GWB Approval Rating 4/24/06
POSTED BY: STDOUBT
UPDATED: Monday, April 7, 2025 04:26
VIEWED: 6755
PAGE 5 of 10
Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Me and all my friends is richer than Buddha right now!
We can't all be Gates Chrisisall
AWESOME!
Except not because well, everyone is richer than Buddha in monetary terms . . . .
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Well, I'm probably richer than Auraptor! 
BTW Auraptor, please see my post above.
---------------------------------
Free as in freedom, not beer.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Oh Auraptor...
what do you think that 96 3 vote for ginsberg meant? It meant that Clinton picked somebody the Repubs jumped on because they thought she was moderate enough for their tastes in presentation...And if they truly thought that she was going to do harm to their values in that seat and still picked her, if that is your contention, then they really screwed their constituents.
It is their job to dissent choices to the supreme court that they think are bad. They have a say in this matter as a check on the presidency. If they aren't using that check when it is warranted, they don't deserve to hold their seats.
Feel free to respond, but I don't expect you to. too many different posts have been heaped on you to respond to them all. Where is Hero when we need him? Where is Finn? Give a brother a hand out here guys.
Oh, I didn't see your post to me until just now. Okay, profits are different than profit margins. You schooled me again. Of course you brought up their profit margin as if it was paltry, and now you've agreed that Exxon Mobile is doing quite well...so which is it?
Yes, it would be absurd for me to say that we went to war just for the oil companies, because that would leave out Haliburton and the Carlile group.
I stand corrected again...thank you.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Oh, also that part about employees getting paid well being a good thing was not in reference to the oil companies it was in reference to your exasperated question about why there was no outrage at dot com employees getting paid well.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
ARE CONSUMER CONFIDENCE, HOME SALES, AND CONSUMER SPENDING THE INDICATORS BY WHICH YOU JUDGE THE ECONOMY? Yes or no.
Jusat keeping this question front and center for 'Rap. For detail, scroll up a couple
---------------------------------
Free as in freedom, not beer.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Ahhh, Capitalista's:
http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/capitalista.htm
Let's get something straight shall we regarding the Voodoo economics (love that term and it really fits) of 'trickle down'.
Trickle down doesn't happen, I doubt even serious capitalist economists believe it does. Trickle down is something that is there to get the gullible in the lower rungs of society behind the idea and allay any guilt those on the upper rungs may feel.
Money isn't real, it's a symbol, a place holder for natural resources, usually equivalent to gold held in the gold reserves of that nation. Essentially printing more money doesn't give you more wealth; it gives you more symbols that are worth less. Simplistically if you put twice as many dollars into circulation today as there were yesterday a dollar will be worth today what 50 cents was worth yesterday.
Therefore it's reasonable to say the total amount of money you have is fixed. Okay you get inflation but that doesn't effect 'trickle down' so for the sake of simplicity we can discount it.
So you have a fixed amount of wealth. The rich accumulate wealth, i.e. they bank more than they spend. So now we have a fixed size resource (wealth) with a group receiving more of this resource than they pass back into the system.
Question: Eventually what happens to this resource?
Answer: It gets depleted.
So how would this depletion of wealth manifest? Well by the distance between the haves and the have nots increasing.
Anyone want to tell me which country of all Industrialised nations should see the effect of 'Trickle Down' the most, which is also the Industrialised nation with the biggest gap between rich and poor and the largest percentage of population living under the poverty line?
Why is this?
Well obviously it's the evil socialist body snatchers and their evil mind control.
Obviously regulations too. Without regulations all those companies that break regulations that are there would suddenly start playing fair, it's all part of capitalist magic.
More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
And as you know, these are open forums, you're able to come and listen to what I have to say.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by fredgiblet:Quote:
Tax cuts INCREASED revenue to the Federal Treasurey, not decreased.
Then why is the deficit so bad? Why is the owner of the national debt clock looking into adding another number to the clock for when (not if) the debt hits 1 Trillion?
Um, have you actually paid attention to the national debt? Last month, it passed 9 TRILLION DOLLARS.
You're welcome on my boat. God ain't.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by reaverman:Quote:
Originally posted by fredgiblet:Quote:
Tax cuts INCREASED revenue to the Federal Treasurey, not decreased.
Then why is the deficit so bad? Why is the owner of the national debt clock looking into adding another number to the clock for when (not if) the debt hits 1 Trillion?
Um, have you actually paid attention to the national debt? Last month, it passed 9 TRILLION DOLLARS.
You're welcome on my boat. God ain't.
Damnit, meant to put 10, caught my mistake, edited it and it still shows 1. I'll try to edit it again.
EDIT: fixed, finally.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Yo! Rap! Where's that point by point discussion we were both looking forward to?????
---------------------------------
Free as in freedom, not beer.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Righteous9:
Oh Auraptor...
what do you think that 96 3 vote for ginsberg meant? It meant that Clinton picked somebody the Repubs jumped on because they thought she was moderate enough for their tastes in presentation...And if they truly thought that she was going to do harm to their values in that seat and still picked her, if that is your contention, then they really screwed their constituents.
It is their job to dissent choices to the supreme court that they think are bad. They have a say in this matter as a check on the presidency. If they aren't using that check when it is warranted, they don't deserve to hold their seats.
Feel free to respond, but I don't expect you to. too many different posts have been heaped on you to respond to them all. Where is Hero when we need him? Where is Finn? Give a brother a hand out here guys.
Oh, I didn't see your post to me until just now. Okay, profits are different than profit margins. You schooled me again. Of course you brought up their profit margin as if it was paltry, and now you've agreed that Exxon Mobile is doing quite well...so which is it?
Yes, it would be absurd for me to say that we went to war just for the oil companies, because that would leave out Haliburton and the Carlile group.
I stand corrected again...thank you.
The GOP didn't in any way think that Ginsberg was 'moderate', but they still honored the idea that the President has the right to choose whom he wants to sit on the bench. In short, the GOP acted like statesmen, and not fanatical, partisan hacks as the Dems have become. The Senate is charged w/ the duty of 'advice and consent 'when the President nominates an executive or judicial post, and that's what the they did. Even though the GOP could have tried to play Quid Pro Quo for the the Bork lynching, they felt the interest of the country was best served to simply take the vote and move on.
The Dems werent' so compelled to do the same.
People love a happy ending. So every episode, I will explain once again that I don't like people. And then Mal will shoot someone. Someone we like. And their puppy. - Joss
" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME