Trump Card

I really haven't made up on my mind on Cain. Like a lot of non-politicians or outsiders, we don't know a whole lot about them and have guess what they'd actually do if governing... Originally Posted by atlcomedy

Well we took a chance on a community organizer. Think what someone who had actually accomplished something, instead of just compiling a resume, could do.

Well we took a chance on a community organizer. Think what someone who had actually accomplished something, instead of just compiling a resume, could do. Originally Posted by pjorourke

WE took a chance on a B movie actor and he has fooled half of you into thinking that we can lower taxes and increase spending!

WE took a chance on a B movie actor and he has fooled half of you into thinking that we can lower taxes and increase spending!



Originally Posted by WTF

It's a damn good thing we did too.

WE took a chance on a B movie actor and he has fooled half of you into thinking that we can lower taxes and increase spending!



Originally Posted by WTF

No, he correctly figured out that if you refuse to approve tax rate increases, the bastards that are spending all the money eventually have to stop. Such as is slowly dawning on the current administration.

You'll note that he no longer runs Godfathers -- hence the four crusts. The damn Liberals must have taken over there again. Originally Posted by pjorourke

He picked his story, not me. I found some irony in the "rest of the story" as the late Paul Harvey would say.

How long do you plan for Herman (with that name alone there should be some good nicknames) for be in office?

He left GF's in '02, I have no idea when "Crust Creep" started, but I doubt it was yesterday.

Point is, even if HC is able to simplfy some things when/if in office, are you happy with his legacy if we're back in the same place we were less than a decade later?

WE took a chance on a B movie actor and he has fooled half of you into thinking that we can lower taxes and increase spending!



Originally Posted by WTF

The debate is over and research proves that Ronaldus Maximus was RIGHT, very RIGHT!....

No, he correctly figured out that if you refuse to approve tax rate increases, the bastards that are spending all the money eventually have to stop. Such as is slowly dawning on the current administration. Originally Posted by pjorourke

Ummm....don't forget to mention Supply Side Economics....

Don't worry PJ, there's always Michele Bachmann. Originally Posted by Doove

Michele would be a fantastic president...pity there's too many people like you who would not vote for her because she's a woman...I'll bet you didn't vote for Hilary Clinton....

Do you understand any of this PJ? There is the objective and then there is reality. You Reagan guys no longer live in reality. You live in the past. You remind me of the French...wanting to dig a ditch around their country to protectect them from Germany.

http://dailybail.com/home/stockman-t...l-madness.html






This lamentable prospect is deeply grounded in the policy-driven transformation of the economy during recent decades that has shifted income and wealth to the top of the economic ladder. While not the stated objective of policy, this reverse Robin Hood outcome cannot be gainsaid: the share of wealth held by the top 1 percent of households has risen to 35 percent from 21 percent since 1979, while their share of income has more than doubled to around 20 percent.
The culprit here was the combination of ultralow rates of interest at the Federal Reserve and ultralow rates of taxation on capital gains. The former destroyed the nation’s capital markets, fueling huge growth in household and business debt, serial asset bubbles and endless leveraged speculation in equities, commodities, currencies and other assets.
At the same time, the nearly untaxed windfall gains accrued to pure financial speculators, not the backyard inventors envisioned by the Republican-inspired capital-gains tax revolution of 1978. And they happened in an environment of essentially zero inflation, the opposite of the double-digit inflation that justified a lower tax rate on capital gains back then — but which is now simply an obsolete tax subsidy to the rich...

It's a damn good thing we did too. Originally Posted by Marcus Aurelius

Only if you are in the top 1%. Glad to hear you are doing so well from that piss poor movie actors actions.

The debate is over and research proves that Ronaldus Maximus was RIGHT, very RIGHT!.... Originally Posted by Marshall

Right about what? That " the share of wealth held by the top 1 percent of households has risen to 35 percent from 21 percent since 1979, while their share of income has more than doubled to around 20 percent.''

Not even close any more. Was doing well but things have a way of happening. I'm still breathing though and have my freedom so no tears.

Do you understand any of this PJ? There is the objective and then there is reality. You Reagan guys no longer live in reality. You live in the past. You remind me of the French...wanting to dig a ditch around their country to protectect them from Germany.

http://dailybail.com/home/stockman-t...l-madness.html






This lamentable prospect is deeply grounded in the policy-driven transformation of the economy during recent decades that has shifted income and wealth to the top of the economic ladder. While not the stated objective of policy, this reverse Robin Hood outcome cannot be gainsaid: the share of wealth held by the top 1 percent of households has risen to 35 percent from 21 percent since 1979, while their share of income has more than doubled to around 20 percent.
The culprit here was the combination of ultralow rates of interest at the Federal Reserve and ultralow rates of taxation on capital gains. The former destroyed the nation’s capital markets, fueling huge growth in household and business debt, serial asset bubbles and endless leveraged speculation in equities, commodities, currencies and other assets.
At the same time, the nearly untaxed windfall gains accrued to pure financial speculators, not the backyard inventors envisioned by the Republican-inspired capital-gains tax revolution of 1978. And they happened in an environment of essentially zero inflation, the opposite of the double-digit inflation that justified a lower tax rate on capital gains back then — but which is now simply an obsolete tax subsidy to the rich...




Only if you are in the top 1%. Glad to hear you are doing so well from that piss poor movie actors actions.




Right about what? That " the share of wealth held by the top 1 percent of households has risen to 35 percent from 21 percent since 1979, while their share of income has more than doubled to around 20 percent.'' Originally Posted by WTF

I don't see the purpose of your Stockman article posting....

I haven't fact checked your numbers...I will agree with the 1% of earners having 20% of the income; of course, they do pay 40% of the income taxes....

Didn't Mr. Reagan want you to keep more of the money you worked hard for rather than taking it from you by force and giving it to some else? Nobody has been able to explain to me what moral justification exists for them to get your money....


The wealthy don't get to just take income and wealth from other people...they have to provide goods and services to people at acceptable prices...you provide numbers I have not fact-checked, but you just assume they got what they have because they stole it...

perhaps you can clarify some of your point by sharing with us how globalization played into your numbers, or even social mobility [certainly the top 1% of earners are not the exact same people as the top 1% from 10 years ago]

the financial speculator/backyard inventor comment is laughable...the backyard inventor never gets off the ground without the financial speculators! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!

I also love those "loaded" terms: FINANCIAL SPECULATORS...sounds so evil and dirty [doesn't mom and pop saving for retirement belong to the financial speculator class?]....BACKYARD INVENTOR...sounds so innocent and wholesome...HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!

Right about what? That " the share of wealth held by the top 1 percent of households has risen to 35 percent from 21 percent since 1979, while their share of income has more than doubled to around 20 percent.'' Originally Posted by WTF

What is your objective? Do you want to make sure the government is sufficiently funded, or do you want to punish the people you're jealous of because they are successful?

IF your numbers are correct, then explain what happened to create the change..........

I don't see the purpose of your Stockman article posting....
Originally Posted by Marshall

That says it all.

You probably do not even know who Stockman is.

Obviously you do not understand the history of the last thirty years. That is Reagan's legacy. Pitiful really.

Not seeing the purpose of Stockman's article is like not seeing the effect wind shear had on the Space Shuttles.

http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question...ns/q0122.shtml

WTF, did you actually say something or just pull a Marshall and post something long that someone else wrote?

WTF, did you actually say something or just pull a Marshall and post something long that someone else wrote? Originally Posted by pjorourke

You think this is long***? As to who wrote what. PJ remember that it is better to post articles by experts and have people think you an idiot than post you own idoitic thoughts and leave no doubt.

I thought you would attack the messanger. Whats a matter you and Marshall can't find fault with the facts?


***This lamentable prospect is deeply grounded in the policy-driven transformation of the economy during recent decades that has shifted income and wealth to the top of the economic ladder. While not the stated objective of policy, this reverse Robin Hood outcome cannot be gainsaid: the share of wealth held by the top 1 percent of households has risen to 35 percent from 21 percent since 1979, while their share of income has more than doubled to around 20 percent.
The culprit here was the combination of ultralow rates of interest at the Federal Reserve and ultralow rates of taxation on capital gains. The former destroyed the nation’s capital markets, fueling huge growth in household and business debt, serial asset bubbles and endless leveraged speculation in equities, commodities, currencies and other assets.
At the same time, the nearly untaxed windfall gains accrued to pure financial speculators, not the backyard inventors envisioned by the Republican-inspired capital-gains tax revolution of 1978. And they happened in an environment of essentially zero inflation, the opposite of the double-digit inflation that justified a lower tax rate on capital gains back then — but which is now simply an obsolete tax subsidy to the rich...