Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Guy)   Understanding Obama's Loot and Plunder Theory   (larrymwalkerjr.blogspot.com ) divider line
    More: Obvious, obama, private economy, pejorative, u.s. politics, Reaganomics, obamanomics, capital gains taxes, wages  
•       •       •

1710 clicks; posted to Politics » on 15 Aug 2012 at 10:33 AM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



108 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2012-08-15 08:09:06 AM  
In the real world, and called by its proper name, supply-side economics has never failed.

*facepalm*

/your blog sucks
 
2012-08-15 08:12:34 AM  
John Maynard Keynes and his Amazing Time Machine
 
2012-08-15 08:15:22 AM  
The a.m. derp.
 
2012-08-15 08:19:34 AM  
is this freep week or what?

In the real world, and called by its proper name, supply-side economics has never failed.

this is literally the opposite of reality. how do people get away with stating bullshiat that is so easily refuted?
 
2012-08-15 08:35:10 AM  

FlashHarry: is this freep week or what?

In the real world, and called by its proper name, supply-side economics has never failed.

this is literally the opposite of reality. how do people get away with stating bullshiat that is so easily refuted?


It is not untrue. Sure, supply-side economics will destroy infrastructure, leave more unemployed and create a greater gulf in wealth distribution while impoverishing whole new sections of the nation or world. It will, however, consistently supply more money to the wealthy. From that standpoint, it works like a charm.

The problem isn't whether it works or not, because it does work. The issue is selling this as some kind of positive for the nation as a whole rather than being honest and simply acknowledging that it is a way to repay your wealthy friends for investing in your campaign or acknowledging your intent to return to the days of feudalism.
 
2012-08-15 08:37:27 AM  

dr_blasto: It is not untrue. Sure, supply-side economics will destroy infrastructure, leave more unemployed and create a greater gulf in wealth distribution while impoverishing whole new sections of the nation or world. It will, however, consistently supply more money to the wealthy. From that standpoint, it works like a charm.


From the perspective of the wealthy, the infrastructure and unemployment problems are also good things - the closer people are to the edge, the more they're hanging on by their fingernails, the harder they'll work for less.
 
2012-08-15 08:39:41 AM  
...in other words from their perspective it has worked perfectly and anyone who thinks otherwise is a peasant.
 
2012-08-15 08:42:31 AM  
can we get a "blog" tab?
 
2012-08-15 08:44:17 AM  

unlikely: dr_blasto: It is not untrue. Sure, supply-side economics will destroy infrastructure, leave more unemployed and create a greater gulf in wealth distribution while impoverishing whole new sections of the nation or world. It will, however, consistently supply more money to the wealthy. From that standpoint, it works like a charm.

From the perspective of the wealthy, the infrastructure and unemployment problems are also good things - the closer people are to the edge, the more they're hanging on by their fingernails, the harder they'll work for less.


I can't wait for some schmuck who makes less than I do to waddle in here and defend it
 
2012-08-15 08:48:38 AM  
I wish I could write a sucky blog so I could get retarded greenlights.
 
2012-08-15 08:49:31 AM  

skinnycatullus: In the real world, and called by its proper name, supply-side economics has never failed.

*facepalm*

/your blog sucks


And this was exactly what I was gonna post. ARE YOU A WIZARD??
 
2012-08-15 08:49:47 AM  
oooooh great blog shiatmitter
 
2012-08-15 08:50:17 AM  
It is an irrefutable fact that the richest Americans love trickling down on the poor.

R. Kelly is pretty rich and he provided a perfect example of the plan in action.
 
2012-08-15 08:53:01 AM  

SilentStrider: I wish I could write a sucky blog so I could get retarded greenlights.


1. Put on Derp Hat and drool words all over the digital page, insure you use the President's middle name.
2. Submit to Fark.
3. Greenlit Profit!
 
2012-08-15 08:53:26 AM  

xanadian: And this was exactly what I was gonna post. ARE YOU A WIZARD??


Don't tell James Randi.
 
2012-08-15 09:06:54 AM  
Heh
 
2012-08-15 09:07:01 AM  
In the real world, and called by its proper name, supply-side economics has never failed.

Yes. The only thing that ever prevented Reaganonics from actually working was that some people called it 'pissing down out back while telling us it's raining'. Oh woe to us; if only we had called it by it's Christian name!
 
2012-08-15 09:14:11 AM  
*opens page link*
*sees phrase trickle-up-theory*
*closes page*
*rolls eyes*
*posts sarcastic comment*
 
2012-08-15 09:26:11 AM  
"We have to remind the far-left, including our clownish president (act like a clown and you get called one), that the four pillars of Reagan's economic policy were to reduce growth of government spending, reduce income taxes and capital gains taxes, reduce government regulation of the economy, and control the money supply to reduce inflation. "

Controlling the money supply to reduce inflation was the one thing that really helped.
But that was a Fed policy that began in 1979, more than a year before Reagan was even elected.
 
2012-08-15 09:33:10 AM  
'natural born conservative' is kind of an idiot.
 
2012-08-15 09:36:10 AM  
You mean the past three years of spend, spend, spend that have yet to stimulate the economy isn't trickle down?

Reaganomics failed in the 80's and Obamanomics has failed him in this decade. The only thing we have showing are the trillions in additional debt that our grandchildren will have to pay.

/and if you were a democrat insider, you probably made out like a bandit while the rest of US are still struggling on unemployment, disability, underemployment, student loans, etc...
 
2012-08-15 09:39:09 AM  

EnviroDude: You mean the past three years of spend, spend, spend that have yet to stimulate the economy isn't trickle down?

Reaganomics failed in the 80's and Obamanomics has failed him in this decade. The only thing we have showing are the trillions in additional debt that our grandchildren will have to pay.

/and if you were a democrat insider, you probably made out like a bandit while the rest of US are still struggling on unemployment, disability, underemployment, student loans, etc...


I like how you skipped over the Bush year failures. was that intentional or did you just forget how badly we've been f*cked by the past 30 odd years...?
 
2012-08-15 09:58:04 AM  

EnviroDude: and if you were a democrat insider, you probably made out like a bandit


Someone sure sounds jealous of the success of others. Oh, boohoo. If you don't like it then work harder and you can be as rich as your fictional "Democratic insiders".
 
2012-08-15 09:59:01 AM  

FlashHarry: is this freep week or what?

In the real world, and called by its proper name, supply-side economics has never failed.

this is literally the opposite of reality. how do people get away with stating bullshiat that is so easily refuted?


It's a free country. you can say whatever you want, no matter how retarded. There are plenty of trolls on the politics tab that prove that point.
 
2012-08-15 10:13:06 AM  
i love how he goes out of his way to add a couple of footnotes to sound authoritative but decides against providing anything to support this little nugget:

In fact, in spite of the ignorance of a few, any improvement in our economy since the end of the Great Recession can be attributed directly to the remaining bands of supply-side tax policies left over from the Bush Tax Cuts, which are scheduled to expire on December 31st.
 
2012-08-15 10:13:50 AM  

rumpelstiltskin: "We have to remind the far-left, including our clownish president (act like a clown and you get called one), that the four pillars of Reagan's economic policy were to reduce growth of government spending, reduce income taxes and capital gains taxes, reduce government regulation of the economy, and control the money supply to reduce inflation. "

Controlling the money supply to reduce inflation was the one thing that really helped.
But that was a Fed policy that began in 1979, more than a year before Reagan was even elected.


And it was done by Volcker, not the executive branch. The President, by design, had absolutely nothing to do with breaking inflation. Bernie, from Weekend at Bernie's, had just as much to do w/breaking inflation as Reagan did.
 
2012-08-15 10:30:47 AM  
Ugh! I clicked that link! I have stupid germs! Get hot water! Get some disinfectant! Get some Iodine!
 
2012-08-15 10:35:12 AM  
In the real world, and called by its proper name, a unicorn as head of state has never failed.
 
2012-08-15 10:35:38 AM  
If it was really a freep week there would be 5 stories on how R&R will be putting us back in chains.
 
2012-08-15 10:36:36 AM  
This is satire, right?
 
2012-08-15 10:36:45 AM  
Romney's Reverse Robinhood Plan

/see I can make shiat up too
 
2012-08-15 10:37:25 AM  
But Captain Planet said bad guys like to loot and plunder. Does that mean the conservative blog author is a Captain Planet fan?
 
2012-08-15 10:37:36 AM  

rumpelstiltskin: "We have to remind the far-left, including our clownish president (act like a clown and you get called one), that the four pillars of Reagan's economic policy were to reduce growth of government spending, reduce income taxes and capital gains taxes, reduce government regulation of the economy, and control the money supply to reduce inflation. "

Controlling the money supply to reduce inflation was the one thing that really helped.
But that was a Fed policy that began in 1979, more than a year before Reagan was even elected.


Not to mention that Reagan did nothing to reduce the growth of government spending, and raised taxes several times.
 
2012-08-15 10:38:47 AM  

sprawl15: In the real world, and called by its proper name, a unicorn as head of state has never failed.


In the real world, and called by its proper name, my penis has never failed.
 
2012-08-15 10:39:12 AM  
You know who stands up to bad guys who like to loot and plunder?
www.wired.com
 
2012-08-15 10:39:17 AM  

EnviroDude: You mean the past three years of spend, spend, spend that have yet to stimulate the economy isn't trickle down?

Reaganomics failed in the 80's and Obamanomics has failed him in this decade. The only thing we have showing are the trillions in additional debt that our grandchildren will have to pay.

/and if you were a democrat insider, you probably made out like a bandit while the rest of US are still struggling on unemployment, disability, underemployment, student loans, etc...


Would be nice if you Republitards cared about debt when you guys were starting wars and giving away Tax Cuts using budgetary shennigans.
 
2012-08-15 10:39:19 AM  
* Bush II administration conveniently omitted.
 
2012-08-15 10:40:41 AM  

degenerate-afro: You know who stands up to bad guys who like to loot and plunder?
[www.wired.com image 350x352]


Damn, I was all excited that I'd get to be the Weeners that. Well done, sir.
 
2012-08-15 10:41:02 AM  
img.photobucket.com

/Bigspot Lady's been getting a workout lately
//so many bad blogs!
 
2012-08-15 10:42:13 AM  

degenerate-afro: You know who stands up to bad guys who like to loot and plunder?
[www.wired.com image 350x352]


CAPTAIN MITTNET.

Captain Mittnet, he's our hero.
Gonna take taxation down to zero!
Only on those wealthy folks
People who make $10000 bets as jo-okes!
 
2012-08-15 10:43:08 AM  

qorkfiend: rumpelstiltskin: "We have to remind the far-left, including our clownish president (act like a clown and you get called one), that the four pillars of Reagan's economic policy were to reduce growth of government spending, reduce income taxes and capital gains taxes, reduce government regulation of the economy, and control the money supply to reduce inflation. "

Controlling the money supply to reduce inflation was the one thing that really helped.
But that was a Fed policy that began in 1979, more than a year before Reagan was even elected.

Not to mention that Reagan did nothing to reduce the growth of government spending, and raised taxes several times.


You take that back! St Reagan retroactively did the things we decided to tell you he did.

/all praise to St Reagan, blessings and peace be upon him.
 
2012-08-15 10:44:40 AM  
I the blog is sourced from numbers from The Department of Rectally-Derived Statistics.
 
2012-08-15 10:46:02 AM  
t0.gstatic.com
RIP
 
2012-08-15 10:47:27 AM  

FarkedOver: [t0.gstatic.com image 257x196]
RIP


Mitt Romney's not dead.
 
2012-08-15 10:50:09 AM  
In the real world, and called by its proper name, supply-side economics Communism has never failed.

This is what you sound like, Conservatives.
 
2012-08-15 10:50:10 AM  
24.media.tumblr.com
 
2012-08-15 10:53:43 AM  
 
2012-08-15 10:56:37 AM  
Well, I suppose Obama's loot and plunder plan is doomed.

Given that the GOP already did it and is fighting like mad to keep it in place.
 
2012-08-15 10:56:52 AM  

Jim_Callahan: degenerate-afro: You know who stands up to bad guys who like to loot and plunder?
[www.wired.com image 350x352]

Damn, I was all excited that I'd get to be the Weeners that. Well done, sir.


Bah, I was beaten to it while I was looking for an image.
 
2012-08-15 11:02:58 AM  

unlikely: dr_blasto: It is not untrue. Sure, supply-side economics will destroy infrastructure, leave more unemployed and create a greater gulf in wealth distribution while impoverishing whole new sections of the nation or world. It will, however, consistently supply more money to the wealthy. From that standpoint, it works like a charm.

From the perspective of the wealthy, the infrastructure and unemployment problems are also good things - the closer people are to the edge, the more they're hanging on by their fingernails, the harder they'll work for less.



Maybe in the short term, having armies of unemployed can be seen as good for the wealthy elite. But if you look at history since 1900, we can clearly see that having a large and healthy middle class is actually better for the rich in the long run. Ford knew that when he was selling his Model Ts to his own workers, just as Steve Jobs knew it while selling overpriced IPods to the masses.

I just don't understand how a majority of rich people, who should be really well educated, can't clearly see this too.
 
Displayed 50 of 108 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter








In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report