obamas job proposal

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

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

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.

Not remotely close to what I said.

Your idea that food stamps or payroll tax decreases cause all this stiulus spending is completely misguided.

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

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. Sustenance living isnot effective stimulus. Paying your utility bill is not great stimulus. Buying food is not great stimulus.

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.

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

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.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

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.

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?

[jms62]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

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?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by jms62

"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?

I guess he doesn't read the papers

well I guess no one reads papers anymore

[jms62]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

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?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by jms62

Does the New York Times on my IPAD count?

no ink, no paper!

[hoovesupsideyourhead]

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

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

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

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

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

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.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

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



.

Post 45
You wrote it!

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Post 45
You wrote it!

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.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

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.

http://www.analyzeindices.com/dow-jones-history.shtml

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

http://www.analyzeindices.com/dow-jones-history.shtml

I'll see your opinion piece on the failure of the stimulus from the Wall Street Journal, and raise you nine fiscal studies saying the opposite:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...bibJ_blog.html

[Riot]

Help the economy - adopt a job creator

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xVwbY...layer_embedded

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

I'll see your opinion piece on the failure of the stimulus from the Wall Street Journal, and raise you nine fiscal studies saying the opposite:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...bibJ_blog.html

Doesnt anyone read links anymore?

Uh there are 2 of your 9 that said it didnt work and 4 of the others are based on modeling (i.e. guessing)

If it worked so well why are things still so bad?

[horseofcourse]

Obama's a price is right girl...a spokesmodel for global corporate capitalism, nothing to see here. His opponent in the next election cycle will be his clone. Are people still having trouble figuring this out?? It's a clown show and nothing more.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Doesnt anyone read links anymore?

Uh there are 2 of your 9 that said it didnt work and 4 of the others are based on modeling (i.e. guessing)

Interesting interpretation. Much more credible to listen to an anti-Obama op-ed.

If it worked so well why are things still so bad?

It's just that simple. Right

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

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.

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.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

You really think that it is this simple?

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.

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.

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

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

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)

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

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

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

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.