Where Are the Jobs, Dammit!?

[웃 910]

Bingo. They did teach me there was no difference between the parties. And guess what? Spending lots of money did not pull us out of the depression. In fact it made it worse and deepened it. We are not going to spend our way out of this mess. It is a means only for the ones in charge of our spending to get the maximum amount of money to their fave donors.

Wrong. It tells you a difference between the parties. The Republicans ARE THE SPENDERS

Reagan $1 trillion to $2.9 trillion in 8 years (tripled / +$1.9 trillion)

Bush 1 $2.9 trillion to $4.4 trillion in FOUR YEARS (+1.5 trillion)

Clinton $4.4 trillion to $5.6 trillion in EIGHT YEARS (+1.2 trillion)

Bush 2 $5.6 trillion to $11.5 trillion in EIGHT YEARS (added $6 trillion to the debt!!!!!!!!) <----Bush tax cuts in a relatively booming economy makes no economic sense

Obama so far has us at $14.5 trillion (+3 trillion in 2.5 years) but then again Bush 2 handed him the worst economy in roughly 100 years!

Edited July 12, 2011 by Lord Infamous

[luckytxn 2,263]

Wrong. It tells you a difference between the parties. The Republicans ARE THE SPENDERS

Reagan $1 trillion to $2.9 trillion in 8 years (tripled / +$1.9 trillion)

Bush 1 $2.9 trillion to $4.4 trillion in FOUR YEARS (+1.5 trillion)

Clinton $4.4 trillion to $5.6 trillion in EIGHT YEARS (+1.2 trillion)

Bush 2 $5.6 trillion to $11.5 trillion in EIGHT YEARS (added $6 trillion to the debt!!!!!!!!)

Obama so far has us at $14.5 trillion (+3 trillion in 2.5 years) but then again Bush 2 handed him the worst economy in roughly 100 years!

Good stuff you are smoking. Don't bogart.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Bingo. They did teach me there was no difference between the parties.

Well, that's a bit melodramatic. Obviously there are differences between the parties, but even Reagan embraced some form of Keynesian Economics and the GOP up until the Ayn Randian fanboys took over the party and embraced ideological fascism over pragmatism, giving way to the Tea Party freaks and their inability to compromise. It's Washington gridlock that will be the undoing of this country.

Spending lots of money did not pull us out of the depression. In fact it made it worse and deepened it. We are not going to spend our way out of this mess.

More fairy tales. We got out of the Great Depression from spending money on infrastructure. The problems with what is going on right now are multifaceted. For one, the tax rates are the lowest they've been in 75 years. Second, we've got two wars that have been going on longer than WWII. And third, we've got extremists in Washington who don't understand the concept of compromise. We're fvcked if something doesn't change soon.

[luckytxn 2,263]

Well, that's a bit melodramatic. Obviously there are differences between the parties, but even Reagan embraced some form of Keynesian Economics and the GOP up until the Ayn Randian fanboys took over the party and embraced ideological fascism over pragmatism, giving way to the Tea Party freaks and their inability to compromise. It's Washington gridlock that will be the undoing of this country.

More fairy tales. We got out of the Great Depression from spending money on infrastructure. The problems with what is going on right now are multifaceted. For one, the tax rates are the lowest they've been in 75 years. Second, we've got two wars that have been going on longer than WWII. And third, we've got extremists in Washington who don't understand the concept of compromise. We're fvcked if something doesn't change soon.

No we got out of that depression because of world war II. Toward the end even the top economic wonk said that he wished they hadn't spent all that money. I do agree though that spending a certain amount on infrastructure is a good idea for the whole.

Oh and it was the not the Rand faction at all that took over the party. It was the so called compassionate conservatives that displaced the fiscal conservatives. The compassionate conservatives came from the Reagan democrats that entered the party.

Edited July 12, 2011 by luckytxn

[one...two...tree 2,762]

No we got out of that depression because of world war II. Toward the end even the top economic wonk said that he wished they hadn't spent all that money. I do agree though that spending a certain amount on infrastructure is a good idea for the whole.

The only way you can explain how WWII got us out the depression is the fact that we were spending loads of money building a war machine that required millions of jobs. That's essence of Keynesian Economics. So apparently you are a closest Keynesian pretending to be Libertarian, or a pragmatist.

Oh and it was the not the Rand faction at all that took over the party. It was the so called compassionate conservatives that displaced the fiscal conservatives. The compassionate conservatives came from the Reagan democrats that entered the party.

Sure it was. Ayn Rand's philosophy is a pseudo-religious cult that has taken a stranglehold on the Republican Party. Before, the Randians kept to themselves - insisting they were Libertarians - far different than Reagan Republicans. Milton Friedman, however, was the apostle of Rand, patiently and relentless preaching Randian philosophy to up and coming Conservative politicians until finally we see the fruits of his labor in economic wackos like Eric Cantor and Paul Ryan. I'll bet those two have copies of Atlas Shrugged in vacuumed sealed vault, for when society crumbles, we can start over with Randian philosophy instead of the wisdom of our Founding Fathers.

Edited July 12, 2011 by 8TBVBN

[Zero Sum 305]

Bingo. They did teach me there was no difference between the parties. And guess what? Spending lots of money did not pull us out of the depression. In fact it made it worse and deepened it. We are not going to spend our way out of this mess. It is a means only for the ones in charge of our spending to get the maximum amount of money to their fave donors.

We were/are in a depression?

Again, who has benefited the most from the massive spending stimuli given out by the US Government? I'll help you out: it wasn't a foreign government- it was those very same 'job creators' being defended against minimal tax 'increases' right now by the same paranoid legislators that echo your Socialist rhetoric.

[slim 1,514]

There's an old Soviet joke -

Vladimir Lenin, Joseph Stalin, Nikita Khrushchev and Leonid Brezhnev are all travelling together in a railway carriage. Unexpectedly the train stops. Lenin suggests: "Perhaps, we should call a subbotnik, so that workers and peasants fix the problem." Stalin puts his head out of the window and shouts, "If the train does not start moving, the driver will be shot!" But the train doesn't start moving. Khrushchev then shouts, "Let's take the rails behind the train and use them to construct the tracks in the front". But it still doesn't move. Brezhnev then says, "Comrades, Comrades, let's draw the curtains, turn on the gramophone and pretend we're moving!"

If that doesn't sum up what's happening in the U.S., I don't know what does. How'd it work out for the Soviets?

[웃 910]

There's an old Soviet joke -

Vladimir Lenin, Joseph Stalin, Nikita Khrushchev and Leonid Brezhnev are all travelling together in a railway carriage. Unexpectedly the train stops. Lenin suggests: "Perhaps, we should call a subbotnik, so that workers and peasants fix the problem." Stalin puts his head out of the window and shouts, "If the train does not start moving, the driver will be shot!" But the train doesn't start moving. Khrushchev then shouts, "Let's take the rails behind the train and use them to construct the tracks in the front". But it still doesn't move. Brezhnev then says, "Comrades, Comrades, let's draw the curtains, turn on the gramophone and pretend we're moving!"

If that doesn't sum up what's happening in the U.S., I don't know what does. How'd it work out for the Soviets?

And your solution is what? Give everyone a gun so that 'crime goes down' and drop taxes to 5%?

[slim 1,514]

And your solution is what? Give everyone a gun so that 'crime goes down' and drop taxes to 5%?

It's not the government's job to give everyone a gun anymore than it's their job to give everyone healthcare.

My solution would be to cut every single government agency or program not outlined in the constitution and require average citizens to be responsible for themselves and their communities. If you give the constitution a quick thumb-through, you'll see that's what we were supposed to be doing in the first place.

[Zero Sum 305]

It's not the government's job to give everyone a gun anymore than it's their job to give everyone healthcare.

My solution would be to cut every single government agency or program not outlined in the constitution and require average citizens to be responsible for themselves and their communities. If you give the constitution a quick thumb-through, you'll see that's what we were supposed to be doing in the first place.

I would seriously consider voting for you in order to implement these ideas.

[slim 1,514]

I would seriously consider voting for you in order to implement these ideas.

Then check out Ron or Rand Paul. They seem to get it. One of them will be running for president in 3....2....1.....

[Zero Sum 305]

Not the first time sarcasm is lost on you.

[slim 1,514]

Not the first time sarcasm is lost on you.

Not the first time you've lost touch with reality.

[Ban Hammer 12,835]

i keep reading this topic title as "Where Are the Jobs, Darnell!?"

[mawilson 2,133]

Well, we've kind of just done that.

Not really - we traded future prosperity for some short term gains.