the success of the bush tax cuts
 

On 12/06/2011 6:38 AM, I_am_Tosk wrote:
In ,
says...

On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 20:27:31 -0400, wrote:

1. the bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003
2. the trillion dollar iraq war

obama had nothing to do with either

Obama continued both.

let's see...number of troops in iraq under bush

150,000

under obama: zero in december.

that's some continuance.

Actually it will be about 50,000. The quibble about whether they are
"combat" soldiers is ridiculous when most are killed by road side
bombs, not combat.

Oh, is that what she was dribbling about with the "zero"? Is that kind
of like the "not war" we are fighting in Libya?

and the tax cuts? oh. you forgot obama wanted to continue them for the
productive middle class and eliminate them for the leeches.

83% of the cost of the Bush tax cut was the people who made less than
$250k. The amount of money that would be recovered if they raised the
taxes of the $250k and up people was doubled by the 14% payroll tax
cut.
The total cost of the Obama tax cut is over a half trillion dollars a
year. That alone is close to half or our deficit.

In two years and she claims Obama isn't a big spender.. The woman is
just dishonest, period...

deplume, a woman, debatable. But Obama is now the world record holder
for debt and debt spend. No other name in history represents the amount
of debt as Obama.


--
Government isn't the solution to the bad economy, it is the problem.

the success of the bush tax cuts
 

On 11/06/2011 11:14 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 20:27:31 -0400, wrote:

1. the bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003
2. the trillion dollar iraq war

obama had nothing to do with either

Obama continued both.

let's see...number of troops in iraq under bush

150,000

under obama: zero in december.

that's some continuance.

Actually it will be about 50,000. The quibble about whether they are
"combat" soldiers is ridiculous when most are killed by road side
bombs, not combat.

and the tax cuts? oh. you forgot obama wanted to continue them for the
productive middle class and eliminate them for the leeches.

83% of the cost of the Bush tax cut was the people who made less than
$250k. The amount of money that would be recovered if they raised the
taxes of the $250k and up people was doubled by the 14% payroll tax
cut.
The total cost of the Obama tax cut is over a half trillion dollars a
year. That alone is close to half or our deficit.

Your math is wrong, please cite.

Those numbers are all wrong. First, the cuts are not a hill of beans to
and elephant of debt. Second, the annual deficit is $1.6 trillion, so
do the math right. The problem is really much worse than you think when
you add in GMAC, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac delinquent and fraud debts.
--
Government isn't the solution to the bad economy, it is the problem.

the success of the bush tax cuts
 

On 11/06/2011 6:29 PM, wf3h wrote:
On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 11:29:11 -0600,
wrote:

On 09/06/2011 8:59 PM, wf3h wrote:
On Thu, 9 Jun 2011 22:17:26 -0400, I_am_Tosk
wrote:



and this is more right wing bull****

14.5 trillion where? how?

oh. you just heard it somewhere.

lemme know when you get some facts, OK?

Open a newspaper... the debt is 14.5 T... Duh...


gee. and almost none of this is due to obama

but he's black, you see....

Funny, the day Bush left it was $9.67T, now it is approaching $14.5T,
that means Obama was in office for over $4.5T of it.

bush's last budget deficit:

1.2 trillion

obama's are about 1.3

uh huh. seems that, since there's no difference the only reason you
hate obama is...

I don't like any politicians through their own need greed for power sell
debt spending to fleabaggers for votes. Just mortgges our childrends
future for greed today. Selfish evil *******s really.
--
Government isn't the solution to the bad economy, it is the problem.

the success of the bush tax cuts
 

On 11/06/2011 6:31 PM, wf3h wrote:
On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 11:40:36 -0600,
wrote:

On 11/06/2011 10:04 AM, wf3h wrote:
On Fri, 10 Jun 2011 08:52:10 -0400, I_am_Tosk
wrote:

In ,
says...


hmmm...tax cuts for the rich in 2001 and 2003

the GOP controlled the congress and the presidency

t
while now that Obama is in
office, it's the House of Reps, with it's minor majority and no Senate
or Oval office behind them that's responsible.. You are a dip****, your
hypocrisy is only surpassed by the likes of John and Harry Krause...

you know zip about contemporary affairs

And you could care less about truth, just talking points...

and you dont even care about the truth

Tosk is right. Your argument is basted on bu11sh1t and fiction. Fact
is, the bubble has burst and fleabaggers fear what needs to be done to
fix it.'

gee. all you have to do is prove me wrong

go ahead. i'll wait


A massive downsize of government for starters. 50% reduction in size
minimum. The footprint of current government is far too big to support
by the society. Now it can either do it voluntarily and save a lot of
grief, or it can be forced.

meaningless.

and, of course, your method was tried

it was called the depression of 29

ever hear of it??

Actually, you dumbsh1t fleabaggers should read. In 1929 they tried to
spend out of it. In 1933 they realized after the 1932 crash that
fleabagger debt spend does not work. Took 6 years of restraint to cover
the debts and recovery was slow.
--
Government isn't the solution to the bad economy, it is the problem.

the success of the bush tax cuts
 

On 12/06/2011 10:37 AM, wf3h wrote:
On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 01:15:39 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 20:33:22 -0400, wrote:

HAHAHAHAH american taxes are teh lowest they've been in FOURTY YEARS!!


Yet you support a half trillion dollar Obama tax cut.

Is it just because he isn't white?

yep. because the middle class hasnt had a pay increase in 30 years

while the richest 1% have had their wages go up by 500%

want to know why we're in a depression?

read those numbers

When government gets bigger, people get smaller.
--
Government isn't the solution to the bad economy, it is the problem.

the success of the bush tax cuts
 

On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 17:20:49 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 11/06/2011 6:30 PM, wf3h wrote:
On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 11:37:31 -0600,
wrote:

On 11/06/2011 10:04 AM, wf3h wrote:
On Fri, 10 Jun 2011 02:09:00 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 09 Jun 2011 23:01:12 -0400, wrote:


but he says the middle class is overpaid and undertaxed while the rich
are taking it on the chin

Might be more accurate to say th rich left in the last 3 years. And are
still doing so.

really?

proof? oh. none.


Some of the companies I own are relocating offshore. Greedy government
taxes. In todays world it is easy to move offshore.

greedy govt taxes?

you mean that the US has the lowest corporate taxes in the OECD and
companies are so greedy this isnt good enough for them?

good. let 'em go

Yep. In case the fleabaggers haven't noticed, the world competes on
taxation too, no business person has moved to Greece in decauses, but
plenty moved out. Reason? Simple, 60% income tax rate with 23%
VAT...hey, government greed killed the government as it collapsed. Now
the economy is for the most part underground.

You sure like to use fleabagger. You must have an infestation problem
in your pubes.

the success of the bush tax cuts
 

On 11/06/2011 6:35 PM, wf3h wrote:
On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 11:52:55 -0600,
wrote:

On 10/06/2011 12:22 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 10 Jun 2011 02:13:37 -0400, wrote:


ummm...if they're insignifican

why does ALL GOP policy focus on cutting their taxes?

if the amount is so small, why does the GOP refuse to cut taxes unless
they're rincluded??

They are idiots too.


We really needed Obama to veto the whole renewal bill

And the result would have been even more pain for people least able to
handle it.

Actually true. As Mr Rich might move the business elsewhere and the
people who need to work get unemployed.

great. THIS is the economy with the rich running it.

let 'em go and let the middle class reclaim america


I have never hidden why I left USA in 2004, it was economical to do so.
And I was right...

and you went to canada

socialized medicine

more bank regulations than the US

golly.

Hardly, I don't look forward to the day I have to use care up here.

As for banks, not my much. Mostly a monopoly. 5 key names, but all
agree on everything.
--
Government isn't the solution to the bad economy, it is the problem.

the success of the bush tax cuts
 

On 11/06/2011 6:35 PM, wf3h wrote:
On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 11:54:32 -0600,
wrote:

On 11/06/2011 10:06 AM, wf3h wrote:
On Fri, 10 Jun 2011 02:13:37 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 09 Jun 2011 23:53:16 -

sure is. healthcare for the middle class...financial regulation...as
much as the GOP will let him get

obama proposed a tax cut ONLY for those making less than 250K


The $250k and above tax may be nice symbolism but it is insignificant.

gee. then why does the GOP say only THEY can drive the economy and
only THEY deserve a tax cut?

Roman empire fell when they targeted the rich. Smart ones left, the
others perished and good time were over for everyone.

HAHAHAHA

the rich owned egypt

how'd that work out?

Think, some Roman thought just like you.
--
Government isn't the solution to the bad economy, it is the problem.

the success of the bush tax cuts
 

On 11/06/2011 4:42 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 14:11:26 -0600,
wrote:

On 11/06/2011 1:08 PM, I_am_Tosk wrote:
In ,
says...

On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 12:03:12 -0600,
wrote:

On 09/06/2011 8:03 PM, wf3h wrote:
On Thu, 09 Jun 2011 12:00:35 -0600,
wrote:

On 07/06/2011 6:18 PM, wf3h wrote:
while the ku klux clowns are blaming obama for bush's turning the
economy over to the chinese, let's look at the effects of 10 years of
bush tax cuts


----------

and the right wing tells us how WONDERFUL this is...the rich are
getting richer...the middle class, worthless scum that they are, are
paying for it.

as god intended.

Do the math fleabagger. Oh wait, I forgot, fleabaggers are mentally
challenged so lets summarize it.

says the guy who thinks obama was pres in 2001


Now 0.1% is 1:1000. Only about 100M taxpayers. That means the claim is
100,000 people make over $3M/year. First, I seriously question that
number as being far too high, but lets go with it.

100,000 * .5M is only $50B so.... with a $1600B overspend, where do you
suggest the other $1550B comes from?

hey you tell me. you guys cut taxes on the 0.1% and let the normal
working people die on the vine

Hey, you vote for debt, statism and more debt, you have to take what
comes along with it. No road paved with debt comes wealth.

No nation or individual before has succeeded with more debt. Not a one.
What makes you fleabaggers think your exempt from reality?

I believe it is greed, so much greed and selfishness you ignore reality.
And when it really bits your arses, I will laugh good.

No, you're just an idiot.

Holy ****, do you ever say anything else? You are like a broken record
with no point, ever... Holy ****ing ****...

Even parrots are smarted the deplume.

Unfortunately, you're not as smart as even a parrot.

Tosk is a right wing stalker, and you're a moron.

We are just scraping greedy fleabagger bulls1t of.

--
Government isn't the solution to the bad economy, it is the problem.

the success of the bush tax cuts
 

On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 17:22:54 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 11/06/2011 6:31 PM, wf3h wrote:
On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 11:40:36 -0600,
wrote:

On 11/06/2011 10:04 AM, wf3h wrote:
On Fri, 10 Jun 2011 08:52:10 -0400, I_am_Tosk
wrote:

In ,
says...


hmmm...tax cuts for the rich in 2001 and 2003

the GOP controlled the congress and the presidency

t
while now that Obama is in
office, it's the House of Reps, with it's minor majority and no Senate
or Oval office behind them that's responsible.. You are a dip****, your
hypocrisy is only surpassed by the likes of John and Harry Krause...

you know zip about contemporary affairs

And you could care less about truth, just talking points...

and you dont even care about the truth

Tosk is right. Your argument is basted on bu11sh1t and fiction. Fact
is, the bubble has burst and fleabaggers fear what needs to be done to
fix it.'

gee. all you have to do is prove me wrong

go ahead. i'll wait


A massive downsize of government for starters. 50% reduction in size
minimum. The footprint of current government is far too big to support
by the society. Now it can either do it voluntarily and save a lot of
grief, or it can be forced.

meaningless.

and, of course, your method was tried

it was called the depression of 29

ever hear of it??

Actually, you dumbsh1t fleabaggers should read. In 1929 they tried to
spend out of it. In 1933 they realized after the 1932 crash that
fleabagger debt spend does not work. Took 6 years of restraint to cover
the debts and recovery was slow.

So, military spending doesn't count?? Freakin stupid little man.

the success of the bush tax cuts
 

On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 17:25:20 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 12/06/2011 10:37 AM, wf3h wrote:
On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 01:15:39 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 20:33:22 -0400, wrote:

HAHAHAHAH american taxes are teh lowest they've been in FOURTY YEARS!!


Yet you support a half trillion dollar Obama tax cut.

Is it just because he isn't white?

yep. because the middle class hasnt had a pay increase in 30 years

while the richest 1% have had their wages go up by 500%

want to know why we're in a depression?

read those numbers

When government gets bigger, people get smaller.

So, that's what happened to you.

the success of the bush tax cuts
 

On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 17:28:11 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 11/06/2011 6:35 PM, wf3h wrote:
On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 11:52:55 -0600,
wrote:

On 10/06/2011 12:22 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 10 Jun 2011 02:13:37 -0400, wrote:


ummm...if they're insignifican

why does ALL GOP policy focus on cutting their taxes?

if the amount is so small, why does the GOP refuse to cut taxes unless
they're rincluded??

They are idiots too.


We really needed Obama to veto the whole renewal bill

And the result would have been even more pain for people least able to
handle it.

Actually true. As Mr Rich might move the business elsewhere and the
people who need to work get unemployed.

great. THIS is the economy with the rich running it.

let 'em go and let the middle class reclaim america


I have never hidden why I left USA in 2004, it was economical to do so.
And I was right...

and you went to canada

socialized medicine

more bank regulations than the US

golly.

Hardly, I don't look forward to the day I have to use care up here.

As for banks, not my much. Mostly a monopoly. 5 key names, but all
agree on everything.

You're already using the mental health services, right? If not, you
should avail yourself forthwith.

the success of the bush tax cuts
 

On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 17:30:00 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 11/06/2011 4:42 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 14:11:26 -0600,
wrote:

On 11/06/2011 1:08 PM, I_am_Tosk wrote:
In ,
says...

On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 12:03:12 -0600,
wrote:

On 09/06/2011 8:03 PM, wf3h wrote:
On Thu, 09 Jun 2011 12:00:35 -0600,
wrote:

On 07/06/2011 6:18 PM, wf3h wrote:
while the ku klux clowns are blaming obama for bush's turning the
economy over to the chinese, let's look at the effects of 10 years of
bush tax cuts


----------

and the right wing tells us how WONDERFUL this is...the rich are
getting richer...the middle class, worthless scum that they are, are
paying for it.

as god intended.

Do the math fleabagger. Oh wait, I forgot, fleabaggers are mentally
challenged so lets summarize it.

says the guy who thinks obama was pres in 2001


Now 0.1% is 1:1000. Only about 100M taxpayers. That means the claim is
100,000 people make over $3M/year. First, I seriously question that
number as being far too high, but lets go with it.

100,000 * .5M is only $50B so.... with a $1600B overspend, where do you
suggest the other $1550B comes from?

hey you tell me. you guys cut taxes on the 0.1% and let the normal
working people die on the vine

Hey, you vote for debt, statism and more debt, you have to take what
comes along with it. No road paved with debt comes wealth.

No nation or individual before has succeeded with more debt. Not a one.
What makes you fleabaggers think your exempt from reality?

I believe it is greed, so much greed and selfishness you ignore reality.
And when it really bits your arses, I will laugh good.

No, you're just an idiot.

Holy ****, do you ever say anything else? You are like a broken record
with no point, ever... Holy ****ing ****...

Even parrots are smarted the deplume.

Unfortunately, you're not as smart as even a parrot.

Tosk is a right wing stalker, and you're a moron.

We are just scraping greedy fleabagger bulls1t of.

Ewww.. you're scraping each others sh*t? Gross.

the success of the bush tax cuts
 

On 11/06/2011 7:40 PM, I_am_Tosk wrote:
In ,
says...

On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 21:01:12 -0400, I_am_Tosk
wrote:

In ,
says...

yeah. by eliminating nobel prize winners on the fed

good move.

never let it be said the GOP ever tried to do what's right for the
country

You keep bringing up the Nobel prize, is that supposed to impress me?
About as much as the crown on the head of the king of the Jr. Prom back
in '75...

let's see....which university has the most nobels in economics?

oh....the right wing u. of chicago.

milton friedman

the chicago school

but you're right wing so dont even know your own histor
ry

So, are you suggesting that because it was a great honor years ago, that
it couldn't have changed to something else lately? That's either short
sighted, or dishonest.. Oh wait, don't tell me....

'years ago'

means when the right controlled the bull****. now that it's shown the
right is bankrupt you guys complain about the prize

go figure

You are delusional...

Good part about cutting government welfare, is wf3h will be gone when
the electricity is disconnected for non-payment.

--
Government isn't the solution to the bad economy, it is the problem.

the success of the bush tax cuts
 

In article ,
says...

Maybe if we restored the "Reagan/Tip O'Neill" tax rates people would
get on board. ;-)
Something for everyone.

You missed your calling in marketing - I like it.
But only the Dems could propose that, and the Rep response would be
"Give us JFK style Medicare first."
The real problem barring solutions is rigid Rep ideology.
Reagan/Tip O'Neill actually compromised positions.
The Reps stonewall taxes absolutely.
I really hope Dems and Reps can't agree on anything when the massive
Obama tax cuts expire, and that they expire per current law.
Best outcome I can see. The parties can just blame each other.
Any deal they cut will be bad for the country.
Because, as I've said, they're mostly dip****s, without math skills.
Especially the ones who cut the deals.
People will really be ****ed if nothing is done about debt.

the success of the bush tax cuts
 

On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 21:31:15 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 17:17:04 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 11/06/2011 11:14 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 20:27:31 -0400, wrote:

1. the bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003
2. the trillion dollar iraq war

obama had nothing to do with either

Obama continued both.

let's see...number of troops in iraq under bush

150,000

under obama: zero in december.

that's some continuance.

Actually it will be about 50,000. The quibble about whether they are
"combat" soldiers is ridiculous when most are killed by road side
bombs, not combat.

and the tax cuts? oh. you forgot obama wanted to continue them for the
productive middle class and eliminate them for the leeches.

83% of the cost of the Bush tax cut was the people who made less than
$250k. The amount of money that would be recovered if they raised the
taxes of the $250k and up people was doubled by the 14% payroll tax
cut.
The total cost of the Obama tax cut is over a half trillion dollars a
year. That alone is close to half or our deficit.

Your math is wrong, please cite.


The "Bush/Obama" tax cut is $370 billion a year (OMB) and the 14%
payroll tax holiday is another $120Billion.

I agree that is only 60-70% of the deficit but I think getting to $1
trillion is possible.

Unless we can actually come up with 15 -20 million decent jobs it is
all academic anyway.

I am a little frustrated with our attempts at "infrastructure".
Whenever I drive by one of these road projects I see machines sitting
idle with nobody around.
If we have such an unemployment problem, why isn't there an ass in
that seat shoving dirt around and getting this damned road done?

So, you want the gov't to employ people directly? Or, do you want the
gov't to give money to companies? So, basically, you're position on
the gov't doing something positive is complete bs, and you just change
your tune whenever you feel like it.

the success of the bush tax cuts
 

On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 20:06:27 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 11/06/2011 7:40 PM, I_am_Tosk wrote:
In ,
says...

'years ago'

means when the right controlled the bull****. now that it's shown the
right is bankrupt you guys complain about the prize

go figure

You are delusional...

Good part about cutting government welfare, is wf3h will be gone when
the electricity is disconnected for non-payment.

let's see...canuck hates socialized medicine in the US. says w'ere
headed for disaster

where does he live?t

canada. what does canada have?

oh. socialized medicine....

shall we compare costs to see how SOCIALIZED medicine compares to FREE
MARKET medicine?? guess which is cheaper?

SOCIALIZED MEDICINE!!

http://dailydish.typepad.com/.a/6a00...a62f970c-popup

the success of the bush tax cuts
 

On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 17:04:16 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 11/06/2011 6:24 PM, wf3h wrote:
On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 12:15:04 -0400, I_am_Tosk
wrote:


uh...which house passes the budget??

oh. the representatives

controlled by the GOP

how they doing? what cuts have they made?

oh. none.

Jury is on on this, are they going to expand the debt past $14.5 trillion?

there is no choice. it's already been spent. it's just admitting it
has to be paid for


If I were the GOP, I would let 75% of the government shut down for 3
months. And only expand it a bit forcing the issue, debt spend less now
or be off work every 3 months.

they did that once before. they almost disappeared in the next
election.

the success of the bush tax cuts
 

On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 17:11:55 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:



Funny, US based corporations are amongst the highest taxed in the world.
Why do you think they are moving offshore?d

PPHWWEETT!!!

WRONG!!

the tax CODE says they are highly taxed

the EFFECTIVE tax...loopholes and deductions, means US corporations
pay a lower tax than virtually any country in the OECD

but canuck's a right wing idiot so is too stupid to know this


Face it, too much fleabagging greed and persecuting the successful, and
they leave. Then the fleabagger socialists can all share having nothing.

successful???
HAHAHAHAAH bush cut taxes on the rich by 25%

how's that work out? we at full emplloyment??

the success of the bush tax cuts
 

On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 17:18:51 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 11/06/2011 6:29 PM, wf3h wrote:
On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 11:29:11 -0600,
wrote:


Funny, the day Bush left it was $9.67T, now it is approaching $14.5T,
that means Obama was in office for over $4.5T of it.

bush's last budget deficit:

1.2 trillion

obama's are about 1.3

uh huh. seems that, since there's no difference the only reason you
hate obama is...

I don't like any politicians through their own need greed for power sell
debt spending to fleabaggers for votes. Just mortgges our childrends
future for greed today. Selfish evil *******s really.

the selfish evil *******s were on wall street

those folks the GOP consider to be heroes

the success of the bush tax cuts
 

On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 17:22:54 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 11/06/2011 6:31 PM, wf3h wrote:
On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 11:40:36 -0600,
wrote:

meaningless.

and, of course, your method was tried

it was called the depression of 29

ever hear of it??

Actually, you dumbsh1t fleabaggers

says the right winger with a reader's digest view of economics


should read. In 1929 they tried to
spend out of it. In 1933 they realized after the 1932 crash that
fleabagger debt spend does not work. Took 6 years of restraint to cover
the debts and recovery was slow.

really?

uh...why did the depression end in 39?

did something happen in 39? uh yeah...the US started to spend for ww2

canuck's moronic view of economics is exceeded only by his ignorance
of history

the success of the bush tax cuts
 

On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 18:28:41 -0700, wrote:

On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 17:22:54 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 11/06/2011 6:31 PM, wf3h wrote:
On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 11:40:36 -0600,
wrote:
meaningless.

and, of course, your method was tried

it was called the depression of 29

ever hear of it??

Actually, you dumbsh1t fleabaggers should read. In 1929 they tried to
spend out of it. In 1933 they realized after the 1932 crash that
fleabagger debt spend does not work. Took 6 years of restraint to cover
the debts and recovery was slow.

So, military spending doesn't count?? Freakin stupid little man.

i LOVE his view of economics. the 29 depression ended in 39. he seems
to be unaware of what happened at that time

typical right wing nut

the success of the bush tax cuts
 

On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 17:25:20 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 12/06/2011 10:37 AM, wf3h wrote:
On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 01:15:39 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 20:33:22 -0400, wrote:

HAHAHAHAH american taxes are teh lowest they've been in FOURTY YEARS!!


Yet you support a half trillion dollar Obama tax cut.

Is it just because he isn't white?

yep. because the middle class hasnt had a pay increase in 30 years

while the richest 1% have had their wages go up by 500%

want to know why we're in a depression?

read those numbers

When government gets bigger, people get smaller.

hey moron

then why have the richest 1% gotten so much bigger?

DUH!!

the success of the bush tax cuts
 

On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 17:28:11 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 11/06/2011 6:35 PM, wf3h wrote:
On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 11:52:55 -0600,
wrote:


and you went to canada

socialized medicine

more bank regulations than the US

golly.

Hardly, I don't look forward to the day I have to use care up here.

HAHAHAHAH try getting it in the US if you have no health insurance!!


As for banks, not my much. Mostly a monopoly. 5 key names, but all
agree on everything.

and here in the US, with a 14 trillion economy?

10 banks control 80% of assets

you were saying?

the success of the bush tax cuts
 

On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 17:28:54 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 11/06/2011 6:35 PM, wf3h wrote:
On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 11:54:32 -0600,
wrote:

On 11/06/2011 10:06 AM, wf3h wrote:
On Fri, 10 Jun 2011 02:13:37 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 09 Jun 2011 23:53:16 -

sure is. healthcare for the middle class...financial regulation...as
much as the GOP will let him get

obama proposed a tax cut ONLY for those making less than 250K


The $250k and above tax may be nice symbolism but it is insignificant.

gee. then why does the GOP say only THEY can drive the economy and
only THEY deserve a tax cut?

Roman empire fell when they targeted the rich. Smart ones left, the
others perished and good time were over for everyone.

HAHAHAHA

the rich owned egypt

how'd that work out?

Think, some Roman thought just like you.

and in 1937, some italian thought like you

the success of the bush tax cuts
 

In article ,
says...

On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 12:53:19 -0400, I_am_Tosk
wrote:

In article ,
says...


What, because we don't care about a popularity contest? Pfffftt. You
obviously don't have any real argument...

let's see...you guys run the country

no wonder you dont care about 'popularity' contests

Still more bull****. The democrats have had majorities in the three
corners of washington for the last 40 years.... So, you are still full
of ****..

really? 22 years of GOP presidents in the last 30 is a majority?

gee. who could have imagined!

Please look back and see who controlled congress during those terms.
Rarely did the repubs even hold two sides of the triangle, never all
three like the dems have done several times... You don't get it I know,
cause if you did, you would even call me more names.

--
Team Rowdy Mouse, Banned from the Mall for life!

the success of the bush tax cuts
 

On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 18:04:16 -0400, I_am_Tosk
wrote:

In article ,
says...

no wonder you dont care about 'popularity' contests

Still more bull****. The democrats have had majorities in the three
corners of washington for the last 40 years.... So, you are still full
of ****..

really? 22 years of GOP presidents in the last 30 is a majority?

gee. who could have imagined!

Please look back and see who controlled congress during those terms.
Rarely did the repubs even hold two sides of the triangle, never all
three like the dems have done several times... You don't get it I know,
cause if you did, you would even call me more names.

again, who controlled the presidency

the dems rarely controlled BOTH houses of congress like the GOP did
for 6 years under bush

and look what they did with it.

bankrupted the country.

the success of the bush tax cuts
 

In article ,
says...

On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 17:22:54 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 11/06/2011 6:31 PM, wf3h wrote:
On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 11:40:36 -0600,
wrote:

meaningless.

and, of course, your method was tried

it was called the depression of 29

ever hear of it??

Actually, you dumbsh1t fleabaggers

says the right winger with a reader's digest view of economics


should read. In 1929 they tried to
spend out of it. In 1933 they realized after the 1932 crash that
fleabagger debt spend does not work. Took 6 years of restraint to cover
the debts and recovery was slow.

really?

uh...why did the depression end in 39?

did something happen in 39? uh yeah...the US started to spend for ww2

canuck's moronic view of economics is exceeded only by his ignorance
of history

It was something called lend lease that got the factories moving again.

the success of the bush tax cuts
 

In article ,
says...

On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 17:25:20 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 12/06/2011 10:37 AM, wf3h wrote:
On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 01:15:39 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 20:33:22 -0400, wrote:

HAHAHAHAH american taxes are teh lowest they've been in FOURTY YEARS!!


Yet you support a half trillion dollar Obama tax cut.

Is it just because he isn't white?

yep. because the middle class hasnt had a pay increase in 30 years

while the richest 1% have had their wages go up by 500%

want to know why we're in a depression?

read those numbers

When government gets bigger, people get smaller.

hey moron

then why have the richest 1% gotten so much bigger?

DUH!!

They are smarter than you.

the success of the bush tax cuts
 

On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 19:33:44 -0400, wrote:


That would encourage more long term investment.
I think I would but an extra tax on any financial instrument that was
kept less than a month to make flash trading less attractive.

let's get one thing straight

we dont need more INVESTMENT

we need more CONSUMPTION.

although investment is a form of consumption, ONLY MIDDLE CLASS
CONSUMPTION can pull us out of the depression

and wall street is NOT gonna let that happen

the success of the bush tax cuts
 

In article ,
says...

On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 18:04:16 -0400, I_am_Tosk
wrote:

In article ,
says...

no wonder you dont care about 'popularity' contests

Still more bull****. The democrats have had majorities in the three
corners of washington for the last 40 years.... So, you are still full
of ****..

really? 22 years of GOP presidents in the last 30 is a majority?

gee. who could have imagined!

Please look back and see who controlled congress during those terms.
Rarely did the repubs even hold two sides of the triangle, never all
three like the dems have done several times... You don't get it I know,
cause if you did, you would even call me more names.

again, who controlled the presidency

the dems rarely controlled BOTH houses of congress like the GOP did
for 6 years under bush

and look what they did with it.

bankrupted the country.

Your are full of ****. Look at control for the last 40 years...

--
Team Rowdy Mouse, Banned from the Mall for life!

the success of the bush tax cuts
 

On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 20:01:07 -0400, BAR wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 17:22:54 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 11/06/2011 6:31 PM, wf3h wrote:
On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 11:40:36 -0600,
wrote:

meaningless.

and, of course, your method was tried

it was called the depression of 29

ever hear of it??

Actually, you dumbsh1t fleabaggers

says the right winger with a reader's digest view of economics


should read. In 1929 they tried to
spend out of it. In 1933 they realized after the 1932 crash that
fleabagger debt spend does not work. Took 6 years of restraint to cover
the debts and recovery was slow.

really?

uh...why did the depression end in 39?

did something happen in 39? uh yeah...the US started to spend for ww2

canuck's moronic view of economics is exceeded only by his ignorance
of history

It was something called lend lease that got the factories moving again.

So, money was spent by the US gov't. This stabilized the economy.
Thanks for the confirmation.

the success of the bush tax cuts
 

On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 20:01:38 -0400, BAR wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 17:25:20 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 12/06/2011 10:37 AM, wf3h wrote:
On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 01:15:39 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 20:33:22 -0400, wrote:

HAHAHAHAH american taxes are teh lowest they've been in FOURTY YEARS!!


Yet you support a half trillion dollar Obama tax cut.

Is it just because he isn't white?

yep. because the middle class hasnt had a pay increase in 30 years

while the richest 1% have had their wages go up by 500%

want to know why we're in a depression?

read those numbers

When government gets bigger, people get smaller.

hey moron

then why have the richest 1% gotten so much bigger?

DUH!!

They are smarter than you.


Nope. About 1/2 of the wealthiest inherited it. And, many of those who
earned it, gave a lot of it to their kids to buy things like homes.

the success of the bush tax cuts
 

On 13/06/2011 3:29 PM, wf3h wrote:
On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 20:06:27 -0600,
wrote:

On 11/06/2011 7:40 PM, I_am_Tosk wrote:
In ,
says...

'years ago'

means when the right controlled the bull****. now that it's shown the
right is bankrupt you guys complain about the prize

go figure

You are delusional...

Good part about cutting government welfare, is wf3h will be gone when
the electricity is disconnected for non-payment.

let's see...canuck hates socialized medicine in the US. says w'ere
headed for disaster

where does he live?t

canada. what does canada have?

oh. socialized medicine....

shall we compare costs to see how SOCIALIZED medicine compares to FREE
MARKET medicine?? guess which is cheaper?

SOCIALIZED MEDICINE!!

http://dailydish.typepad.com/.a/6a00...a62f970c-popup

Just know how screwed up it left Canada and Obamacare is just a huge tax
grab. Dumbsh1t Obama doesn't seem to get it.

And dumbsh1ts like you don't either. Want to double your taxes and add
rationing and long waits? Then you should move to Canada. But wait,
you can't get into Canada. US insured care is far superior to Canada's
HC in many ways.

Pretty obvious Obamacare was a knee jerk CF.

--
Government isn't the solution to the bad economy, it is the problem.

the success of the bush tax cuts
 

On 13/06/2011 3:30 PM, wf3h wrote:
On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 17:04:16 -0600,
wrote:

On 11/06/2011 6:24 PM, wf3h wrote:
On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 12:15:04 -0400, I_am_Tosk
wrote:


uh...which house passes the budget??

oh. the representatives

controlled by the GOP

how they doing? what cuts have they made?

oh. none.

Jury is on on this, are they going to expand the debt past $14.5 trillion?

there is no choice. it's already been spent. it's just admitting it
has to be paid for


If I were the GOP, I would let 75% of the government shut down for 3
months. And only expand it a bit forcing the issue, debt spend less now
or be off work every 3 months.

they did that once before. they almost disappeared in the next
election.

So? Sometimes you have to do the RIGHT thing and not the GRREDY
fleabagger thing.

But honor, integrity and rationality are not fleabagger long suits.
Watched Rep presidential candidates. Good selection....

But one thing they all got wrong, I strongly believe a woman owns her
own womb. Pro lifers, bunch of fanatics. Sad these zealots can't let
that go. But a small question.

--
Government isn't the solution to the bad economy, it is the problem.

the success of the bush tax cuts
 

On 13/06/2011 3:41 PM, wf3h wrote:
On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 17:22:54 -0600,
wrote:

On 11/06/2011 6:31 PM, wf3h wrote:
On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 11:40:36 -0600,
wrote:

meaningless.

and, of course, your method was tried

it was called the depression of 29

ever hear of it??

Actually, you dumbsh1t fleabaggers

says the right winger with a reader's digest view of economics


should read. In 1929 they tried to
spend out of it. In 1933 they realized after the 1932 crash that
fleabagger debt spend does not work. Took 6 years of restraint to cover
the debts and recovery was slow.

really?

uh...why did the depression end in 39?

did something happen in 39? uh yeah...the US started to spend for ww2

canuck's moronic view of economics is exceeded only by his ignorance
of history

I know more than you, your just a piece of trailer trash pretending to
know much more than you actually do. We can see your ignorance.
--
Government isn't the solution to the bad economy, it is the problem.

the success of the bush tax cuts
 

On 13/06/2011 3:43 PM, wf3h wrote:
On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 17:25:20 -0600,
wrote:

On 12/06/2011 10:37 AM, wf3h wrote:
On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 01:15:39 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 20:33:22 -0400, wrote:

HAHAHAHAH american taxes are teh lowest they've been in FOURTY YEARS!!


Yet you support a half trillion dollar Obama tax cut.

Is it just because he isn't white?

yep. because the middle class hasnt had a pay increase in 30 years

while the richest 1% have had their wages go up by 500%

want to know why we're in a depression?

read those numbers

When government gets bigger, people get smaller.

hey moron

then why have the richest 1% gotten so much bigger?

DUH!!

Because they are not SHEEP, like you. Get two self made people
together, the conversation isn't trailer trash idiots shooting off and
worship of Obama or any other political idiot. It gets down to hard
core numbers and analysis. Cold reality and not fleabagger emotional
basket case chirp.
--
Government isn't the solution to the bad economy, it is the problem.

the success of the bush tax cuts
 

On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 23:34:20 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 13/06/2011 3:29 PM, wf3h wrote:
On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 20:06:27 -0600,
wrote:

On 11/06/2011 7:40 PM, I_am_Tosk wrote:
In ,
says...

'years ago'

means when the right controlled the bull****. now that it's shown the
right is bankrupt you guys complain about the prize

go figure

You are delusional...

Good part about cutting government welfare, is wf3h will be gone when
the electricity is disconnected for non-payment.

let's see...canuck hates socialized medicine in the US. says w'ere
headed for disaster

where does he live?t

canada. what does canada have?

oh. socialized medicine....

shall we compare costs to see how SOCIALIZED medicine compares to FREE
MARKET medicine?? guess which is cheaper?

SOCIALIZED MEDICINE!!

http://dailydish.typepad.com/.a/6a00...a62f970c-popup

Just know how screwed up it left Canada and Obamacare is just a huge tax
grab. Dumbsh1t Obama doesn't seem to get it.

And dumbsh1ts like you don't either. Want to double your taxes and add
rationing and long waits? Then you should move to Canada. But wait,
you can't get into Canada. US insured care is far superior to Canada's
HC in many ways.

Pretty obvious Obamacare was a knee jerk CF.

Well, heck... you know about knee jerk Cluster F*cks! You're an
expert. You are a NJCF.

the success of the bush tax cuts
 

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 01:05:46 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 20:04:44 -0400, wf3h wrote:

On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 19:33:44 -0400, wrote:


That would encourage more long term investment.
I think I would but an extra tax on any financial instrument that was
kept less than a month to make flash trading less attractive.

let's get one thing straight

we dont need more INVESTMENT

we need more CONSUMPTION.

although investment is a form of consumption, ONLY MIDDLE CLASS
CONSUMPTION can pull us out of the depression

and wall street is NOT gonna let that happen

You can't get consumption without jobs and the only way we get that is
by expansion. It is clear the stimulus money just went into rich
people's pockets and not much actually got invested in expanded
industry. (thanks for a "no stimulus" stimulus bill)

There are plenty of stim projects underway, even if you don't believe
it or think they're working. They are working. We need more of them.

the success of the bush tax cuts
 

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 01:02:05 -0400, wrote:


spend out of it. In 1933 they realized after the 1932 crash that
fleabagger debt spend does not work. Took 6 years of restraint to cover
the debts and recovery was slow.

really?

uh...why did the depression end in 39?

did something happen in 39? uh yeah...the US started to spend for ww2

canuck's moronic view of economics is exceeded only by his ignorance
of history

It was something called lend lease that got the factories moving again.

That was when the rest of the world was borrowing from us.

Bob, do you see the difference?


Greg, do you see that the US gov't was injecting money into the
economy? Do you see why it doesn't make much difference how it does it
and that via a war isn't exactly the best way to do that... unless you
don't mind killing a lot of people in the name of profit of course.

Never mind. You're hiding. I forgot.