Times are Hard

That's only because your grammar is so craptastic that it takes awhile to decipher what it is you're trying to say.

Perhaps you should spend a little more time doing your homework Jonny. Originally Posted by Doove

yup, dragging you along through the whole thing 3 posts ahead of you!!LMFAO!!

You are so misguided it is not even funny. It encourages states to require some sort of employment search in exchange for providing funds to individuals, and imposes a five-year lifetime limit on cash assistance] Originally Posted by WTF

ENCOURAGES!!LOL!! theres the KEY word.We're "encouraging"!!LOL!!.... no expectations to be met there..section 8 qualified tenants HAP payments rise and fall according to a persons income.So on the years where the full ride is paid, they work more hours untill recert comes up and their past years income has them only recieving half. Then they all of a sudden become unemployed for a year, sit on the couch, so they can qualify for the full ride again the next year.It never ends and there is no expectation for them to re enter the workforce.THEY have an EXPECTATION that THEY are not responsible to pay RENT, that is something that is ENTITLED to them.5 years!!LOL!! how bout 25!!LOL! there is no "SHUT OFF" point in NYS, just manipulation... I love how libs "word" things.......ENCOURAGING!!LOL! ! Yah!! that works!! OMG!!LOL!!!

I liked her post.

So, what are you saying exactly, marshall??

I've posted the facts that tax cuts have always raised tax revenue......you need to go back and review when tax cuts were implemented and look at the tax revenue figures......you will find that information in my old posts......

............ Originally Posted by Marshall

You lying stupid fuc, if tax cuts always raised revenue then we should cut it to 1% to prove your correct.

Nobody in their right mind believes that, except you and you are not normal. You are in your right mind but your right mind is that of a welfare queen. You want something for nothing. You want the impossible, roads , military and no taxes. You are what you hate...a welfare queen.

How many times did Reagan RAISE taxes. Google it. Here I did it for you.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_1...29-503544.html

Also read just WTF the Laffer Curve is.

100% taxes = no tax revenue

0% taxes= no tax revenue

there is a point that is efficient, you are just to fucn stupid to understand that easy concept.











Meanwhile, following that initial tax cut, Reagan actually ended up raising taxes - eleven times. That's according to former Republican Sen. Alan Simpson, a longtime Reagan friend who co-chaired President Obama's fiscal commission that last year offered a deficit reduction proposal.
"Ronald Reagan was never afraid to raise taxes," historian Douglas Brinkley, who edited Reagan's diaries, told NPR. "He knew that it was necessary at times. And so there's a false mythology out there about Reagan as this conservative president who came in and just cut taxes and trimmed federal spending in a dramatic way. It didn't happen that way. It's false."

It's important to note that Reagan's tax increases did not wipe out the effects of that initial tax cut. But they did eat up about half of it. And as Peter Beinart points out, the 1983 payroll tax hike went to pay for Social Security and Medicare. ("Reagan raised taxes to pay for government-run health care," Beinart writes.) Reagan also raised the gas tax and signed the largest corporate tax increase in history, an act Joshua Green writes would be "utterly unimaginable for any conservative to support today."

. . . . Fuck you!!!! Without you, these people might have had to get a clue and find out how to hustle for themselves and ended up doing better than you have done. . . . Originally Posted by amusemeant

Thank You for illustrating EXACTLY what I did FOR MYSELF after working for the EVIL RICH MF'rs of the world for over twenty years!! * Looking back... it really wasn't any more difficult than continuing to allow the EVIL RICH MF'r to assrape me for so long! * I quit bitching about it a long time ago!!

. . . . Of course, I still want your money too bring it on over, but I'll name my own terms and you'll never write me any memos reprimanding me for any behavior I exhibit . . . Originally Posted by amusemeant

Thank You again, for admitting to your plan for success!

INFUCKINGCREDIBLE !!

You post explains perfectly why your current profession is more appropriate for you than economist.....do you know what a book is? Originally Posted by Marshall

You are outta line asshole. Even for here.

Act like a man and quit picking on women and their chosen profession.

If thats is all you have , get the fuc outta here. I may not agree with half the posters POV here in this forum but at least they have the common decency to show the women some respect. Try it and see if you can't act like a man in the future. You are in your early thirties is my guess, try and act like it.

Thank You again, for admitting to your plan for suckcess!

INFUCKINGCREDIBLE !! Originally Posted by MrGiz

I expect this from Marshall.

You lying stupid fuc, if tax cuts always raised revenue then we should cut it to 1% to prove your correct.

Nobody in their right mind believes that, except you and you are not normal. You are in your right mind but your right mind is that of a welfare queen. You want something for nothing. You want the impossible, roads , military and no taxes. You are what you hate...a welfare queen.
...
Also read just WTF the Laffer Curve is.

100% taxes = no tax revenue

0% taxes= no tax revenue

there is a point that is efficient, you are just to fucn stupid to understand that easy concept. Originally Posted by WTF

Best case in point is the effect of the Bush tax cuts (arguably the source of our current economic difficulties). For the year 2000, the last year before Bush took office, Federal revenues were $2,310,000,000,000. In 2008 (the last year of the Bush Presidency), they were $2,288,500,000,000. This doesn't really tell the whole story, though, because it doesn't take rising population into account.

On a per-capita basis, Federal revenues were $8180 per person in 2000 and fell to $7508 in 2008. As a percent of GDP, they fell from 20.6% in 2000 to 17.5% in 2008. We know that Republicans just don't want to pay taxes. We know that they'll say or do anything to achieve that end. The numbers, however, tell the story of how Bush inherited a budget surplus and promptly frittered it away into a massive deficit, through unwise tax cuts which reduced--not increased--revenue.

Also read just WTF the Laffer Curve is. Originally Posted by WTF

Marshall is living proof of what he claims the laffer curve says; the more idiotic he acts, the less annoying he truly becomes.

well, Spain aint the only place shes been..http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZO8Q...eature=related...HOW MUCH DID ALL THIS COST!!!??HHHHHHUUUUHHHHHH!!!!? ??

well, Spain aint the only place shes been..http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZO8Q...eature=related...HOW MUCH DID ALL THIS COST!!!??HHHHHHUUUUHHHHHH!!!!? ?? Originally Posted by JONBALLS

20 billion gazzillion dollars. Or so i hear.

you stupid turd, I'm renaming you 2face because of your love for Ron Paul and Odumbo.......how can anyone support those 2 who are on opposite extremes of the political spectrum.....you must be attracted to them because you're attracted to the cult of their personalities....that makes you a groupie! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! How can anyone take you seriously? You say such stupid things but don't realize how stupid they are.....HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!

I read and study substantially more than you.....your opinions are based on your feelings, not facts......when people provide you with facts, you ignore the facts if you disagree with them......

I've posted the facts that tax cuts have always raised tax revenue......you need to go back and review when tax cuts were implemented and look at the tax revenue figures......you will find that information in my old posts......

you need to stop giving Barry BBBJTCCIMWS............ Originally Posted by Marshall

"If there's one thing that Republican politicians agree on, it's that slashing taxes brings the government more money. "You cut taxes, and the tax revenues increase," President Bush said in a speech last year. Keeping taxes low, Vice President Dick Cheney explained in a recent interview, "does produce more revenue for the Federal Government." Presidential candidate John McCain declared in March that "tax cuts ... as we all know, increase revenues." His rival Rudy Giuliani couldn't agree more. "I know that reducing taxes produces more revenues," he intones in a new TV ad.

If there's one thing that economists agree on, it's that these claims are false. We're not talking just ivory-tower lefties. Virtually every economics Ph.D. who has worked in a prominent role in the Bush Administration acknowledges that the tax cuts enacted during the past six years have not paid for themselves--and were never intended to. Harvard professor Greg Mankiw, chairman of Bush's Council of Economic Advisers from 2003 to 2005, even devotes a section of his best-selling economics textbook to debunking the claim that tax cuts increase revenues."


http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1692027,00.html

. . . I expect this from Marshall. Originally Posted by WTF

Okay... point acknowledged... edit made.
She still represents a pretty lazy position, in my opinion!

That one is from Kurt Vonnegut and yes dear I know what a book is and I do read.

IB - I know enough to look up heritage.org and see that it is a right wing funded 'information' source for many topics but it seems the main one is 'conservative' spending. IB find me a pie or bar chart from a non partisan source if you want to talk about the real deal. I don't accept partisan sources from conservative funded idiot tanks. How does heritage.org define welfare and military? I mean seriously. Wanna call me stupid? You wouldn't get good marks in school using that type of source on any research paper weirdo. I don't need to be an economist to know that.

Entitlements? LMFAO we should be entitled to a Gulf of Mexico that is not full of oil. We should be entitled to an Alaska without strip mining in the National Forest. We should be entitled to preserving our old growth forest that we have left. We should be entitled to a lot of things that the conservatives (who don't conserve anyhing) want to take away from us as human beings.

I really don't care if you pick on me. I know why I do what I do. You don't know me. If you did you might eat your hasty and rude words in one big bite and swallow a bitter pill. I live in an economic environment created by a long run of conservative fiscal policy at work. I don't live on welfare. I hustle and I pay for everything in this world myself with your leftover money. I also help out my family members and their kids on a regular basis, who are struggling living hand to mouth in a rich man's world. Does that mean I'm not educated and I can't read? Obviously not. As you can see I am able to formulate a fairly complicated opinion and I am able to rebutt your comments just fine. You don't need to feel sorry for me. I sure as hell don't feel sorry for you - believe that. Just by being on this site you have acknowledged the importance of women like me in your life, so don't pretend that you don't care to understand something about the general me, if not the specific me.

I agree with you about paying most of our money in taxes. We pay some of the highest percentages of our income (except me of course HAHAHA) in taxes. Compared to any other civilized country, we don't get shit in return. I think we need to clean up a lot of overspending in our nation. I'm sure I don't agree on where that money should be cut - but can we agree that we at least need to add to our education budget? I mean damn you should see the sh*t they feed our kids at school. It's worse than jail food. What you gonna say to that mr. conservative - let them eat cake? LMAO

In one breath you agree with me and in the next you call me lazy. I'm not sure why you think that. I'm a single mom, and I spend hours and hours a day on the computer planning and preparing for the time I spend with my clients both on the computer and in the real world. It's not like you guys just show up at the door without my doing anything to get you there. I do work. My family tends to think I spend too much time on the computer.

Whatever the case, I am a single mom. I don't work for a bunch of rich fucks or a corporation that expect me to to work 8 - 14 hours a day making them rich while my kid spends her time with strangers. I take her to school, pick her up, participate in her life, and take good care of her. I'm not a drug addict, don't drink or smoke, and I don't spend my money frivalously. If it weren't for you guys, I couldn't do that. So thank you for allowing me to spend more time with my kid.

That's probably why more girls don't participate here though. I mean really - you are here because of girls. But in reality - you insult each other worse than you have insulted me. After all, regardless of how shitty you talk to me here, there are still plenty of you who are going to call me up when you want the best BJ in the world!!!! Smile.....some things you just can't insult.

Okay... point acknowledged... edit made.
She still represents a pretty lazy position, in my opinion! Originally Posted by MrGiz

In one breath you agree with me and in the next you call me lazy. I'm not sure why you think that. I'm a single mom, and I spend hours and hours a day on the computer planning and preparing for the time I spend with my clients both on the computer and in the real world. It's not like you guys just show up at the door without my doing anything to get you there. I do work. My family tends to think I spend too much time on the computer.

Whatever the case, I am a single mom. I don't work for a bunch of rich fucks or a corporation that expect me to to work 8 - 14 hours a day making them rich while my kid spends her time with strangers. I take her to school, pick her up, participate in her life, and take good care of her. I'm not a drug addict, don't drink or smoke, and I don't spend my money frivalously. If it weren't for you guys, I couldn't do that. So thank you for allowing me to spend more time with my kid.

That's probably why more girls don't participate here though. I mean really - you are here because of girls. But in reality - you insult each other worse than you have insulted me. After all, regardless of how shitty you talk to me here, there are still plenty of you who are going to call me up when you want the best BJ in the world!!!! Smile.....some things you just can't insult. Originally Posted by amusemeant

Perhaps, I read your earlier post the wrong way...

Fuck you!!!! Without you these people might have had to get a clue and find out how to hustle for themselves and ended up doing better than you have done. They certainly haven't been given a damned thing they didn't earn and I'm sure have had scant if any favors done for them by you, their boss. Whatever. Of course, I still want your money too bring it on over but I'll name my own terms and you'll never write me any memos reprimanding me for any behavior I exhibit lmao

If you meant for me to bring my money on over for "the best BJ in the world ".... please forgive me!. * In your earlier post, you didn't make it very clear that you wanted my money as compensation for a job well done.. * It sounded as though you wanted it simply because I had too much of it!

I have a pretty damned good reputation for taking up for you great ladies, here.... to the point where I've been heckled for it!
Please pardon me for any misunderstandings I may have had!