The Obama debates

[VA Cowboy]

Now, even if we kept the tax rate the same, if we can drive the demand for plantards up then you are going to create more jobs, regardless of your tax rate. Because your profits will go up regardless, and you NEED to hire more people to meet demand. A good way to do that would be to give the general public, the largest sector of citizens, more money to purchase things with. More jobs are created to meet demand, more taxes are paid on sales and income, everything is better.

OH you mean like a STIMULUS! lol Yeah, like that worked so well the last few times.

Also, taking money from others and redistributing it to others is out-right libtarded.

Republicans want to create a world where the "job creators" WANT to create more jobs. Even if they never do. Democrats want to create a world where "job creators" NEED to create more jobs.

Speaking of libtarded, punishing job creators in an effort to try and create more jobs would be out-right retarded. Good idea, sp.

 

[VA Cowboy]

It's all worthless to you.

Did you know uneducated people work 5 hours a week less than educated people? Nothing anecdotal about that. People with more money flat out work more.

They have to in order to give more of their money to those working less.

 

[jeebus]

http://www.junkland.net/2012/01/8-myths-about-welfare-queens-debunked.html

read and learn - or don't and continue to be terrified of the bogeymen welfare queens who are draining our resources.

We are not talking about welfare, no one has mentioned welfare, but I guess you got me. You set that straw an in fire so quickly I barely had a chance to get out of the way.

 

[bkeavs]

Right. Poor people are choosing to be poor.

Heres where I can disagree with you to a degree. I dont think poor people choose to be poor but there is a portion of them that is content with the way the system is set up and take full advantage of it. They do not choose to be poor yet they do not do everything in there power to try to get out of it because if you make a certain amount of money in this country. You will in fact have to pay for housing, insurance, food.

 

[VA Cowboy]

But if you really want to give people more money in order to stimulate more spending that could in turn possibly create more jobs, one could reduce their tax burden allowing them to keep more of THEIR OWN money.

 

[jeebus]

Give a 40,000 person 2k, they spend it, not real investment at all. 1 in 10 invests it. Give a guy making 500,000 another 50,000 1 in 10 spen it and the rest invest.

So are you saying buy useless consumer shit will drive job growth more than investing it? That just sounds like the economics of a ******, or someone trying to buy loyalty (I am looking at you W.)

 

[bkeavs]

OH you mean like a STIMULUS! lol Yeah, like that worked so well the last few times.

If it werent for the stimulus packages that both BUsh and Obama presented, this country might be in a far worse deprssion than the The great depression

 

[jeebus]

Heres where I can disagree with you to a degree. I dont think poor people choose to be poor but there is a portion of them that is content with the way the system is set up and take full advantage of it. They do not choose to be poor yet they do not do everything in there power to try to get out of it because if you make a certain amount of money in this country. You will in fact have to pay for housing, insurance, food.

Section 8 welfare for slum lords and scum.

 

[jeebus]

If it werent for the stimulus packages that both BUsh and Obama presented, this country might be in a far worse deprssion than the The great depression

If Obama had decided he was going to use the stimulus for actual stimulus instead of culture war it might have actually worked like it was supposed to instead of just barely adverting worst case scenario.

 

[jeebus]

But if you really want to give people more money in order to stimulate more spending that could in turn possibly create more jobs, one could reduce their tax burden allowing them to keep more of THEIR OWN money.

Didnt you know, the government not taking your money is the exact same as the government giving someone else money. You can't be for one and against the other.

 

[superpunk]

OH you mean like a STIMULUS! lol Yeah, like that worked so well the last few times.

Also, taking money from others and redistributing it to others is out-right libtarded.



Speaking of libtarded, punishing job creators in an effort to try and create more jobs would be out-right retarded. Good idea, sp.

So you've got nothing then?

We are not talking about welfare, no one has mentioned welfare, but I guess you got me. You set that straw an in fire so quickly I barely had a chance to get out of the way.

I guess I got confused by all your claims that there are tons of people out there who don't want to pay to care for their family. If you're not talking about welfare I'm interested in knowing how you believe these people are getting this money so they don't have to care for themselves.

Give a 40,000 person 2k, they spend it, not real investment at all. 1 in 10 invests it. Give a guy making 500,000 another 50,000 1 in 10 spen it and the rest invest.

So are you saying buy useless consumer shit will drive job growth more than investing it? That just sounds like the economics of a ******, or someone trying to buy loyalty (I am looking at you W.)

Sounds like you don't have the first clue how a consumer-based economy works. Hint: We are a consumer-based economy. It works exactly how I described. Your lack of education might be influencing your poor choices here.

 

[jeebus]

Sounds like you don't have the first clue how a consumer-based economy works. Hint: We are a consumer-based economy. It works exactly how I described. Your lack of education might be influencing your poor choices here.

given that we are so highly wheighted to consumerism the low hanging fruit is in investment (exact opposite of china) which explains why bushes 2k rebates failed so spectacularly.

Gas makes an engine run, more gass makes it run faster, but a flooded engine gets no benitets from more gas.

 

[superpunk]

given that we are so highly wheighted to consumerism the low hanging fruit is in investment (exact opposite of china) which explains why bushes 2k rebates failed so spectacularly.

Gas makes an engine run, more gass makes it run faster, but a flooded engine gets no benitets from more gas.

In your analogy consumers are the gas, correct?

So you're saying we have too many consumers (flooded) and adding more would be bad?

 

[Sheik]

Damn.

Obama won independents by 8 points in 2008(battle ground states), Romney is up by 16 right now.

 

[jeebus]

In your analogy consumers are the gas, correct?

So you're saying we have too many consumers (flooded) and adding more would be bad?

Lol, okay I see where you are going. Not bad, rather not the most effective

Keystone pipeline would help this country far more than the equivalent number of facials and pedicures.

 

[bkeavs]

Lol, okay I see where you are going. Not bad, rather not the most effective

Keystone pipeline would help this country far more than the equivalent number of facials and pedicures.

Agreed

 

[jeebus]

Damn.

Obama won independents by 8 points in 2008(battle ground states), Romney is up by 16 right now.

I got my doubts about sudden dramatic swings in the polls

 

[VA Cowboy]

If it werent for the stimulus packages that both BUsh and Obama presented, this country might be in a far worse deprssion than the The great depression

Or it might be better off.

 

[VA Cowboy]

So you've got nothing then?

More than offering up another failed stimulus as a viable option.

 

[superpunk]

More than offering up another failed stimulus as a viable option.

Oh. I guess it's good that I didn't do that then.