All the rants raves and ramblings by Rhinoceroses Donkeys and Jackasses not fit to print
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
Save A Trillion Dollars, Send Obama Some Pepto-Bismol
"If anything ail a man, so that he does not perform his funtions, if he have a pain in his bowels even.... he forthwith sets about reforming---the world". Thoreau
I do not know if the stimulus will work or not. Neither do you. I hope that it does, you know, stimulate the economy. I support it because, yes, a consensus of economists, including Nobel-Prize winning Paul Krugman, think it is necessary. Those who disagree tend to be conservative idealogues who think we need to cut taxes (on the wealthy, for the most part) and deregulate. You know, the program that was in place for the last damn eight years and didn't prevent our economic problems. In fact, probably contributed to them.
Could I be wrong? Yes. In fact I am not at all sure that this will work. You, on the other hand, are completely sure that you are right.
Which brings to mind another quote, this one from Bertrand Russell:"The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt."
Let's not go down this road again where for the next year your entire argument is...
Blah blah blah consensus Yadda yadda yadda nobel prize
Its just not to be taken seriously.
Sure I could counter you by rattling off a couple hundred economists from libertarian and conservative think tanks that agree with me or see your Krugman and raise you a Lucas but here's the thing...
Economists don't know shit and I hold the Pinewood Derby trophy I won when I was a 10 year old Cub Scout in higher regard than the nobel.
Its pointless to discuss economic theory when we have a wealth of actual economic history to guide us.
Tax cuts stimulate and raising taxes stiffle economies. It really is as simple as that. The reason conservatives always talk about cuts is that libs always talk about hikes, why are you afraid of debate? Could it be that hikes have never rescued a failing economy whereas cuts always have? Cuts worked for Kennedy, they worked for Reagan and yes, they worked for Bush.
And please refer to the "wealthy" by their proper name.... taxpayers.
If the dems insist on using the great depression in comparison as a scaremongering tactic then why the fuck would they insist on doing exactly the same things that prolonged it.
Despite Hoover's tax increase and FDR's massive spending, eight of the twelve years from 1930 to 1942 were considered bear markets with uneployement never dropping below twice todays levels. The average bear market has historically lasted 1.3 years. You do the math.
See Gary you are dead wrong that I don't know what's going to happen with the stimulus (if you can honestly call it that) bill. I know exactly what is going to happen and its not gonna be pretty and its the middle class that will suffer the most.
Even Pelosi doesn't think the stimulus will work and its her bill.
Now that being said, I also know these things are cyclical and most importantly that this too will pass in spite of incompetent political interference.
I also know the thunder in the rifleman's arm. The riflemans name? The United States of America. Fuck yeah!!!
So I'm not about to "go galt" in fact I'm gonna "do the dagny" and try to save this railroad.
I am going to buy a new American car for the first time in my life this weekend and as soon the market gives back yesterdays gains Im going long the Dow.
I will no longer be party to the climate of negativity that liberalism has created. I'm taking my ball but not going home, I'm taking that shit to work. Unlike the President I don't have time to be exhausted, its people like me that have a real job to do.... getting us out of this mess, because it will be the American worker that pulls us through this and not some half-witted nimwits in DC.
If economists don't know shit (and it was John Kenneth Galbraith, I believe, who said that the purpose of economic forecasting was to make astrology look respectable) then you and I don't know shit either. Which was the point of my comment..
I don't know if Krugman or your enonomists are right. When the experts disagree the layman would be wise to suspend judgement.
And yet, you are 100% sure that we need tax cuts even though we had tax cuts during Bush and they didn't work. That's faith.
I have to agree with Gary on the fact that we don't know if it will work or not. Only time will tell. Great quote by the way from B. Russell. Even if you had the capacity to understand every single detail of the history of economics for the past, um, forever, the best you could do is come up with a theory. Knowing is impossible.
While I agree that you don't know shit, I can assure you that I am neither clergy nor layman.
In other words this is my wheelhouse, this is what I do.
If this were a courtroom, my testimony would be classfied expert.
If this were a boardroom, an economist would be fetching my coffee.
And for the last time the Bush cuts worked. They stopped the Clinton recession he inherited dead in its tracks. They instilled investor confidence that was shaken after 911. They increased overall tax revenue by encouraging productivity. They put more of the American workers pay in their own pocket.
In short they promoted six years of pretty solid economic growth for six of eight years up to the collapse of 07. To imply that they either did not work or that they were in fact the cause for the collapse demonstrates either your ignorance on this subject or your that your blind anti Bush partisanship has clouded your judgement.
I am not saying 100% that new cuts are needed I'm saying with 100% certainty that tax hikes and reckless govt spending will fail.
Hind sight is 20/20 my friend. Again, you don't "know". You just "think". Which means it's your theory. You may be right, but you also may be wrong. And anyone who says anything with 100% certainty is seriously testing the laws of physics. I am 99.999999% certain of that.
100% of past tax increases during a recession have failed.
For everyones sake let's hope this will be the first time and my theort is proven wrong.
...but it won't.
And it would be testing the law of averages if anything jackass. your teeth hitting the ground before your body when I crack you upside your jowls would be phtsics.
Oh, it's physics. Chaos theory my friend. It's all about systems and the economy is a system. So now that I have proven you wrong TWICE, I think I should be given some sort of award, after I pick up my teeth.
getlive i'm seriously dissappointed in you, gary...well i expect it from gary.
What is the saying about insanity?
Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result....
Hoover,FDR,Johnson,Carter,and i'm sorry to say Bush 1..all faced economic troubles and all tried to use some sort of socialist policies/tax hike to get us out of it. What was the result? Failure. in the case of Bush it was minor but he did lose the next election.
JFK,Reagan,Bush 2,and yes even Clinton (although i give most of the credit for that one to Newt) all faced financial turmoil, and all used free market principles and tax cuts to spur the economy. What was the result? Success. The fact is that if you look at what happened to the economy before Bush 2 took over you can see where Clinton started raising taxes again and how it led directly to the mild recession of the later years. That recession would have been deepened if algore had won the election so just one more reason to be thankful for W.
So is Obama insane? I don't think so. I think he knows exactly what result he's going to get and that's what he's counting on. He needs the crisis for a while longer now. You don't believe me? He's said it himself. As has his cheif of staff and secretary of state.
Oh, yes thank god that Bush was President instead of Gore. Gore would have REALLY fucked things up.
Obama isn't raising taxes, at least not the taxes that count, namely mine. And I don't buy the argument that raising rich people's taxes a couple of a percentage points will cause them to give to give up and take their marbles home. In decades past the top tax rate was much higher (too high no doubt) and rich people still still seemed to have all the incentives they needed.
Doing the same thing over and over is insanity? And yet, your answer when things are good is tax cuts and when things are bad is tax cuts. But only the Right kind of tax cuts. How would you feel about a tax cut targeting the middle class? Oh wait, that's what Obama's doing so I guess you're against it. Hell, we'll probably just spend the money. Oh wait, isn't that the idea?
Bush's tax cuts and deregulation worked and damn it all the economy went to hell anyway. No doubt Clinton's fault, right? If Obama extended the tax cuts would that really solve the problem?
I hope you Republicans keep advocating the same failed policies over and over--we'll have Democratic administrations for the rest of my life, and hopefully my daughter's life too. The Republican party is intellectually bankrupt, completely out of ideas.
Yes, in theory according to your ideology a completely unregulated market would solve all problems. Of course we've never had that and so your belief is unproven.
In practice regulation has been proven to be necessary. In practice deregulation seems to lead to disaster and the crooks come in and loot the industries involved. Your answer--more deregulation.
doing the same thing over and over again AND EXPECTING A DIFFERENT RESULT.
Do you pay taxes gary? do you have a house or apartment? do you have a cell phone? car? computer? high speed internet? you go out to dinner from time to time? smoke some weed? grab a drink after work?
so why should i have to have my taxes raised in order to subsidize your health insurance? You can afford it yourself but you CHOOSE to not have it.
anyway,
i guess to you it's all about who's ox is being gored, but to me it's about what's best for the country.
I would address more of your comment, but i already did numerous times and in fact you're just being ridiculous.
16 comments:
I do not know if the stimulus will work or not. Neither do you. I hope that it does, you know, stimulate the economy. I support it because, yes, a consensus of economists, including Nobel-Prize winning Paul Krugman, think it is necessary. Those who disagree tend to be conservative idealogues who think we need to cut taxes (on the wealthy, for the most part) and deregulate. You know, the program that was in place for the last damn eight years and didn't prevent our economic problems. In fact, probably contributed to them.
Could I be wrong? Yes. In fact I am not at all sure that this will work. You, on the other hand, are completely sure that you are right.
Which brings to mind another quote, this one from Bertrand Russell:"The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt."
Let's not go down this road again where for the next year your entire argument is...
Blah blah blah consensus
Yadda yadda yadda nobel prize
Its just not to be taken seriously.
Sure I could counter you by rattling off a couple hundred economists from libertarian and conservative think tanks that agree with me or see your Krugman and raise you a Lucas but here's the thing...
Economists don't know shit and I hold the Pinewood Derby trophy I won when I was a 10 year old Cub Scout in higher regard than the nobel.
Its pointless to discuss economic theory when we have a wealth of actual economic history to guide us.
Tax cuts stimulate and raising taxes stiffle economies. It really is as simple as that. The reason conservatives always talk about cuts is that libs always talk about hikes, why are you afraid of debate? Could it be that hikes have never rescued a failing economy whereas cuts always have? Cuts worked for Kennedy, they worked for Reagan and yes, they worked for Bush.
And please refer to the "wealthy" by their proper name.... taxpayers.
If the dems insist on using the great depression in comparison as a scaremongering tactic then why the fuck would they insist on doing exactly the same things that prolonged it.
Despite Hoover's tax increase and FDR's massive spending, eight of the twelve years from 1930 to 1942 were considered bear markets with uneployement never dropping below twice todays levels. The average bear market has historically lasted 1.3 years. You do the math.
See Gary you are dead wrong that I don't know what's going to happen with the stimulus (if you can honestly call it that) bill. I know exactly what is going to happen and its not gonna be pretty and its the middle class that will suffer the most.
Even Pelosi doesn't think the stimulus will work and its her bill.
Now that being said, I also know these things are cyclical and most importantly that this too will pass in spite of incompetent political interference.
I also know the thunder in the rifleman's arm. The riflemans name? The United States of America. Fuck yeah!!!
So I'm not about to "go galt" in fact I'm gonna "do the dagny" and try to save this railroad.
I am going to buy a new American car for the first time in my life this weekend and as soon the market gives back yesterdays gains Im going long the Dow.
I will no longer be party to the climate of negativity that liberalism has created. I'm taking my ball but not going home, I'm taking that shit to work. Unlike the President I don't have time to be exhausted, its people like me that have a real job to do.... getting us out of this mess, because it will be the American worker that pulls us through this and not some half-witted nimwits in DC.
....and stop talking about my cocksure. Fag.
If economists don't know shit (and it was John Kenneth Galbraith, I believe, who said that the purpose of economic forecasting was to make astrology look respectable) then you and I don't know shit either. Which was the point of my comment..
I don't know if Krugman or your enonomists are right. When the experts disagree the layman would be wise to suspend judgement.
And yet, you are 100% sure that we need tax cuts even though we had tax cuts during Bush and they didn't work. That's faith.
I have to agree with Gary on the fact that we don't know if it will work or not. Only time will tell. Great quote by the way from B. Russell. Even if you had the capacity to understand every single detail of the history of economics for the past, um, forever, the best you could do is come up with a theory. Knowing is impossible.
While I agree that you don't know shit, I can assure you that I am neither clergy nor layman.
In other words this is my wheelhouse, this is what I do.
If this were a courtroom, my testimony would be classfied expert.
If this were a boardroom, an economist would be fetching my coffee.
And for the last time the Bush cuts worked. They stopped the Clinton recession he inherited dead in its tracks. They instilled investor confidence that was shaken after 911. They increased overall tax revenue by encouraging productivity. They put more of the American workers pay in their own pocket.
In short they promoted six years of pretty solid economic growth for six of eight years up to the collapse of 07. To imply that they either did not work or that they were in fact the cause for the collapse demonstrates either your ignorance on this subject or your that your blind anti Bush partisanship has clouded your judgement.
I am not saying 100% that new cuts are needed I'm saying with 100% certainty that tax hikes and reckless govt spending will fail.
Hind sight is 20/20 my friend. Again, you don't "know". You just "think". Which means it's your theory. You may be right, but you also may be wrong. And anyone who says anything with 100% certainty is seriously testing the laws of physics. I am 99.999999% certain of that.
Ok ill play the game of semantics
100% of past tax increases during a recession have failed.
For everyones sake let's hope this will be the first time and my theort is proven wrong.
...but it won't.
And it would be testing the law of averages if anything jackass. your teeth hitting the ground before your body when I crack you upside your jowls would be phtsics.
Oh, it's physics. Chaos theory my friend. It's all about systems and the economy is a system. So now that I have proven you wrong TWICE, I think I should be given some sort of award, after I pick up my teeth.
Settle down Ashton. I will concede thing on the strength of Dom Deluise's performance in the Cannonball Series.
Doctor Nikolas Van Helsing: Madam, not to be indelicate but in my profession; if you've seen one, you've see them all.
We've got a secret weapon. God is our copilot
God is our copilot? Remember our car?
Two seats!
Where's he gonna sit?
getlive i'm seriously dissappointed in you, gary...well i expect it from gary.
What is the saying about insanity?
Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result....
Hoover,FDR,Johnson,Carter,and i'm sorry to say Bush 1..all faced economic troubles and all tried to use some sort of socialist policies/tax hike to get us out of it. What was the result? Failure. in the case of Bush it was minor but he did lose the next election.
JFK,Reagan,Bush 2,and yes even Clinton (although i give most of the credit for that one to Newt) all faced financial turmoil, and all used free market principles and tax cuts to spur the economy. What was the result? Success. The fact is that if you look at what happened to the economy before Bush 2 took over you can see where Clinton started raising taxes again and how it led directly to the mild recession of the later years. That recession would have been deepened if algore had won the election so just one more reason to be thankful for W.
So is Obama insane? I don't think so. I think he knows exactly what result he's going to get and that's what he's counting on. He needs the crisis for a while longer now. You don't believe me? He's said it himself. As has his cheif of staff and secretary of state.
I think also his chief of staff too, but i could be wrong about that one.
Great, but who are the Chefs? GREAT GOOGLY MOOGLEY
Oh, yes thank god that Bush was President instead of Gore. Gore would have REALLY fucked things up.
Obama isn't raising taxes, at least not the taxes that count, namely mine. And I don't buy the argument that raising rich people's taxes a couple of a percentage points will cause them to give to give up and take their marbles home. In decades past the top tax rate was much higher (too high no doubt) and rich people still still seemed to have all the incentives they needed.
Doing the same thing over and over is insanity? And yet, your answer when things are good is tax cuts and when things are bad is tax cuts. But only the Right kind of tax cuts. How would you feel about a tax cut targeting the middle class? Oh wait, that's what Obama's doing so I guess you're against it. Hell, we'll probably just spend the money. Oh wait, isn't that the idea?
Bush's tax cuts and deregulation worked and damn it all the economy went to hell anyway. No doubt Clinton's fault, right? If Obama extended the tax cuts would that really solve the problem?
I hope you Republicans keep advocating the same failed policies over and over--we'll have Democratic administrations for the rest of my life, and hopefully my daughter's life too. The Republican party is intellectually bankrupt, completely out of ideas.
Yes, in theory according to your ideology a completely unregulated market would solve all problems. Of course we've never had that and so your belief is unproven.
In practice regulation has been proven to be necessary. In practice deregulation seems to lead to disaster and the crooks come in and loot the industries involved. Your answer--more deregulation.
gary keep reading.
doing the same thing over and over again AND EXPECTING A DIFFERENT RESULT.
Do you pay taxes gary? do you have a house or apartment? do you have a cell phone? car? computer? high speed internet? you go out to dinner from time to time? smoke some weed? grab a drink after work?
so why should i have to have my taxes raised in order to subsidize your health insurance? You can afford it yourself but you CHOOSE to not have it.
anyway,
i guess to you it's all about who's ox is being gored, but to me it's about what's best for the country.
I would address more of your comment, but i already did numerous times and in fact you're just being ridiculous.
Post a Comment