On 13/06/2011 10:52 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 17:43:03 -0400, wrote:

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

Because government tax policies and import policies made it a lot more
profitable to make things offshore and import them.
That started in the 90s (GHW Bush/Clinton)
Then you had the Clinton era deregulation that made the idea of money
making money more attractive than actually making anything.
Most of that Clinton era business boom was just an illusion (fraud,
phony profits and irrational exuberance in the stock market) and the
GW Bush boom was all based on borrowing money that didn't exist.

The people who got rich were the ones who knew when to cash in before
both bubbles popped.

And the only politician to call it right on, Ron Paul.
--
Government isn't the solution to the bad economy, it is the problem.

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 15:25:48 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 13/06/2011 10:52 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 17:43:03 -0400, wrote:

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

Because government tax policies and import policies made it a lot more
profitable to make things offshore and import them.
That started in the 90s (GHW Bush/Clinton)
Then you had the Clinton era deregulation that made the idea of money
making money more attractive than actually making anything.
Most of that Clinton era business boom was just an illusion (fraud,
phony profits and irrational exuberance in the stock market) and the
GW Bush boom was all based on borrowing money that didn't exist.

The people who got rich were the ones who knew when to cash in before
both bubbles popped.

And the only politician to call it right on, Ron Paul.

you should have been a standup comedian.

the kluxer has no more understanding of economics than he does of his
love affair with the KKK

"wf3h" wrote in message ...

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 15:25:48 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 13/06/2011 10:52 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 17:43:03 -0400, wrote:

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

Because government tax policies and import policies made it a lot more
profitable to make things offshore and import them.
That started in the 90s (GHW Bush/Clinton)
Then you had the Clinton era deregulation that made the idea of money
making money more attractive than actually making anything.
Most of that Clinton era business boom was just an illusion (fraud,
phony profits and irrational exuberance in the stock market) and the
GW Bush boom was all based on borrowing money that didn't exist.

The people who got rich were the ones who knew when to cash in before
both bubbles popped.

And the only politician to call it right on, Ron Paul.

you should have been a standup comedian.

the kluxer has no more understanding of economics than he does of his
love affair with the KKK


Reply:
Actually Ron Paul was the only one to call several economic disasters
correctly of all the Pols. He seems to have a better understanding of Econ
101 than 95% of the rest of the politicians and most of the public also. He
will not be President, but would make one hell of an advisor. Probably the
best candidate and will also not get the nod, is Newt G. He was the one who
balanced Clinton's budgets. The Contract with America was one of the best
things that happened to WJC. His first 2 years were a spending orgy. Newt
seems to be the only one who is concerned about overspending.

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 21:56:34 -0700, "Califbill"
wrote:

"wf3h" wrote in message ...

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 15:25:48 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:
The people who got rich were the ones who knew when to cash in before
both bubbles popped.

And the only politician to call it right on, Ron Paul.

you should have been a standup comedian.

the kluxer has no more understanding of economics than he does of his
love affair with the KKK


Reply:
Actually Ron Paul was the only one to call several economic disasters
correctly of all the Pols.

meaningless. and he IS a kluxer


He seems to have a better understanding of Econ
101 than 95% of the rest of the politicians and most of the public also. He
will not be President, but would make one hell of an advisor. Probably the
best candidate and will also not get the nod, is Newt G. He was the one who
balanced Clinton's budgets. The Contract with America was one of the best
things that happened to WJC.

the contract ON america you mean. the continued war of the right
against the ameircan middle class

"wf3h" wrote in message ...

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 21:56:34 -0700, "Califbill"
wrote:

"wf3h" wrote in message ...

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 15:25:48 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:
The people who got rich were the ones who knew when to cash in before
both bubbles popped.

And the only politician to call it right on, Ron Paul.

you should have been a standup comedian.

the kluxer has no more understanding of economics than he does of his
love affair with the KKK


Reply:
Actually Ron Paul was the only one to call several economic disasters
correctly of all the Pols.

meaningless. and he IS a kluxer


He seems to have a better understanding of Econ
101 than 95% of the rest of the politicians and most of the public also.
He
will not be President, but would make one hell of an advisor. Probably the
best candidate and will also not get the nod, is Newt G. He was the one
who
balanced Clinton's budgets. The Contract with America was one of the best
things that happened to WJC.

the contract ON america you mean. the continued war of the right
against the ameircan middle class


Reply:
No the war on the middle class is the insane overspending by almost all the
Congress's for 50 years. And the inflation that it has caused. 1968, a
middle class family had an income of about $14k. Could buy a house and car
and decent vacation. 43 years later, that is 1/2 of poverty level. The
Contract with America was to allow those middle class to have the value of
the money they earned. Not having to keep sending more to Washington, D,C.
to pay for bloated government. One of the only places in the USA that has
not seen a housing bust is the DC area. Lots of money there.

On Wed, 15 Jun 2011 10:45:39 -0700, "Califbill"
wrote:

"wf3h" wrote in message ...

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 21:56:34 -0700, "Califbill"
wrote:

meaningless. and he IS a kluxer


He seems to have a better understanding of Econ
101 than 95% of the rest of the politicians and most of the public also.
He
will not be President, but would make one hell of an advisor. Probably the
best candidate and will also not get the nod, is Newt G. He was the one
who
balanced Clinton's budgets. The Contract with America was one of the best
things that happened to WJC.

the contract ON america you mean. the continued war of the right
against the ameircan middle class


Reply:
No the war on the middle class is the insane overspending by almost all the
Congress's for 50 years. And the inflation that it has caused. 1968, a
middle class family had an income of about $14k. Could buy a house and car
and decent vacation. 43 years later, that is 1/2 of poverty level. The
Contract with America was to allow those middle class to have the value of
the money they earned. Not having to keep sending more to Washington, D,C.
to pay for bloated government. One of the only places in the USA that has
not seen a housing bust is the DC area. Lots of money there.

funny the rich seem to be doing OK. they had a 500% pay increase in
the last 30 years.

so why are they doing fine and the rest of us are headed for poverty?

answer: that's what the right wing wants for the US

wf3h wrote:
On Wed, 15 Jun 2011 10:45:39 -0700, "Califbill"
wrote:


"wf3h" wrote in message ...

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 21:56:34 -0700, "Califbill"
wrote:

meaningless. and he IS a kluxer


He seems to have a better understanding of Econ

101 than 95% of the rest of the politicians and most of the public also.
He
will not be President, but would make one hell of an advisor. Probably the
best candidate and will also not get the nod, is Newt G. He was the one
who
balanced Clinton's budgets. The Contract with America was one of the best
things that happened to WJC.

the contract ON america you mean. the continued war of the right
against the ameircan middle class


Reply:
No the war on the middle class is the insane overspending by almost all the
Congress's for 50 years. And the inflation that it has caused. 1968, a
middle class family had an income of about $14k. Could buy a house and car
and decent vacation. 43 years later, that is 1/2 of poverty level. The
Contract with America was to allow those middle class to have the value of
the money they earned. Not having to keep sending more to Washington, D,C.
to pay for bloated government. One of the only places in the USA that has
not seen a housing bust is the DC area. Lots of money there.

funny the rich seem to be doing OK. they had a 500% pay increase in
the last 30 years.

so why are they doing fine and the rest of us are headed for poverty?

answer: that's what the right wing wants for the US

It's actually related to education and work ethic - both that don't
come easy. I'll pay you to wash and wax my $60K cars if that helps.