Perry hot right now but I think he might flame out rather soon. He's got some huge problems including seeking out, granting tax breaks to a Chinese company, Huawei Technologies, so they'd open a center in Plano, Tx. Huawei Technologies has been caught several times cyber hacking US agencies and and companies and since 2008 have been blocked from entering in to partnership with US companies by a U.S. government security panel.
-
Comment -
Wrigley, if you take 100 million of your useless liberal democratic flock with you to Canada, I'll do everything I can to get her elected.If it became President I would move to Canada
Pathetic liberals across the country promised to leave the country if Bush won a 2nd term and NOT one of them kept their promise. What did they think when they were making that promise, people wouldn't vote for Bush to keep those useless PARASITES around?Comment -
If you hate liberals so much andypoo, you've got the money, GTFO! Move to China!Comment -
Not one? Then why am I living on a white sandy beach in Mexico? Cause I got sick and tired of the neo-con non-sense just as much as I'm fed up with the current tea party non-sense. Neo-con morons simply turned into tea bagger morons. Only now deficits matter. Before deficits didn't matter, what mattered was we needed to rename french toast and french fries to freedom toast/fries." I had enough, sold my business and cashed out. And I'm not alone either there's a lot of US citizens down here that did the same. We had a pool party/BBQ here this weekend, little off and on rain from Harvey, but other than that beautiful. I showed a couple guys the posts in this thread... I think they're still laughing.
Screw this, you guys are a lost cause. Have fun running the rat wheel for your corporate owners. I'm gonna go sip a cold beer and watch the girls walk by while the sun goes down.Comment -
Bachmann sure can eat a corn dog no wonder hubby dont divorce her always wonder how he could live with that nut case now we know why
Comment -
I'm not so sure Mr. Bachmann has any interest in her or any "her' eating his corn dog. But to be fair to her the press is always publishing these horrible photos of her, they seriously don't have a better shot then that? I think their just messing with her. I also think the press is totally messing with Ron Paul. Hell he came in 2nd in Iowa and they barely mentioned his name. I've made no bones about how I feel about the tea party here. I think they basically fall into two groups, racist or just too stupid to realize their being jacked. But Paul's the most legit of the group I feel. he's always said the same stuff, doesn't change his tune based on polls or what the nitwits on TV say. I think if we elected him the country would last about three months but at least he says exactly what he thinks and seems sincere.Comment -
Comment -
Look up income vs inflationComment -
What is it with you? Why do I have to keep going to look for data to prove your points? First it was US oil supplies now unions and their effects on economies. If you're got credible data and statistics post them up big boy, otherwise... nothing to see here folks... move along.Comment -
Link Not Working- RemovedComment -
How many tea party patriots does it take to change a lightbulb? Ten million and five: One to go to Wal-Mart and buy a lightbulb (and a gun because he’s going to the store anyway), one to scoff at global climate change, one to draw a rally poster making fun of Al Gore, one to complain about the socialist conspiracy to bring light to all Americans, one to change the bulb, and 10 million to sit in the dark even though the light is on.Comment -
That data is from 2010. The graph is a cut and paste from this article-
It doesn't paint unions as either heroes or villains, simply points out that all the talking points on either side are over hyped. it does end with this though-
To that point, unionization levels are higher in states with more highly educated workforces and knowledge based economies. Union membership is moderately correlated (.3) with both human capital levels (the percent of adults with a college degree) and the share of the workforce in knowledge, professional, and creative jobs (.35). More surprising, unionization is even more highly correlated with the percentage of the workforce in artistic and culturally creative jobs (.53). This is not to say that artistic and culturally creative workers are more likely to belong to unions (though some, like actors and musicians, do) but rather that states with more dynamic creative economies are also more likely to be highly unionized. It's also worth pointing out that unionization is more likely in states with higher levels of immigrants. Union membership is closely correlated with the share of adults that are foreign born (.42).
Unions continue to be a hot-button issue in American politics despite the fact that the level of unionization has fallen precipitously over the past half century. While many continue to think of unions as the province of blue-collar working class economies, less than one in five workers in Rustbelt states - Michigan, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Ohio--belongs to a union. Union states have more knowledge-intensive economies, boast more highly educated workforces, and have higher incomes as well.
The basic fact that unions are positively associated with so many key measures of prosperity suggests that their existence has little to do with state budget problems. Unions are not the cause of the serious economic and fiscal problems that are challenging so many American states, which are result of the economic crisis, collapsed housing market and massively reduced revenues. In fact, the economic influence of unions has been dramatically curtailed as a result of the ongoing transformation of the U.S. economy. At the same time, the existence of unions does not appear to be enough to forestall growing income inequality within the U.S, states.
It's time to get beyond the angry, ideologically motivated rhetoric about unions. We need to put our fiscal house in order and buckle down to the serious business of generating good jobs; more than that, we need to reinvent the U.S. economy for this new age.Comment -
I don't know about you guys, I use my tea bag once and throw it out.
Do the same with those morons.
Oooo, that graph really shows those union workers are making some BIG bucks.
Doesn't the average worker earn $50k?Comment -
Most if not all automobile mfg companies have union workers, union workers get paid more than avg income per person in that area, cars cost more due to production/mfg cost, how is that a good thing?Comment -
To really answer your question, or at least make you're question logical you'd have to prove that not only "union workers get paid more than avg income per person in that area" and that "cars cost more due to production/mfg cost" which I'm going to assume you're correlating to union wages.
I mean I could say oil wells produce toxic, poisonous chemicals that cause cancer and kill people into all the ground water in the areas they operate, how could that be a good thing? Wouldn't I first have to supply some proof the wells were the cause of such harmful effects?
But to give you a very basic answer... the fact the one group or even one or more groups make a higher wage in an area doesn't necessarily have a negative effect on that area or community. For example higher paid worker may help support local businesses and pay more in taxes. The community as a whole then gains. When Ford started making his Model T en mass he paid a whopping sum of $5 dollars a day to his workers. At that time that was an amazing wage. The community around his plant flourished and had a strong economy.Comment -
vote for no bamaComment -
Its a long time until election day. BUT, the cry for "change" didn't work out as it seems we actually got a double helping of the usual. Now its the Right's turn. Bring them on, cut spending and cut taxes and let's get going again.Comment -
Taxes are at dramatically historic lows. I doubt cutting them more will produce anything but more debt and more problems.
At this point I'm open to voting for the GOP nom. But that depends on who it is, if it's someone completely bat snit crazy then I'll vote Obama again. He's the devil I know. People that run around yaking nothing but ideology and rhetoric will only make things much worse.Comment -
Trickle down economics don't work John, low taxes/ loopholes for 10 years now, nothing good came out of it. It's common sense.
Spending must be cut, and taxes must go up. A balanced approach. American companies are "people", so they should be patriotic and sacrifice for America, instead of greed.Comment -
10 years!?! Umm, some version of the trickle down eco. has been in function off and on since Reagan held office. Bush Sr. saw the writing on the wall and tried to reverse course and his party abandoned him for it. Clinton made some head way but was certainly not the hero the left would have people believe. Bush Jr. was an unmitigated disaster. Starting two wars and having no plan in place to fund them or have an exit strategy was insane. And Obama has done nothing but punt the ball anytime it gets near him. If he were a football coach he'd punt on every first down.
We need to turn the ship around and the folks currently on the bridge are only interested in themselves and/or winning an argument solely to win the argument. Until the nation unites and stops all this "You V. Us" crap and realizes that we're all Americans and we need to work toward a common goal of digging out of this hole, until then we're all riding on the good ship Titanic. And currently we're focused on what color the curtains are in the ballroom and not the huge freaking iceberg were headed towards.Comment -
Good. Lots of people don't understand what trickle down is. I'm glad you do
They're sitting on the cash because of the uncertainty of the tax situation, Obamacare, and the economy. Don't you think they would rather be using that money than sitting on it? This cash hoarding isn't because of trickle down, its because of our government. BOTH parties, not just Dems or Repubs
Edit- taxes are NOT low though. Not even close. One of the highest corporate tax rates in the world.Comment -
Will Rodgers coined the phrase back in the great depression when he said "money was all appropriated for the top in hopes that it would trickle down to the needy." But anymore it's usually a term associated with Reagan who called it "supply side economics." many referred to it as Reaganomics. It's the idea that if the top earners and businesses are taxed less they'll spend more and that spending will benefit everyone. While Reagan was in office the Dem. controlled congress agreed to lower the top tax rate from 70% to 28% based on this philosophy. People debate the effect but most noted economists agree it's a failed economic policy.Comment -
I think only Japans is higher but that's just the tax rate. With all the tax codes and loopholes the average US Corporation doesn't pay anywhere near what the tax rate is, unless their accounts are brain dead or something.Good. Lots of people don't understand what trickle down is. I'm glad you do
They're sitting on the cash because of the uncertainty of the tax situation, Obamacare, and the economy. Don't you think they would rather be using that money than sitting on it? This cash hoarding isn't because of trickle down, its because of our government. BOTH parties, not just Dems or Repubs
Edit- taxes are NOT low though. Not even close. One of the highest corporate tax rates in the world.
Here's a article discussing the current situation-Comment -
But millions upon millions of dollars get wasted trying to find those loopholes. That money could be going towards actually improving the company. A low, unavoidable corporate tax rate would solve that problem. Charge companies 10% to do business here, and that's that. It would free up a lot of capital, which could be used to expand businesses and make everyone more competitive. That is closer to 'trickle down' than anything we've had so far.Comment -
Most noted economists? Like who, Paul Krugman and his ass-sniffing pals?
Paul Krugman thinks if we all go around breaking our old shit so we have to buy new shit it will help the economy.
"Failed" is the wrong description here. The policy didn't "fail," it just simply didn't work to the degree it's proponents had suggested. Part of this is because supporters of the theory were unable to create the ideal conditions needed for the policy to work best.
You should consider what it takes to get "noted" these days in the field of economics. Usually it takes bashing some previously held economic theory that supports lower taxes and less government, and generally concludes we should tax the people more and increase the size of government. So of course most "noted" economists are going to agree supply-side economics failed. Most "noted" economists are status-whore douchebags who must pay lip service to the Keynes cultists running our universities or risk being ostracized. As soon as you disagree with them you are branded an outlier, a fringe critic, an eccentric not worthy of consideration.
It's too bad people like you don't see what's going on and are all to ready to get down on your knees and give the Keynesians a moist salute.No more of that talk, or I'll put the leeches on you.Comment -
You mean like referring to people as morons and making lame-ass light-bulb jokes about groups of people you don't like? That kind of civility?
Don't be a douchebag. We all talk shit. Don't try and pretend like you don't. Makes you look like a whiny sissy. The kind that's got Obama's nuts dangling on his chin.
Civility comes from respect. Respect comes from not treating people like stupid assholes. You want civility, get you and your pals to stop treating the people you disagree with like stupid assholes. Then maybe they'll respect you.
It would also help if you didn't go around making asinine proclamations about shit you don't fully understand.
Economics more than anything, is about the study of people and their behavior. Far too many individuals believe it's a study of numbers. Well those numbers represent people, and unless you take the time to get to know those people, then you will never understand what in the hell it is you are analyzing in the first place. And so those numbers become meaningless. Which is why half-wit schmucks like Paul Krugman fall for dumbass ideas like the broken window fallacy. I bet he's a terrible gambler. Probably believes in trends like they can't change.
Here's a free lesson:
economics is about what's happening NOW. Not what happened 100 years ago. The conditions that occurred 100 years ago are not the conditions we have now. The world is different. Technology is different. People are different. Their reactions are different. What may or may not have been good for the economy in 1934 or 1984 has little bearing on what's good for the economy now. And you're certainly not going to figure out what's good for the economy now by going back and cherry picking random data trends from 3 decades ago. And you certainly can't use that data in an attempt to prove how a particular theory didn't work as the main evidence as to why another theory will work instead. You follow?
I'll make it simpler:
Reaganomics=failure does not dictate that Keynesian economics=success.
Point is, as an economist it is your duty to get out there and talk to people and see how they are reacting and why. Socially awkward dweebs like Paul Krugman and his douchebag pals will never understand this, which is why their economic policies never seem to work and central planning always fails.
It's why the Knicks sucked with Isiah Thomas. Why Mike Martz's offensive philosophy always falls apart without a great QB. Why Roy Williams' KU/UNC teams are only contenders when they have one of the best point guards in the game. What looks good on paper isn't what always works. And sometimes you have to make adjustments. But some people are just too dumb to know how to make adjustments. People like Roy Williams. Others are just too full of themselves, people like Paul Krugman/Mike Martz. That is why guys who know how to make adjustments, guys like Bill Walsh and Mike Krzyzewski, are considered the best at what they do. And guys that don't know how to make adjustments never seem to live up to the hype.
Life is all about making adjustments. And arrogant/self-righteous economists who have never set foot outside a classroom should be the last people in charge of that.No more of that talk, or I'll put the leeches on you.Comment -
First I make a point to try and not make comments about other specific members on here, if I did my bad. But I don't recall calling any member on here names or telling them things like they are "ready to get down on your (their) knees..." or like your latest post states they're "the kind that's got Obama's nuts dangling on his chin." If you can't see the difference between making a joke or referring to a group or political party in negative terms and basically telling a member on here they're ready to suck out someone a$$hole. Then I don't know what to tell you.
Second, obviously you're reading comprehension is lacking. I've repeatedly stated I'm not a fan of Obama. I think my last reference to him stated if he were a football coach he'd punt on every 1st down. Why you'd think I'd be the kind to have his balls on my chin, which I assume would mean his dick was in my mouth, is beyond me.
As for "don't be a douche bag" and "It would also help if you didn't go around making asinine proclamations about shit you don't fully understand." Just hold those comments up to a mirror.
As for the the rest of your post, I don't completely disagree with everything you said. But I do think there's some value in looking at historical events and how they effected things. But it's also valid to understand the entire world has change dramatically and at times what happened then doesn't apply to whats happening now.Comment
