What happened to all of the doom and gloom economic threads?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I just heard that closing "tax loophole for corporate jet owners," the class hating Obama is so worried about, and talks about every fucking day lately, will result in a whopping .03% reduction in his deficit.:rolleyes:

I'm not sure what this tax "loophole" is, but if getting rid of it does for the private jet industry what it did for the yacht industry when they raised taxes on boats, get ready for a whole lot more unemployment.
 
I just heard that closing "tax loophole for corporate jet owners," the class hating Obama is so worried about, and talks about every fucking day lately, will result in a whopping .03% reduction in his deficit.:rolleyes:

just another example as to how much of a jackass obama is. obama is on a mission to destroy America
 
I'm not sure what this tax "loophole" is, but if getting rid of it does for the private jet industry what it did for the yacht industry when they raised taxes on boats, get ready for a whole lot more unemployment.

So you're saying you're in favor of subsidizing profitable industries? And you're pro-loophole?

Also you realize that you just admitted that the stimulus created jobs right? You guys are trying to have things both ways. You claim that the stimulus didn't create jobs, but if it's removed then jobs will be lost... Talking out of both sides of your mouth...
 
So you're saying you're in favor of subsidizing profitable industries? And you're pro-loophole?

Also you realize that you just admitted that the stimulus created jobs right? You guys are trying to have things both ways. You claim that the stimulus didn't create jobs, but if it's removed then jobs will be lost... Talking out of both sides of your mouth...

if it created JOBS

why is NIGGERHO! wanting to cancel it out?
 
So you're saying you're in favor of subsidizing profitable industries? And you're pro-loophole?

Also you realize that you just admitted that the stimulus created jobs right? You guys are trying to have things both ways. You claim that the stimulus didn't create jobs, but if it's removed then jobs will be lost... Talking out of both sides of your mouth...

wow, you are really drinking the jim jones juice, I mean obama juice.

keep those blinders on, cuz we all know you are a lazy ignorant government worker not living in reality
 
So you're saying you're in favor of subsidizing profitable industries? And you're pro-loophole?

Also you realize that you just admitted that the stimulus created jobs right? You guys are trying to have things both ways. You claim that the stimulus didn't create jobs, but if it's removed then jobs will be lost... Talking out of both sides of your mouth...

POON PUTZ

I axed a simple question of you

if it created JOBS

why is NIGGERHO! wanting to cancel it out?


why is there no answer from you

POON PUTZ?
 
This thread has jumped the goldfish.

Things stopped getting worse. Things haven't gotten better. Stopping a downward trend is significant. Reversing that trend is also significant.

Administration is 50%. In baseball, they're they've won the batting crown. In tennis, they've barely gotten a first serve in.

Whatever.
 
This thread has jumped the goldfish.

Things stopped getting worse. Things haven't gotten better. Stopping a downward trend is significant. Reversing that trend is also significant.

Administration is 50%. In baseball, they're they've won the batting crown. In tennis, they've barely gotten a first serve in.

Whatever.

no one is ARGUING That, LATRINE

all recession end on their OWN

this rebound would have been BETTER and STRONGER with NIGGEROMICKS

Where teh fuck is your response to my question

Show me KOO KOO BEAR RACISM!

Or is your shrieks of RACISM

merely knee JERK rants of a JERK:confused:
 
this is the shallowest "bounceback" ever,

as documented in this thread

if you have SHIT to add here LATRINE

add it to the SHIT THREAD!
 
Gloom, despair and agony: Why small businesses aren’t hiring:cool:
Don’t read this article if you want to smile at any point in the next week or so.

The low job growth in the U.S. isn’t a “soft patch,” it’s a sea of quicksand. In a nutshell, here’s the situation: 2/3 or more of all job growth comes from small businesses starting up and expanding; only a third or less of new jobs come from Corporate America or government expansion.

As recent reports have shown, Corporate America has been on a hiring spree–overseas. From the point of view of globalized Corporate America, why hire anyone in a slow-growth market like the U.S.? It makes sense to hire new employees in fast-growing markets where the corporation is reaping its growth and most of its profits.

As for government hiring: the game of expansion based on explosively rising debt or Federal stimulus spending is over. To live within their means, local goverment and related agencies will have to shed jobs, as labor accounts for 80% of government expenses.

The author cites several structural reasons that small businesses aren’t hiring, and they boil down to: Healthcare costs continuing to rise; the fact that most politicos don’t have a clue about small business; the threat of lawsuits by employees against employers; and local governments treating small business like “tax donkeys.” All of this is structural, and there are no efforts on the table to deal with any of them. With so much standing against hiring, adding the headcount just doesn’t make sense for most small businesses.
 
Oh look

PUTZ POON authored an opinion piece!


Esquire develops serious and possibly fatal man-crush on Obama
Title: Loving Obama — How Can We Not Love Obama? Seriously, click on the link. That’s the actual title.

Before the fall brings us down, before the election season begins in earnest with all its nastiness and vulgarity, before the next batch of stupid scandals and gaffes, before Sarah Palin tries to convert her movie into reality and Joe Biden resumes his imitation of an embarrassing uncle and Newt and Callista Gingrich [FIG.1] creep us all out, can we just enjoy Obama for a moment? Before the policy choices have to be weighed and the hard decisions have to be made, can we just take a month or two to contemplate him the way we might contemplate a painting by Vermeer or a guitar lick by the early-seventies Rolling Stones or a Peyton Manning pass or any other astounding, ecstatic human achievement? Because twenty years from now, we’re going to look back on this time as a glorious idyll in American politics, with a confident, intelligent, fascinating president riding the surge of his prodigious talents from triumph to triumph. Whatever happens this fall or next, the summer of 2011 is the summer of Obama.

It’s also the summer of 9.2% unemployment and a president threatening to starve the elderly and veterans. How can we not love him? Easy, pal, all too easy. Andrew Sullivan just called to say “Dude, that guy’s laying the purple prose on a bit thick.”

It continues from there and gets worse, managing to fake a quote from Walt Whitman and put Obama up above Ronald Reagan along the way. It includes lines like this:

But even if you disagree with him, even if you hate him, even if you are his enemy, at this point you must admire him.

No, I don’t. The only thing I must do in relation to him is ensure that he is stopped and defeated.

And this:

“I am large, I contain multitudes,” Walt Whitman [FIG.3] wrote, and Obama lives that lyrical prophecy. Christopher Booker’s 2004 book The Seven Basic Plots, a wide-ranging study from the Epic of Gilgamesh on and a surprisingly convincing explanation for why we crave narrative, reduced all stories to a few plots, each with its own kind of hero. Amazingly, Barack Obama fulfills the role of hero in each of these ancient story forms.

As far as I can tell, this is not an Onion parody. It is one of the most over-the-top, embarrassing pieces of idol worship I’ve ever seen. Stephen Marche wrote the piece as a serious sonnet to Obama’s alleged virtues, his heroic qualities, and his life narrative. Marche all but declares Obama to be a deity (Evan Thomas beat him to that one). He does declare The Man Who Had Never Run A Lemonade Stand Prior to Being Elected President a hero out of legend, an archetype right out of Joseph Campbell.
 
why is NIGGERHO! wanting to cancel it out?

14365.jpg


auschwitz-jews.jpg


holocaust-nazis-execute-jews.jpg


LOL RACISM!!!
 
If the stimulus created jobs, then it turned around and lost them...



Until we get serious about government spending and government debt, we are going to continue to have a Lost Decade. Raising taxes is merely going to exacerbate the problem by taking even more out of the private sector to be handed over to voters who don't give a shit about the private sector, many of whom are doing everything that can to avoid partaking in it.

They're like the "professional" whose job it is to council combat veterans and help them with their demons, having never experienced what they go through but instead are armed with all the grandest, shiniest theories that real modern SCIENCE has to offer*...

There's a model for that!







* and yet let Hassan sneak up on them.
 
Yeah, he's panicking. He's the one in charge of paying the bills and he tells the world, I'm going to try and stiff the veterans and the elderly first in order to win reelection...




WHATTA GUY! I'm so in love! He cares about ME! *sniff* *sniff*


Evil Republicans! They never want to spend, they're so niggardly, *sniff*, private jets for ALL!
 
Gloom, despair and agony: Why small businesses aren’t hiring:cool:
Don’t read this article if you want to smile at any point in the next week or so.

The low job growth in the U.S. isn’t a “soft patch,” it’s a sea of quicksand. In a nutshell, here’s the situation: 2/3 or more of all job growth comes from small businesses starting up and expanding; only a third or less of new jobs come from Corporate America or government expansion.

As recent reports have shown, Corporate America has been on a hiring spree–overseas. From the point of view of globalized Corporate America, why hire anyone in a slow-growth market like the U.S.? It makes sense to hire new employees in fast-growing markets where the corporation is reaping its growth and most of its profits.

As for government hiring: the game of expansion based on explosively rising debt or Federal stimulus spending is over. To live within their means, local goverment and related agencies will have to shed jobs, as labor accounts for 80% of government expenses.

The author cites several structural reasons that small businesses aren’t hiring, and they boil down to: Healthcare costs continuing to rise; the fact that most politicos don’t have a clue about small business; the threat of lawsuits by employees against employers; and local governments treating small business like “tax donkeys.” All of this is structural, and there are no efforts on the table to deal with any of them. With so much standing against hiring, adding the headcount just doesn’t make sense for most small businesses.

Those closest to the point of inflation always do the best.

It's those farthest away that pay the price.

Immelt says HIRE! Damnit!

DO as I say NOT

As I do...
 
To pay for these and other government programs and to make up for revenue lost due to the Depression, Hoover agreed to roll back previous tax cuts his Administration had effected on upper incomes. In one of the largest tax increases in American history, the Revenue Act of 1932 raised income tax on the highest incomes from 25% to 63%. The estate tax was doubled and corporate taxes were raised by almost 15%. Also, a "check tax" was included that placed a 2-cent tax (over 30 cents in today's dollars) on all bank checks. Economists William D. Lastrapes and George Selgin, conclude that the check tax was "an important contributing factor to that period's severe monetary contraction." Hoover also encouraged Congress to investigate the New York Stock Exchange, and this pressure resulted in various reforms.


National debt expressed as a fraction of gross national product climbs from 20% to 40% under Hoover; levels off under FDR; soars during World War II. From Historical Statistics US (1976)
For this reason, years later libertarians argued that Hoover's economics were statist. Franklin D. Roosevelt blasted the Republican incumbent for spending and taxing too much, increasing national debt, raising tariffs and blocking trade, as well as placing millions on the dole of the government. Roosevelt attacked Hoover for "reckless and extravagant" spending, of thinking "that we ought to center control of everything in Washington as rapidly as possible." Roosevelt's running mate, John Nance Garner, accused the Republican of "leading the country down the path of socialism".


History has a funny way of repeating itself.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top