World Politics

[Anonymous]

Scott...You not only voted for Bush twice.. Your vote would have made Phil Gramm treasury secretary. of course McCain would have died in his sleep already leaving us with ---------------..

Madame President? Makes you crazy don't she? C'mon, tell the truth....

 

[redtreviso]

Madame President? Makes you crazy don't she? C'mon, tell the truth....

Makes me want to finish my life in flanders

http://www.opposingviews.com/i/photo-why-is-sarah-palin-wearing-star-of-david

 

[Anonymous]

Makes me want to finish my life in flanders

http://www.opposingviews.com/i/photo-why-is-sarah-palin-wearing-star-of-david

You need help with airfare?

 

[Cobblestones]

Wow. this is surprising given the author.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/aa81cf92-8c3f-11e0-b1c8-00144feab49a.html#axzz1O9PoBxgV




So what you are saying is a less burdensome tax policy can generate a favorable jobs climate.... OMG! Really??

Robert Reich, welcome to the real world.

Edit: I guess this is one way to get unemployment down.

More job seekers give up, reducing unemployment

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110602/ap_on_bi_ge/us_economy_missing_workers

Fine, let's do everything R. Reich says. The whole package. Do you think Boehner and his repubs would vote for it? A large Keynesian program? Basically a second stimulus?

No, the Senate repubs, in a spending mood like a drunk sailor on shore leave, rather filibust the repeal of subsidies for oil companies. Debt? What debt?

 

[redtreviso]

You need help with airfare?

If more of your kind vote for Ms Star of David/speaks in tongues I might.

 

[Anonymous]

 

[Anonymous]

If more of your kind vote for Ms Star of David/speaks in tongues I might.

You, Alec Baldwin, Cher..... maybe you all can go on Baldwin's G5. Not real friendly on the environment... but at least you won't have to stand in line at the airport.

 

[Hugh Januss]

Wow. this is surprising given the author.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/aa81cf92-8c3f-11e0-b1c8-00144feab49a.html#axzz1O9PoBxgV




So what you are saying is a less burdensome tax policy can generate a favorable jobs climate.... OMG! Really??

Robert Reich, welcome to the real world.

Edit: I guess this is one way to get unemployment down.

More job seekers give up, reducing unemployment

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110602/ap_on_bi_ge/us_economy_missing_workers

So now you are in favor of lowering the taxes on the poor? I thought it was the rich people that we had to lower taxes on......you know so they would hire more poor people. Try to keep your stories straight, huh.

 

[Anonymous]

So now you are in favor of lowering the taxes on the poor? I thought it was the rich people that we had to lower taxes on......you know so they would hire more poor people. Try to keep your stories straight, huh.

Try and keep up HJ. I am for reasonable (historically low) tax rates for those who actually pay taxes. I don't get in to the Rich versus Poor thing. That's for you guys.

 

[redtreviso]

Try and keep up HJ. I am for reasonable (historically low) tax rates for those who actually pay taxes. I don't get in to the Rich versus Poor thing. That's for you guys.

You leave that up to the people you vote for. Bill Frist once said it wouldn't be fair to raise the minimum wage and not give tax breaks to the wealthy..

 

[redtreviso]

“Thanks for ruining our vacation.”

— Piper Palin, 10, to a Time photographer, part of the media scrum following Sarah Palin’s is-it-an-exploratory-campaign-or-what PAC-financed bus tour along the East Coast.

They've taught that child the culture of false victimhood

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Yes, blame the media...right after you clamor for their attention.

It does make you wonder what the future holds. If we were to just eliminate the borrowing for just one month the reduction in spending would be in excess of $100 Billion. So to hear the groaning coming from Washington just goes to show how little concern they have.

Reminds me of the David Stockman quote how you could lock Congress in a room demanding a budget or face death, they would collectively come up with $35b, when they need to come up with $3 trillion.

Funny thing is, there are elements of the Ryan plan that Democrats have sought in the past, such as means testing. But just as some TP Republicans now won't even discuss defense or military spending cuts they were so vocally against, the Democrats won't even mention the means testing.

Putting both, all of this on the table, and we could make huge strides in the budget without instantly marching out of Iraq and Afghanistan, or without altering Medicare or Medicaid very much at all. But as you so aptly say:

It's a huge dis-connect. Washington is about raising money for re-election and that's about it.

Absolute power...

 

[Cobblestones]

The part that surprised me I highlighted. I have to laugh... on one hand leftists will state as fact that lowering tax rates does nothing to stimulate the economy. On the other hand, when that lie is exposed, they come forward with good ideas to stimulate the economy through a "tax holiday". It's funny to me and that's why I posted it.

Reich's ideas are (mostly) crap, but hey, even a blind squirrel finds a nut on occasion.

Repeal energy subsidies... I could not care less. It's just a guess but I'll bet they will stop investing in this though...

The part you highlighted is basically direct subsidies for job creation. This is different from the nebulous 'let's cut taxes on $1M+ incomes and hope for the best' schemes.

If you look at the data, job creation in the private sector is actually not bad at all at the moment. The problem is the public sector which has been strangled. With a second stimulus, including investment in public education and public projects, the job numbers would probably be much better.

 

[redtreviso]

The part that surprised me I highlighted. I have to laugh... on one hand leftists will state as fact that lowering tax rates does nothing to stimulate the economy. On the other hand, when that lie is exposed, they come forward with good ideas to stimulate the economy through a "tax holiday". It's funny to me and that's why I posted it.

Reich's ideas are (mostly) crap, but hey, even a blind squirrel finds a nut on occasion.

Repeal energy subsidies... I could not care less. It's just a guess but I'll bet they will stop investing in this though...

leftists...pffft

Your blind squirrel worships a russian fiction writer who glorifies a serial killer.

 

[rhubroma]

Well then it should be easy to demonstrate... I mean just connect the dots.

Haliburton? How many other companies in the world do what they do?

Invade a country to loot our own treasury? Sure man. Now where did I put my tin foil hat... oh here it is;

Who's etal BTW?

The really sick thing is that they did so under the aegis of the federal government.

Take off the blinders Scott, and that ridiculous tin hat!

 

[rhubroma]

Health Care reform has scared the **** out of private business...

This only demonstrates what fanatics of rational egoism you guys are.

A public health care system would only scare the hell out of private insurance, though this would undoubtedly be a great thing for America. Even the medics would still be able to take recourse to private clinics for their rich clients.

By contrast all the businesses providing private coverage for their clients would be eliminated, as everything gets paid for out of the State's coffers, which belongs to the public domain.

The type of universal privatization and the consequent destruction of the res publica your kind yearns for, means that the government and political class that makes it up would only function in the interests of a business plutocracy, the collective becomes further and further subjected to the appetites of private business, democracy becomes a total sham with a class of oligarchs establishing an agenda exclusively to its liking and in its interests that the voted politicians are bound too support with an oath of allegiance (given that its lobbies greased their palms), education becomes a privilege of those with means and not a civic right guaranteed by a sound and honorable public school system, meritocracy is finished as a cast system of wealth and privilege is reinforced and maintained....

In short, the entire cause of the revolutionary collective democratic State and the consequent shunning of a system of feudal overlords, vassals and serfs becomes merely illusory.

Be careful what you wish for.

 

[Hugh Januss]

The part you highlighted is basically direct subsidies for job creation. This is different from the nebulous 'let's cut taxes on $1M+ incomes and hope for the best' schemes.

If you look at the data, job creation in the private sector is actually not bad at all at the moment. The problem is the public sector which has been strangled. With a second stimulus, including investment in public education and public projects, the job numbers would probably be much better.

Scott is a bit like "Joe the Plumber" he thinks that since his business grosses 1 mil. they are talking about raising his taxes here. Also I suspect that he works in the health insurance industry. He is for whatever will benefit him the most.

 

[Anonymous]

The part you highlighted is basically direct subsidies for job creation. This is different from the nebulous 'let's cut taxes on $1M+ incomes and hope for the best' schemes.

If you look at the data, job creation in the private sector is actually not bad at all at the moment. The problem is the public sector which has been strangled. With a second stimulus, including investment in public education and public projects, the job numbers would probably be much better.

The part you highlighted is basically direct subsidies for job creation.

This speaks volumes. Taxes are the confiscation of labor. To say that the elimination of a tax is in actuality a direct subsidy is completely backwards. I agree that taxes are required to sustain government so please don't get me wrong.... but let's be honest about what a tax actually is.

Payroll taxes are particularly interesting. An employer pays taxes for having the unmitigated gall of hiring someone. I don't get it but I'd imagine that does not surprise you.

If you look at the data, job creation in the private sector is actually not bad at all at the moment. The problem is the public sector which has been strangled. With a second stimulus, including investment in public education and public projects, the job numbers would probably be much better

This is just factually inaccurate. You are yanking my chain here, right?

 

[Anonymous]

leftists...pffft

Your blind squirrel worships a russian fiction writer who glorifies a serial killer.

Worship? Not so much.

 

[Anonymous]

The really sick thing is that they did so under the aegis of the federal government.

Take off the blinders Scott, and that ridiculous tin hat!

Well I suppose a good conspiracy theory helps to justify certain world views from time to time. Please excuse me if I don't join that party.

 

[Anonymous]

Scott is a bit like "Joe the Plumber" he thinks that since his business grosses 1 mil. they are talking about raising his taxes here. Also I suspect that he works in the health insurance industry. He is for whatever will benefit him the most.

Would'nt it be nice for you if I were that simple?

So grossing a million is what your side has determined to be rich? I thought is was $250,000. Was that gross or net? Or was it $200,000? $125? $67,500??

I'm still waiting to be told what being rich means... Help a brother out HJ, define it for me.

 

[Anonymous]

Interesting blog post.

http://www.financialsense.com/contributors/paul-mladjenovic/job-creation-versus-job-destruction

At both the public and private levels, the talk is about “jobs” and doing “everything we can to create jobs” but the great tragedy is that federal economic policy makers (and many state level economic policy makers) simply don’t understand how to create jobs and are in fact enacting policies that destroy jobs. The reason why these policy makers are harming job creation and spurring on job destruction is really quite simple:

1.They have never run a business.
2.They have never met or managed a payroll.
3.They have never worked in the private sector.
4.They have never created goods or services.
5.They were educated by people with no business experience or knowledge.
6.Many are ideologues that understand politics but not real economics.
In addition, these same decision-makers don’t understand (or don’t care to know) the difference between “private jobs (VERY necessary) and “public jobs” (funded by private jobs!).

Fire away boys....

 

[rhubroma]

Well I suppose a good conspiracy theory helps to justify certain world views from time to time. Please excuse me if I don't join that party.

There are those who can't see because they are blind. There are those who can't see because they choose not to look (you). Then there are those who see only what the propaganda presented to them has shown them.

And this is a serious problem for the world, in that latter two cases exist among too many of my compatriots.

 

[rhubroma]

Would'nt it be nice for you if I were that simple?

So grossing a million is what your side has determined to be rich? I thought is was $250,000. Was that gross or net? Or was it $200,000? $125? $67,500??

I'm still waiting to be told what being rich means... Help a brother out HJ, define it for me.

You seem to be capable of quantifying wealth, being rich, only in terms of a monetary status.

We knew it was all just about money, Scott, but even I didn't think you could be so stiff and rigid by nature. You sit stiffly and rigidly at your work place and on your estate, your life's mission being to ensure that this immense mass of accumulated wealth progressively solidified and under no circumstances dissolved. In the course of time your entire world took on the rigidity and solidity, the absolute hardness, of this mass and fused with it into a dreadful, sickening unity, without even noticing what was happening.

I noticed, however.

 

[Anonymous]

There are those who can't see because they are blind. There are those who can't see because they choose not to look (you). Then there are those who see only what the propaganda presented to them has shown them.

And this is a serious problem for the world, in that latter two cases exist among too many of my compatriots.

You forgot to mention there are those who think they see everything because they think they know it all (you).

Your theory should be easy to prove, no? Have at it...