On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 16:16:47 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 14/06/2011 3:03 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 14:26:07 -0600,
wrote:

On 14/06/2011 11:14 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 08:21:23 -0400, wrote:

In ,
says...

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

In ,
says...

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

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.

It was just like any other business deal. The corporations were told
that if they made and sold the items now they would get some money down
the road. This loaded up the companies billables and they could use that
to borrow against.

Which is exactly what happens when the gov't pumps money into the
economy for things like the STIM. Jobs are created and people pay
taxes. Same with the GM/Chrysler bailouts. All those people are still
employed and paying taxes.

The best bang for your buck (other than a war) are things like food
stamps. That money returns to the economy immediately, and is a net
positive, esp. in the short term.

Look up the fine print of lend lease. First, it was less than a
trillion dollars to end a decade long depression. Very, very cheap and
efficient compared to Obamanomics. And no government debt for it.

It was also precipitated by the ned for war munitions and goods for the
world. No such needs to that level are needed today. But could be why
Obama is war hungry. A bad mad debtor.

Third element, it didn't have a debt battered business base. Debt of
government, business and people were relatively low compared to today.
Some economists say the end of the depression may have occured anyways
and in fact had already started before WW II.

The US gov't was going broke during WWII. That's what the bond push
was all about.

For God's sake, look things up before you quack.

But that was for US weapons not forign weapons....look it up dough brain.

Bozo... we're talking about gov't spending. Gov't spent. The economy
recovered. I know it's a difficult concept for someone of your low
intellect...

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 20:17:38 -0400, BAR wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 08:21:23 -0400, BAR wrote:

In article ,
says...

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.

It was just like any other business deal. The corporations were told
that if they made and sold the items now they would get some money down
the road. This loaded up the companies billables and they could use that
to borrow against.

Which is exactly what happens when the gov't pumps money into the
economy for things like the STIM. Jobs are created and people pay
taxes. Same with the GM/Chrysler bailouts. All those people are still
employed and paying taxes.

The best bang for your buck (other than a war) are things like food
stamps. That money returns to the economy immediately, and is a net
positive, esp. in the short term.

How much of the "STIM" money has been spent and what was it spent on?


Look it up. Two people posted the link.

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 16:18:42 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 14/06/2011 2:41 PM, Boating All Out wrote:
In ,
says...

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 11:50:19 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 07:14:57 -0400, wrote:

On 6/14/2011 2:33 AM, wrote:
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.

Greg isn't hiding.I see all of his posts. Check your filters.

I am just not engaging Plume. I got tired of every debate ending up in
an insult when she ran out of things to say

You got tired of have no facts. You started the insults, but you're
not going to admit it. Did I call you a moron or an asshole? Did I
claim you have a small ding dong? No. What was this terrible insult?
Oh, I think it was "you're delusional if you think...."

How terrible. You must have a very thin skin. I apologize.

That's very nice, if sincere.
If Greg bites there might be 2 intelligent people talking at once here.
When cannuck is one side that's impossible.

Why? Because I don't tolerate fleabagger whining, excuses, belly
aching, smear, fear and feed their need for denial of reality?

Tolerate? You can't help yourself. You reply with whining to every
post you don't agree with... same nonsense over and over.

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 14:56:39 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 14/06/2011 11:16 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 11:50:19 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 07:14:57 -0400, wrote:

On 6/14/2011 2:33 AM, wrote:
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.

Greg isn't hiding.I see all of his posts. Check your filters.

I am just not engaging Plume. I got tired of every debate ending up in
an insult when she ran out of things to say

You got tired of have no facts. You started the insults, but you're
not going to admit it. Did I call you a moron or an asshole? Did I
claim you have a small ding dong? No. What was this terrible insult?
Oh, I think it was "you're delusional if you think...."

How terrible. You must have a very thin skin. I apologize.

If you did two things people would respect you more.

1) No whine and fleabagger chirp towards others.
2) If you don't know anything, shut up an listen.

So how is our welfare mama doing today? Give us a laugh at least.

You should take your own advice. Then, people would think you were
just mildly retarded.

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 15:05:05 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 14/06/2011 11:17 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 08:22:44 -0400, wrote:

In ,
says...

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.

It is funny that when some try to tell us that the only way to make
money is to spend money. Yet it just never seems to work with
governments. They more the spend the more debt they create for everyone.

It's funny that you don't know anything about how an economy works.

Knows more than you. You don't have much money.

Whatever knuckle brain... you're the one who's bragging all the time.
That usually indicates insecurity. Keep doing it.

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 20:19:49 -0400, BAR wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 08:22:44 -0400, BAR wrote:

In article ,
says...

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.

It is funny that when some try to tell us that the only way to make
money is to spend money. Yet it just never seems to work with
governments. They more the spend the more debt they create for everyone.

It's funny that you don't know anything about how an economy works.

Governments do not generate wealth. The only thing governments are good
at with respect to money is waste, fraud and corruption.

Wealth isn't the issue. It's the middle class who are getting screwed
and they're not interested in wealth. They're interested in short term
survival.

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 15:10:04 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 14/06/2011 11:17 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 08:24:05 -0400, wrote:

In ,
says...

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?


yep. typical LIBERAL KEYNESIAN economcis

-borrow and spend in bad times
-pay back in good

thanks. i already knew that

That is national suicide and we are seeing it occur right in front of
our eyes.

We have borrowed and spent our self to near insolvency.


This is a long term problem, not a short term problem. Get real.

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting
different results.
-- Albert Einstein

So what drives DC, fleabagger and Obama insanity?

Then, why do you keep digging? The hole is just getting bigger.

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 20:21:09 -0400, BAR wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 08:24:05 -0400, BAR wrote:

In article ,
says...

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?


yep. typical LIBERAL KEYNESIAN economcis

-borrow and spend in bad times
-pay back in good

thanks. i already knew that

That is national suicide and we are seeing it occur right in front of
our eyes.

We have borrowed and spent our self to near insolvency.


This is a long term problem, not a short term problem. Get real.

The spending has been going on for about 100 years. It needs to stop.


Tomorrow... and screw the middle class who are going to get hurt. No
need to actually fix the problems, just screw over people. Typical
right-wing greedy asshole.

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 15:32:07 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 14/06/2011 12:36 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 00:52:13 -0400, 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.

So, Greenspan was an oracle? Not really...

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/24/bu...y/24panel.html

Greenspan had it partially right but the cause was government and US Fed
ponzi policies.

Lending money at below market rates caused it. There hasn't been
supply/demand in lending/borrowing for some time. The idea that
government sets the rates IS the problem and the market was not allowed
this correction.

If it was the market driving, too much borrowing would be offset by a
shortage of cash to lend and rates would go up. But the US Fed/Congress
flooded the market with cheap undervalued money. Causing the market for
debt to economy to inflate, and then someone wanted to be paid.

Still is a problem too. Government needs to borrow real money and stop
the devaluing money print NOW before a major currency run starts.

Thus, Greenspan screwed up. Try reading for comprehension next time.

In article ,
says...

On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 12:01:26 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 13/06/2011 5:58 PM, wf3h wrote:
On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 18:04:16 -0400, I_am_Tosk
wrote:

In ,
says...

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.

Funny, you get the facts wrong and blame the wrong group.

2006 congress had senate and congress democrats, they sat in January
2007, just when unemployment started rising. Later that year
congressional money for nothing scared a liquidity crisis. Democrats
ignored it and it lead to Sept 2008.

let's see how his facts stand up

CSE's ruined the economy. they allowed banks to run themselves

they were closed down after it became apparent banks could not
regulate themselves...in 2006 after a 10 year run

even canuck admits the dems had only taken office when the economy
collapsed

this is AFTER the GOP ran it for 6 years. and ran it into the ground
AFTER deregulating the banks

the right pushed deregulation

the right pushed MASSIVE tax cuts that bankrupted the country

the right started thw war in iraq that cost a trillion

and yet he blames the dems who had no role in this whatsoever

that's what the right does. lies.


But Obama 2008, was too stupid to realize Reagan was right, government
isn't the solution, government is the problem.

HAHAHAHAHA let's see...we deregulated the banks

how'd that work out??

Greg has filled your stories full of holes on this one several times..
Give it up...

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