I'm curious, we've had many bailouts, each getting larger and larger. Just how many more bailouts are needed to fix the problem and restore the frivolous orgy of spending money we don't have, that our consumer nation has become?

GaryPDX: Just how many more bailouts are needed to fix the problem and restore the frivolous orgy of spending money we don't have, that our consumer nation has become?

42

Totally different, Subby. In 2001 there was a budget surplus and they had an election to buy.

GaryPDX: I'm curious, we've had many bailouts, each getting larger and larger. Just how many more bailouts are needed to fix the problem and restore the frivolous orgy of spending money we don't have, that our consumer nation has become?

Misdirection of the topic, right out of the gate. You must have had your Wheaties this morning, Gary.

TFA: $1.4 trillion tax cut package

I have no problem with tax cuts then and now...what I had a problem with then and still have now is the out of control spending.

01 plan: Gov't will take less money from productive earners so that they can invest more in productive earning

'09 plan: Gov't will take more money from productive earners* to redistribute in the form of pork, waste and pet projects
*many who haven't even been born yet

/Letting me keep more of what I earn feels stimulating; taking away more of what I earn feels like rape

Il Douchey: 01 plan: Gov't will take less money from productive earners so that they can invest more in productive earning

'09 plan: Gov't will take more money from productive earners* to redistribute in the form of pork, waste and pet projects
*many who haven't even been born yet

Well stated my man!

Il Douchey: 01 plan: Gov't will take less money from productive earners so that they can invest more in productive earning

How'd that work out?

Lionel Mandrake: How'd that work out?

Not bad actually. The economy recovered from a reccession, a dot.com bubble burst and a major terror attack. Yes, things have devolved hideously since then, but the tax cuts didn't cause the problems.

/Of course, if you weren't contributing any taxes in the first place, you didn't get any cut; so I guess the "something for nothing" crowd didn't like it so much -but now it's their turn.

Il Douchey: Not bad actually. The economy recovered from a reccession, a dot.com bubble burst and a major terror attack. Yes, things have devolved hideously since then, but the tax cuts didn't cause the problems.

Actually, most economists think the Bush tax cuts were a horrible idea. Moreover, not all of them directly affected the economy in the way you think.

sloppy shoes: Actually, most economists think the Bush tax cuts were a horrible idea

Which is why there are tax cuts in this bill...

Ok then.

Dancin_In_Anson: Which is why there are tax cuts in this bill...

It matters who the tax cuts are for.

Tax cuts for the upper class might increase investments.
Tax cuts for the middle class will almost certainly increase demand.

Dancin_In_Anson: Which is why there are tax cuts in this bill...

Ok then.

One, they are much needed for the lower class.

Two, it was to appease the douchebag Republicans.

hillbillypharmacist: It matters who the tax cuts are for.

sloppy shoes: One, they are much needed for the lower class.

So, are we talking cuts or credits? These are two entirely different animals.

Dancin_In_Anson: So, are we talking cuts or credits? These are two entirely different animals.

Not really. A credit is just a more specific tax cut.

Dancin_In_Anson: Which is why there are tax cuts in this bill...
Ok then.

it may shock you...but there are different types of tax cuts

I know it's a crazy idea, but it is one worth learning about.

Il Douchey: Not bad actually. The economy recovered from a reccession, a dot.com bubble burst and a major terror attack. Yes, things have devolved hideously since then, but the tax cuts didn't cause the problems.

One ^{(^)}

Two ^{(^)}

Three ^{(^)}

bulldg4life: One, Two, Three

All of those articles bemoan the "cost" of the tax cuts to the government; but if BigGuv decides to take less of the money that you earned from you, how is that a cost to them? It was never their money in the first place.

/The real problem was that the GOP taxed like conservatives but still spent like liberals in heat

Guys - its obvious. Back then there was no debt to pay back. Now the Democrats have created a massive debt and they want to borrow even more.

Duh.

Il Douchey: All of those articles bemoan the "cost" of the tax cuts to the government;

Um...that's all you got out of those links?

You lost. Shut the fark up and get over your own hypocrisy.

Has anyone bothered to point out that that $1.4 trillion was over 10 years?

But yeah, it's exactly the same.

Dancin_In_Anson: sloppy shoes: Actually, most economists think the Bush tax cuts were a horrible idea

Which is why there are tax cuts in this bill...

Ok then.

The tax cuts in this bill have nothing to do with the Bush tax cuts. And they're only in there for partisan reasons anyway.

I am all for a $1.4 trillion tax cut stimulus - I am NEVER in favor of an equivalent spending stimulus.

/Not so hard to figure out, is it?

so... just to make sure i understand... tax cuts are okay even if they are unfunded but that is completely different than increased spending even though both have the same result: less coming in than going out?

apparently the rich getting richer the last 8 years didn't make our economy bulletproof after all, maybe something else is worth a try.

Dancin_In_Anson: sloppy shoes: Actually, most economists think the Bush tax cuts were a horrible idea

Which is why there are tax cuts in this bill...

Ok then.

Geez, what a stupid farking argument.

Even for you.

Republicans:Crooks and Liars. whoda' thunk?? lol

Private capital tends to become concentrated in few hands, partly because of competition among the capitalists, and partly because technological development and the increasing division of labor encourage the formation of larger units of production at the expense of the smaller ones. The result of these developments is an oligarchy of private capital the enormous power of which cannot be effectively checked even by a democratically organized political society. This is true since the members of legislative bodies are selected by political parties, largely financed or otherwise influenced by private capitalists who, for all practical purposes, separate the electorate from the legislature. The consequence is that the representatives of the people do not in fact sufficiently protect the interests of the underprivileged sections of the population. Moreover, under existing conditions, private capitalists inevitably control, directly or indirectly, the main sources of information (press, radio, education). It is thus extremely difficult, and indeed in most cases quite impossible, for the individual citizen to come to objective conclusions and to make intelligent use of his political rights. (Albert Einstein, 1949)

voodoorat: so... just to make sure i understand... tax cuts are okay even if they are unfunded but that is completely different than increased spending even though both have the same result: less coming in than going out?

apparently the rich getting richer the last 8 years didn't make our economy bulletproof after all, maybe something else is worth a try.

I think we should cut most people's taxes, cut spending enormous amounts, eliminate DHS, legalize marijuana, and raise the upper brackets back where they used to be (90%). That would be a good start.

Dancin_In_Anson: TFA: $1.4 trillion tax cut package

I have no problem with tax cuts then and now...what I had a problem with then and still have now is the out of control spending.

I agree, we need to cut the Pentagon off from the teat.

liverpool1892: I am all for a $1.4 trillion tax cut stimulus - I am NEVER in favor of an equivalent spending stimulus.

/Not so hard to figure out, is it?

Oh it's easy to figure out what your saying, but it is equally easy to figure out that tax cuts have never successfully stimulated a failing economy. Voodoo economics don't work, period. The only "economists" that would say that VE works are working for the Heritage Foundation or some other equally dubious, right-wing wankfest organization.

iaazathot: Dancin_In_Anson: TFA: $1.4 trillion tax cut package

I have no problem with tax cuts then and now...what I had a problem with then and still have now is the out of control spending.

I agree, we need to cut the Pentagon off from the teat.

Wow, there are so many things wrong right now that I forgot "don't invade other countries and keep military bases all over the world." That's the main one, really.

China's economy is doing very good...8-9% growth in a world-wide recession. Their stimulus package is much larger than the USA's plan. Oh, well. Investing in the GOP was the worst mistake!

China to see early recovery ahead of global economy
(Xinhua)
Updated: 2009-02-06 09:09

Most Chinese economists said China's economy would recover as early as this year, a survey has showed.

China Economic Monitoring and Analysis Center, a survey organization of the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) said in a report on Thursday that 92 percent of the economists polled believed China's economy will recover from the global financial crisis in 2009, backed by the government's four-trillion-yuan stimulus plan.

The survey was carried out at the end of December last year among 73 domestic economists who study the macro economy. Three percent of the polled economists said the stimulus package would pay off in 2010.

The polled economists believed China would embrace an early recovery before the global economy picked up speed.

The average prediction of China's Gross Domestic Product growth in 2009 is 8.0 percent, according to the survey. Some 86 percent of the economists believed the inflation index would drop from 2008, with the Consumer Price Index (CPI) falling from 5.9 to 2.5 percent this year.

China's economy cooled to its slowest pace in seven years in 2008, expanding 9 percent year-on-year as the widening global financial crisis continued to affect the world's fastest-growing major economy, according to data released by NBS.

The 9-percent rate was the lowest since 2001, when an annual rate of 8.3 percent was recorded, and it was the first time China's GDP growth fell into the single-digit range since 2003.

Spending trillions on useless shiat that doesn't help Americans is fine as long as you have an R next to your name.

Remember. If you want to be a useless douche that can get away with anything and then lie about it 10 minutes later and still have millions of morons vote for you then be a Republican.

I am republican, and I will tell you Bush's tax cuts weren't really tax cuts were moronic. There is a reason why the Bush's are related to of English monarchs, he shows the same ass backwards economic ideology that British monarchs showed.

granderoho: I am republican, and I will tell you Bush's tax cuts weren't really tax cuts were moronic. There is a reason why the Bush's are related to of English monarchs, he shows the same ass backwards economic ideology that British monarchs showed.

and one of the reasons we left England to come to the New World.

granderoho: I am republican, and I will tell you Bush's tax cuts weren't really tax cuts were moronic. There is a reason why the Bush's are related to of English monarchs, he shows the same ass backwards economic ideology that British monarchs showed.

It wasn't ass-backwards for the upper-class. The tax cuts did exactly what they were designed to do.

I'm curious, we've had many bailouts, each getting larger and larger. Just how many more bailouts are needed to fix the problem and restore the frivolous orgy of spending money we don't have, that our consumer nation has become?

1.4 Trillion dollars in 2001 is not larger than 800 Billion dollars in 2009.

So much fail.

It's almost sad.

Dancin_In_Anson: TFA: $1.4 trillion tax cut package

I have no problem with tax cuts then and now...what I had a problem with then and still have now is the out of control spending.

There's a HUGE difference between a tax cut, and out of control Congressional spending on pork projects.

bulldg4life: Il Douchey: Not bad actually. The economy recovered from a reccession, a dot.com bubble burst and a major terror attack. Yes, things have devolved hideously since then, but the tax cuts didn't cause the problems.

One (^)

Two (^)

Three (^)

Why is it that Congress always asks if THEY can afford a tax cut, but they never wonder if WE can afford a tax increase?

Do I earn my money or not???

The ignorance and/or intellectual dishonesty promulgated by Tax Cut Crusaders is staggering. Flat taxation didn't work a century ago, tax cuts didn't work 25 years ago, and tax cuts didn't work 8 years ago. That earnest, empirical Farkers continue respond to those kooks is mind-boggling.

iaazathot: Dancin_In_Anson: TFA: $1.4 trillion tax cut package

I have no problem with tax cuts then and now...what I had a problem with then and still have now is the out of control spending.

I agree, we need to cut the Pentagon off from the teat.

Because defending ourselves is so over-rated.

Linux_Yes: granderoho: I am republican, and I will tell you Bush's tax cuts weren't really tax cuts were moronic. There is a reason why the Bush's are related to of English monarchs, he shows the same ass backwards economic ideology that British monarchs showed.

and one of the reasons we left England to come to the New World.

And yet, we saddled ourselves with another insane idiot named George.

Linux_Yes: Republicans:Crooks and Liars. whoda' thunk?? lol

Private capital tends to become concentrated in few hands, partly because of competition among the capitalists, and partly because technological development and the increasing division of labor encourage the formation of larger units of production at the expense of the smaller ones. The result of these developments is an oligarchy of private capital the enormous power of which cannot be effectively checked even by a democratically organized political society. This is true since the members of legislative bodies are selected by political parties, largely financed or otherwise influenced by private capitalists who, for all practical purposes, separate the electorate from the legislature. The consequence is that the representatives of the people do not in fact sufficiently protect the interests of the underprivileged sections of the population. Moreover, under existing conditions, private capitalists inevitably control, directly or indirectly, the main sources of information (press, radio, education). It is thus extremely difficult, and indeed in most cases quite impossible, for the individual citizen to come to objective conclusions and to make intelligent use of his political rights. (Albert Einstein, 1949)

In how many threads are you going to post the same freaking quotes? 10? 12?

TigerStar: China's economy is doing very good...8-9% growth in a world-wide recession. Their stimulus package is much larger than the USA's plan. Oh, well. Investing in the GOP was the worst mistake!

China to see early recovery ahead of global economy
(Xinhua)
Updated: 2009-02-06 09:09

Most Chinese economists said China's economy would recover as early as this year, a survey has showed.

China Economic Monitoring and Analysis Center, a survey organization of the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) said in a report on Thursday that 92 percent of the economists polled believed China's economy will recover from the global financial crisis in 2009, backed by the government's four-trillion-yuan stimulus plan.

The survey was carried out at the end of December last year among 73 domestic economists who study the macro economy. Three percent of the polled economists said the stimulus package would pay off in 2010.

The polled economists believed China would embrace an early recovery before the global economy picked up speed.

The average prediction of China's Gross Domestic Product growth in 2009 is 8.0 percent, according to the survey. Some 86 percent of the economists believed the inflation index would drop from 2008, with the Consumer Price Index (CPI) falling from 5.9 to 2.5 percent this year.

China's economy cooled to its slowest pace in seven years in 2008, expanding 9 percent year-on-year as the widening global financial crisis continued to affect the world's fastest-growing major economy, according to data released by NBS.

The 9-percent rate was the lowest since 2001, when an annual rate of 8.3 percent was recorded, and it was the first time China's GDP growth fell into the single-digit range since 2003.

Dude, you are quoting Communist Government Economists from a State run Communist News Source.

This just in from Newsmax.com! Bush was the greatest President EVER!!! Obama did not really get sworn in!!! Obama's Recession Deepens as Republicans fight valiantly to save the economy form liberal policies!!

Who would you rather? Palin or Coulter?

/just sayin..

glassa: Why is it that Congress always asks if THEY can afford a tax cut, but they never wonder if WE can afford a tax increase?

No one is considering raising taxes, luckily. Post again, and hopefully it'll be relevant.

TofuTheAlmighty: The ignorance and/or intellectual dishonesty promulgated by Tax Cut Crusaders is staggering. Flat taxation didn't work a century ago, tax cuts didn't work 25 years ago, and tax cuts didn't work 8 years ago. That earnest, empirical Farkers continue respond to those kooks is mind-boggling.

Tax cuts + huge increases in spending never work, but stating "tax cuts never work" is stupid. Tax cuts given to the proper segment of the populace have significant beneficial effects.

DamnYankees: Guys - its obvious. Back then there was no debt to pay back. Now the Democrats RepugnantCons have created a massive debt and they want to borrow even more.

Duh.
Your comment was broken, I fixed it for you.

Wow. For once, I think GaryPDX had a good question.

We can throw as much money at this as can possibly be invented because that money doesn't actually exist. The vast majority of our economy exists in the form of leveraged capital accessible only to banks and investment firms. This is something that started decades ago. Do you know anyone who lives on cash? I don't. Most everyone is in debt far beyond their immediate means because that's about the only way to actually *have* anything. Car loans, mortgages, financed medical/dental bills, life insurance, retirement funds... all of it is based on leveraged capital that is so far removed from any tangible assets that it's become meaningless.

We can print money and puke it out to the "people" as much as we want, but all we're doing is giving a face to the phantom money that the banking institutions have owned and sold for years. This country is Link (new window)over 10 trillion dollars in debt in the public sector alone! It's that much AGAIN in the private sector.

There isn't a "stimulus package" that can be devised that can fix this. The problem isn't spending, it's unregulated usury lending practices combined with a basic lack of education on the part of the consuming public. Most folks try to be responsible, but if you can't find a house for less than $250K and a car for less than $15K and medical bills for mom's heart condition in excess of $10K a year, then what the hell are you supposed to do? The median income of the American population is just over $50K.

We've been getting anal raped by banking and investment firms for decades. All any stimulus package can do at this point is act as a bit of KY lubricant to help dull the pain. Notice that every speech every public official gives is just that the stimulus package will help "bolster the confidence" of consumers in the economy.

The system is broken. Unless we correct, reformulate and re-regulate the economic system as it exists, this problem isn't going away.

Il Douchey: '09 plan: Gov't will take more money from productive earners* to redistribute in the form of pork, waste and pet projects

Pork projects like scientific research! Take that liberal academic elites!

* NSF 100% cut ($1,402,000,000)
* NASA exploration 50% cut ($750,000,000)
* NOAA 34.94% cut ($427,000,000)
* NIST 37.91% cut ($218,000,000)
* DOE energy efficiency & renewable energy 38% cut ($1,000,000,000)
* DOE office of science 100% cut ($100,000,000)