Most of the stimulus money went to rich Democrat elites.

Kinda reminds one of Russia back in the cold war times giving Communist Party elites a life of luxury while the rest lived in poverty.

 

Just a thought, have they looked into the population differences between republican and democratic districts? I've learned to be very skeptical of averages because they often are not weighted.

Another thought, isn't giving more to richer areas or companies the "trickle down theory" in effect? I thought that republicans were firm believers in that theory. If Obama is doing something that is deemed conservative, shouldn't the republicans be happy?

Anyway, just trying to challenge the information. I can't help but feel skepticism towards polls and all that average crap. These numbers can mean different things depending on how much you leave in or out of the equation.

 

Not exactly Reagan just said what was logical. "Look you have the top 10% paying 70% of the taxes and the middle class paying the other 30%. Lets lower taxation on the upper and middle classes and thereby stimulate the economy.

This experiment was tried twice and yes the Socialist joked about it on late night television. If there had been a fugly forum then I have little doubt you and Cheesedog would be calling it "crazy ass voodoo economics" a "lame-brain" scheme that will only make the rich richer.

Fact is both times it worked. Both times it stimulated the economy and increased tax revenue as a whole. And the little man at the bottom got to reap the rewards also.

Reagan did not give one read cent to the rich. He simply took less of their money.

Keeping money in the private sector is ALLWAYS much better than taking money from the people and hiring the government to do the job.

The average stimulus created job = ~30k You know how much it cost the government to create the job? ~127k

And they will raise taxes on small businesses from now on to pay for those jobs over the next few decades. Those extra tax dollars paid will be less dollars available to hire more workers in 2010, 2020, 2030 .....

This is not rocket science to understand.

 

sounds like their voting majority is really starting to pay off... reminds me of the ol' Texas Supercollider days.

any checks and balances in government have been completely trashed by our two party political system. unfortunately, the alternative requires thought, thought requires effort, and most people are lazy authoritarians that prefer to be led.

"most of the money went to rich democrat elites!" funny! your stuff is interesting enough without the trollwork.

 

It's called "Trickle Down" Economics. And its been proven that it doesn't work.

Frankly, if I made 10 million a year.... I wouldn't cry about paying 5 million in taxes. I'd be so happy that in 1 years time I could retire if I wanted to. I really wouldn't need any more money after netting 5 million.

 

With that mentality it only makes sense to raise taxes even more. That is until the plan backfires. The evecutives just increase their pay to compensate the difference, increase their product cost (inflation), or lower middle class wages.

Reaganonics does work this has already been proven the only way to argue against this is to re-define success. Tax revenues increase when taxes are lowered, the quality of living is increased for all people.

 

I made the mistake of voting independent and helped get Clinton elected by doing so. You guys need to pick your side. Either you believe in socialism or capitalism, disregarding the rights of citizens and using the constitution for a doormat, or defending the constitution and rights of the citizens.

 

Neither side does that though, Joe. That is why I'm a libertarian. I only believe in Freedom. Not capitalism. Not Socialism. Just Freedom.

Wars are not fought for freedom anymore. They are fought for political strength and religious differences.

Drugs are not illegal because they kill people. Drugs are illegal because the government doesn't want to lose money.

We walk around talking about the US is free! We can do anything and be anything we want! I guess thats true if your idea of freedom is being allowed to walk around inside your prison cell.

People on both sides want to take Freedom from you and trick you into believing you are free AND you are on the side of right. As we've seen in the last decade... the US is no longer the good guy in the world. We only tell ourselves this to make ourselves feel better at night.

 

I consider myself Libertarian I just vote Republican rather than ensure that the worst case scenario.

Like I said I voted Perot in 92 doing my part to help elect Bill Clinton thats a mistake I'll never forgive myself for.

Turn the Republican party back to its conservative roots and Libertarians would be happy to vote Repub for the most part.

 

relax - it's not a democracy and your vote doesn't do anything.

 

What would be an instance in which you would vote dem?

 

If I had a moron Republican candidate running against Lieberman I might be compelled to consider Lieberman. Like one of the RINOs.

 

How do you feel about the tea parties? Do they constitute a viable alternative or do they have their own flaws as well? Just trying to get a feel of where you stand on these things.

 

This country started with some fed-up people tired of being taxed to death by the British. What they did was a very honorable thing as is the same now.

I also know the radical left wing media is out to infiltrate the group and looking hard for ammunition against them.

Be VERY leery of unidentified voices recorded in sound clips in edited videos and such when basing an opinion. the media here is certainly not to be trusted.

We had huge gatherings at the state capital in Tennessee to protest a state income tax. Thousands of people against a state tax for weeks at a time. The media tried to make the crowd out to be a bunch of loons. They even used trick camera angles and timing to try to make as if there was an impressive pro-income-tax movement. Then they finally after a week right out falsified reports of vandalism on the capital to justify using state troopers to breakup a peaceful protest.

The sort of tactics Vladamire Pootin would have used with his state run media in Communist Russia.

 

Should show you the issue has NOTHING to do with economic policy, e.g. communism vs capitalism. It's about enforcing authority.

Our Republicans are the Authoritarians here in the states.
The hard right SHOOTS at crowds, and they do it to enforce authority, not to protect capitalism. Kent State vs Tiananmen Square: different economic policy, same repressive police state results.

It cracks me how the right sells themselves as "small government..." but like Mencken said:

 

Not Republicans, liberals are the ones who police the populace. Same case in this instance. The states Congress was Dr.Socrates and them who called in the troops. The liberals like to try to associate (falsely ) Republicans guts their typical M.O.

I dare you to make you arguments in terms of liberal vs Co servative ideology. Capitalist vs Socialist or Communist.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091231/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_airliner_attack_tsa_subpoenas​

 

No TRIPLE DOG DARE?

The President is Commander in Chief of the military, not congress. Blame him for lack of protection against Undie Bombers, ok, but let him off the hook for shooting unarmed American civilians?

Don't take this the wrong way but ah um er you do sound just slightly um biased.

"Capitalist?" Like, Adam Smith/invisible hand/free market economy? Or "capitalist" like "everything Obama has done or will ever do is and always will be wrong?"

 

I'm about to head out the door. Here is the corrected version.

As for this:

Yeah sure what ever version you like just sort by idology.

Don't be sucked in by the media into finding a RINO in the liberal policy stench pile and blaming the bad policy on Repubilcans when there are 99 Liberal Democrats with their hand in the pot. Every stupid and shitty policy I have noticed for the last 20 years are liberal / Socialist policies. Many of which the media tie to Republicans. I admit there are some RINO's mixed into the wood pile. Double, triple, quadruple whatever multiple you like. It's a challenge you are getting suckered in.

TARP = Socialist / Liberal policy Almost a straight line party vote Democrats for and Republicans against. I think you will find what? Four Republicans including the President around 2% that voted for it. That does not make it a Conservative or Republican policy.

Public Healthcare for all = Liberal / Socialist Policy you can find a person who calls themselves a Republican if you like that is or was a proponent of it but you need to at least not be so stupid as to believe the stench you smell is Republican stench. The stench you will smell from this is rotting corpses and Liberal policy.

 

Um, wow. Bush II and and his appointee Paulson are Socialist/Liberals because they came up with TARP... ok I think I understand now ... if you *don't* like it, then it's a socialist /liberal policy regardless of which political party pushed it through...

Now THAT I agree with, not sure it's news though. They've been hammering on it longer than I've been alive I think, despite it getting shot down over and over again.

WTF you need me to get your rant on?
Besides, ya can't sucker an honest man.