Go fuck yourself thread.

[mpd]

...i was not trying to start shit with anyone... the statement about people LIVING LARGE on welfare is the MOTHER FUCKING exception I can promise you... Why don't you go to the poor side of town and see how some poor folks live...

Seemed to me that you were trying to start some shit. Just sayin'.

On the poverty thing, when you subsidize something you get more of it and when you tax something you get less of it. I don't pity the poor and I don't envy the rich because I know you cannot create prosperity for the many by taking the money out of the pockets of the few.

You can't tax your way out of a recession.

Redistributing wealth has a shorter name: stealing and stealing is not sustainable policy.

You can't spend your way to prosperity and you can't borrow your way out of debt.

If you want to argue about economics I'm an economist and will be glad to debate you, but you shouldn't bring a water pistol to a gun battle. Load up and try again.

 

[KSP]

This is supposed to be a happy day. Let's not bicker and argue about who killed who.

 

[One Love 731]

The whole dirty system, go fuck yourself. Well thats my list, thanks for the chance to get that off me chest. 1

 

[Hermanthegerman]

What a funny thread!

Go fuck yourself boss, weekend and 1 week holidays!

 

[ShroomDr]

"To all those people who take Hawaiian vacations with their food stamp money."
-Newt Gingrich
(link)


Which airliner takes food stamps again?

 

[cobcoop]

Which airliner takes food stamps again?

Pretty sure it's delta... fuckin freak show on those planes

 

[Hermanthegerman]

Go fuck myself, another sunday wasted before the computer!

 

[Jellyfish]

.

Redistributing wealth has a shorter name: stealing and stealing is not sustainable policy.

I give it a different name- stealing it back from those bastards. Do you really think the one percent didn't steal it all in the first place? Go ask an Indian, if you can still find one.

 

[ShroomDr]

=

seems fair to me.

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

... Redistributing wealth has a shorter name: stealing and stealing is not sustainable policy.

Redistributing wealth is just a distraction from the idea that too few opportunities exist, therefore we keep the unwashed masses down so that more opportunity falls in our lap. That's the way we like it, falling in our lap. Those who realize that strong economies don't diminish their own fortunes merely see themselves as separate and apart from the general public. We used to lay railroad tracks to delineate the haves from have nots.

Our parents and grandparents didn't dicuss religion and politics as openly as we do. The rich didn't promote discussions of money because their interests were diametrically opposed to too many.

Now, half the electorate actually swallows what the top once refrained from admitting, they're greedy.

It's the same argument that casts aspersions of freebies when folks want to be able to purchase affordable health care by joining larger pools of policy holders.

It's the same argument that thinks less opportunity will be afforded to personal interest if unemployment is greatly reduced.

It's the same argument that has yet to admit (at least publicly) a class is better than it's mass. We have comments such as "Let them eat cake" and "Only the little people pay taxes" to understand that greed has transgressed for centuries and will continue.

If managed macro economics isn't sustainable (i.e, the mid to late 1990s) it requires a subsequent administration to reverse course.

Bring some evidence that supply side grows economies. I'll show you where they hide the baloney and point to their actual record.

Only Frank Luntz and those like him would look at the numbers and change the dialog, not the policies. When a salesman changes their approach without changing the problematic aspect, we call them crooks. They don't fix the problem, they crook the pitch - thus the sale.

 

[Captain Ginyu]

My list is too long, so I'll just sum them all up & call them "The Establishment", which is what they are anyways. So here you go Establishment!!!...(raises both middle fingers)

 

[paladin420]

Has it been said lately??? LEO GO FUCK YOURSELF...My old longhaired ass just taught your daughter how to rip bong hits...she likes IT...doing my part for a better tomorro!!! Cause tonite is ssswwwweeeetttt...

 

[SOTF420]

#1 - People who do "fuck" themselves often do not leave the house, well maybe not often other than to buy batteries & groceries. Many of the hottest chicks do just stay at home watching TV and doing "other various things" while the poor drunk dudes waste their time looking for them out in bars & clubs only to be rubbing elbows with all the other desperate guys out there many of which I truly feel bad for. So, all you hot horny chicks out there please do not I repeat DO NOT go fuck yourselves, please just let us men do it for you! Spread the love!


#2 - Fuck the brainwashed politicians who still preach non-factual lies about our wonderful Cannabis plant and instead push their big pharma poison & cash motivated ideals on the innocent people of this great country. FUCK YOU bastards and burn in the ashes of hell for infringing upon our freedoms and human rights!

Long live Cannabis!

 

[mpd]

I give it a different name- stealing it back from those bastards. Do you really think the one percent didn't steal it all in the first place? Go ask an Indian, if you can still find one.

Funny how you mention Indians. They traded self-sufficiency for government support and now their culture has imploded and they are the poorest minority in our country. I would ask them but they are too poor to be able to afford anything other than having the government decide their lives for them. They have the power to originate sovereign debt, tax and create their own government and they have utterly failed.

 

[mpd]

Redistributing wealth is just a distraction from the idea that too few opportunities exist, therefore we keep the unwashed masses down so that more opportunity falls in our lap. That's the way we like it, falling in our lap. Those who realize that strong economies don't diminish their own fortunes merely see themselves as separate and apart from the general public. We used to lay railroad tracks to delineate the haves from have nots.

Our parents and grandparents didn't dicuss religion and politics as openly as we do. The rich didn't promote discussions of money because their interests were diametrically opposed to too many.

Now, half the electorate actually swallows what the top once refrained from admitting, they're greedy.

It's the same argument that casts aspersions of freebies when folks want to be able to purchase affordable health care by joining larger pools of policy holders.

It's the same argument that thinks less opportunity will be afforded to personal interest if unemployment is greatly reduced.

It's the same argument that has yet to admit (at least publicly) a class is better than it's mass. We have comments such as "Let them eat cake" and "Only the little people pay taxes" to understand that greed has transgressed for centuries and will continue.

If managed macro economics isn't sustainable (i.e, the mid to late 1990s) it requires a subsequent administration to reverse course.

Bring some evidence that supply side grows economies. I'll show you where they hide the baloney and point to their actual record.

Only Frank Luntz and those like him would look at the numbers and change the dialog, not the policies. When a salesman changes their approach without changing the problematic aspect, we call them crooks. They don't fix the problem, they crook the pitch - thus the sale.

In 1980 the top 1% paid 14% of the total tax bite and then we had the supply-side economic revolution under Ronald Reagan and the top rate was reduced from 78% to 28%. The results are seen today; the top 1% now pay 40% of the tax bite. There's the prima facie evidence you cannot ignore - unless you do.

Supply-side economics always works because consumption based economics are the worst possible elective activity an economic society can elect to undertake. You can't spend your way to prosperity, you can only invest your way there.

If central-planned economies could work, then the largest economy on the planet would be the USSR and it would be closely followed by China, North Korea, Vietnam, Angola and Cuba. Yet all of these countries have per capital GDP rankings below the Top 100 countries in the world.

 

[KSP]

Great to see the polishit creeps into everything and everywhere. FFS

 

[Hermanthegerman]

Love this thread,.....

Go fuck yourself trash can, why I have to carry you out during this rain and storm!

 

[ShroomDr]

In 1980 the top 1% paid 14%

How much of the wealth did the top 1% control in 1980?

It was no where near what it is today, 400 Americans have the same net worth as the bottom 200,000,000.

Look though history to see the future.

Our 1880-1920, and more extremely the Russian Revolution, their Time of Troubles.

If you really take a step back, if it gets much worse, who's really gonna lose out?

You have never seen a U-Haul following a hearse have you?

Extreme income inequality is flat wrong. If they ultra rich dont correct it themselves, it gets corrected for them.

Sonny, if ya father dies you take the deal.

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

In 1980 the top 1% paid 14% of the total tax bite and then we had the supply-side economic revolution under Ronald Reagan and the top rate was reduced from 78% to 28%. The results are seen today; the top 1% now pay 40% of the tax bite. There's the prima facie evidence you cannot ignore - unless you do.

Their rate of income has tripled since the 70s. Nice try.

Supply-side economics always works because consumption based economics are the worst possible elective activity an economic society can elect to undertake. You can't spend your way to prosperity, you can only invest your way there.

Lol. That's why business sits on $2.7 trillion. There's no demand to increase consumption. Our economy is consumption based and everyday commerce generates 70% of our GDP. The investment argument is mott unless you're willing to invest.

If central-planned economies could work, then the largest economy on the planet would be the USSR and it would be closely followed by China, North Korea, Vietnam, Angola and Cuba. Yet all of these countries have per capital GDP rankings below the Top 100 countries in the world.

Still on the commie argument.

 

[GP73LPC]

Seemed to me that you were trying to start some shit. Just sayin'.

On the poverty thing, when you subsidize something you get more of it and when you tax something you get less of it. I don't pity the poor and I don't envy the rich because I know you cannot create prosperity for the many by taking the money out of the pockets of the few.

You can't tax your way out of a recession.

Redistributing wealth has a shorter name: stealing and stealing is not sustainable policy.

You can't spend your way to prosperity and you can't borrow your way out of debt.

If you want to argue about economics I'm an economist and will be glad to debate you, but you shouldn't bring a water pistol to a gun battle. Load up and try again.

i think maybe you need to go re-read my post...

i didn't make a statement in regards to the economy, nor suggest i had the answers to our economic situation....

what i did do was giggle about you being pissed at poor people LIVING LARGE on welfare... you must know some really well off poor people on welfare, cuz ( i repeat) i don't know anyone LIVING LARGE on welfare...