Well here's some more GOP hypocritical hilarity

If you listen to the conservative/Republican/Tea Party folks you'll hear them claim that they were elected because President Obama and the Democrats did not listen to the desires of the majority of Americans and cut the spending and budget deficit.

Now, polls showed they were lying when they said it because the overwhelming concern of Americans are jobs not deficit reduction. But a new poll shows just how far off they really are. 77% of Americans want cuts and compromise on deficit. Americans by a two to one margin prefer defense cuts rather than cuts to social security or medicare. And more than 60% of Americans believe states should not have the power to break pension plan agreements.

Bloomberg poll: Public wants compromise, not shutdown (and cut the military, not Medicare)

 

Twice I have asked you to document the $13 trillion figure, if you can not do that, then you are the liar. Which we already know that you are.

 

Well once again we know who the liar is, don't we tenguy?

https://forum.xnxx.com/showpost.php?p=3856684&postcount=188

What's your next move you old personal pisser you?

 

That is not a bail out, that is a the Fed loaning money to the banks like they have since the inception of the Fed. What is different is that it is three times what they normally loan to banks. But they are loans, not TARP funds, not rescue funds, not stabilizing funds.

All of the money is secured, it is intended to infuse cash into the hands of the lenders, so they can open up credit once again.

This is the most convoluted claim of a bailout I have ever seen. Shame on you, Mother Jones and the blogger. Bloomberg called it right, they did not call it a bailout.

 

Much of the industry in the US today is military industry, which is funded by the government, whose jobs (according to you) do nothing for the economy.

Something doesn't add up here, aside from the numbers you pulled out of your ass.

 

Lying again tenguy you phony fuck. I said it took more than $13 Trillion to bail out wall street the bankers and the insurance companies and it did you lying old personal pissing phony non-fuck.

 

The only thing you have right in this whole bullshit claim is that the Fed was involved in opening the credit tap. It has almost nothing to do with Wall Street bankers, even Bloomberg pointed that out. But you and the bloggers are having a heyday spreading bullshit.

 

Workers in factories producing military goods are not on the government payroll, they a employed by private industry.

Military goods account for less than 6% of our manufacturing output, but they do account for about 10% of our exported manufactured goods.

 

They are paid with money that comes from the government.

 

What they are paid to do, is to produce goods for a customer at a private industry. Their customers are buyers for many countries and for many other defense related industries.

To make them appear to be on the public payroll is false.

You could make the same claim for refinery workers who produce fuel for government vehicles or food for the military commissaries.

 

Republicans selling net-neutrality to the phone companies

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/10/fcc-net-neutrality-rules_n_833892.html


This is not Republican hilarity. This SHOULD be public outrage at once again selling the American people out to giant corporations and trying to gain control of the internet by restricting access.


Just how much access do you think we'll have to XNXX if the bible thumping conservative/Republican/Tea Baggers ever get their way?

 

The logical leaps that tenguy goes through to avoid this fact are pretty amazing. If the government wasn't giving them money, the businesses wouldn't exist

I knew he and the rest would try the same old worn out tactic, but it's just fun to watch them flail around.

 

Those on the right like military spending and dislike domestic spending. They argue that the Great Depression was not ended by the New Deal, but by the Second World War. The Great Depression was ended by government spending. It did not have to be military spending. It had to be government spending, because the private sector was not generating enough jobs by itself.

Before the Great Depression classical economists, which is to say those in the tradition of Adam Smith, argued that "panics," as they were called, would end naturally without the government doing anything. Manufacturers with unsold inventories would lower the prices of their goods. Unemployed workers would accept lower wages.

John Maynard Keynes pointed out that these tendencies counteracted each other. When manufacturers lowered their prices workers still could not buy the items because they were earning less, or they were still unemployed. He said that anything the government did to put money in the pockets of lower income people would reduce unemployment, because they would spend that money, causing manufacturers to sell their inventories, and hire more people.

Keynes believed that it was better for people to work for the money than be on the dole. When he visited President Roosevelt he said that even if the government paid one group of men to dig holes in the ground, and paid another group to fill the holes up again, that was better for the economy than letting those men remain unemployed.

In effect, military spending is like paying people to dig holes and fill them up. People cannot buy military hardware. Nevertheless, people who make it earn pay checks, that they use to buy consumer goods.

The rich lost ground during the Great Depression. They took a bath during the stock market crash of 1929. Nevertheless, by hiking their taxes the government had money to hire people and reduce unemployment.

Currently the rich, the corporations, and the banks have plenty of money. The benefits of taxing them heavily and spreading the wealth around would be even greater than they were during the 1930s.

 

Bullshit Ace. Damn now that's just dumb. The fight's been going on ever since I've been on this forum and the whole issue is keeping the internet neutral as far as access goes.

But how in the hell can the mega phone companies and corporations increase their profits and sell more of their products if just anyone can have access to the internet without paying them for it.

Its all about who's going to make the money off the internet and who gets to decide which sites you get pushed to by controlling the access.

Oh bull fucking shit Ace. Leading Tea Baggers like Sarah Palin and Christine O'Donnell have already attacked pornography. And the fundamentalist Christians on the right have never given up trying to outlaw pornography and never will.

 

Right now the free market is reducing the standard of living for most Americans while the rich get richer.

 

Yes, I've also been amused at people who argue that WWII pulled us out of the depression, then argue that government spending didn't do anything. :lol:

Even worse, the people who think this won't even be able to connect the dots.

 

The free market is not doing that at all. The truth is that the obscene taxes are doing it. Companies and the population are fleeing the highest taxed states, and moving to where profits and lower tax rates are.

In closing, you have no idea how the free market works either.