Citrate1007: So vote for Romney's economic plan that he refuses to give specific details about other than tax cuts, deregulation, and allowing major industries to fail?

He gave specifics.

He's going to do the opposite of Obama.

Which to me, means raise taxes. After all, Obama did sign the Bush tax cut extension plus cut taxes with the stimulus, as well as the payroll tax cut.

Cletus C.:
You, on the other hand, have your nose so far up Obama's ass you think you're smelling daisies, if you don't mind me saying so.

I DO mind, because I don't have my nose up anyone's "ass". I pointed out that Romney has nothing to build on except flip flopping, and you assume that I blindly follow Obama? Actually, if the Republicans had a single viable candidate to offer, I would have considered voting Republican, but they lost the last person that had any sense when they let Huntsman drop off. The rest look like they had just graduated from clown college, and they sounded no better in the "debates". Don't assume because I think the Republicans had nothing to offer but clowns that I am some kind of Obama freak. The simple truth is that the Right has produced nobody of substance in this election cycle, and Obama has had far more results than the Right will ever admit. Looking at it that way, I am comfortable staying with Obama, whereas I am completely uncomfortable with Bachmann, Palin, Gingrich, Cain, Perry, Santorum or Romney even being the local dogcatcher, let alone Leader of the Free World. Suddenly those 'Miss Me Yet' Dubya posters would seem to be relevant.

That's the problem: The Right has offered up such bad options that people are starting to wonder if having Bush back would be a better option for a Republican "leader". Think on that one.

Cletus C.: and we're going to wrap all that in a dubious birth certificate.

Political crap is political crap.


Well, at least you can identify the "dubious birth certificate" line as "political crap". There's hope for you yet...

meat0918: Citrate1007: So vote for Romney's economic plan that he refuses to give specific details about other than tax cuts, deregulation, and allowing major industries to fail?

He gave specifics.

He's going to do the opposite of Obama.


You mean he's not going to be President? Because Obama is President, so the opposite is to not be President. That may be the first truthful thing he has said in his entire campaign.

bdub77
Economy sucks, I just don't know how this is Obama's fault.
Really?

He is the president. His party has been the majority in power since 2006 and has added more to the deficit than any other president in history (it's not even close) in only one term and we have 2% GDP and 8% unemployment to show for it.

His economic policies have failed miserably right in front of our very eyes. How on earth can he not be held responsible for it?

Oh that's right, we should decrease taxes on the wealthy, that'll solve the problem. After all, if they have more money they'll be more likely to invest more money overseas in China and India. Which somehow means more jobs in America.

The United States has the highest corporate tax rate in the world and Democrats like you think this is good for business.

And we should offset all that non-growth in private sector jobs with massive layoffs in the public sector. Got it.

Those jobs were created in the first place because we private sector that could pay for them. Now we don't.

The public sector was created to serve the private sector, not the other way around.

cameroncrazy1984: More_Like_A_Stain: Dog Welder: I don't think anyone's really being fooled by the limp job numbers, but on the other hand I'm sure nobody is being fooled by RMoney saying he's going to create 500k jobs per month when he gets into office, either.

Romney only said that that's what the number should be. He never said that he would be able to achieve that number.

Well then that's an incredibly pointless statement.

And that pretty much defines the entire Romney campaign. He has offered nothing of substance that he himself has not opposed at some other point in time.

MFL: The United States has the highest corporate tax rate in the world and Democrats like you think this is good for business.

Only if you don't adjust for deductions and subsidies. Once you do that, the true corporate tax rate becomes one of the lowest in the industrialized world. So your argument is disingenuous at best. I know for a fact this has been pointed out to you before, and yet you keep sliding that same argument in there as if it's some sort of revelation.

Stop it.

Intrigued by Romney? Really? Did you forget the 8 years of looting by George W. Bush and a GOP controlled Congress?

What more do you need to know? Enron? WorldComm? Housing bubble? 9-11? No WMD?

pacified: Intrigued by Romney? Really? Did you forget the 8 years of looting by George W. Bush and a GOP controlled Congress?

What more do you need to know? Enron? WorldComm? Housing bubble? 9-11? No WMD?


But if we stop coddling the top 1% then Zombie Osama wins!

MFL: The public sector was created to serve the private sector, not the other way around.

No the Public sector was created to serve the people, not businesses.

Cletus C.: OK, now we're going to talk about the community organizer with no real job experience, a USA!-hating wife, a racist preacher who tells him what to do, a phony belief in Christianity masking his brotherhood, and we're going to wrap all that in a dubious birth certificate.

Hey, go for it. I encourage Mr. Romney and the rest of the GOP to use these attacks on the President.

FTA: Another depressing statistic: The nation's companies are generating more output than before the recession started - suggesting the 5 million workers they shed have become redundant. Who in Washington has an answer for that?

Well, for starters, Washington can change some things to make employing people in India more unappealing to get a lot of those jobs back over to the U.S. The jobs are only "redundant" in the sense that someone in India is doing the job for far less.

Dog Welder: FTA: Another depressing statistic: The nation's companies are generating more output than before the recession started - suggesting the 5 million workers they shed have become redundant. Who in Washington has an answer for that?

Well, for starters, Washington can change some things to make employing people in India more unappealing to get a lot of those jobs back over to the U.S. The jobs are only "redundant" in the sense that someone in India is doing the job for far less.


Far less hourly, but they can be expensive. The ones this company uses are the shiattiest programmers I've ever seen. The amount of time spent on redoing their useless code, the resources they waste, plus the time spent trying to decipher some of their emails...

The greatest task the Democratic Party has at hand:

EDUCATE THE REPUBLICANS !!!!!

The Why Not Guy: Cletus C.: OK, now we're going to talk about the community organizer with no real job experience, a USA!-hating wife, a racist preacher who tells him what to do, a phony belief in Christianity masking his brotherhood, and we're going to wrap all that in a dubious birth certificate.

Hey, go for it. I encourage Mr. Romney and the rest of the GOP to use these attacks on the President.

Again? Child please.

Lucky LaRue: Cletus C.: Come on, right wingers. Have they chased you all away? Can't we have some fun?

Most conservatives won't post on non-partisan-moderated political forums because the tea baggers have made all of you look like nut jobs with the crazy-blogs (breitbart, world-net, etc.al). To be fair, the herbal teahadists aggravate the situation by painting the rational conservatives with the same, broad brush, but ya'll got a problem with your image that isn't going to go away until you deal with it.

The point I'm trying so hard to make is most of the people here seem to have the Obama campaign's hands up their backs.

Cletus C.: Lucky LaRue: Cletus C.: Come on, right wingers. Have they chased you all away? Can't we have some fun?

Most conservatives won't post on non-partisan-moderated political forums because the tea baggers have made all of you look like nut jobs with the crazy-blogs (breitbart, world-net, etc.al). To be fair, the herbal teahadists aggravate the situation by painting the rational conservatives with the same, broad brush, but ya'll got a problem with your image that isn't going to go away until you deal with it.

The point I'm trying so hard to make is most of the people here seem to have the Obama campaign's hands up their backs.

Aww, it's ok. It's only natural for ventriloquist dummies to think that everyone else must be a ventriloquist dummy as well.

Cletus C.: The point I'm trying so hard to make is most of the people here seem to have the Obama campaign's hands up their backs.

Seems clear enough to me. If it's not taking root, maybe it's just not true.

Descartes: After he spends a billion dollars painting Rmoney as teh anti-christ, no one is gonna care about the economy. Rmoney doesn't have a chance.

Wow, really? You are going with the money thing? With Romney? And the Super PACS? Bwahahahaha!

Cletus C.: OK, now we're going to talk about the community organizer with no real job experience, a USA!-hating wife, a racist preacher who tells him what to do, a phony belief in Christianity masking his brotherhood, and we're going to wrap all that in a dubious birth certificate.

Political crap is political crap.

Wow, I haven't seen a flameout like that since Ted Stryker was over Macho Grande. Well played.

Jim_Tressel's_O-Face: Cletus C.: OK, now we're going to talk about the community organizer with no real job experience, a USA!-hating wife, a racist preacher who tells him what to do, a phony belief in Christianity masking his brotherhood, and we're going to wrap all that in a dubious birth certificate.

Political crap is political crap.

Wow, I haven't seen a flameout like that since Ted Stryker was over Macho Grande. Well played.

Ted Stryker will never get over Macho Grande.

I'm waiting for the GOP to start claiming retirees are all Obama operatives.

the opposite of charity is justice: I'm waiting for the GOP to start claiming retirees are all Obama operatives.


I'm waiting for the retirees to realize the Right wants to end their Social Security and Medicare programs...

pwhp_67: the opposite of charity is justice: I'm waiting for the GOP to start claiming retirees are all Obama operatives.


I'm waiting for the retirees to realize the Right wants to end their Social Security and Medicare programs...

They are, slowly but surely, they are.

The whole, we'll leave it alone for people 55 and older, the rest can use vouchers that don't keep pace with medical inflation didn't fly with a lot of older people.

pwhp_67: the opposite of charity is justice: I'm waiting for the GOP to start claiming retirees are all Obama operatives.


I'm waiting for the retirees to realize the Right wants to end their Social Security and Medicare programs...

The right's been pretty good about placating those fears, usually by proposing phase-ins so changes don't affect current or soon-to-be beneficiaries.

SpaceButler: Trickle-down thinking amazes me.


It also goes against their own interests, which you would think they would have told their GOP puppets.

They get richer by investing their money and when the Middle Class has money to spend, and they spend it, businesses grow creating more investment opportunities for the wealthy. The top 5% should always want a strong middle class and the Republicans are taking that away from them...

SpaceButler: A rational rich person, given extra money, will invest that money in ways which earn him or her even more money. For every $x they invest, they expect to keep that $x and gain $y. That $y has to come from elsewhere in the economy. Making rich people richer doesn't "trickle down" to everyone else -- it gives them the leverage to extract even more.

I generally agree with what you've written in this post, but the part I've bolded is simply wrong. It's not a zero-sum game. Furthermore, the common misconception that it is a zero-sum game is at least part of why the wealthy are disinclined to allow any of their gains to be clawed back - they don't understand that, ultimately, their continued success depends on the success of the broader community.

lennavan: The economy added a measly 115,000 jobs in April.

This is how you know everyone recognizes the economy is better. The right is scoffing at 115,000 new jobs.

[farm6.staticflickr.com image 500x349]

IT'S NOT ENOUGH! IF EVERYONE ISN'T EMPLOYED THEN THE ECONOMY IS GETTING WORSE AND IT'S ALL OBAMA'S FAULT!!!!!

SpaceButler: BMulligan: I generally agree with what you've written in this post, but the part I've bolded is simply wrong. It's not a zero-sum game. Furthermore, the common misconception that it is a zero-sum game is at least part of why the wealthy are disinclined to allow any of their gains to be clawed back - they don't understand that, ultimately, their continued success depends on the success of the broader community.

As I said in the next paragraph, for the sake of making a simpler/clearer/shorter argument, I was deliberately omitting the factor of time and the increase of monetary supply over that time. What I meant to express was not that economics is a zero-sum game; I was just trying to highlight the idea that, for the most part, the money rich people earn on investments is money that was previously in the hands of others.

As an off-the-cuff attempt to rephrase my argument without the zero-sum implication:
Getting extra money to the top x% (by wealth) will only be a net benefit to the economy as a whole if the return which those people gain off of their resulting investments is, in aggregate, less than (100-x)% of the total increase in available money during the time it takes those investments to mature.

Does that work better?

No problem. As I said, the remainder of your post was spot on, so I was inclined to assume you were engaging in a bit of simplification for the sake of brevity. I did think it was important to mention, though, that the erroneous notion that it is a zero-sum game is part of what motivates the wealthy to wage class warfare.

Poopspasm: mrshowrules: 342,000 Americans gave up looking for jobs

according to author, nobody retired last month, they gave up looking for jobs

Exactly. Lost on these clowns is the fact that a lot of people's stock portfolios are performing well, allowing them to retire. Such a thing was not possible in 2009.

Really? That's your spin? Why then is the labor participation rate still so much lower than in 2007, when stock prices were higher than today?

I'm not blaming Obama for job losses, but don't fool yourself into thinking that people leaving the workforce isn't relevant.

Cletus C.
This place is truly an Obama circle jerk.

I don't think he's been a bad president. But I am intrigued by what Romney might bring as president.

I see weaknesses in both but overall it's not one of those elections where people need to vote for the candidate they hate the least.

But fark is too heavily populated with Obama apologists and those who seek to rationalize all his failures. They spout political talking points like automatons. Come on, right wingers. Have they chased you all away? Can't we have some fun?

Post of the f**king month. For me, both obama & romney suck, the the mouth-breathing obama supporters will attempt to rationalize anything their despot does.

Mikey1969: Another depressing statistic: The nation's companies are generating more output than before the recession started - suggesting the 5 million workers they shed have become redundant. Who in Washington has an answer for that?


NOBODY in Washington has an "answer" for companies being able to produce more output with a smaller workforce, you morons. It's not a magic formula that can be fixed, it's a side effect of technological progress. Jesus, how stupid can these people be?

Representative Ned Ludd does. Vote Ned Ludd. Stoop technology in its tracks. First we'll destroy the calculators, and hire two men per device to do the math. Then we'll destroy the welding robots and put men, real men, back in the car factories. Don't think you're safe, though, threshing machine, you job destroyer.

Vote Ned Ludd, and we'll put the MAN back in manufacturing, managriculture, and manthematics. Ned Ludd, for the better tomorrows of yesterday.

FARTNOISE FARTNOISE JUNIOR: Mikey1969: Another depressing statistic: The nation's companies are generating more output than before the recession started - suggesting the 5 million workers they shed have become redundant. Who in Washington has an answer for that?


NOBODY in Washington has an "answer" for companies being able to produce more output with a smaller workforce, you morons. It's not a magic formula that can be fixed, it's a side effect of technological progress. Jesus, how stupid can these people be?

Representative Ned Ludd does. Vote Ned Ludd. Stoop technology in its tracks. First we'll destroy the calculators, and hire two men per device to do the math. Then we'll destroy the welding robots and put men, real men, back in the car factories. Don't think you're safe, though, threshing machine, you job destroyer.

Vote Ned Ludd, and we'll put the MAN back in manufacturing, managriculture, and manthematics. Ned Ludd, for the better tomorrows of yesterday.

And no, I don't proofread out of protest of spellcheckers.

DrippinBalls: Cletus C.
This place is truly an Obama circle jerk.

I don't think he's been a bad president. But I am intrigued by what Romney might bring as president.

I see weaknesses in both but overall it's not one of those elections where people need to vote for the candidate they hate the least.

But fark is too heavily populated with Obama apologists and those who seek to rationalize all his failures. They spout political talking points like automatons. Come on, right wingers. Have they chased you all away? Can't we have some fun?

Post of the f**king month. For me, both obama & romney suck, the the mouth-breathing obama supporters will attempt to rationalize anything their despot does.

All I learned from your post is you don't know what despot means.