Debt Ceiling Keeps Receding; GOP Loses Another Issue

[head of joaquin]

do you mean immigration or secure against invasion.....Jesus, cant you be clear?

I think you need to take this to another one of your tedious rightwing threads, pronto.

 

[Master PO]

I think you need to take this to another one of your tedious rightwing threads, pronto.

i see, your not going to answer, why cannot to put forth your ideas, you have had no trouble int he past!

 

[head of joaquin]

i see, your not going to answer, why cannot to put forth your ideas, you have had no trouble int he past!

Take it outside Ernst. You're boring us.

 

[Master PO]

Take it outside Ernst. You're boring us.

more deflection by you, isn't it any wonder why. people laugh and say your silly in your arguments.

since you dont want to answer i will provide.

immigration by the federal government is not an enumerated power, its a state power.

against invasion, the federal government has the power, and are excising it by patrolling our borders of water.....coast guard/navy

really head!......you not as fun today as you normally are......but there always tomorrow.

 

[froggigger]

You confuse Keynesianism with government running the market. Instead, it prevents financial crises from steering the populace towards a redefinition of property rights that paves the way toward full scale worker controlled means of production.

Keynesianism goes hand in hand with government regulation to run the market. We have moved away from a market system and moved instead to a fascist system thanks to thousands of pages of regulations. Property rights needs no redefinition. It is the very basis of freedom, and is the one right that makes all other rights possible.

 

[Fenton]

Yeah, we need a jobs bill. Too bad the GOP has
blocked it.

NEXT RIGHTWING MEME!

There's 40 jobs bills sitting in the Senate from the House waiting for a vote that will never come.

Your'e wrong...again.

 

[head of joaquin]

Keynesianism goes hand in hand with government regulation to run the market. We have moved away from a market system and moved instead to a fascist system thanks to thousands of pages of regulations. Property rights needs no redefinition. It is the very basis of freedom, and is the one right that makes all other rights possible.

All markets are regulated. Without rules there is no market, just "might makes right." So you're not against regulation; you're just against regulation that helps working people prosper in a modern economy. Just say it and get it over with.

 

[head of joaquin]

There's 40 jobs bills sitting in the Senate from the House waiting for a vote that will never come.

Your'e wrong...again.

BWHAHHAHAHAH!

House jobs bills.

BHWHAHHAHAHAHH!

 

[Master PO]

BWHAHHAHAHAH!

House jobs bills.

BHWHAHHAHAHAHH!

what do you say when you drive through the McDonald drive through......"give me a BHWHAHHAHAHAHH!"......must be hard to take your order.

 

[blaxshep]

All markets are regulated. Without rules there is no market, just "might makes right." So you're not against regulation; you're just against regulation that helps working people prosper in a modern economy. Just say it and get it over with.

Might makes right is the policy of Government. Get a clue.

 

[Fenton]

BWHAHHAHAHA
H!

House jobs bills.

BHWHAHHAHAHAHH!

Well Obama's jobs initiatives by your own admission have led to 70% of working American families living pay check to pay check.

Your'e saying the House jobs bills would actually be worse ?

Because your'e just guessing since theyv'e been sat on for years now without being voted on.

It's why we're so hard on you Obama supporters. You criticize things that haven't even been implemented and celebrate the things that have failed.

I feel like I need to start giving you obvious life advice.

You know, stuff like " if it has hornets coming out of it, it's not a pinata, so don't hit it with a stick while blind folded ".

 

[Glen Contrarian]

Well Obama's jobs initiatives by your own admission have led to 70% of working American families living pay check to pay check.

Your'e saying the House jobs bills would actually be worse ?

Because your'e just guessing since theyv'e been sat on for years now without being voted on.

It's why we're so hard on you Obama supporters. You criticize things that haven't even been implemented and celebrate the things that have failed.

I feel like I need to start giving you obvious life advice.

You know, stuff like " if it has hornets coming out of it, it's not a pinata, so don't hit it with a stick while blind folded ".

What you don't get is that we're still living under low-tax, all-bow-before-the-rich Reaganomics.

Try going back and find out the three times that taxes on the rich were lowest since the end of WWI...and you know what you'll find? They immediately precede 1929, 1982, and 2008. And what happened in each of those years?

 

[head of joaquin]

what do you say when you drive through the McDonald drive through......"give me a BHWHAHHAHAHAHH!"......must be hard to take your order.

A Tea party jobs bill has the same relationship to jobs and a McDonald's hamburger has to ham.

 

[head of joaquin]

Well Obama's jobs initiatives by your own admission have led to 70% of working American families living pay check to pay check.

Your'e saying the House jobs bills would actually be worse ?

Because your'e just guessing since theyv'e been sat on for years now without being voted on.

It's why we're so hard on you Obama supporters. You criticize things that haven't even been implemented and celebrate the things that have failed.

I feel like I need to start giving you obvious life advice.

You know, stuff like " if it has hornets coming out of it, it's not a pinata, so don't hit it with a stick while blind folded ".

Psst: If Obama's jobs bill had passed we'd be OK. But the Tea party occupation forces in the House stopped it. Funny that.

But keep trying.

 

[Kushinator]

Keynesianism goes hand in hand with government regulation to run the market. We have moved away from a market system and moved instead to a fascist system thanks to thousands of pages of regulations. Property rights needs no redefinition. It is the very basis of freedom, and is the one right that makes all other rights possible.

Nope! Keynesianism ensures the survival of a market orientated system (as any good socialist/Marxist will agree). Sustained periods of high unemployment within a political democracy will lead to socialism, as the masses will only tolerate such a predicament for so long. Of course, capitalism also requires a welfare state to alleviate the impact of (involuntary) unemployment that persists even in growth times.

The problem is your position is dominated by the division of U.S. party politics, and therefore you are incapable of having an unbiased take on political economy.

 

[Master PO]

A Tea party jobs bill has the same relationship to jobs and a McDonald's hamburger has to ham.

tea party!.........:lol:

do you drink tea?

 

[Glen Contrarian]

Nope! Keynesianism ensures the survival of a market orientated system (as any good socialist/Marxist will agree). Sustained periods of high unemployment within a political democracy will lead to socialism, as the masses will only tolerate such a predicament for so long. Of course, capitalism also requires a welfare state to alleviate the impact of (involuntary) unemployment that persists even in growth times.

The problem is your position is dominated by the division of U.S. party politics, and therefore you are incapable of having an unbiased take on political economy.

Of course, of course! That's why NONE of the non-OPEC first-world nations - the non-OPEC nations with the highest standards of living in the world - are socialized democracies! And that's why Greece and Spain and Italy and England are on top of the EEC's economic heap because they adopted austerity measures! And that's why Germany is at the very bottom of the economic heap, because they would adopt austerity!

Right?

Oh, wait...you mean I got all that BACKWARDS? You mean that all the non-OPEC first-world nations with high standards of living are socialized democracies, and austerity didn't help any nations, and those that didn't adopt austerity are better off for not having done it? But...that's crazy! That would mean that Keynesian economics works! And that can't be right!

Keynesian economics is always wrong - we KNOW this! Just like we know that evolution is wrong, climate change is a hoax, Obama's a Marxist Kenyan Nazi, and the world is only 6,000 years old!

There...I feel SO much better!

 

[froggigger]

Nope! Keynesianism ensures the survival of a market orientated system (as any good socialist/Marxist will agree). Sustained periods of high unemployment within a political democracy will lead to socialism, as the masses will only tolerate such a predicament for so long. Of course, capitalism also requires a welfare state to alleviate the impact of (involuntary) unemployment that persists even in growth times.

The problem is your position is dominated by the division of U.S. party politics, and therefore you are incapable of having an unbiased take on political economy.

You need to go back and read what I have written here. How you arrived at the conclusion that my "position is dominated by the division of U.S. party politics" is so utterly absurd it hardly dignifies a response. My problem is government, Democrats and Republicans alike, and I have made that abundantly clear here and everywhere else I post. Bottom line, you made it up. Let me repeat myself for you since you either missed it or ignored it: the letter after any given politician's name is irrelevant.

Keynesianism ensures the survival of government and is anathema to a free market system. Government interference is what causes unemployment. One such example is the minimum wage. Other regulations and laws do the same. If you think capitalism requires a welfare state, you show a very basic misunderstanding of capitalism. You revealed your hand when you even mentioned a "political economy". Putting politics in an economy is the problem.

 

[Kushinator]

You need to go back and read what I have written here. How you arrived at the conclusion that my "position is dominated by the division of U.S. party politics" is so utterly absurd it hardly dignifies a response. My problem is government, Democrats and Republicans alike, and I have made that abundantly clear here and everywhere else I post. Bottom line, you made it up. Let me repeat myself for you since you either missed it or ignored it: the letter after any given politician's name is irrelevant.

You made the standard error that typically comes from the (partisan right wing) notion that Keynesianism is about government control. It is not!

Keynesianism ensures the survival of government and is anathema to a free market system. Government interference is what causes unemployment.

Unemployment occurs when the private sector protects short term profits by cutting variable costs, typically in the form of labor.

One such example is the minimum wage.

Markets are not perfectly competitive, and therefore monopsony will ensure disemployment. Since you are without a doubt unaware of what monopsony is, see this.

Other regulations and laws do the same.

Another ignorant comment. Keynesianism has nothing to do with regulation.

If you think capitalism requires a welfare state, you show a very basic misunderstanding of capitalism. You revealed your hand when you even mentioned a "political economy". Putting politics in an economy is the problem.

You have obviously bitten off more than you can chew. A welfare state ensures the negative effects of unemployment do not lead to social unrest.

 

[froggigger]

You made the standard error that typically comes from the (partisan right wing) notion that Keynesianism is about government control. It is not!

You made the standard error that typically comes from the (partisan left wing) of making stuff up. I said nothing about government control. I said Keynesianism ensures the survival of government and is anathema to a free market system. I would suggest you address what I say and not what you think I mean. I already have a wife that does that.

Unemployment occurs when the private sector protects short term profits by cutting variable costs, typically in the form of labor.

Throw a blanket over that statement. It ain't that simple.

Markets are not perfectly competitive, and therefore monopsony will ensure disemployment. Since you are without a doubt unaware of what monopsony is, see this.

You are truly amazing. Not only can you tell me what I really mean by what say, you also know which words are not in my vocabulary.

Another ignorant comment. Keynesianism has nothing to do with regulation.

Another ignorant response. I never said it did. You made that up, too. Oh, I forgot. That's what I really meant.

You have obviously bitten off more than you can chew. A welfare state ensures the negative effects of unemployment do not lead to social unrest.

Were you born that arrogant or was it learned behavior? A welfare state contributes to unemployment.

 

[Kushinator]

You made the standard error that typically comes from the (partisan left wing) of making stuff up. I said nothing about government control. I said Keynesianism ensures the survival of government and is anathema to a free market system. I would suggest you address what I say and not what you think I mean. I already have a wife that does that.

Nope. You said this:

Keynesianism goes hand in hand with government regulation to run the market.

Throw a blanket over that statement. It ain't that simple.

Of course it is. Without the need to protect short term profits, there would be no reason for mass layoffs.

You are truly amazing. Not only can you tell me what I really mean by what say, you also know which words are not in my vocabulary.

Had you been aware of how monopsony impacts labor markets, you wouldn't have made such a naive comment regarding minimum wage.

Another ignorant response. I never said it did. You made that up, too. Oh, I forgot. That's what I really meant.

You said this:

Keynesianism ensures the survival of government and is anathema to a free market system. Government interference is what causes unemployment. One such example is the minimum wage.

Were you born that arrogant or was it learned behavior? A welfare state contributes to unemployment.

Of course you cannot support this position with empirical evidence, just as you could not support your asinine position that having free checking is added to GDP. You are just butt hurt that i called you out for making **** up.

 

[Fenton]

What you don't get is that we're still living under low-tax, all-bow-before-the-rich Reaganomics.

Try going back and find out the three times that taxes on the rich were lowest since the end of WWI...and you know what you'll find? They immediately precede 1929, 1982, and 2008. And what happened in each of those years?

LOL !!

You don't know what your'e talking about, it's embarrassing. To think someone would post nonsensical ramblings publicly and with pride even.

It's the insipid responses expected from the left who've condensed supply side economics into a couple of one line talking points. I have to assume you've fallen into a well and you've gotten someone to lower you a extension chord for your lap top.

It's the only reasonable explanation for your perennial ignorance in reference to the effects of Obama's policies on Businesses.

Because how else could you have missed the obvious ? I mean every President before him, even Democrats knew that American businesses and the private sector were at the heart of a real economic activity and growth.

No, borrowing nearly 7 TRILLION for a ever increasing dependent class and having your FED appointee pump 4 TRILLION of liquidity into the banks so they can sit on it and collect interest payments from the FEDS on their nearly Record reserves does not a recovery make.

Lets start with Obama's radical appointee for the NLRB and the strong arm pro-union tactics that kept Boeing from building planes in South Carolina, Obama dragging his feet on Free Trade agreements that increased tariffs for American Companies for his first 3 years as a failure of a President. There's a good reason Michigan changed to a right to work state.

Obama's long list of draconian Executive orders via the EPA that have stunted growth by placing a massive weight on corporations, that have caused power companies to cut back, retrofit which in turn increases energy prices for the consumer. There are some estimates that the cost of Obama's new coal regulations will cause a 15 to 25 % increase in energy rates. He's so f**king incompetent, or he's a royal di**, you chose. I mean increased energy cost when nearly 3/4 of the population live paycheck to paycheck.


He's extended Obama-Care waivers to some Companies but most have had to prepare for the arbitrary mandated cost increases. Of-course, that too is passed on to the consumer.

Dividend and capital gains tax increases within Obama-Care while people are " FINED " because their company unloaded them and they can't afford the massive increases in health Insurance premiums is going to be a another shock to the economy. Even President Clinton had the sense to lower Capital Gaines taxes.
He said rates were going to drop 2500.00 per year for your average American Family.

He's such a fu**ing liar. Obama when he was a candidate promised to explore new energy reserves, Natural Gas etc. In 2012 he actually jetted off to Colorado and made a speech bout Natural Gas explorations and when 60 million idiots re-elected him, he quickly closed off Federal lands intended for Natural Gas exploration.

Hey lets talk about Obama's job plan after he was elected...BRILLIANT !!!....no, actually one of the stupidest things an American President has EVER done.

He was going to build a manufacturing base for a product no one wanted. It's what happens when you let university Liberals apply their education in a vacuum in the real world. You know, like when they apply post Keynesian stupidity in a world economy ? We just buy more junk from China.

Anyway, no attention was payed to China's OBVIOUS ability to undercut our manufacturing cost so all of the Obama donors that suddenly went into the manufacturer of photo-voltaic..got big bonuses and everyone else got fired as China did just that. Remember the FBI raiding Solyndra ? Lol....didn't they plead the Fifth too ?

It was like a Sixth Graders Science project or worse, a Liberals attempt at trying to comprehend free market economics.

Wait. Are you in the Sixth Grade ?

 

[obvious Child]

Wow: Nearly All Americans Living Paycheck-to-Paycheck - Katie Pavlich

So....no change from the past 15 years then?

FFCI :: How Financially Literate are Today's Youth? Their Current Practices and What We Need to Know as Educators

You act like most Americans haven't been living pay check to pay check in the past and that our savings rate from 2001-2009 wasn't negative.

Short memory you seem to have. FYI, 76% is not "nearly all."

Sorry, only the minds that hold the most perverted realities can come to that conclusion after 5 years of Obama's policies.

Some of us have longer memories. And the capacity to access a thing called Google to check out the rates of savings in the period before Obama.

Essentially you're citing Same **** different day as proof it's all Obama's fault.

 

[obvious Child]

Keynesianism ensures the survival of government and is anathema to a free market system.

Without government, you do not have a free market system as the economy descends into Anarchy.

Government interference is what causes unemployment.

It can. Does not mean it is the sole cause. Changing consumer tastes can cause unemployment.

One such example is the minimum wage. Other regulations and laws do the same.

Except that without regulations and laws, the framework for a free market system does not exist. Without a framework to prevent force from deciding all rules, anarchy ensures.

you think capitalism requires a welfare state

Too bad he never said welfare state. Kenysian is not a welfare state.

 

[Glen Contrarian]

Wait. Are you in the Sixth Grade ?

Very good, guy. I'm sure you make a fine, I say, a FINE conservative!

BTW - when were the three most serious economic crises since the end of WWI? And who was in charge during every one of them? And worst of all, conservatives STILL want the minuscule tax rates and next-to-nothing regulation that got us into all three of those crises, somehow believing that those same policies will make things turn out differently than they did all the other times!