.....he's now pushing for spreading the 'national resources'!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oUouD2Ndhqs

WADF!

On 03/03/2011 3:07 PM, John H wrote:
....he's now pushing for spreading the 'national resources'!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oUouD2Ndhqs

WADF!

Michael Moore is a blow hard idiot. Marxist like Obama? Didn't work
well for the USSR and elsewhere. Bet Obama and Moore didn't do well in
history.

--
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.

On Sat, 05 Mar 2011 20:17:39 -0700, Canuck57
wrote:

On 03/03/2011 3:07 PM, John H wrote:
....he's now pushing for spreading the 'national resources'!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oUouD2Ndhqs

WADF!

Michael Moore is a blow hard idiot. Marxist like Obama? Didn't work
well for the USSR and elsewhere. Bet Obama and Moore didn't do well in
history.

Sort of like how poorly you did in English class?

On 3/6/2011 1:32 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 05 Mar 2011 20:17:39 -0700,
wrote:

On 03/03/2011 3:07 PM, John H wrote:
....he's now pushing for spreading the 'national resources'!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oUouD2Ndhqs

WADF!

Michael Moore is a blow hard idiot. Marxist like Obama? Didn't work
well for the USSR and elsewhere. Bet Obama and Moore didn't do well in
history.

Sort of like how poorly you did in English class?

Another falsie from DePlume.

In 2004, the wealthiest 25% of US households owned 87% ($43.6
trillion) of the country’s wealth, while the bottom quartile held no
net wealth at all. That is NOT the American dream. From a historical
perspective, this sort of stagnant economy has toppled governments....

The Fed has tried fixing the problem by printing more money... with
predictably disastrous results. So, how do you get that money back in
circulation? How do you fix the problem? Is there any way to do so
without it reeking of "redistribution of wealth?"


Good question. Maybe one of our great thinkers here will have the answers.

On Sun, 06 Mar 2011 09:16:23 -0500, Gene
wrote:

On Thu, 03 Mar 2011 17:07:43 -0500, John H
wrote:

....he's now pushing for spreading the 'national resources'!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oUouD2Ndhqs

WADF!

As much as I despise Michel Moore, he's vaguely correct about all of
this.

Since I was a kid, the tax rate for the richest Americans has declined
from a high of 91% (Eisenhower) to effectively near zero. Rather than
allow the opportunity for these richest folks to invest in the
American economy, it has given them the opportunity to become hoarders
and they have steadily been moving money out of active circulation...
read that, "no trickle down." After you have SO MUCH money, there's
just no way to spend an appreciable amount of it and the stagnant
wealth just grows without bounds... it turns the economy into one of
those horribly boring Monopoly games where everybody is just hoping
for the end..... not a good thing for a REAL economy.

In 2004, the wealthiest 25% of US households owned 87% ($43.6
trillion) of the country’s wealth, while the bottom quartile held no
net wealth at all. That is NOT the American dream. From a historical
perspective, this sort of stagnant economy has toppled governments....

The Fed has tried fixing the problem by printing more money... with
predictably disastrous results. So, how do you get that money back in
circulation? How do you fix the problem? Is there any way to do so
without it reeking of "redistribution of wealth?"

Well, gosh. With logic like that maybe we should just 'go get' whatever oil we
need from whoever has it stashed.

On Sun, 06 Mar 2011 09:16:23 -0500, Gene
wrote:

On Thu, 03 Mar 2011 17:07:43 -0500, John H
wrote:

....he's now pushing for spreading the 'national resources'!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oUouD2Ndhqs

WADF!

As much as I despise Michel Moore, he's vaguely correct about all of
this.

Since I was a kid, the tax rate for the richest Americans has declined
from a high of 91% (Eisenhower) to effectively near zero. Rather than
allow the opportunity for these richest folks to invest in the
American economy, it has given them the opportunity to become hoarders
and they have steadily been moving money out of active circulation...
read that, "no trickle down." After you have SO MUCH money, there's
just no way to spend an appreciable amount of it and the stagnant
wealth just grows without bounds... it turns the economy into one of
those horribly boring Monopoly games where everybody is just hoping
for the end..... not a good thing for a REAL economy.

In 2004, the wealthiest 25% of US households owned 87% ($43.6
trillion) of the country’s wealth, while the bottom quartile held no
net wealth at all. That is NOT the American dream. From a historical
perspective, this sort of stagnant economy has toppled governments....

The Fed has tried fixing the problem by printing more money... with
predictably disastrous results. So, how do you get that money back in
circulation? How do you fix the problem? Is there any way to do so
without it reeking of "redistribution of wealth?"

But that's just not fair, Gene. Those people earned their money and
nothing you say about the sad state of our economy or country will
alter their view on being able to keep every cent of it.

Warren Buffet be damend, meritocracy doesn't deserve the time of day.

In article ,
says...

On Thu, 03 Mar 2011 17:07:43 -0500, John H
wrote:

....he's now pushing for spreading the 'national resources'!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oUouD2Ndhqs

WADF!

As much as I despise Michel Moore, he's vaguely correct about all of
this.

Since I was a kid, the tax rate for the richest Americans has declined
from a high of 91% (Eisenhower) to effectively near zero. Rather than
allow the opportunity for these richest folks to invest in the
American economy, it has given them the opportunity to become hoarders
and they have steadily been moving money out of active circulation...
read that, "no trickle down." After you have SO MUCH money, there's
just no way to spend an appreciable amount of it and the stagnant
wealth just grows without bounds... it turns the economy into one of
those horribly boring Monopoly games where everybody is just hoping
for the end..... not a good thing for a REAL economy.

In 2004, the wealthiest 25% of US households owned 87% ($43.6
trillion) of the country?s wealth, while the bottom quartile held no
net wealth at all. That is NOT the American dream. From a historical
perspective, this sort of stagnant economy has toppled governments....

The Fed has tried fixing the problem by printing more money... with
predictably disastrous results. So, how do you get that money back in
circulation? How do you fix the problem? Is there any way to do so
without it reeking of "redistribution of wealth?"

The question becomes is there any private property? Michael Moore
believes that YOUR private property is not yours it should be everyones.
However, Michael Moore's private property is his and you should keep
your ****ing hands off of it.

If he truly believed the crap he spewed he would give away all of his
money.