patrick.net

Nope. Both sides are equally to blame.

Can I have my pundit gig now?

Obama got elected on Fiscal restraint, and then did the opposite:

"The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the US Government cannot pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government's reckless fiscal policies. Increasing America's debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that, 'the buck stops here.' Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better."

~ Senator Barack H. Obama, March 2006

Entitlemented says

Obama got elected on Fiscal restraint, and then did the opposite

Bush hadn't yet crashed the economy in March 2006.

Federal spending on the American people is wasteful and destroys us!

Federal spending to hunt non-existent WMDs in Iraq and strengthen Iran by eliminating Saddam is sensible, restrained conservatarian spending which makes us stronger.

I need to try 'shrooms some time.

The housing bubble caused the 2007 crash - or did some not see the bubble pop?

His teleprompter had the wrong words in it. Someone hacked the teleprompter, he never meant that. Bush's fault,yet again.

"The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the US Government cannot pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government's reckless fiscal policies. Increasing America's debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that, 'the buck stops here.' Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better."

~ Senator Barack H. Obama, March 2006

Entitlemented says

The housing bubble caused the 2007 crash - or did some not see the bubble pop?

No: John Kerry and Obama caused the housing crash and subsequent depression (sources: Bush White House Press Office, plus public statements by Dick Cheney and GOP officials).

You see, Kerry (during the 2004 election), and Obama (during the 2007 Democrat primaries) both made disparaging remarks about the U.S. economy, despite stern warnings from Cheney that such talk has no place in an America at war. GOP pundits were quick to highlight the negative economic impact such derogatory slurs can have on jobs and growth. Obama finally destroyed the housing market with his remarks on the stump in 2007, as well as the fear he created in investors and job creators rightfully terrified at an impending Obama presidency.

Footnote:This is totally different from threatening to default on Treasury debt payments, which has no discernible effect on business activity, interest rates, or the ability of the government or private individuals to borrow money, so stop saying that.

Entitlemented says

His teleprompter had the wrong words in it. Someone hacked the teleprompter, he never meant that. Bush's fault,yet again.

"The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the US Government cannot pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government's reckless fiscal policies. Increasing America's debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that, 'the buck stops here.' Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better."

~ Senator Barack H. Obama, March 2006

ooooohhh! I see, you'll just post the same response over and over again. Well, that's pretty simple then. Just press "enter" every time...

Entitlemented says

Obama got elected on Fiscal restraint, and then did the opposite:

OK great. Maybe Entitlemented will elaborate on exactly what new spending was initiated under Obama that cause you do say he abandoned fiscal restraint.

tatupu70 says

Entitlemented says

Obama got elected on Fiscal restraint, and then did the opposite:

OK great. Maybe Entitlemented will elaborate on exactly what new spending was initiated under Obama that cause you do say he abandoned fiscal restraint.

Maybe...but probably not.

tatupu70 says

Maybe Entitlemented will elaborate on exactly what new spending was initiated under Obama that cause you do say he abandoned fiscal restraint.

No, she'll just post the "Senator Barack H. Obama, March 2006" quote again.

finehoe says

Bush hadn't yet crashed the economy in March 2006.

Serious.. Bush paid some $200K for his Texas Ranch house.. how many American were
upbidding every home in the LIBERAL EAST and WEST coasts... by several hundredthousand year over year... It sure wasnt BUSH who was overpaying for California Homes..

Bush gave a good example not to overbid and overspend on homes.

APOCALYPSEFUCK is Comptroller says

All deficits would disappear within hours of the elimination of taxes.

All economists know this is the truth.

All communists deny it.

These facts are known to all who read the Bible -- I need not belabor the arithmetic behind irrefutable truths.

The only question which remains: Do atheists and Muslims reject these truths because they are evil communists, or because they are lying communists?

thomaswong.1986 says

Bush gave a good example not to overbid and overspend on homes.

If only he'd gave a good example on not spending billions on wars fought for made-up reasons.

Entitlemented says

Bush's fault,yet again.

Damn right. Almost all the current debt is a function of massive tax cuts in 2001 that were never paid for (Bush), two bank-breaking wars that were never paid for (Bush), a big new entitlement for seniors, Medicare D, that was never paid for (Bush), and the revenue sinkhole provided by the worst recession since the 1930s (begun before Obama took office.).

finehoe says

Damn right. Almost all the current debt is a function of massive tax cuts in 2001 that were never paid for (Bush), two bank-breaking wars that were never paid for (Bush), a big new entitlement for seniors, Medicare D, that was never paid for (Bush), and the revenue sinkhole provided by the worst recession since the 1930s (begun before Obama took office.).

The right wingers have special glasses that prevent them from even seeing this post.

Entitlemented says

Obama got elected on Fiscal restraint, and then did the opposite:

The republicans made it EXTREMELY clear that their goal was to defund Obamacare; the debt ceiling was merely the weapon they used to try to extort the democrats. Why are you lying now and claiming this issue is about fiscal restraint?

Here's what happened (and what you would know if you read the article):

1. Republicans held a gun to the democrats' head and said "Defund Obamacare or we'll shut down the government".

2. The public was immediately disgusted with the republicans' childish and dangerous political tactics.

3. Realizing this, the republicans are trying to rewrite history and claim this was about fiscal restraint rather than trying to sink Obamacare, even though when they hatched this idea, they said it was about Obamacare over and over and over.

Any other view is pure fantasy.

I'm all for fiscal restraint. The problem could be solved very easily, without any government shut downs (which actually end up costing MORE money). We need to tax capital gains as ordinary income. The wealthy make their money from capital gains, not payroll income. So why should they get a lower tax rate? It makes no sense. Actually, it does make sense - it's the Golden Rule. He who has the gold makes the rules. Change that, and the problem is solved, without taking food out of poor people's mouths or taking medical care away from the elderly.

Entitlemented says

Obama got elected on Fiscal restraint, and then did the opposite:

Obama got elected on [...], and then did the opposite
1. Closing Gitmo
2. Ending the wars
3. Bringing change to Washington
4. Not being Bush
5. Championing the poor and middle class

APOCALYPSEFUCK is Comptroller says

HydroCabron says

The only questions which remains: Do atheists and Muslims reject these truths because they are evil communists, or because they are lying communists?

No, they reject these truths because they are gay, satanic baby-eating communists.

http://youtu.be/FG1NrQYXjLU

finehoe says

Entitlemented says

Bush's fault,yet again.

Almost all the current debt is a function of massive tax cuts in 2001 that were never paid for (Bush), two bank-breaking wars that were never paid for (Bush), a big new entitlement for seniors, Medicare D, that was never paid for (Bush), and the revenue sinkhole provided by the worst recession since the 1930s (begun before Obama took office.).

Nitpicking.

What about the monument closures, the long form, and Benghazi?

Call it Crazy says

You're not insinuating he lied, are you??

No, I'm not insinuating it. I'm outright stating it.

bgamall4 says

HydroCabron says

These facts are known to all who read the Bible -- I need not belabor the arithmetic behind irrefutable truths.

He was being sarcastic, silly.

They are both being sarcastic.

bgamall4 says

HydroCabron says

These facts are known to all who read the Bible -- I need not belabor the arithmetic behind irrefutable truths.

He was being sarcastic, silly.

You know what sort of person doesn't understand sarcasm?

A communist, is who!

Homeboy says

The wealthy make their money from capital gains, not payroll income. So why should they get a lower tax rate? It makes no sense. Actually, it does make sense - it's the Golden Rule. He who has the gold makes the rules. Change that, and the problem is solved, without taking food out of poor people's mouths or taking medical care away from the elderly.

Why do you want America to fail? ;-)

Homeboy says

The wealthy make their money from capital gains, not payroll income. So why should they get a lower tax rate? It makes no sense.

the rich like everyone else earned their income once.. and it was taxed once.. the residual after

taxes are savings which can be reinvested back into purchases of newer assets.

therefore replacement of Machinery and other Assets if sold may leave a gain or loss..

so why not encourage early disposal / sale and purchases of newer modern assets

without triggering higher taxes.. therefore business (the rich!) provide demand from

factories and thus higher employment of labor.

DO YOU UNDERSTAND THIS ?

Homeboy says

He who has the gold makes the rules. Change that, and the problem is solved, without taking food out of poor people's mouths or taking medical care away from the elderly.

Even the farmer, doctor, small business owner understand the tax code better since they are encouraged to purchase new capital equipment from factories which maximizes production and employment.

thomaswong.1986 says

Homeboy says

the rich like everyone else earned their income once.. and it was taxed once.. the residual after

taxes are savings which can be reinvested back into purchases of newer assets.

therefore replacement of Machinery and other Assets if sold may leave a gain or loss..

so why not encourage early disposal / sale and purchases of newer modern assets (durable

goods) without triggering higher taxes.. therefore business (the rich!) provide demand from

factories and thus higher employment of labor.

But that would be the government picking winners and losers, saying "this sort of income is more socially beneficial than that kind, so we'll give preferential treatment to this kind." Picking winners and losers sounds like socialism and social engineering to me.

Why do you love big government?

HydroCabron says

But that would be the government picking winners and losers, saying "this sort of income is more socially beneficial than that kind, so we'll give preferential treatment to this kind." Picking winners and losers sounds like socialism and social engineering to me.

funds put at risk is not picking winners or losers.. if you modernize your business with new orders of assets.. it could be any asset you use in your business to generate income... it may be office equipment, manufacturing eq, or IT equipment.. there is NO winners or losers..

26 USC § 1221 - Capital asset defined

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/1221

bgamall4 says

A wealth tax would not have to be yearly, just once in awhile to balance expenditures more closely and get the debt under 3 percent of GDP. We need some deficit spending or we would run out of treasuries as pristine collateral.

why not encourage more capital investment and more job formation and thus collect more in taxes..

why is govt from Russia to Brazil to Japan understand this and you dont ?

why do you thing they are growing ?

your going to tax US corporations more who hold the US treasuries which are due from the US Govt.

Collect from A in taxes to payback A which you borrowed...

There is no such thing as objective reality. There is only conservatism. Any sentence may be stated on behalf of conservatism, which means sometimes one thing, sometimes its opposite, according to the needs of the wealthy at any point in time. Such sentences, however, are strictly for the consumption of potential recruits to conservatism, and are unneeded by confirmed disciples of conservatism.

Most generally, conservatism is a first principle, and not a philosophy derived from any higher principles, as there can be no such.

Therefore, conservatism is what one uses in an argument, but never something one argues about.

In no way does conservatism differ from a religion.

thomaswong.1986 says

the rich like everyone else earned their income once.. and it was taxed once.. the residual after

taxes are savings which can be reinvested back into purchases of newer assets.

therefore replacement of Machinery and other Assets if sold may leave a gain or loss..

so why not encourage early disposal / sale and purchases of newer modern assets

without triggering higher taxes.. therefore business (the rich!) provide demand from

factories and thus higher employment of labor.

DO YOU UNDERSTAND THIS ?

Understand? It's complete gibberish. The problem is that the elite in the financial sector earn their money through investment, not payroll. What part of that don't you understand? When you say they "earned their income once and it was taxed once", that has nothing to do with anything. Yes, capital gains are taxed once, and that one time they are taxed, it is at a LOWER rate than that person would pay on employment income. Therefore, Richie Rich, who makes his money through complex investment schemes that the working class doesn't even understand, pays a lower tax rate than Joe Middle Class, who works a 9-5 job. This is not right, and this is what's killing our economy. Your trickle down nonsense was tried and it FAILED. Trickle down doesn't work. Period.

DO YOU UNDERSTAND THIS?

thomaswong.1986 says

Even the farmer, doctor, small business owner understand the tax code better since they are encouraged to purchase new capital equipment from factories which maximizes production and employment.

I AM a small business owner. The majority of my income is not derived from capital gains. What you are saying is complete bullshit.

80% of the population derives virtually no benefit from lower capital gains taxes.

Homeboy says

I AM a small business owner. The majority of my income is not derived from capital gains. What you are saying is complete bullshit.

you misunderstand the tax laws here.. its not for for the benefit of 1% but 100% of the people.

26 USC § 1221 - Capital asset defined26 USC § 1221 - Capital asset defined

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/1221

As a small business owner you already paid TAX for your past net earnings,

Retained Earnings can be reinvested in non-inventory asset purchases..

capital equipment.. and what else to motivate new capital orders..hire more workers..

Maybe you want to sell that business or buy a new one.. be it Corporate

or Partnership.. that too is also based on valuations of your tax basis..

Some is ordinary income and some at lower capital gains from original capital

contributed. Lower capital gains, are created to incentive investments into

business/industries.. if you suffer a loss, there are deductions to provide

relief...

yep... the 1% got taxed lower rate, and here you are doing this fucking internet thing..

cause some rich jackass put his after tax money at risk..... Aint Life Grand !

You think he should of bought 1,000,000 lotto tickets instead ?

If your a small business owner, then your Accountant (CPA) will spell it out once again.

If your some Occupier.. sorry, your a lost cause...

Homeboy says

80% of the population derives virtually no benefit from lower capital gains taxes.

too busy chasing housing bubbles.. they never save a single dime to call their own.

had 99 % said no to higher housing prices and simply walked away from the commissioned

realtors... dont you think everything would have turned different ? Yes.. you would have had

a lower priced house and some savings earning a divided and long term capital gains.

trickle-down wong.1986 says

As a small business owner you already paid TAX for your past net earnings,

Retained Earnings can be reinvested in non-inventory asset purchases..

capital equipment.. and what else to motivate new capital orders..hire more workers..

Trickle down bullshit. The evidence shows that the rich HOARD their money; they don't reinvest it into the economy.
thomaswong.1986 says

Lower capital gains, are created to incentive investments into

business/industries.. if you suffer a loss, there are deductions to provide

relief...

Nope. Created to keep the 1% in the 1%. The rich get richer; the middle class gets fucked in the ass.

thomaswong.1986 says

and here you are doing this fucking internet thing..

cause some rich jackass put his after tax money at risk..... Aint Life Grand !

You think he should of bought 1,000,000 lotto tickets instead ?

Blah, blah, blah. "Should HAVE", jackass. Learn English for Christ's sake.

Trickle down doesn't work. Never has, never will. Deal with it.

thomaswong.1986 says

sorry, your a lost cause...

Your, you're. Are you fucking retarded? It's hard to believe you know anything about economics when you can't even spell. You probably inherited some money and think you're the fucking chosen one. Nope, you're just lucky.

thomaswong.1986 says

too busy chasing housing bubbles.. they never save a single dime to call their own.

They weren't born with a silver spoon in their mouth. They want to live in a house, but the game is rigged by the god damn 1 percenter assholes with their favorable tax treatment.

I waited out the bubble and managed to buy a house by the skin of my teeth, right at the exact bottom of the market, before the new fake bubble started inflating. This is bullshit. It shouldn't be like this. In the 1950s, a family could buy a house off of ONE income. Now with husband and wife BOTH working, they're lucky if they can afford anything at all. And you fucking LIKE it. FUCK YOU.

thomaswong.1986 says

a lower priced house and some savings earning a divided and long term capital gains.

A savings account doesn't even earn half of a percent right now. What planet do you live on?

thomaswong.1986 says

the rich like everyone else earned their income once.. and it was taxed once.. the residual after

taxes are savings which can be reinvested back into purchases of newer assets.

therefore replacement of Machinery and other Assets if sold may leave a gain or loss..

so why not encourage early disposal / sale and purchases of newer modern assets

without triggering higher taxes.. therefore business (the rich!) provide demand from

factories and thus higher employment of labor.

DO YOU UNDERSTAND THIS ?

Even by Twrong standards this makes no sense. Demand from factories? Replace machines? Manufacturing is 11% of GDP. All the rich are in the FIRE sector. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THIS?

Homeboy says

Therefore, Richie Rich, who makes his money through complex investment schemes that the working class doesn't even understand, pays a lower tax rate than Joe
Middle Class, who works a 9-5 job. This is not right, and this is what's killing our economy. Your trickle down nonsense was tried and it FAILED. Trickle down doesn't work. Period.

WHY DO YOU HATE FREEDOM??!!! WHY DO YOU HATE AMERICA??!!!