, Eisboch wrote:


His roadmap isn't perfect ... or maybe even feasible ... but band-aid
approaches to each crisis isn't going to work either. It's really time
to re-think economics in this global economy and then plan and act
accordingly. The programs and solutions being beaten to death in D.C.
aren't going to solve anything, long term.

Yeah, but, is it the government's job to rethink the economics?
Governments are for tweaking, perhaps giving direction, and, if
necessary, saving our economic asses. More than that, would scare the
hell out of me. I'll give you, tax code simplification would be a good
thing, but an overhaul, is very unlikely. I'd like to see more support
for our small business engine, as opposed to the multinationals. Obama
seems to support this, and, I'd like to see health care untied from
business. The competitive disadvantage it puts on our businesses is
considerable, but, other than those things, I think we are quite
resilient, and will recover nicely. Not as fast as I would like, or
those who are hurting would like, but there is no magic wand.

Obama does not support the small businesses at all. Have you noticed the
number of small banks that have been closed over the past year. Who were
those banks servicing? They were not servicing large multinational
corporations. Typically, these small banks when seized have their assets
sold to larger banks and these larger banks do lend as easily to small
businesses.

If you want support for small businesses then you want tax cuts,
permanent tax cuts, not targeted tax cuts, tax cuts across the board.

Small businesses want to know what the rules and regulations are going
to be for the next three to 10 years so that they can make plans and
execute those plans. With Obama and his maniac/depressive and bi-polar
policies nobody knows what the rules are going to be from one day to the
next.

When BofA, Wells Fargo and CitiBank took the TARP money there was no
mention of limiting executives salaries to $500,000. That was something
that popped into Obama's head one day and he proclaimed it like the
dictator that he wants to be. That is not governing that is ruling and
we do not elect rulers.

Consideration required
 

On Jan 27, 11:23*pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:
"Jack" wrote in message

...
On Jan 27, 8:05 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:





"Jack" wrote in message

...
On Jan 27, 6:52 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:

"Eisboch" wrote in message

m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Eisboch" wrote in message
om...

Just finished reading this. It's worth consideration, I think.

Short summary can be viewed and read he

http://www.house.gov/ryan/press_rele...ses/RoadmapSum...

Detailed report with the numbers to back it up he

http://www.house.gov/budget_republic...dmap_detailed_...

Have fun,
Eisboch

Competely DOA as thunder said. Now is the time to spend money not
contract. If the private sector doesn't create jobs, the gov't must.

Consideration required
 

On Jan 28, 9:44*am, Jack wrote:
On Jan 27, 11:23*pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:





"Jack" wrote in message

...
On Jan 27, 8:05 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:

"Jack" wrote in message

....
On Jan 27, 6:52 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:

"Eisboch" wrote in message

m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Eisboch" wrote in message
om...

Just finished reading this. It's worth consideration, I think.

Short summary can be viewed and read he

http://www.house.gov/ryan/press_rele...ses/RoadmapSum...

Detailed report with the numbers to back it up he

http://www.house.gov/budget_republic...dmap_detailed_...

Have fun,
Eisboch

Competely DOA as thunder said. Now is the time to spend money not
contract. If the private sector doesn't create jobs, the gov't must.
This
was learned the hard way by the Hoover administration.

Pssst... (looking around nervously) .... the "gov't" is broke......

Eisboch

No it isn't. It's called deficit spending.

Broke implies insolvent or lacking in funds.
"Deficit spending is the amount by which a government, private
company, or individual's spending exceeds income"

Let's see... I spend more than I make, so I'm lacking in funds, so
therefore I'm "broke".
Why not just admit you're wrong.

OK plum, I'm wrong. *I'm sure the US gov has plenty of money, and
they're just borrowing billions from China because it's fun. *They
aren't lacking any funds at all.

Hey, I hear there's a show sale just down the street from you. *Go buy
some.
Good ditz.

show, shoe. Jusr onw ket awat.

Consideration required
 

On 1/28/10 10:16 AM, Jack wrote:
On Jan 28, 9:44 am, wrote:
On Jan 27, 11:23 pm, wrote:





wrote in message

...
On Jan 27, 8:05 pm, wrote:

wrote in message

...
On Jan 27, 6:52 pm, wrote:

wrote in message

...

wrote in message
...
wrote in message
...

Just finished reading this. It's worth consideration, I think.

Short summary can be viewed and read he

http://www.house.gov/ryan/press_rele...ses/RoadmapSum...

Detailed report with the numbers to back it up he

http://www.house.gov/budget_republic...dmap_detailed_...

Have fun,
Eisboch

Competely DOA as thunder said. Now is the time to spend money not
contract. If the private sector doesn't create jobs, the gov't must.
This
was learned the hard way by the Hoover administration.

Pssst... (looking around nervously) .... the "gov't" is broke.....

Eisboch

No it isn't. It's called deficit spending.

Broke implies insolvent or lacking in funds.
"Deficit spending is the amount by which a government, private
company, or individual's spending exceeds income"

Let's see... I spend more than I make, so I'm lacking in funds, so
therefore I'm "broke".
Why not just admit you're wrong.

OK plum, I'm wrong. I'm sure the US gov has plenty of money, and
they're just borrowing billions from China because it's fun. They
aren't lacking any funds at all.

Hey, I hear there's a show sale just down the street from you. Go buy
some.
Good ditz.

show, shoe. Jusr onw ket awat.


So, English is not your primary language...