patrick.net

FortWayne says

That's not exactly how it went. You see he fixed tax system by lowering overall taxes. Because when he came into the office a millionnaire could pay less in taxes (as in total amount) than a many earning 80,000. Reagan fixed that crony Democrat driven system of bullshit.

You want to put up some real world examples of millionaires paying less in taxes than people earning 80,000 before reagan's tax reform? I thought not. It's true because I feel it should be true.

The tax act of 1986 brought in 54.9 billion in additional revenue in 1987. It's true look it up. How is that lowering overall taxes?

Does your anal orifice ever hurt from pulling so much of your "information" from it?

Dan8267 says

That's bullshit. Mexicans -- and we're really talking about Mexicans here -- come to the U.S. legally as temp workers for big farm because Republicans insist on farm bills that make this possible.

Now lets understand this here, because you are missing a lot.

Farm workers with work visas = legal. Republicans support, unions (read Democrats) against this.
Illegals that run the border by millions, or overstay = illegal, Democrats support, Republicans want to remove.

The problem here is with your team, your team wants illegals here.

FortWayne says

Farm workers with work visas = legal. Republicans support, unions (read Democrats) against this.

Illegals that run the border by millions, or overstay = illegal, Democrats support, Republicans want to remove.

The problem here is with your team, your team wants illegals here.

Bullshit. Your Republicans, who are in the pockets of big farm, want slave labor. It's impossible to have rotating workers on farms because you can't get your slave labor to leave the country. And even if you could, you wouldn't want to because illegals keep the wages down for Mexicans with work Visas.

The solution is quite simple. Stop all work Visas. Stop the flow of slave workers into the U.S.

If workers are needed, then grant U.S. citizenship and permanent residency to the farm workers already here.

Conservatives wanted black slaves and when the Civil War prevented them from having that, conservatives wanted child slaves. When child labor laws prevented that, conservatives wanted economic slaves through "illegal alien" status. There's a big theme in conservatism, and it's slavery.

Hell, stop all work Visas and deport all the Mexican farm workers and watch farming profits immediately disappear. Watch as supermarkets scramble to import basic foodstocks from Mexico, Canada, and South America. It'll be fun.

The last thing Democrats or liberals want are millions of people living at the poverty line in this country who can't even vote. Sorry, that's a conservative wet dream, not ours.

Dan8267 says

Bullshit. Your Republicans, who are in the pockets of big farm, want slave labor. It's impossible to have rotating workers on farms because you can't get your slave labor to leave the country. And even if you could, you wouldn't want to because illegals keep the wages down for Mexicans with work Visas.

Those people come and leave. It's when your liberal peeps hire illegals is when we have a problem. But it's cute how you blame Republicans for what your team supports.

Dan8267 says

The last thing Democrats or liberals want are millions of people living at the poverty line in this country who can't even vote.

Dan, you make good points about capital vs labor, which you sometimes call conservative vs "Democrats or liberals" (obviously two different and increasingly uncorrelated groups). You seem to have overlooked however a point about whom the Democrats represent. PatNet has two threads about a book on the topic, arguing that Democrats have shifted from labor to the professional class, though I think even the professional class get betrayed, e.g. 70% of doctors oppose Obamneycare. I will relate a story that I observed, and maybe try to add links later, but the connection would be only anecdotal.

Here in the SFBA, the large number of illegal aliens began to draw cottage industries that catered to them, including illegal pharmacies that sold Rx drugs imported illegally from Mexico, at or near Mexican prices. As in Mexico, customers could buy Rx drugs without an Rx, thus saving 90% compared to the American system. These pharmacies began occasionally to get reported on the evening news, though only ever in the rare occasions of somebody getting hurt or arrested.

What happened in this "liberal" Democratic city? Presto: "Healthy San Francisco." It provides nearly free comprehensive medical coverage to indigent persons, and essentially to illegal aliens whose assets are south of the border. The means test excludes nearly all legal residents of San Francisco, so as not to take paying customers away from the legal pharmacies. BTW, it is the only way to get full coverage at San Francisco General Hospital, which has the only Level 1 trauma facility in San Francisco (population more than 800,000). So, if you with your Florida Obamneycare insurance policy happen to visit SF and get hit by a car, you are at best only partially covered, subject to "balance billing" for whatever astronomical number the hospital corporation makes up, but an illegal alien on Healthy SF is covered in full, because his assets in Mexico might be too difficult to find.

Cue also the earnest programs on PBS talking about how we need to get more insurance programs for illegal aliens because they are not buying enough pills and "services", as indicated by their utilization statistics. It's presented as "liberal," as all mandatory medical insurance programs tend to be.

So yes, Democrats have found a reliable way to profit from the presence of illegal aliens. The Democrats don't represent the laborers whom illegal aliens compete with. The Democrats represent Marcus and other government workers, whose government jobs are immune from NAFTA. And, the more illegal aliens there are, and the more they they can be incentivized to claim "poverty" (whether true or false), the more "services" must be funded, enriching the providers. I had not understood this when I lived on the east coast, but I see it here. I love Mexico and have had only good experiences there, and I don't worry about how many illegal aliens might be here, but I do worry about Democrats building so-called "liberal" patronage networks to "help" them. And, seeing and hearing the construction crews doing the local remodels, I can understand the frustration of American laborers who do face that competition, and whose taxes pay for those "services".

FortWayne says

The problem here is with your team, your team wants illegals here.

FortWayne says

But it's cute how you blame Republicans for what your team supports.

To be honest - it is tiring to keep arguing "your team vs. my team". Conversations need to get above the level of a 5 year old to really understand the root causes. In my reading of Dan's posts, he has criticized the establishment Democrats as much as the batshit crazy Republicans -- for all the wreck that they have caused to this country. And I also think he is highlighting a clear distinction between a classical liberal (honoring rights of an individual, morality and justice) and an establishment liberal (yet another hypocrite like the batshit crazy conservatives).

FWayne -- some of the points you make are legit.
But you have a very skewed perception given your level of ignorance on Reagan and the batshit crazy Republicans in general. You keep arguing that Democrats are causing all the problems, while being blind to the fact that the Rep-Dem Duopoly oligarchy that is beholden to private for-profit corporations and is at the heart of problems.

It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. - Aristotle.

FortWayne says

Farm workers with work visas = legal. Republicans support, unions (read Democrats) against this.

Illegals that run the border by millions, or overstay = illegal, Democrats support, Republicans want to remove.

You are too funny for words. You are seriously in the running to displace tbp as the most hallucinogenic poster on patnet. Do you smoke lots of dope or make this stuff up while straight?

Every major corporation hires tons of illegals, they depend on illegals as part of their business plan. Farm workers? What a joke. The huge agri corporations (let's take a minute to get all misty eyed for the mythical family farmer that all those billions of dollars in agri subsidies goes to) hire millions of illegals. Who do you think butchers all the meat? Cleans all the fish? Republicans want to remove illegals about as much as the want to cut off their dicks or be faithful to their wives. There was something like 6 corporations prosecuted for hiring illegals during the 8 bush years. Average fine around 1000 dollars. Yep that certainly shows a serious republican commitment to getting tough on illegals.

FortWayne says

It's when your liberal peeps hire illegals is when we have a problem

Liberals aren't running factory farms with mass slave labor. That's conservatives. You are simply lying.

curious2 says

Dan, you make good points about capital vs labor, which you sometimes call conservative vs "Democrats or liberals" (obviously two different and increasingly uncorrelated groups). You seem to have overlooked however a point about whom the Democrats represent. PatNet has two threads about a book on the topic, arguing that Democrats have shifted from labor to the professional class, though I think even the professional class get betrayed, e.g. 70% of doctors oppose Obamneycare. I will relate a story that I observed, and maybe try to add links later, but the connection would be only anecdotal.

This is all true.

Liberals want the U.S. population to be
- equal under law, which includes all residents being citizens with the rights of citizens including the right to vote and run for office. Having large segments of the population being non-citizens with few rights is detrimental to liberty.
- the population to be educated so they can support rational and wise policies and aren't easy to manipulate. This means schooling for everyone.
- don't want economic slavery in which people are coerced by financial or legal means to live in poverty they cannot escape

Democrats used to be the party of labor, but right now there is no party of labor. However, Democrats are significantly less bad for labor than Republicans and don't support the mass economic slavery of immigrant workers that Republicans do. Democrats aren't good on the issue, but Republicans are far worse.

However, Democrats do support a path to citizenship for all the current immigrants, something that Republicans don't want because they rightfully know that the immigrants will not support Republican economic tyranny.

curious2 says

It provides nearly free comprehensive medical coverage to indigent persons, and essentially to illegal aliens whose assets are south of the border.

Turning to economic policy... If the cost of basic health care for imported workers is greater than the productivity of those imported workers, that's the free market telling you not to import workers and potentially not to produce the products those workers would produce. Maybe the real problem is that food is too cheap in our country today and we waste too much of it. Our grandparents spent a larger percentage of their income on food and a much smaller percentage on education, health care, and housing. Maybe if we made the later three things more affordable, we could afford to spend more on food production and we wouldn't even need to import labor, or if we did, we could pay that labor and provide health care for it.

uomo_senza_nome_0 says

In my reading of Dan's posts, he has criticized the establishment Democrats as much as the batshit crazy Republicans

criticism isn't a solution. Dan doesn't know how to solve problems, and he is just like every Democrat he criticizes supports all the same principles and values that are failing our nation today. If he were in child services, I'm sure well over 90% of the people would lose their children to government. And if he was in education our education would go down faster than a drunk girl on a prom night.

FortWayne says

criticism isn't a solution. Dan doesn't know how to solve problems, and he is just like every Democrat he criticizes supports all the same principles and values that are failing our nation today.

1. The first step to solving a problem is acknowledging it's existence.
2. Blaming the right policies, and yes the right people, is critical to solving problems. If you blame 9/11 on Saddam Hussein, you don't stop terrorism, rather you get ISIS.
3. I'm not a Democrat, which is why I cannot vote in the Democratic primaries in a closed state like Florida.
4. I solve problems for a living. That's what software developers do. And I'm damn good at it as demonstrated by my pay and employment history. Most software developers have huge gaps in employment. I have none and I'm in constant demand.
5. You stated on the record that gay marriage would destroy our civilization because all of civilization is based on marriage between one woman and one man. Aside from being historically inaccurate, your statement has been proven false as gay marriage has been the law of our land for about a year and no such collapse has happened. Put simply, whenever you say something is hurting our nation, you're just trying to justify your despicable bigotries. You, like all conservatives, are on the wrong side of history, and history will not be kind to you.
6. Reaganomics has been shown to have destroyed the middle class, yet you continue to use Reagan as your avatar. Oh, and Reagan armed terrorists. You are an idiot.

FortWayne says

If he were in child services, I'm sure well over 90% of the people would lose their children to government.

And I'm sure that fewer people would lose their children if I were in charge of child services. For one thing, I would prosecute to the fullest extent of the law, any and all police who used threats to take away people's children in order to rob people under asset forfeiture laws. Funny how such shit only happens in conservatives places like Texas.

FortWayne says

And if he was in education our education would go down faster than a drunk girl on a prom night.

Keep your daughter out of this.

You want to know which one of us is better on education? Answer a simple question. FortWayne, are you descendant from rodents?

We all know FortWayne is physically incapable of answering that question correctly. 'Nuff said.

Dan8267 says

2. Blaming the right policies, and yes the right people, is critical to solving problems.

Liberals are the problem, since all they are doing is repeating the mistakes of the past.

Dan8267 says

4. I solve problems for a living. That's what software developers do.

Tell me one problem you solved that benefited human kind. I doubt you can even come up with one.

Dan8267 says

5. You stated on the record that gay marriage would destroy our civilization because all of civilization is based on marriage between one woman and one man. Aside from being historically inaccurate, your statement has been proven false as gay marriage has been the law of our land for about a year and no such collapse has happened.

I said we'll be just like Roman empire and like Sodom and Gamorah, all failed. And none of it happened overnight, but it all began and progressed the same way, the way we are going. History is on my side of the argument, it is your side that got it wrong in the name of desire for sick pleasures.

Dan8267 says

Keep your daughter out of this.

What would you the 30 year old virgin know about kids.

Dan8267 says

6. Reaganomics has been shown to have destroyed the middle class, yet you continue to use Reagan as your avatar.

Reaganomics saved this nation, and defeated USSR in the cold war. You are too young to remember, and too clueless to understand, probably just bought into some stupid commie propaganda like every other 16 year old socialist who was told that world runs on rainbows and unicorns.

FortWayne says

Dan8267 says

6. Reaganomics has been shown to have destroyed the middle class, yet you continue to use Reagan as your avatar.

Reaganomics saved this nation, and defeated USSR in the cold war. You are too young to remember, and too clueless to understand, probably just bought into some stupid commie propaganda like every other 16 year old socialist who was told that world runs on rainbows and unicorns

You are full of shit. No such thing happened, you just imagine it happened. I very much doubt you were old enough to remember either. Not only am I old enough to remember, but I actively worked for Reagans election campaign as well as Fords. That was before the republican party went batshit crazy catering to the lunatic fringe like you. For someone who is always talking about Reagan you don't seem to know much about what Reagan actually did and didn't do.

You never did explain how reagan's tax reforms increasing tax revenue by 54 billion was an overall lowering of taxes. Is that like:
“War is peace.
Freedom is slavery.
Ignorance is strength.”
― George Orwell, 1984

FortWayne says

Liberals are the problem, since all they are doing is repeating the mistakes of the past.

Closed minded divisive rhetoric, media outlets which are now solidly about ratings and co-opted message, and a population which is kept scared but comforted by simple solutions and simple people with simple answers: is the problem.

Too many of us have lost our imagination and ability to critically challenge and come to decisions ourselves. It's far easier to be told what to believe and be angry about it on the way.

The solution is, and forever will be, be between the spectrum of liberal and conservative. As long as people are willing to demonize a label, and apply that label to whomever they believe embodies it, without actually seeking any nuance or perspective on an opinion or policy, America is destined to not be great again. We will continue our "YouTube comments section" slide into mediocrity and irrelevance.

FortWayne says

I said we'll be just like Roman empire and like Sodom and Gamorah, all failed. And none of it happened overnight, but it all began and progressed the same way, the way we are going. History is on my side of the argument, it is your side that got it wrong in the name of desire for sick pleasures.

... or we could be like the Renaissance. For America to do that we would have to put a much higher value on Education and stop our idealogical attack on Science. Honestly, by population belief we are pretty well leaning in that direction anyway. The US is becoming more secular by the second.

Funny, the Protestant Reformation ended the Renaissance, and in a round about way formed the US. Also interesting that the Renaissance was essentially a fundamental embracing of humanity itself, at the expense of traditional ideals and religion. Oh well, I'm sure that's all just correlation and not causation though, right?

FortWayne says

Liberals are the problem, since all they are doing is repeating the mistakes of the past.

Name one mistake of the past liberals are repeating.

Here are some of the mistakes of the past conservatives are repeating.
- Jim Crow Laws through voter ID laws
- Marriage prohibitions. They prevented interracial marriages in the 1960s. Today they try to prevent same sex marriages.
- Reaganomics, the policies that have destroyed the middle class.
- Deregulation. It didn't work in the last century and still doesn't today.
- Importing massive numbers of low-paid workers, especially in big farm and in IT.
- Using the military to steal oil from crazy-ass Muslim nations
- Using torture, a device that only succeeds as a recruitment tool for terrorism
- Trusting the government with unlimited power to spy on the American people
- Prosecuting whistle blowers like Edward Snowden
- Allowing money to dominate politics. See Citizens United.
- Renewing the vile USA Patriot Act
- Pretending that climate change isn't real
- Ignoring the massive amounts of pollution our nation releases
- Applying the U.S. spy and criminal prosecution forces against peaceful political groups

I could go on and on.

FortWayne says

Tell me one problem you solved that benefited human kind. I doubt you can even come up with one.

I, and about ten thousand other engineers just like me, created the Internet you used today. We solved a myriad of problems about how to manage information and connect people and how to use computers in new and amazing ways.

So, what have you done?

FortWayne says

I said we'll be just like Roman empire and like Sodom and Gamorah, all failed.

Sodom and Gomorrah were fictional cities. Neither Lot nor his wife were real people. She did not turn into a pillar of salt. There were no angels.

Rome fell because it overexpanded its empire. All empires that have ever existed, except our new and young one, have failed. It is highly unlikely that the American empire will set any longevity records as its been failure due to Reagan's economic policies, the outsourcing of manufacturing and technology to other nations, and the corruption of political parties, especially the Republicans.

Your assertion that gay marriage is going to bring down our society is laughable.

FortWayne says

What would you the 30 year old virgin know about kids.

The fact that you think that I'm 30 or a virgin demonstrates how ignorant you are.

FortWayne says

Reaganomics saved this nation, and defeated USSR in the cold war.

Feel free to back that shit up with some evidence. You might as well claim that Mickey Mouse won WWII by riding a dinosaur into Germany.

FortWayne says

probably just bought into some stupid commie propaganda like every other 16 year old socialist who was told that world runs on rainbows and unicorns.

Do you even know the difference between communism and socialism? Or for that matter progressiveness and liberalism? You are the epitome of willful ignorance.

If there is one thing that FortWayne demonstrates above all else, it is that it's impossible to believe in a god and to be sane at the same time. Anyone who thinks an all-powerful sky daddy is controlling the universe, clearly does not have a grasp on reality. A god is far more ridiculous than even "rainbows and unicorns".

bob2356 says

You never did explain how reagan's tax reforms increasing tax revenue by 54 billion was an overall lowering of taxes. Is that like:
“War is peace. (George Orwell 1984)

Because at that time there were so many loopholes in the tax system that most very high earners never paid any of it. Reagans system reduced overall taxes, while increasing them by removing loopholes. It worked out to be a better system.

bob2356 says

You are full of shit. No such thing happened, you just imagine it happened. I very much doubt you were old enough to remember either. Not only am I old enough to remember, but I actively worked for Reagans election campaign as well as Fords. That was before the republican party went batshit crazy catering to the lunatic fringe like you. For someone who is always talking about Reagan you don't seem to know much about what Reagan actually did and didn't do.

For a man who claims to have worked on it, you sure seem to not know what actually happened. I highly doubt you did something more than passed out flyers on the street for $4/hour if you are that unaware.

FortWayne says

criticism isn't a solution. Dan doesn't know how to solve problems

Note the comment where it was acknowledged when you were right about the establishment Democrats. On the other hand, you are unwilling to even entertain the possibility that you are wrong. I gave you the benefit of doubt, now after reading your responses, I think that was useless.

“Being ignorant is not so much a shame, as being unwilling to learn.” - Benjamin Franklin

uomo_senza_nome_0 says

I gave you the benefit of doubt, now after reading your responses, I think that was useless.

As others before you have discovered, Forthood/Fortwayne is a lying troll. He used to troll SFGate, then got kicked off there and came to PatNet. He claims to have gone to college, but never says where; I suspect a Catholic indoctrination center. Others and I wasted time disproving his lies about Rome and Reagan, but it never made any difference. Every time he blows another Teamster at the Reseda truck stop toilet, he feels compelled to atone by trolling online. At least his toothless gums may have provided some solace to those lonely long haul truckers.

uomo_senza_nome_0 says

Note the comment where it was acknowledged when you were right about the establishment Democrats. On the other hand, you are unwilling to even entertain the possibility that you are wrong. I gave you the benefit of doubt, now after reading your responses, I think that was useless.

It is not unwillingness to learn, it is a disagreement. I've been wrong plenty, but I'm not wrong here. Liberals usually can't handle disagreements well, hence arguments start here, and that's where their need for "safe spaces" comes from.

FortWayne says

It is not unwillingness to learn, it is a disagreement. I've been wrong plenty, but I'm not wrong here. Liberals usually can't handle disagreements well, hence arguments start here, and that's where their need for "safe spaces" comes from.

Let's test those assertions.

1) I count myself a liberal, and yet I don't Ignore anyone, and PatNet is hardly a "safe space."
2) You keep commenting obsessively about homosexuality, including commonly in the Roman Empire. I have a lifelong fascination with Rome, the eternal city, including the Roman Republic and the Roman Empire. As for homosexuality in the Roman Empire, Cicero wrote of same-sex marriage, and Nero's five marriages included two to men. Rome continued to prosper, and went on to achieve what most consider its greatest period: the era of the five good emperors, including Hadrian, who was gay exclusively throughout his life. The reign of the five good emperors ended with the death of the otherwise brilliant Marcus Aurelius, who made one mistake: unlike the others, he chose his own biological son to succeed him as Emperor. One can find a parallel to Bush 43 becoming POTUS and ignoring warnings about Iraq including from Brent Scowcroft, advisor to Bush 41. The fall of Rome resulted ultimately from Constantine imposing Christianity, for reasons anyone who's read Neitzsche can explain. Yet, you go on and on trying to be more Catholic than the Pope, attributing the fall of Rome and fictional cities from the Bible to your own self-loathing bigotry. I can handle disagreement based on ambiguous evidence, but your endless lying and trolling become tedious.

So, what is the basis of your purported but counterfactual erudition about Rome, and what was that clown college you claim to have attended?

FortWayne says

It is not unwillingness to learn, it is a disagreement. I've been wrong plenty, but I'm not wrong here.

You are completely wrong on Chomsky, because you did not even bother reading the papers he cited in the video. You called Chomsky full of theories that are of no practical relevance. This is demonstrably false.

You are also massively wrong on Reagan, as you disagree with these facts. These are the facts, you are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts . Note that I am not extolling the establishment Democrats. The lesser of the two evils is also evil.

This doesn't even count the other comments where you've been wrong plenty Comrade, LOL.

curious2 says

Every time he blows another Teamster at the Reseda truck stop toilet, he feels compelled to atone by trolling online. At least his toothless gums may have provided some solace to those lonely long haul truckers.

Thanks for the pointers, what a waste of time..

Dan8267 says

FortWayne says

Liberals are the problem, since all they are doing is repeating the mistakes of the past.

Name one mistake of the past liberals are repeating.

Guess you're not man enough to answer this.

So you say.... Regan did all this:
1. Spent enormous sums on military while cutting social programs for the poor.
2. Reduced taxes on wealthy and doubled both military budget and national debt
3. Deregulated industries and eroded environmental standards (there is something called 'EXTERNALITIES' which require regulation)
4. Deregulated savings and loans institutions which led the start of TOO BIG TO FAIL, by 1995 costs $87 billion for taxpayers
5. Helped Repeal the Fairness Doctrine leading to enormous right-wing brainwashing

Let's see, I don't dispute he did any of those. All I said is he was a great president who won the cold war and saved the nation from collapse. All those on the list, most were good things. 1 Helped win cold war, 2 helped the nation grow its economy and made taxes more fair. Liberals view of fair is taking everything they can from those who make something, Reagan instead reduced taxes and eliminated loopholes so that taxes became more fair. It is not fair for you to take my money. Industry deregulation at that time was what every nation does when economy is tough, you deregulate to increase profits and should regulate back when economy recovers. Reagan did the right thing for his time. Savings and Loan deregulation grew a lot of loan and savings banks, it's not your or my job to keep banks from crashing, its their own fucking job. Fairness Doctrine is unconstitutional, you can't have freedom of speech and have someone telling you "oh you can't say that".

Liberal brainwashing buddy, let it go and you'll see the world for what it is instead of liberal theories and love for socialism which DOES NOT WORK.

Don't bet on that.

Frank showed a lot of confidence on his White House visits, knowing just where in the East Wing to deliver the sanctifying balm.

Historians are now all but unanimous that the Reagan era was not Frank's first rodeo.

Eleanor. Bess. Mamie. Jackie. Lady Bird. Pat. Betty. Roslyn. And, later, Bar - wielding that giant strap-on which crushed so many visitors into submission - tourists and dignitaries alike.

DieBankOfAmericaPhukkingDie says

Remember, too, he's the only president whose wife sucked off Frank Sinatra!

I miss those two.

FortWayne says

Liberal brainwashing buddy, let it go and you'll see the world for what it is instead of liberal theories and love for socialism which DOES NOT WORK.

Comrade, the fog of stupidity in your post is so dense that I need to begin where it is the thickest and see if I can get through LOL.

FortWayne says

Savings and Loan deregulation grew a lot of loan and savings banks, it's not your or my job to keep banks from crashing, its their own fucking job.

Do you even understand what EXTERNALITIES mean? Here's a reasonable definition from Wikipedia: an externality is the cost or benefit that affects a party who did not choose to incur that cost or benefit. Economists often urge governments to adopt policies that "internalize" an externality, so that costs and benefits will affect mainly parties who choose to incur them.

When the government deregulates an industry and protect the corporations when they fail , the general public (external to the corporations' failure) gets negatively impacted.Tax payers pay the cost of moral hazard when the financial institutions fail. This is exactly what Reagan set as a precedent. Reagan set the stage for the rise of the ultra-right and oligarchy. Corporate predators were legalized.

Regulations exist to protect the taxpayer from such negative externalities and promote fair competition.
Systematic dismantling of regulations is a significant reason we are in this mess today. Reagan lauded all this.
Let's see if you can suspend your belief in the Reagan myth for a moment and understand this.

Dan8267 says

Dan8267 says

FortWayne says

Liberals are the problem, since all they are doing is repeating the mistakes of the past.

Name one mistake of the past liberals are repeating.

Guess you're not man enough to answer this.

Yep, definitely not man enough.

uomo_senza_nome_0 says

When the government deregulates an industry and protect the corporations when they fail , the general public (external to the corporations' failure) gets negatively impacted.Tax payers pay the cost of moral hazard when the financial institutions fail. This is exactly what Reagan set as a precedent. Reagan set the stage for the rise of the ultra-right and oligarchy. Corporate predators were legalized.

Somehow it turned out good in a long run, we have a lot of banks that can provide savings and checking accounts instead of a few like back in the days where it was a monopoly and you had to bend over backwards to get a checking account. But you can ignore it, because your commie mentors told you that Republicans are bad and everything about them is bad, and the only thing is good is government taking earners money and spending it the way they wise government men desire to.

Everything else you said about moral hazard, Reagan set as a precedent, ultra-right oligarchy, blah blah blah, all same shit liberals say all the time when promoting socialism so they can have more control over our lives. You are parroting that cute high school propaganda word by word. Nice job parrot, want a cracker?

uomo_senza_nome_0 says

Regulations exist to protect the taxpayer from such negative externalities and promote fair competition.

Get with reality bud, most regulation is there to drive competition down by letting only few companies qualify. It is rare when it's there to protect us the taxpayers, we as taxpayers are their fucking cash cow.

FortWayne says

Somehow it turned out good in a long run, we have a lot of banks that can provide savings and checking accounts instead of a few like back in the days where it was a monopoly and you had to bend over backwards to get a checking account.

LOL, Reality on the ground: JP Morgan has over 2.3 trillion in assets and more than 3000 subsidiaries.
Elizabeth Warren is scorching the lies you are believing, here:

www.youtube.com/embed/XYtSMLgaW6U

uomo_senza_nome_0 says

LOL, Reality on the ground: JP Morgan has over 2.3 trillion in assets and more than 3000 subsidiaries.

And how is that a problem? Why is that your problem? Oh, thats right you are a liberal. So if someone has more than you it's a problem, because you are the ultimate authority on what everyone should have and how much of it. I'm sorry your majesty, forgot to ask you just how much money I should have in the bank before I make your list of people who need to pay more in taxes.

FortWayne says

And how is that a problem? Why is that your problem?

When such a systemically important financial institution fails (and there are 25 of those in the US), get ready to bail them out Comrade. It will be the tax payer money on the line. Should be no problem for you as you love doling out tax payer dollars to the corporate predators.

uomo_senza_nome_0 says

Elizabeth Warren is scorching the lies you are believing, here:

Damn it, she should be president, not Hillary.

uomo_senza_nome_0 says

When such a systemically important financial institution fails (and there are 25 of those in the US), get ready to bail them out Comrade. It will be the tax payer money on the line. Should be no problem for you as you love doling out tax payer dollars to the corporate predators.

And what does this have to do with you dodging a question where you are bitching about them having 2 trillion?

. FortWayne says

bob2356 says

You never did explain how reagan's tax reforms increasing tax revenue by 54 billion was an overall lowering of taxes. Is that like:

“War is peace. (George Orwell 1984)

Because at that time there were so many loopholes in the tax system that most very high earners never paid any of it. Reagans system reduced overall taxes, while increasing them by removing loopholes. It worked out to be a better system.

What percentage constitutes "most" high earners that never paid any income taxes? Please stop overwhelming us with this overflowing cascade of facts proving your case. The massive volume of research you have been presenting is simply awesome. AKA zero facts, it's true because I believe it should be true.

Did you really say reagan reduced taxes while increasing them? Orwell would be so proud of you. Assuming you know who Orwell is.

FortWayne says

3. Deregulated industries and eroded environmental standards (there is something called 'EXTERNALITIES' which require regulation)

Carter deregulated. You don't know what you are talking about, apparently your baseline condition.

FortWayne says

For a man who claims to have worked on it, you sure seem to not know what actually happened. I highly doubt you did something more than passed out flyers on the street for $4/hour if you are that unaware.

Nope wrong. I know exactly what happened which is why I know you are full of shit. Reaganomics didn't "save" anything and the soviet union was well on it's way to failing when Reagan took office.

I still think you were wearing diapers when reagan was elected.

bob2356 says

Carter deregulated. You don't know what you are talking about, apparently your baseline condition.

Let uomo_senza_nome_0 know, that's his liberal condition.

FortWayne says

And what does this have to do with you dodging a question where you are bitching about them having 2 trillion?

FWayne - I am not dodging any question. A bank that has assets over 2 trillion, with over 3000 subsidiaries, and one that was bailed out during 2008 crisis -- could potentially be at risk of failing again. This risk is non-zero, as the bank itself prepares a living will to the Federal Reserve. You asked why is this the tax payer's problem -- and I gave a clear explanation. The financial institutions have been bailed out before and there was mishandling during these bailouts. Are you not concerned about the moral hazard perpetuated by these bailouts? Or do you want me to explain what moral hazard means? LOL.

And that has to do what with Republicans vs. Democrats? Because your whole whining above only said something about "Republicans are evil, look at how much some banks have.". If that's not your point, you need to make the worlds more clear, whats in your head is not whats in the post.