You seriously think that CEO's of major corporations don't spend money? You really think Wall Street execs live miserly lifestyles? Yeah ok.

Food stamps are spent on one thing, food which is already a hugely gov't sponsored business. No grocery stores are being opened up or expanded because of the influx of food stamps. No grocery stores are going out of business becasue of the lask of food stamps. Any money spent has some degree of stimulative effect but the effect of food stamps is very small.

Your idea that food stamps or payroll tax decreases cause all this stiulus spending is completely misguided. Food stamps are spend almost exclusively on food, an industry that is not expanding and is being paid in many cases not to expand. The minor amount of money each consumer receives from payroll tax decreases are generally used to pay off debt, pay utilities or rent. You can't say that people cant afford to eat and are broke then say they are going to be big consumers when given food stamps or a few dollars extra in their paychecks. Sustenance living isnot effective stimulus. Paying your utility bill is not great stimulus. Buying food is not great stimulus.

Yeah they all get hundreds of millions when they get canned. I'm sure that they all just sit around and surf the net in their offices in between secret 'screw the middle class' conferences because they have giant golden parachutes. Most also have a high standard of living, spending LOTS of money and few people can afford to live off their savings forever regardless of how much they have. Your theory that there is no incentive for CEO's to perform because they may get a nice compensation package if they are fired is naive at best, ridiclous at worst.

The idea that the common investor has been screwed is bluster, plain and simple.

If in group A Mr. CEO has 20 million dollar a year salary and no other income and Group B we have 200 folks getting 100K in income at the end of the year which group would have spent the most buying goods and services?

Is 100k a year now middle class?

How many CEO's make 20 million a year in hard cash?

Hypothetical question. Reduce the numbers to what you see fit.

:zz: Not remotely close to what I said.

Not according to the facts I see, but you're entitled to your own opinion.

It is when consumers have zero money, because they are unemployed. Wal Mart welcomes those with food aid cards. Because otherwise they are not selling food.

Yeah, the investment accounts of the "common investor" have been reaping gains averaging 8% a year since 1996, haven't they? Whoops - no, they have not.

Look, it is this simple:

Republicans say that if you give the wealthy tax and incentive financial breaks, they will create jobs regardless of lack of consumer demand. "Trickle down" theory (long disproven)

Democrats say too many people are unemployed, the middle class has been ravaged, there is no longer a huge consumer class creating the demand that allows jobs to be created.

Pick one as the basis of one's economic opinion formulation.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Bernan...00699.html?x=0

So Wal Mart isnt selling food if not for food stamps?

8% a year? That is your standard? Why pick 1996? Why not 1986 or 1976?

"Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said Thursday that he's surprised by how cautious consumers remain more than two years since the recession officially ended. "

And they give this guy the keys? He has no idea why people aren't spending?

You really think that it is this simple?

The world is a far more complicated place than these two statements. It isnt black and white. For every move made there is a counter move, sometimes not the one expected, often effected by factors beyond anyones control or knowledge when the initial move was made.

I guess he doesn't read the papers

well I guess no one reads papers anymore

Does the New York Times on my IPAD count?

Sigh ... Sorry, refuse to have a discussion if this simplistic nonsense is your idea of debate.

Yes, 8% a year has been the historical 20th century stock market return if you invested and let it be without trying to time any markets. That's long gone. Of course, when I was young, savings accounts payed 5 1/4%.

That regular rate of return ended when Wall Street stopped being people investing capitalization in corporate American company growth and longevity, and became a gambling casino.

It is that simple as far as the very basic foundation of one's political economic theory, yes. Looking at the GOP vs the Dems, yes, that is exactly the basic, essential difference in what they believe.

And we have the past 100 years of economic actuality to see which has been factually more productive in this country.

Of course it's far more complicated than that.

Yes, zero-sum game theory versus the economic theory that that paradigm no longer exists (or never did)

Post 45
You wrote it!

When exactly did you lay out any Democratic economic theory? Is unemployment is high a theory?

no ink, no paper!

yet another fail by the da prez..

pretty bad when rolling stone has had enough of his bs

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics...ymore-20110906

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...p_mostpop_read

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...p_mostpop_read

Oh for god's sake. Yes, I wrote, "Wal Mart welcomes those with food aid cards. Because otherwise they are not selling food."

Now, if you want to take that statement as I somehow think that Wal Mart only sells to people with food stamps, go ahead and be ridiculously black and white. I gave you far more credit than that.

:zz:

What are you trying to say?

I am talking about the essential party platform basic economic differences between the two major political parties in the US.