FARK.com: (7364520) Mitt promises 12 million new jobs, eliminate the deficit, & lower taxes. Wall Street investor does the math: "At a 25 percent Federal tax rate on all the new income, the average new job would have to pay a mere $433,333 per year to fill the gap"

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.

		Mitt promises 12 million new jobs, eliminate the deficit, & lower taxes. Wall Street investor does the math: "At a 25 percent Federal tax rate on all the new income, the average new job would have to pay a mere $433,333 per year to fill the gap" (nationalmemo.com)		75
		More: Hero, Mitt Romney, deficits, tax rates

• • •

3998 clicks; posted to Politics » on 04 Oct 2012 at 6:01 PM | Favorite | share:

Share this link:

URL:

http://fark.com/go/7364520

Bookmark:

Article Comments close

Voting Results (Smartest)

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Redisplay/refresh voting results (Smartest or Funniest) or Return to comments

Archived thread

Delay		2012-10-04 06:15:34 PM

10 votes:

Mitt Romney is not stupid. He understands basic arithmetic. Here's the real problem: Mitt Romney is a cynical liar and the Republicans chose him.

tortilla burger		2012-10-04 06:23:04 PM

6 votes:

The problem isn't that Romney lied in the debates; it's the voters that are too dumb to know when they're being lied to

gilgigamesh		2012-10-04 06:29:46 PM

5 votes:

ddam: Reagan also had balance budgets and the national deficit was $0 when he left office.

Are you farking high?

Reagan left office in '88 having doubled the deficit he inherited from Carter.

This cult of Reagan crap is out of control.

nevirus		2012-10-04 06:14:43 PM

5 votes:

Yeah, but you did the math without including Romney's super-secret numbers that make it all revenue-neutral and add jobs and bring down the deficit. It's just too freakin' awesome to release to the filthy public.

Funny that all the teabaggers who complained about Obama promising "rainbows and unicorn farts" are now supporting Romney and his magic super-secret fix-all plan. The only thing they're consistent on is their hypocrisy.

Corvus		2012-10-04 06:12:00 PM

5 votes:

The derp squad will be in here in a sec to try to pretend this is wrong, but the thing that needs to be focused on is this:

Never mind that there's a problem lowering the top tax rate to 28 percent from 35 percent, which will cost $250 billion in revenues. Plugging that hole by taking away the $165 billion in deductions used by top earners simply doesn't work.

If taking away the deduction from the rich doesn't pay for this rate cut WHO WILL PAY THE DIFFERENCE?

The middle class, that's who!!!

violentsalvation		2012-10-04 05:13:14 PM

5 votes:

*click*

*closes tab*

Introitus		2012-10-04 05:12:27 PM

5 votes:

When you don't think, it's easy to say Mitt Rmoney won.

aircraftkiller		2012-10-04 06:29:01 PM

4 votes:

One of my FB friends put this bullshiat up as their cover photo:

3.bp.blogspot.com

I linked Snopes for clarification on who actually said it. I got this in response, a few replies after his friends were circle-jerking each other over the evils of "liberals":

"I hate it when people hide behind snopes/APfactcheck/etc. Does it make them feel better that they can provide a link to disprove/discredit something else? These are wise words regardless."

Translation: "I hate when people use facts to show that I'm wrong about what I believe in. Rather than educate myself and learn what my ideology stands for, I'd rather circle-jerk\echo chamber my friends on Facebook because nothing says intellectualism like reading and hearing what I already believed in."

I'm sure you guys knew this, though.

InmanRoshi		2012-10-04 06:06:06 PM

4 votes:

Mitt offered more magical unicorn farts in one hour of the debate than Obama did in all of 2008 combined.

AdolfOliverPanties		2012-10-04 05:22:40 PM

4 votes:

Romney's plans are the very definition of pie in the sky. There is no way they can work,even if he had 100% cooperations from Congress and was able to enact every plan he wants.

He knows this and is banking on the American people being stupid enough to believe his lies.

And Barack Obama helped him out quite a bit by not challenging him on any of his bullshiat.

BMulligan		2012-10-04 09:46:05 PM

3 votes:

Serious question here - why the fark does anyone give two rat turds about the deficit? Real bond yields are negative right now. The government is obligated to pay back something like 97 cents for each dollar it borrows. This situation won't last forever, but as long as it remains the case, we should be borrowing every penny we can without borking the credit market and make some overdue investments in our future.

Teufelaffe		2012-10-04 07:55:55 PM

3 votes:

MyRandomName: Mrtraveler01: MyRandomName: I was unaware the only tax revenue available was income tax. Could have sworn increased income increases purchases, increases corporate taxes, etc.

Can you answer this for me:

How much would the economy have to grow in order to make Romney's plan to reduce tax rates and reduce deductions revenue neutral?

Zero. Many analysts ^{[weasel words]} have shown what a piece of shiat^{[Contentious Labels]} the tax policy center analysis was. It assumed zero GDP growth, discounted all changes to corporate deductions, ignored bond interest writeoffs which can account for half of their deficit. The report basically was an analysis of their retarded assumptions on what Romney bwver put forth. Will link in a few a 3 step example. The tax report was garbage.^{[Editorializing]} The fact they rescinded their original numbers from 86 to 41 billion aafter the aei analysis shows that.

This post has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues in this thread.
This post needs additional citations for verification.
This post is written like a personal reflection or essay rather than an encyclopedic description of the subject.
This post may contain no research whatsoever.

LiberalWeenie		2012-10-04 07:09:37 PM

3 votes:

aircraftkiller: *snip*

i.imgur.com

Tommy Moo		2012-10-04 06:16:33 PM

3 votes:

Or, more realistically, let's say you could create 12 million jobs, Mr. Romney. And each job pays an average of $8,000 in federal income tax. You have now raised $96 billion per year, or about 7% of the federal deficit.

If you call yourself a budget hawk and you don't support cutting offense spending, you are sad joke.

Grungehamster		2012-10-04 06:16:32 PM

3 votes:

MaudlinMutantMollusk: Diogenes: And of course, even if the math worked out, it's all predicated on things he cannot guarantee - like agreement from his own party and Congress as a whole.

Weren't you paying attention to Mitt last night? THE PRESIDENT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR EVERYTHING FROM GASOLINE AND ELECTRICITY PRICES TO SINGLE-HANDEDLY CREATING JOBS AND ECONOMIC GROWTH!

/at least while someone besides him is in office

I love that he called high gas prices and the slow recovery "Obama's economy tax", so that he could say that all of Obama's taxes are what's to blame for the problems America is feeling today. Republicans have redefined tax to mean "anything you don't like."

But remember, he's not saying he's going to cut taxes for the rich, he's just cutting tax rates but they won't pay less in taxes but it will stimulate the economy.

TheMysteriousStranger		2012-10-04 06:09:29 PM

3 votes:

violentsalvation: *click*

[i798.photobucket.com image 539x359]

*closes tab*

I just clicked no and read the article.

But if it bothers you. Get out a calculator and do the math yourself. He uses a deficit of $1.3x10^12. That and what is in the headline is all the info you need to replicate the calculation.

(He assumes that the taxpayers did not even as much take a standard deduction, did not take a exemption, and did not write off anything--and just forked over 25% of everything to the feds. If you don't like that assumption, it will mean the jobs paid even more.)

Diogenes		2012-10-04 05:43:39 PM

3 votes:

And of course, even if the math worked out, it's all predicated on things he cannot guarantee - like agreement from his own party and Congress as a whole.

blahpers		2012-10-04 10:20:13 PM

2 votes:

born_yesterday: LordJiro: colon_pow: Get 12 million off welfare should help

So you're either advocating 'redistributing the wealth' to get 12 million people out of poverty, or you're advocating letting ~12 million people flood homeless shelters, or die in the streets, or filling our already-overcrowded prisons...

What could possibly go wrong? They'll just roll over and die, right?

Why is it that every other known civilization managed to solve the problem of poverty and class stagnation but we can't?

Because the dirty little secret that people have increasingly figured out over the years is that we really aren't that far off from places like China. We pay lip service to liberty and justice, but in the end all we really want is to be the biggest badass on the block. So we pump the military and we pump corporations that keep financing our reelection campaigns, and if it means we don't have enough money for a few basics like ensuring a decent standard of living so that even our less fortunate have the capacity to function, well, they're just wilted leaves to be trimmed from our glorious American tree. Nevermind that with a philosophy like that, pretty soon you end up with nobody capable enough to create and run all that high-tech military hardware--and nobody wealthy enough to buy all the crap our corporations are peddling.

Meanwhile, the civilized world marches on--slowly, but steadily--as we burn out our massive potential in one great blaze of stupid.

Mrtraveler01		2012-10-04 08:44:31 PM

2 votes:

sugardave: sno man: Are there even 12M Americans making $433k currently?

Not sure, how many professional welfare recipients are there?

Does Boeing and Lockheed Martin count?

edmo		2012-10-04 08:40:01 PM

2 votes:

Mitt probably believes that's what jobs pay, what with the middle class around $250K.

Sock Ruh Tease		2012-10-04 08:06:18 PM

2 votes:

gremzo: ddam: meat0918: Corvus: nevirus: Yeah, but you did the math without including Romney's super-secret numbers that make it all revenue-neutral and add jobs and bring down the deficit.

Even if you don't do the math. If it's not going to be a tax cut because the deductions are in theory going to balance it out how is it going to help anyone?? We might have a simpler tax code but if what Romney is saying is true (which I think is not true, I think he plans to shift the tax burden to the middle and poor classes he is just using this as the pretext) then it won't save anyone one penny on their taxes.

And another thing.

Didn't Romney say he would lower the rate while closing loopholes, and then claim no one had ever done that before?

Isn't that exactly what Reagan did???

Reagan also had balance budgets and the national deficit was $0 when he left office.

umm... Really? because this chart says otherwise.

[upload.wikimedia.org image 850x394]

Typical liberal chart. You have to unskew it to see the conservative (truthful) viewpoint. You're probably too dumb and liberal to do it, so I did it for you:

i.imgur.com

meat0918		2012-10-04 07:38:12 PM

2 votes:

soy_bomb: [www.investors.com image 620x518]

/Once QE4 rolls out, $433,333 will be the poverty line.

I like how the first chart ends right before we start shedding 700,000 jobs per month.

Empty Matchbook		2012-10-04 07:20:03 PM

2 votes:

So the Righties make fun of President Obama for "promising unicorns and rainbows," which he never did, and now Romney actually starts doing that and...what, HE really means it??

Don't Troll Me Bro!		2012-10-04 06:46:20 PM

2 votes:

aircraftkiller: One of my FB friends put this bullshiat up as their cover photo:

[3.bp.blogspot.com image 400x518]

I linked Snopes for clarification on who actually said it. I got this in response, a few replies after his friends were circle-jerking each other over the evils of "liberals":

"I hate it when people hide behind snopes/APfactcheck/etc. Does it make them feel better that they can provide a link to disprove/discredit something else? These are wise words regardless."

Translation: "I hate when people use facts to show that I'm wrong about what I believe in. Rather than educate myself and learn what my ideology stands for, I'd rather circle-jerk\echo chamber my friends on Facebook because nothing says intellectualism like reading and hearing what I already believed in."

I'm sure you guys knew this, though.

Reminds me of a facebook conversation that was going around a few years back. The Boobieser said something about how the earth would freeze if it were one foot further, and burn if it were one foot closer to the sun. Then followed it with something about how God is so amazing that he can do that. A couple people started circle-jerking about how awesome God is to plan the earth's orbit like that. Then some guy broke stroke and told them about how the earth's path is an elliptical orbit, and how many tens of thousands of miles difference the major and minor axis are from each other, and how that's why we have colder winters in the northern hemisphere and warmer summers in the southern. The original poster started cursing about how nobody asked his opinion and how he better not say that he's wrong again. It was complete with f-bombs and exclamation points, solidifying that this person was indeed a Christian.

TheMysteriousStranger		2012-10-04 06:38:18 PM

2 votes:

wippit: TheMysteriousStranger: Lets have more fun.

Cut funding to PBS, and you save 0.012% on the budget.

Heck, eliminate all spending besides the military, security, interest, social security, and medicare and you would not even remotely eliminate the deficit.

Clearly one of those sacred cows is going to have to be cut or taxes raises. Romney does not want to tell you that. To be truthful, Obama is almost as bad -- but at least he will at least acknowledge that we do have to up some taxes.

Solid Muldoon		2012-10-04 06:37:04 PM

2 votes:

Isitoveryet: Solid Muldoon: You want to create a million jobs? Ban foreign cars.

b-b-but stockholders!

They day America began to die was the first time anyone ever said the phrase, "We had an obligation to our shareholders."

fusillade762		2012-10-04 06:24:44 PM

2 votes:

AdolfOliverPanties: Romney's plans are the very definition of pie in the sky. There is no way they can work,even if he had 100% cooperations from Congress and was able to enact every plan he wants.

My understanding is that the economy will add 12 million jobs in the next four years no matter who's president. That's only 250,000 jobs a month. Not really an ambitious number.

WhyteRaven74		2012-10-04 06:23:59 PM

2 votes:

hey were are all the usual suspects to defend Romney? Shift change?

justtray		2012-10-04 06:23:54 PM

2 votes:

You can tell how much an article totally destroyed Republicans based on the total lack of paid shills in the thread.

WhyteRaven74		2012-10-04 06:22:00 PM

2 votes:

meat0918: Isn't that exactly what Reagan did???

Yes, yes it is.

meat0918		2012-10-04 06:21:26 PM

2 votes:

Corvus: nevirus: Yeah, but you did the math without including Romney's super-secret numbers that make it all revenue-neutral and add jobs and bring down the deficit.

Even if you don't do the math. If it's not going to be a tax cut because the deductions are in theory going to balance it out how is it going to help anyone?? We might have a simpler tax code but if what Romney is saying is true (which I think is not true, I think he plans to shift the tax burden to the middle and poor classes he is just using this as the pretext) then it won't save anyone one penny on their taxes.

And another thing.

Didn't Romney say he would lower the rate while closing loopholes, and then claim no one had ever done that before?

Isn't that exactly what Reagan did???

Erik_Emune		2012-10-04 06:19:55 PM

2 votes:

In all fairness, from Mitt Romney's perspective, the difference between, say, 43K and 433K in annual income isn't a large amount of money.

Corvus		2012-10-04 06:18:36 PM

2 votes:

nevirus: Yeah, but you did the math without including Romney's super-secret numbers that make it all revenue-neutral and add jobs and bring down the deficit.

Even if you don't do the math. If it's not going to be a tax cut because the deductions are in theory going to balance it out how is it going to help anyone?? We might have a simpler tax code but if what Romney is saying is true (which I think is not true, I think he plans to shift the tax burden to the middle and poor classes he is just using this as the pretext) then it won't save anyone one penny on their taxes.

Nadie_AZ		2012-10-04 06:17:46 PM

2 votes:

Mrtraveler01: Corvus: The middle class, that's who!!!

But I've been reassured by the Fark Independents and the Romney campaign is that it will be revenue neutral because the economy will magically grow fast enough to help offset the loss in revenue from these tax cuts.

/Yes, I know this is a stupid thing to think but this is honestly the right-wing talking point about Romney's tax plan

I think Romney is banking on the fact that the economy has been projected to grow over the next several years regardless of who is president. And that nobody will hold him to anything he says.

Mrtraveler01		2012-10-04 06:16:31 PM

2 votes:

Corvus: The middle class, that's who!!!

But I've been reassured by the Fark Independents and the Romney campaign is that it will be revenue neutral because the economy will magically grow fast enough to help offset the loss in revenue from these tax cuts.

/Yes, I know this is a stupid thing to think but this is honestly the right-wing talking point about Romney's tax plan

mayIFark		2012-10-04 06:13:27 PM

2 votes:

Don't bring math into this, we already know math has a liberal bias.

Show me an unbiased source.

Soup4Bonnie		2012-10-04 06:06:31 PM

2 votes:

There you go. There's the math that Obama said didn't work last night. Right there in black and white.

MrEricSir		2012-10-04 06:02:53 PM

2 votes:

violentsalvation: *click*

[i798.photobucket.com image 539x359]

*closes tab*

Everyone's least favorite web feature -- popup ads -- are back, and more annoying than ever.

God-is-a-Taco		2012-10-04 05:34:46 PM

2 votes:

Nadie_AZ: violentsalvation: *click*

[i798.photobucket.com image 539x359]

*closes tab*

I hate those floating things. I don't care if it was some hot chick asking me for a hot night on the beaches in Hawaii all expenses paid.

Use Noscript, dudes.
I think Chrome has a version of it as well.

ManateeGag		2012-10-04 05:12:59 PM

2 votes:

if that's the case, where can I get one of those 430K/year jobs?

UberDave		2012-10-04 05:06:56 PM

2 votes:

Dusk-You-n-Me		2012-10-04 09:48:50 PM

1 votes:

BMulligan: why the fark does anyone give two rat turds about the deficit?

Because they're told to. Right now it should be much further down the list of things Very Serious People talk about on the teevee.

culebra		2012-10-04 09:23:10 PM

1 votes:

Only a farkwit like Romney could win a debate in such a way as to ultimately make it to his detriment. Without his father's fortune this man would be the petty tyrant manager at your local fast food joint.

LouDobbsAwaaaay		2012-10-04 08:56:54 PM

1 votes:

sugardave: sno man: Are there even 12M Americans making $433k currently?

Not sure, how many professional welfare recipients are there?

I don't know. How many farmers are receiving subsidies and how many corporations exist in the US?

Hobodeluxe		2012-10-04 08:53:33 PM

1 votes:

Shaggy_C: smimmy: No, Obama is failing because Republicans are refusing to tax multi-millionaires at the same tax rate as the rest of us.

Obama signed a bill giving billions of dollars in tax cuts to multi-millionaires not two years ago. It was the great Obama-McConnell Debt Increase of 2010. Don't you remember that December? Lame duck Democrats in the congress passed Republican legislation before the tea party even showed up to take their seats? Good times, good times.

he had to in order to get the debt ceiling raised. it wasn't like the GOP willing to compromise.

RyogaM		2012-10-04 08:52:46 PM

1 votes:

Clinton added 22 Million jobs as president from 1993 to 2000.

Under Clintonian tax rates, federal tax receipts from all sources (Corporate and individual) went from $1.5 Trillion in 1993 to $2.3 T. in 2000, in constant (2005) dollars.

So, 22 million jobs = about $800 Million in additional revenue, if you have Clinton's tax rates/tax structure.

So, 11 million new jobs will get you about half that, or $400 million, under Clinton's taxes.

Romney's tax structure and rates, I assume, will be less than Clinton's, so adding 11 million will not even get you $400 million. Again, that's from all tax sources, Corporate and individual.

He is trying to fill a $1.3 Trillion hole, including an additional $300 billion in new military spending.

That extra million jobs he wants to add won't barely make a difference.

The numbers do not add up. At all.

Jim_Tressel's_O-Face		2012-10-04 08:50:01 PM

1 votes:

cabbyman: Romney wants America to win!

Too bad he's still going to lose.

supportyourlocalgunfighter.com

Bucky Katt		2012-10-04 08:49:49 PM

1 votes:

soy_bomb: [www.investors.com image 620x518]

/Once QE4 rolls out, $433,333 will be the poverty line.

George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Mitchell McConnell, John Boehner and Paul Ryan and their Wall Street Pals Bankrupted America and Mitt Romney Promises Even More of the Same

*The "Great" recession
*SEC fiasco (Madoff, et al)
*costly blunder known as Medicare part D
*massive tax cuts for the ultra rich without spending cuts
*numerous unfunded mandates imposed on the states
*effort to privatize Social Security by Bush then Ryan
*not one veto of a spending bill by Bush in 6 years (and Ryan voted for all of it)
*massive Wall Street bailout (Ryan voted for it)
*LIBOR scandal
*allowed HSBC to evade sanctions against Iran and to launder Mexican drug cartel money
*outright corruption and criminality

Paul Ryan voted FOR Bush's TARP (Wall Street bailout). He voted for everything Bush the budget buster wanted and added $5 trillion to the deficit. He became a budget hawk only in 2009.
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2012/08/06/120806fa_fact_lizza?cur r entPage=all

Paul Ryan created plan to privatize Social Security in 2005: "The Social Security Personal Savings Guarantee and Prosperity Act of 2005" which even George W. Bush thought was "irresponsible"
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/08/11/paul-rya n -isnt-a-deficit-hawk-hes-a-conservative-reformer/
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:h.r.01776

Romeny hired Bush's economic advisors
http://www.salon.com/2012/05/01/the_romney_bush_mind_meld/
http://current.com/community/93772940_large-number-of-bush-advisers-f l ocking-to-romneys-campaign-team.htm
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/may/10/romneys-team-starts-t o -look-like-bushs/
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405297020477860457724158315245 0 486.html

Romney on the budget: increase defense budget, cut taxes for the ultra rich and no plan to pay for it
http://www.thenation.com/blog/167416/romneys-bad-math
http://news.yahoo.com/romney%E2%80%99s-budget-plan-shouldn%E2%80%99t- b e-a-secret-saved-for-wealthy-donors.html
http://www.denverpost.com/nationworld/ci_20457404/romney-plans-big-cu t s-u-s-budget-but
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2012/05/24/experts-skeptical-of-r o mneys-defense-budget-plans

Bush Administration worst fiscal disaster in US history
http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/66778/roger-c-altman-and-richa r d-n-haass/american-profligacy-and-american-power
Economic Damage Caused by Bush and the GOP
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2009/09/closing-the-book- o n-the-bush-legacy/26402

8 Years of Failure
http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1872229_18 7 2230_1872231,00.html

Bush/Boehner/McConnell/Ryan $700 billion bank bailout
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/24/bush.bailout/index.html

Bush/Boehner/McConnell/Ryan bank bailout rewards the cheaters
http://www.denverpost.com/business/ci_7655582

On September 18, 2008, Congressman Boehner attended a closed meeting with congressional leaders, then-Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, and was urged to craft legislation to help financially troubled banks. That same day (trade effective the next day), Congressman Boehner cashed out of an equity mutual fund.[31]
Ryan also profited on inside information during the banking crisis
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/aug/13/paul-ryan-sold-shares-ban k ing-crisis?CMP=EMCNEWEML1355

What Bush Learned From Enron: How to hide an $87 billion debt by pretending it's off the books.
http://slate.msn.com/id/2088318/

Is Bush a socialist? He's spending like one
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/article570387.ece

Bush pleads with China and Japan to save him from his economic failures.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2003-10-19-bush-china-japan_x . htm

Bush White House Philosophy Stoked Mortgage Bonfire
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/business/21admin.html?_r=1&em=&page w anted=all
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/13/AR200 8 021302783.html
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/06/20020617-2.html
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/10/20021015-7.html
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/12/20031216-9.html
http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2004/08/2004 0 809-9.html

Bush's Minority Homeownership Plan Rests Heavily on Fannie and Freddie (2006)
http://realtytimes.com/rtpages/20020624_bushplan.htm
http://www.allbusiness.com/government/government-bodies-offices-heads / 5944494-1.html
http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/housing/2004-01-20-fha_x.htm

Community Reinvestment Act not to blame for Bush's crisis
http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=did_liberals_cause_the_su b prime_crisis
http://www.slate.com/id/2201641/pagenum/all/%23page_start
http://www.businessweek.com/investing/insights/blog/archives/2008/09/ c ommunity_reinvestment_act_had_nothing_to_do_with_subprime_crisis.html
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2008/12/03/feds-kroszner-defends-commu n ity-reinvestment-act/

The $10 trillion hangover: paying the price for 8 years of Bush
http://harpers.org/archive/2009/01/0082337
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/06/09/cheney-bush-left-gm-bankruptcy-for - the-next-guy/

Bush Administration waste and fraud
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/1152ap_wartime_spending_oversi g ht.html?source=mypi

In June 1995, Boehner distributed campaign contributions from tobacco industry lobbyists on the House floor as House members were weighing how to vote on tobacco subsidies.[19] In a 1996 documentary by PBS called The People and the Power Game, Boehner said "They asked me to give out a half dozen checks quickly before we got to the end of the month and I complied. And I did it on the House floor."

James F. Campbell		2012-10-04 08:33:26 PM

1 votes:

Nobody cares about the lies. All that matters is that Romney looks good.

Jesus Christ, what the fark? The narcissists have taken over the henhouse.

dumbobruni		2012-10-04 07:46:01 PM

1 votes:

soy_bomb: [www.investors.com image 620x518]

/Once QE4 rolls out, $433,333 will be the poverty line.

upper right corner shows the massive economic decline ending after Obama takes office.

and the deficits as % of GDP: those figures do not include expenses for the wars & reconstruction in Iraq and Afghanistan, those were kept off of the official budget until Obama came into office ($120 billion a year). that graph also leaves out the $460 billion deficit (before war costs) in 2008.

LordJiro		2012-10-04 07:45:54 PM

1 votes:

colon_pow: Get 12 million off welfare should help

So you're either advocating 'redistributing the wealth' to get 12 million people out of poverty, or you're advocating letting ~12 million people flood homeless shelters, or die in the streets, or filling our already-overcrowded prisons...

Smackledorfer		2012-10-04 07:43:04 PM

1 votes:

meat0918: soy_bomb: [www.investors.com image 620x518]

/Once QE4 rolls out, $433,333 will be the poverty line.

I like how the first chart ends right before we start shedding 700,000 jobs per month.

Soy is one of the least honest posters here.

ghall3		2012-10-04 07:39:46 PM

1 votes:

soy_bomb: /Once QE4 rolls out, $433,333 will be the poverty line.

That right there is an amazing amount of cherry-picked insanity. Like I'm not even mad, that's amazing

10/10

Except I bet you believe those charts aren't utterly useless....

jso2897		2012-10-04 07:38:20 PM

1 votes:

colon_pow: Get 12 million off welfare should help

Not really. What you call "welfare" is chump change. Getting Agribusiness, Big Oil, and the Pentagon off welfare would save some REAL money - but certain people don't want to do that.

jso2897		2012-10-04 07:30:43 PM

1 votes:

I wonder how much the Internet is going to mess with the normal channels of information diepersal this time around. It seems to be more and more every cycle. Lying on TV doesn't seem to work as well as it used to, and I think it's because the fact-checkers are everywhere now, and they can't be shut out of discussions.

aircraftkiller		2012-10-04 06:58:58 PM

1 votes:

Don't Troll Me Bro!
Reminds me of a facebook conversation that was going around a few years back. The Boobieser said something about how the earth would freeze if it were one foot further, and burn if it were one foot closer to the sun. Then followed it with something about how God is so amazing that he can do that. A couple people started circle-jerking about how awesome God is to plan the earth's orbit like that. Then some guy broke stroke and told them about how the earth's path is an elliptical orbit, and how many tens of thousands of miles difference the major and minor axis are from each other, and how that's why we have colder winters in the northern hemisphere and warmer summers in the southern. The original poster started cursing about how nobody asked his opinion and how he better not say that he's wrong again. It was complete with f-bombs and exclamation points, solidifying that this person was indeed a Christian.

I get that quite often. I grew up about 20 miles north of Orlando, which essentially turns into Jesusland/Redneckville pretty quickly. I didn't realize some of these people were so batshiat crazy until I decided to add them as friends in preparation for the 10 year reunion next weekend. For perspective, the Chick-Fil-A debacle prompted one of my FB friends to post this garbage, CSB incoming:

"I support Chick-fil-a because I've been Redeemed.

To Gov Alderman of Chicago: American commerce is a way of life here in the States no matter what your opinion is. However, if there is nothing else better to do I would hope you would put such efforts into decreasing the number of casinos and strip clubs, rather than denouncing community supporting, family restaurants in your great city.

To concerned parties:
1.) God doesn't hate. He cannot because He is love. In every perfect form and fashion. He loves all people and ALL people are sinners;
"This righteousness is given through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference between Jew and Gentile, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus." - Romans 3:22-24

our sins are just different. Yes. Sin.
"...Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God" (1 Corinthians 6:9-10).

2.) That is why He came;
'For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.' - John 3:16

3.) God designed marriage for man & woman.
"Then the rib which the LORD God had taken from man He made into a woman, and He brought her to the man. And Adam said: 'This is now bone of my bones And flesh of my flesh; She shall be called Woman, Because she was taken out of Man.' Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh. And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed."
-Genesis 2:18-25 (NKJV)

4.) He made you & therefore would never think you are "icky".
"For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother's womb."-Psalm 139:13
-BUT-

I can't grab one part of the scripture and say God wants you to be blessed and live an abundant life, and not grab the other part that says, you shouldn't live that way.

"Which is easier: to say, 'Your sins are forgiven,' or to say, 'Get up and walk'?"- Matthew 9:5
We have to choose righteousness and 'Get up & walk' in it.

reason 1: "I just can't help but be this way"--
"To the extent that biological or social factors may contribute to a person's bent toward homosexual behavior, this does not excuse it. Some people have a strong bent towards stealing or abuse of alcohol, but they still choose to engage or not engage in this behavior the law rightly holds them accountable." (Ann Lamont , Creation Ministries International)
Yes, habits can be enslaving.

reason 2: "I was made this way"--
You were made with gender, race and impairments. This relates to what a person is.
Homosexuality relates to what a person does.

Then the rib which the LORD God had taken from man He made into a woman, and He brought her to the man. And Adam said: 'This is now bone of my bones And flesh of my flesh; She shall be called Woman, Because she was taken out of Man.' Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh. And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed."
-Genesis 2:18-25 (NKJV)

reason 3: "It's nobody else's business"--
God, our Designer and Creator, has authority over all aspects of our lives. He makes the rules, and He quite specifically forbids homosexual behavior. (Ann Lamont , CMI)
"You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination" (Leviticus 18:22; see also Leviticus 20:13).

"Liberal" churches espouse tolerance of homosexual behavior in the name of "love." They plug for the acceptance of homosexual conduct as normal, "because they can't help it." They are not only wrong about the latter, but they are actually not being at all loving towards homosexuals, because, contrary to the Bible, they reduce the homosexual person to the level of an animal, driven by instinct. In removing moral responsibility from the person, they dehumanize them, whereas the Bible says we are made in the image of God (Genesis 1:26-27), with the power of moral choice. (Ann Lamont , CMI)

As a Christian, I care too much about people to not tell the truth. I have family that choose to be gay. But I serve a mighty God who gave me His word to give me life everlasting. I didn't write it. But I must strive to do my best just as everyone else. I am not perfect but saved by grace. We all can be Redeemed.

"We love because he first loved us." 1 John 4:19"

I replied with this:

I think most people don't care about the religious views of CFA's CEO - what they, and I, care about is having money donated to groups which think homosexuality should be outlawed.

I don't understand how people can say that they believe in the Lord while simultaneously persecuting homosexuals. The Lord is the ultimate arbiter of justice, and none of our words nor wisdom will change that. CFA would do right to donate to charities that will help the world instead of attempting to prevent homosexuals from having the same civil rights that the rest of us enjoy.

Whether or not anyone is gay has no relevance. All sin is "bad" according to the Lord. If you accept Jesus as your Lord and savior, you are saved. There is no perfection except that which is attained by the grace of the almighty, and since we all sin, that would mean that we all would be punished accordingly.

Even if that were the case, it still has no relevance to civil rights in America, which is a country that is founded on the principles of freedom - including freedom from persecution and the ideal that all men were created equal. CFA has no business donating to hate groups like the Family Research Council.

The derpy replies stopped after I posted that chain e-mail about eating shellfish, wearing two types of thread, etc...

TheMysteriousStranger		2012-10-04 06:53:22 PM

1 votes:

tenpoundsofcheese: let me guess, there would be no increase in corporate revenue when people start having jobs and salaries and stuff.

Okay, propose some numbers and do the math.

I bet you can't.

The whole point is that the numbers are so outrageously wrong that no matter what you take into account that the number still we not add up.

And the GOP wants to lower corporate taxes anyways. If this is done that your numbers will have to be adjusted again.

There is no conceivable way that make Mitt's numbers work.

More fun. A 1.3 trillion dollar deficit is $4333 per every person in the U.S. assuming a population of 300 million. Of course children don't pay federal taxes and people with low incomes (poor people, retirees, etc.) pay very little. So really the $4333 is way too low. When you see the magnitude of the problem and then you see a promise of tax cuts, unwillingness to cut entitlements, the reality the interest must be paid, the idea the the military needs to be expanded, etc. Then you know to call B.S.

wippit		2012-10-04 06:51:27 PM

1 votes:

ghall3: wippit: As a Canadian, I hate those farking things.

At least you arn't buying 2400 of them.

True.

On the flip side, apparently you're selling about 700 of them to other countries (we're buying 65). Personally, for Canada's needs, I think they're useless. I'd rather we bought something like V-22's. We don't need the fighter-aspects of a plane, just its versatility... better to go with a turboprop, IMO.

Smackledorfer		2012-10-04 06:49:28 PM

1 votes:

Solid Muldoon: I've yet to hear how a President can actually create jobs, from either candidate. Unless you are talking about the WPA, the Prez has very little to do with it. You can't do the WPA today because you can't send a bunch of guys into the desert to live in tents and sling shovels with no Union rules and no OSHA, even if they might be happy to have those jobs.

The only way to create jobs at home is to limit foreign products. And that will never happen. Not when our leaders are deep in bed with foreign companies and foreign banks and foreign kingdoms. And Walmart.

You want to create a million jobs? Ban foreign cars.

How about trying to support businesses bringing jobs back from overseas and ending subsidies for those outsourcing?

Because one party wanted that, while the other's candidate claimed last night that those breaks don't exist.

gremzo		2012-10-04 06:46:07 PM

1 votes:

ddam: meat0918: Corvus: nevirus: Yeah, but you did the math without including Romney's super-secret numbers that make it all revenue-neutral and add jobs and bring down the deficit.

Even if you don't do the math. If it's not going to be a tax cut because the deductions are in theory going to balance it out how is it going to help anyone?? We might have a simpler tax code but if what Romney is saying is true (which I think is not true, I think he plans to shift the tax burden to the middle and poor classes he is just using this as the pretext) then it won't save anyone one penny on their taxes.

And another thing.

Didn't Romney say he would lower the rate while closing loopholes, and then claim no one had ever done that before?

Isn't that exactly what Reagan did???

Reagan also had balance budgets and the national deficit was $0 when he left office.

umm... Really? because this chart says otherwise.

upload.wikimedia.org

RyogaM		2012-10-04 06:39:49 PM

1 votes:

fusillade762: AdolfOliverPanties: Romney's plans are the very definition of pie in the sky. There is no way they can work,even if he had 100% cooperations from Congress and was able to enact every plan he wants.

My understanding is that the economy will add 12 million jobs in the next four years no matter who's president. That's only 250,000 jobs a month. Not really an ambitious number.

I used to hear that Romney pledged to drop the unemployment rate to 6% after his first 4 years. That would be about a 2% drop in unemployment in four years. Which is about the same amount the unemployment rate has dropped under Obama, 10% at it's highest rate in October '09 to 8.1% today. I haven't heard this talking point in a while.

Nadie_AZ		2012-10-04 06:36:23 PM

1 votes:

gilgigamesh: ddam: Reagan also had balance budgets and the national deficit was $0 when he left office.

Are you farking high?

Reagan left office in '88 having doubled the deficit he inherited from Carter.

This cult of Reagan crap is out of control.

I didn't think he was serious. Everyone knows Reagan used the deficit and government spending to spike the economy and ride the good times in his second term.

Solid Muldoon		2012-10-04 06:23:49 PM

1 votes:

I've yet to hear how a President can actually create jobs, from either candidate. Unless you are talking about the WPA, the Prez has very little to do with it. You can't do the WPA today because you can't send a bunch of guys into the desert to live in tents and sling shovels with no Union rules and no OSHA, even if they might be happy to have those jobs.

The only way to create jobs at home is to limit foreign products. And that will never happen. Not when our leaders are deep in bed with foreign companies and foreign banks and foreign kingdoms. And Walmart.

You want to create a million jobs? Ban foreign cars.

Glenford		2012-10-04 06:23:27 PM

1 votes:

ParallelUniverseParking: I thought it's "the American dream" - not "the American delusion"

"You know why it's called the American dream? Because you have to be asleep to believe it"

G. Carlin

Delay		2012-10-04 06:23:17 PM

1 votes:

Erik_Emune: In all fairness, from Mitt Romney's perspective, the difference between, say, 43K and 433K in annual income isn't a large amount of money.

Well, I could understand that better if he would ever show his tax returns. And. until he shows those returns, I'll assume he is a liar.

gilgigamesh		2012-10-04 06:22:56 PM

1 votes:

Corvus: The derp squad will be in here in a sec to try to pretend this is wrong, but the thing that needs to be focused on is this:

Never mind that there's a problem lowering the top tax rate to 28 percent from 35 percent, which will cost $250 billion in revenues. Plugging that hole by taking away the $165 billion in deductions used by top earners simply doesn't work.

If taking away the deduction from the rich doesn't pay for this rate cut WHO WILL PAY THE DIFFERENCE?

The middle class, that's who!!!

No no no.

It will come from the magical revenue that will pour down on us like manna from heaven, once the job creators are unshackled from their onerous tax burden.

Delay		2012-10-04 06:20:48 PM

1 votes:

Mrtraveler01: Corvus: The middle class, that's who!!!

But I've been reassured by the Fark Independents and the Romney campaign is that it will be revenue neutral because the economy will magically grow fast enough to help offset the loss in revenue from these tax cuts.

/Yes, I know this is a stupid thing to think but this is honestly the right-wing talking point about Romney's tax plan

A budget that is revenue neutral compared to our previous year's budget will never reduce the deficit and will never balance the budget. We have been in a recession for a while now, remember? Romney is a cynical liar.

Somacandra		2012-10-04 06:20:34 PM

1 votes:

impaler: 12 million new jobs paying $433,333 per year? Sign me up!

The catch is that all these jobs consist of taking it in the ass from China.

impaler		2012-10-04 06:17:13 PM

1 votes:

12 million new jobs paying $433,333 per year?

Sign me up!

Nadie_AZ		2012-10-04 06:16:54 PM

1 votes:

God-is-a-Taco: Nadie_AZ: violentsalvation: *click*

[i798.photobucket.com image 539x359]

*closes tab*

I hate those floating things. I don't care if it was some hot chick asking me for a hot night on the beaches in Hawaii all expenses paid.

Use Noscript, dudes.
I think Chrome has a version of it as well.

Woah. NotScript is the plugin. Had to set a password and then allow Fark for reply to comments to work. Interesting ....

Thanks!

TheMysteriousStranger		2012-10-04 06:15:36 PM

1 votes:

Of course someone getting a new job -- especially as well paying as Romney's numbers imply -- will be dropped from the welfare rolls, food stamps, unemployment, etc. So lets assume each new job meant the federal government spent fifty thousand dollars less. (This way overestimates how much the dole gives out even if you consider the overhead.) This means that the new jobs would only average $383,333 a piece.

But if we assume people deducted stuff from their taxes, the calculation will have to go up depending on how much they are allowed to deduct.

The Jami Turman Fan Club		2012-10-04 06:09:39 PM

1 votes:

MrEricSir: violentsalvation: *click*

[i798.photobucket.com image 539x359]

*closes tab*

Everyone's least favorite web feature -- popup ads -- are back, and more annoying than ever.

Popup ads are my second to least favorite web feature.
My least favorite are popunder ads that have somebody moving on them. Turn my computer's performance to crap if I get enough of them.