patrick.net

"If you Unshackle the Rich"???

So you and that article admits it, it's not about fair share and all that, but it's more malicious and facetious than that isn't it?

And NO! Those are 6 failed Liberal talking points, that has dictated every move this Administration has done. So I'd call it a successful failure at this point.

Wow, pass the crack pipe! Actually, nevermind - that stuff's bad for you.

The article does not indicate anywhere that rich people deserve to be rich, but liberals want to take away their wealth. Read it again. Then try quoting it with evidence of that argument. Just try.

FYI, the 'no I'm not you are!' argument stopped working in the 3rd grade. These days, you have to make an argument and present evidence - as the article did (feel free to dispute it - I'm not saying I agree with all of it, but at least there are concise arguments with supporting evidence).

I'm not even going to bother pointing out how you're wrong, the GOP, because there's no point - you haven't made any arguments, you've just said "No, you are!".

I or someone else will discuss this (ie bash your surely incorrect) arguments as soon as you make one.

Leave it to Tot to shoot down his own argument down, by making it impossible to comprehend.

It's very true that "It could have been way worse" is not a winning slogan.

6 poorly stated Liberal talking points, that's my take and I'm sticking with it.

The myth that "lower taxes are the best way to grow the economy" is a myth. But when taxes are too high, and deficits are under control, it is a good way to stimulate the economy.

I think that the conservative (note I say conservative - not to be confused with republican) position on the deficits is correct. But it was correct even when the Bush tax cuts were first given 10 years ago. Giving tax cuts to the rich which are to be replaced with debt ? That was not prudent.

Unfortunately we need to somehow lower debt and save more and spend less. Given those facts and the fact that only by growing our consumer driven economy will be ever be out of this mess, the conclusion that I reach is that it's going to be a long while before we are out of this.

That's why you can count on the powers that be to make sure Obama is in there for another term. He's level headed and prudent, and he's a democrat who they will continue to blame for everything. It's perfect.

He's been very good for the republicans, which is one of the reasons I'm very disappointed in him.

Edit: He was imppressive though (as usual) on 60 minutes.

marcus says

But when taxes are too high, and deficits are under control, it is a good way to stimulate the economy.

When is this mythical period where deficits are under control and the economy needs stimulating?

Deficits usually show up precisely because of a recession.

Kevin says

When is this mythical period where deficits are under control and the economy needs stimulating?

True, and the government will spend as much as it can.

Really I just wanted to concede that if taxes are too high, then lowering them is good for the economy, like when Kennedy lowered income taxes.

But when Bush did his cuts, rates were already low enough, and they are too low now, at least on high increments of income, and on corporate income.

Chanos had the best response to #4 on CNBC a while ago:

Uncertainty about health-care costs and taxes is the rallying cry of some business leaders who say they’re putting off hiring and expansion till they know what those expenses will be.

Just how much weight that argument carries pitted New Jersey Governor Chris Christie against hedge fund manager James Chanos on CNBC Tuesday.

“Business has complained, ‘we don’t have certainty.’ When does business ever have certainty?” said Chanos, founder of the hedge fund Kynikos Associates. “If we have certainty, you earn T-bill-rates [Treasury bill] of return in the market.”

http://www.cnbc.com/id/39288045/Is_Uncertainty_Really_Holding_Back_the_Economy

thunderlips11 says

Just how much weight that argument carries pitted New Jersey Governor Chris Christie against hedge fund manager James Chanos on CNBC Tuesday.

I can't help laughing at any sentence that uses the words "weight" and "Chris Christie" together.

No shrek, yu are dead wrong.

1. The Congressional Budget office disagrees that the stimuls failed

2.. No, the deficit is not the problem. UNEMPLOYMENT is the problem.

3. Wrong again. The Bush tax cuts lwoered revenue, and the Clinton tax hikes raised revenue. Clintion ablanced the budget, Bush did not.

4. Wrong again. The CBO recently found that regulatiosn are a wash since they require businesses to invest mney they otherwise would not. Case in point: When the EPA recently banned mountain top mining, coal compnaies were forced to hire more miners:

http://appvoices.org/2011/11/18/coal-jobs-reach-15-year-high/

5. Yes, you are correct.

6. Businesses don't make decisions based on political rhetoric. If they need to hire, they will hire.