Winning elections is not good enough
 

On Mon, 21 Feb 2011 12:19:28 -0700, Canuck57
wrote:



But Obama got his way, an unstable middle east and businesses not
investing in American oil development because of BP. Obama be doing a
good job in making all the wrong decisions.

HAHAHAHA obama caused this??

i guess what he should do is part the red sea and send in the marines!

Winning elections is not good enough
 

On Mon, 21 Feb 2011 12:16:39 -0700, Canuck57
wrote:

On 21/02/2011 9:14 AM, bpuharic wrote:
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 23:03:29 -0500, wrote:

On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 21:03:15 -0500, wrote:

and they just hide their heads in teh sand and ignore history

hey...tune your TV to the news channels. tell me how wonderful the
rich are doing in egypt, OK?


What happens when the Egyptians discover they can't vote themselves a
job

they'll work and get paid

something the american right is opposed to. only the rich get paid.

Maybe you should consider that they do something right that you should
consider doing.

yeah. they have no problems stealing. and i work for a living.

you right wingers glorify theft


Here is your first step to getting "rich". Get out of debt, you can't
get rich paying other people for money.

gee. the rich stay rich by losing their money and getting the middle
class to make up their losses

Winning elections is not good enough
 

On Mon, 21 Feb 2011 12:43:59 -0500, wrote:

On Mon, 21 Feb 2011 11:15:15 -0500, bpuharic wrote:

On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 22:58:55 -0500, wrote:

On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 21:00:42 -0500, bpuharic wrote:

hey DEREGULATED WALL STREET WHEN THEY REPEALED GLASS STEAGALL you
CLOWN!!


Hmm which president signed that bill? How many Democrats voted for it?


gee. clinton signed it at the 11th hour after gramm sneaked it into
the bill at the last minute....courtesy of his wife

who happened to be an ENRON VP


Bull****. Clinton was praising that deregulation. There was no
"sneaking" involved.

which is, i suppose, why gramm stuffed it into the legislation at the
last minute.

Winning elections is not good enough
 

On Mon, 21 Feb 2011 12:47:58 -0500, wrote:

On Mon, 21 Feb 2011 11:16:50 -0500, bpuharic wrote:

On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 19:36:28 -0700, Canuck57
wrote:


Hey, liberalism in ponzi debt has been good for me. You can't make this
kind of money in a stable well balanced economy and good honest money
management by government. No sir, the liberalism churns it up for big
swings.

and how's govt by wall street working out?

we growing at 9% PER YEAR?

oh. the chinese are. we arent. courtesy of wall street


Why do you think the banks and wall street are GOP operations?
They give most of the money to democrats


http://www.opensecrets.org/bigpictur...Rep&Cycle=2008

HAHAHA why not go back to LINCOLN??

that's for 2002...8 years ago!

how about last year, when teh dems started talking RE regulating wall
street?

THEN WS started to shovel money to the GOP:

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wall-...ry?id=11359466

Winning elections is not good enough
 

On Mon, 21 Feb 2011 12:39:14 -0700, Canuck57
wrote:

On 21/02/2011 9:16 AM, bpuharic wrote:
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 19:36:28 -0700,
wrote:


henry paulson, bush's treasury secretary

largest deficit in history? bush's last budget, 2009...

Bush's last budget passed in by Congress and an incoming new president.
It is an Obama SPEND.

HAHAHAH how can obama spend it when he wasnt president when bush
signed it???

bush's last budget was during obama's first term in office.

and it had a 1.2T deficit


Hey, liberalism in ponzi debt has been good for me. You can't make this
kind of money in a stable well balanced economy and good honest money
management by government. No sir, the liberalism churns it up for big
swings.

and how's govt by wall street working out?

For me? Great. And you?

yeah. you're 100 million working americans, right?


we growing at 9% PER YEAR?

That is all? I did much better than that.

oh. the chinese are. we arent. courtesy of wall street

Oh, you mean economy. Yep, low debts, solvent government, good economic
policies....yep...China is eating your lunch because their government is
more honest with currency and debt. USA needs to boot Bernke and the
liberalism economists right out of DC.

HAHAHAH bush and the GOP ran the country for 6 of the last 8 years and
22 of the last 30

how's that working out for us?

when CDO's went from 320 BILLION

to SIXTY TWO TRILLION under the GOP

uh...that make us strong? when wall street sucked 10 TRILLION out of
the economy...we still able to fund aircraft carriers and marine
brigades with an economy that's dying?

but the rich are doing well...


Bernke and Treasury bozos need to know, no one has ever debt-spent their
way out of a debt problem ever. But they always make it worse.

gee. if that's the case

why did the 29 depression end in 1940 when the govt started to spend
for war?


NY Crude up $5.50 for the day so far and Dated Brent at $106.50 I would
say Obamaflation is coming to a pump near you.

courtesy of bush's failed middle east policies. but all it took was a
trillion he spent and 4400 dead US troops

but they werent rich so the right ignores them

Winning elections is not good enough
 

On 21/02/2011 12:28 PM, HarryK wrote:
On 2/21/2011 2:12 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 21/02/2011 6:59 AM, HarryK wrote:
On 2/20/2011 11:56 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 20:41:42 -0800, wrote:

On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 23:08:05 -0500, wrote:

That chart in link 2 assumes an unrealistic rise in GDP and the
idea
that the salaries of the people paying in will rise that fast too.
Talk to Bob about how that has been going. The problem is
demographic
and you don't have a chart to dispute that.
No matter what chart or what fact I show you, you're not going to
change your mind. So, what's the point?
You are the one who keeps changing the subject when you get backed
into a corner. I say SS and Medicare is upside down. You present a
chart that says SS and Medicare are not only upside down but will be
in the red forever and try to say that is fine.
I haven't changed the subject at all. I've said and will continue to
say that this is a long-term problem not a short one. Holding people
hostage of this (what's happening in the House as an example) is worse
than nonsense.
Well it might have BEEN a long term problem in 1964 when Goldwater
wanted to fix it but this is 2011 and the plane has crashed into the
mountain. Outgo is less than income. Both programs are under water and
there is still no real plan to fix it. The current Obama plan seems to
be to reduce revenue, they just reduced the payroll tax 2%. Very
republican of him huh?
BTW your chart does not take that into account.

SS and Medicare needs a stimulus package,or at least pay back what was
stolen, with interest.
Obama can do it. He set the precedent.

How can government stimulate it? Just moving debt from one line to
another, like paying a credit card with another.

That would work for me.

Actually, if you are retired and getting Social Security you should be
mad as a hornet. All that Social Security money being loaned and
skimmed to the government for peanuts.

--
Socialism is a great ideal as long as someone else pays for it. And when
no one is left to pay for it, they all can share nothing.

Winning elections is not good enough
 

On 21/02/2011 12:49 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 21 Feb 2011 11:02:11 -0800, wrote:

No matter what chart or what fact I show you, you're not going to
change your mind. So, what's the point?

You are the one who keeps changing the subject when you get backed
into a corner. I say SS and Medicare is upside down. You present a
chart that says SS and Medicare are not only upside down but will be
in the red forever and try to say that is fine.

I haven't changed the subject at all. I've said and will continue to
say that this is a long-term problem not a short one. Holding people
hostage of this (what's happening in the House as an example) is worse
than nonsense.

Well it might have BEEN a long term problem in 1964 when Goldwater
wanted to fix it but this is 2011 and the plane has crashed into the
mountain. Outgo is less than income. Both programs are under water and
there is still no real plan to fix it. The current Obama plan seems to
be to reduce revenue, they just reduced the payroll tax 2%. Very
republican of him huh?
BTW your chart does not take that into account.

It's still a long term problem with long term fixes available. It
doesn't need to be fixed this year or next on the backs of the lower
and middle classes. Both programs are NOT underwater, although they
will be if nothing is done. It's a right wing fantasy.


You really need to read a paper or something. This is the second year
that SS has spent more than it takes in, five years ahead of the date
they said that would happen. A decade ago they were even saying this
would not happen until 2018-2019.
From the 2010 SSA trustees report
"Annual cost is projected to exceed tax income in 2010 and 2011, to be
less than tax income in 2012 through 2014, then to exceed tax income
in 2015 and remain higher throughout the remainder of the long-range
period."
Considering their track record on "predictions" I doubt the 2012-2014
surplus will happen. That assumes we are going to reproduce the Bush
boom years of 2004-2006 again.

Medicare has been upside down for years.
From the trustees' report

"HI expenditures have exceeded income annually since 2008 and are
projected to continue doing so under current law through 2013 ...The
HI trust fund has not met the Trustees’ formal test of short-range
financial adequacy since 2003."

The 2014 thing assumes nobody changes the new health care law taxes.

The chance of that was only made worse by Obama cutting payroll tax
revenues by 2% (in the democratic congress) and they are even talking
about more cuts, perhaps dropping the payroll tax altogether.
They added taxes in the health care bill to get a good CBO cost
estimate and before the ink was dry they cut them again.
I think the plan is to dump the whole program into the general find
and remove any illusion that this is anything but a welfare program.
They have been spending any surplus as fast as it came in since 1939
so there is no "trust fund".

Just exactly what fixes do you see coming any time soon?
I know you say we need to raise taxes but your party does not seem to
agree. Both parties have bought into the idea that lower taxes creates
more revenue or that higher taxes stifle the economy (whether it is
down or if it is booming) .
They just want to use the platitudes you parrot that this will get
fixed some time in the future and they kick the can down the road.

So governemnt borrows it for 0.25% interest rate in a 5% environment,
they are then just turning Social Security into a tax revenue source.

Hardly fair. If government wants the money, they should be at least
paying Social Security real-inflation plus 3%.

Hey, everyone wants money for nothing including government. Does not
mean they should be allowed to raid Social Security.

--
Socialism is a great ideal as long as someone else pays for it. And when
no one is left to pay for it, they all can share nothing.

Winning elections is not good enough
 

On 21/02/2011 1:50 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Mon, 21 Feb 2011 12:41:22 -0500, wrote:

On Mon, 21 Feb 2011 11:14:37 -0500, wrote:

On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 23:03:29 -0500, wrote:

we're EXACTLY in the position of egypt. small, wealthy ruliing
class...lower social mobility than SWEDEN

and they just hide their heads in teh sand and ignore history

hey...tune your TV to the news channels. tell me how wonderful the
rich are doing in egypt, OK?


What happens when the Egyptians discover they can't vote themselves a
job

they'll work and get paid

Work doing what?
There is not a lot of work to do in Egypt, nor much money to pay for

and now that they dont have to pay bribes to the govt to have a job,
the market system can take over.

we havent learned that in the US. here we have crony capitalism where
the middle class has no protection against the raw forces of crony
capitalism

Where did you think all the Obama bailout spending went? It didn't go
to the middle class people. So if you think the middle class should not
bailout the rich, how come you vote Obama?

--
Socialism is a great ideal as long as someone else pays for it. And when
no one is left to pay for it, they all can share nothing.

Winning elections is not good enough
 

On 21/02/2011 2:08 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Mon, 21 Feb 2011 12:47:58 -0500, wrote:

On Mon, 21 Feb 2011 11:16:50 -0500, wrote:

On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 19:36:28 -0700,
wrote:


Hey, liberalism in ponzi debt has been good for me. You can't make this
kind of money in a stable well balanced economy and good honest money
management by government. No sir, the liberalism churns it up for big
swings.

and how's govt by wall street working out?

we growing at 9% PER YEAR?

oh. the chinese are. we arent. courtesy of wall street


Why do you think the banks and wall street are GOP operations?
They give most of the money to democrats


http://www.opensecrets.org/bigpictur...Rep&Cycle=2008

HAHAHA why not go back to LINCOLN??

that's for 2002...8 years ago!

how about last year, when teh dems started talking RE regulating wall
street?

THEN WS started to shovel money to the GOP:

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wall-...ry?id=11359466

Face it, corrupt debtors, corrupt corporation and delinquent debtors
like GM all love democrats, they are so willing to screw the taxpayer
for bailouts and corruption.

You voted for Obama, not me. I don't believe in bailouts. Bailouts
using the tax system is pure corruption. If Chavez does the same thing,
media would say corruption third world. In America we call it bailouts.
--
Socialism is a great ideal as long as someone else pays for it. And when
no one is left to pay for it, they all can share nothing.

Winning elections is not good enough
 

On 21/02/2011 2:12 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Mon, 21 Feb 2011 12:39:14 -0700,
wrote:

On 21/02/2011 9:16 AM, bpuharic wrote:
On Sun, 20 Feb 2011 19:36:28 -0700,
wrote:


henry paulson, bush's treasury secretary

largest deficit in history? bush's last budget, 2009...

Bush's last budget passed in by Congress and an incoming new president.
It is an Obama SPEND.

HAHAHAH how can obama spend it when he wasnt president when bush
signed it???

bush's last budget was during obama's first term in office.

and it had a 1.2T deficit


Hey, liberalism in ponzi debt has been good for me. You can't make this
kind of money in a stable well balanced economy and good honest money
management by government. No sir, the liberalism churns it up for big
swings.

and how's govt by wall street working out?

For me? Great. And you?

yeah. you're 100 million working americans, right?


we growing at 9% PER YEAR?

That is all? I did much better than that.

oh. the chinese are. we arent. courtesy of wall street

Oh, you mean economy. Yep, low debts, solvent government, good economic
policies....yep...China is eating your lunch because their government is
more honest with currency and debt. USA needs to boot Bernke and the
liberalism economists right out of DC.

HAHAHAH bush and the GOP ran the country for 6 of the last 8 years and
22 of the last 30

how's that working out for us?

when CDO's went from 320 BILLION

to SIXTY TWO TRILLION under the GOP

uh...that make us strong? when wall street sucked 10 TRILLION out of
the economy...we still able to fund aircraft carriers and marine
brigades with an economy that's dying?

but the rich are doing well...


Bernke and Treasury bozos need to know, no one has ever debt-spent their
way out of a debt problem ever. But they always make it worse.

gee. if that's the case

why did the 29 depression end in 1940 when the govt started to spend
for war?


NY Crude up $5.50 for the day so far and Dated Brent at $106.50 I would
say Obamaflation is coming to a pump near you.

courtesy of bush's failed middle east policies. but all it took was a
trillion he spent and 4400 dead US troops

but they werent rich so the right ignores them

Actually a joint session of Congress, Dims and GOP gave Bush the money
and marching orders.

I agree in that US needed to retaliate for 9/11, but it should have been
180 days of bomb the crap out of them then leave. Forget occupation,
too expensive in blood and in money.

--
Socialism is a great ideal as long as someone else pays for it. And when
no one is left to pay for it, they all can share nothing.