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

[NeverEndingMe]

Please stop your stand up not that funny

I'm here to fix you

 

[bra_man69]

I'm here to fix you

http://www.superiorsilkscreen.com/240-285-large/if-i-throw-a-stick-will-you-leave.jpg

 

[IrezumiKiss]

You two dipshits would make the perfect couple.

Lucky for Jen, President Obama has made it easier for women to have access to birth control. They seem like they would be the kind of couple to fuck first and think later, most likely grudge or anger fucks after fighting, barebacking her raw over a couch or kitchen countertop when passions are high and makes the sperm n' egg count skyrocket. And we surely don't need any more Octomoms on society's dole.

 

[NeverEndingMe]

Lucky for Jen, President Obama has made it easier for women to have access to birth control. They seem like they would be the kind of couple to fuck first and think later, most likely grudge or anger fucks after fighting, barebacking her raw over a couch or kitchen countertop when passions are high and makes the sperm n' egg count skyrocket. And we surely don't need any more Octomoms on society's dole.

good for Jen, anyway what value do you add?

why do you consume the welfare?

 

[NeverEndingMe]

http://www.superiorsilkscreen.com/240-285-large/if-i-throw-stick-will-you-leave.jpg

there is so much work for me, the obama has given people the impression that welfare is a right and that people shouldn't be ashamed for consuming the welfare.


welfare is a sickness

 

[Disgustipated]

Lucky for Jen, President Obama has made it easier for women to have access to birth control. They seem like they would be the kind of couple to fuck first and think later, most likely grudge or anger fucks after fighting, barebacking her raw over a couch or kitchen countertop when passions are high and makes the sperm n' egg count skyrocket. And we surely don't need any more Octomoms on society's dole.

The biggest decisions they would have to make are who goes to the welfare office for the monthly check and Planned Parenthood for free birth control

 

[NeverEndingMe]

The biggest decisions they would have to make are who goes to the welfare office for the monthly check and Planned Parenthood for free birth control

welfare should be eliminated

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Durable goods are continuing in the same direction in their four-month rolling average...

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

[Ryan said] said Team Romney, with a 20 percent across-the-board tax cut, is aiming at an average growth rate of 4 percent over the next four years. “If we can do that,” he said, “which we think we can with the right economic-pro-growth policies, we can get 12 million people back to work.”

Ryan opposes crony capitalism and corporate welfare. He wants Washington out of the game of picking winners and losers. He argues that if Obama raises the top tax rate on small businesses to over 40 percent, it would kill growth and jobs. He argues in supply-side fashion that lowering tax rates and plugging loopholes will produce more income, not less.

At one point in the interview, Ryan summarized the Romney-Ryan position: “Pro-growth policies, energy policy, regulatory reform, tax reform, and spending cuts.” As I have said before, I believe the Mitt Romney platform is the most conservative Republican policy since the Reagan era. Paul Ryan bolsters it.

Ryan also said this: “Let’s get the size of government back down to where it has historically been: 20 percent of GDP by 2016.” In other words, significant spending restraint. This is pro-growth, too.

Supply-side mentor Art Laffer has been arguing for years that lower spending as a share of GDP is essentially a tax cut to grow the economy. In fact, with a 20 percent reduction in marginal tax rates, and significant spending restraints, it’s the most powerful economic-recovery tonic possible. And let’s add to that: The Romney-Ryan plan will slash the corporate tax rate from 35 to 25 percent — a monumental growth measure.

Depending on how fast the spending comes down, I calculate that Romney could lower the spending baseline by as much $1 trillion in his first term. This, along with economic-growth incentives and upper-bracket loophole-closers, will pay for supply-side tax cuts without raising taxes on the middle class. In fact, this tax reform will drop middle-class tax rates near 12 to 20 percent — a significant reduction from current law.

This comprehensive view of growth incentives and deep spending cuts completely counters the false liberal argument that somehow middle-class taxes have to go up. With a comprehensive growth plan, middle-class taxes go down.

Ryan expressed dismay at the latest CBO recession forecast concerning a possible rollback of the Bush-era tax cuts. But he said the first order of business for the Romney administration will be to fix the tax cliff and avoid another recession, which would be devastating to America’s psyche.

Finally, Ryan summarized his monetary strategy in two words: sound money. He said, “We want to pursue a sound-money strategy so that we can get back the King Dollar, as you say it, Larry.” Indeed, the Republican platform committee, hopefully with Romney’s backing, is including a gold-commission study that would put much-needed discipline into Fed policy.

So let me say this to my skeptical supply-side friends: I don’t see one whiff of evidence that Paul Ryan has departed the pro-growth model. Flatter-tax reform, spending restraint, deregulation, bolstering entitlements — this is all from an updated Reagan-Kemp playbook.

And it’s a playbook that’s going to win another big election.

Larry Kudlow
http://www.nationalreview.com/blogs/print/314942

Let's try their plan, the one that worked sucks.

 

[mercury14]

Larry Kudlow
http://www.nationalreview.com/blogs/print/314942

Let's try their plan, the one that worked sucks.

The one that worked... The Bush tax cuts didn't create jobs but if we just do the same thing that didn't create jobs THIS TIME it will create jobs? Because you promise?

And stop saying Obama wants to increase taxes on small businesses. Something like 2% of small businesses are owned by someone making a quarter million or more annually on them. And even those are typically temporary since it makes sense to incorporate at that point. Besides, under Obama's plan these rare few small businesses would still get the Bush tax cuts on the first $250k they make.

Stop being so dishonest.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Stop ascribing.

That's even more dishonest.

It shows your purely partisan interest in the topic.

 

[mercury14]

Stop ascribing.

That's even more dishonest.

It shows your purely partisan interest in the topic.

Ascribing what? I was responding to your article. If you don't agree with your own C&P then why paste it?

 

[RobDownSouth]

Ascribing what? I was responding to your article.

The chief just wants you playin' defense.

Makes it easier for him.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Economic communism has been an unmitigated disaster everywhere it has been tried. Antonio Gramsci proposed a cultural communism about eighty years ago. If you are not familiar with Comrade Gramsci, he proposed to take over cultural institutions (media, academia, political parties, churches) by infiltration in order to further the goals of a Marxist Utopia. Gramsci's plan has worked quite well here in the USA, insofar as takeover is concerned, but not so well in the surfeit of failures of the Obama administration.

It is quite astonishing that the Manifestoists have gained power so rapidly -- well within my lifetime. Senators Hubert Humphrey and Scoop Jackson were strong members of the Democratic Party with American constitutional values. They reflected the prevailing Democratic Party consensus of that time, which consistently rejected the Manifestoists during the Great Depression and up until the last few years. So how is it that the political landscape has changed so abruptly?

Not to put too fine a point on it, Manifestoists win by lying, cheating, and stealing. There are exactly two current major philosophical systems that make a holy sacrament of dishonesty: Marxism and Islamism. Not coincidentally, these and similar traits are characteristic of psychopaths, as listed in Dr. Robert Hare's Psychopathic Check List - Revised. For example. on "NBC NEWS' MEET THE PRESS," on Sunday, May 22, 2005, Dr. Howard Dean, then Chairman of the Democratic Party, stated:

Our [Democratic Party] moral values, in contradiction to the Republicans', is we don't think kids ought to go to bed hungry at night.

Absolutely no one thinks kids ought to go to bed hungry at night. Watching Dr. Dean on the program, he is so earnest, so sincere, so dishonest, and so like a psychopath. A display of callousness toward his victims is one of the items that tag a psychopath, as Dr. Dean demonstrates. If Democrats are so concerned about hunger and poverty, why do the Democratic Party-controlled big-city ghettos remain mired in poverty, ignorance, crime, and corruption decade after decade? The only major city to make progress in these areas was New York City, but that was under Republican Mayor Rudy Giuliani. Chicago is a cesspool of corruption, with the Illinois governors regularly sent to prison and the city administration thoroughly corrupt. The Democratic Party constituent factions are quite willing to sell their birthright of freedom for a mess of pottage.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012...nt_of_the_democratic_party.html#ixzz24YR22wcU

I ain't no expert here, but the glass slipper looks like it will fit you princess...

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Ascribing what? I was responding to your article. If you don't agree with your own C&P then why paste it?

Because I felt like adding something to the thread for thought and perhaps a future to the Obamanation...

Let's face it, after Obama wins the election, things won't get any better and it will be fun to remind his devotes that they did have a plan B.

 

[mercury14]

Because I felt like adding something to the thread for thought and perhaps a future to the Obamanation...

So lying conservative bullshit that not even you can stomach is valuable food for thought in your opinion? Not much of thinker, are you?

Let's try their plan, the one that worked sucks.

Except you stood by the article. Then you didn't after I showed you the conservative line is a lie.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

You are insane.

We get that.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012...nt_of_the_democratic_party.html#ixzz24YR22wcU

I ain't no expert here, but the glass slipper looks like it will fit you princess...

No bad economic news in what seems like forever, so teh Chief is reduced to spreadin' teh editorial Gospel of Hate, according to American Thinker.

 

[mercury14]

You are insane.

We get that.

Okay Jen.

 

[Sean]

It shows your purely partisan interest in the topic.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-i7CB4-PoTM0/T9D95vj2LcI/AAAAAAAAAs8/K1HghKfqe2w/s1600/Irony1.jpg

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Lovely

 

[mercury14]

Lovely

You're off to a terrible start today. Why not just take the weekend off?

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Is this the Summer of Recovery?

... or the Summer of Recycled Excuses?

Why don't you gear up your economic expertise and tell us how it's really only in Obama's second term that we can turn this economy around, because his experts advised him that it would be much, much sooner, unless of course he is a liar, or clueless, or knows that his followers will accept whatever he says today...



Instead of always attacking everyone, maybe you could defend your policies for a change.

“Look, I’m at the start of my administration. One nice thing about the situation I find myself in is that I will be held accountable. You know, I’ve got four years. A year from now I think people are going to see that we’re starting to make some progress. But there’s still going to be some pain out there. If I don’t have this done in three years, then there’s going to be a one-term proposition.”
Barack Obama, The Today Show February 1, 2009.

"It's time for us to refocus and make sure that we understand that 'change we can believe in' was never going to be change overnight. Rather it's gonna be a slow, steady progression during which this aircraft carrier that we call United States of America slowly shifts in a direction that promises more opportunity. I’m going to need another term to finish the job.”
Barack Obama, Gotham Bar and Grill in the East Village (where donors forked over $25,800 each) December 1, 2011

"If you don't have any fresh ideas, then you use stale tactics to scare voters. If you don't have a record to run on, then you paint your opponent as someone people should run from. You make a big election about small things."
Presidential Nominee Barack Hussein Obama, 2008
Hope & Chains 2012!

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

The irony here is, for Sean's amusement, is that two years ago I said that our economy was going to stay stagnant for as long as Obama was in office, and guess what?

What I said is so much closer to the truth than anything his administration has promised us...

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Goodbye Mr. V-8!

That includes trucks, incidentally.

The new CAFE standard -- 35.5 MPG, average -- doesn't apply just to passenger cars, as the original 22.5 MPG CAFE standard did. Everything short of commercial vehicles is now lumped together in the same category. There is no more "light truck loophole" -- the loophole that made it possible, back in the '90s, for the car companies to do an end-run around CAFE for passenger cars by putting big engines into bigger vehicles that could be categorized as light trucks -- and which they called SUVs.

Hence, Ford is discreetly -- but very clearly -- moving away from V-8s in its big trucks, such as the full-size F-series pickup. There's still one available -- for the moment. But the rest of the engine lineup -- the mass market engine lineup -- is all V-6. Ford calls these engines -- tellingly -- Ecoboost. They're smaller displacement engines with a turbo (or two) bolted on to provide on-demand power but the better fuel efficiency of a smaller engine the rest of the time.

Turbos -- and superchargers -- are seen as the only technically feasible way to match (or at least, come close to) the power/performance of V-8s while still making the CAFE cut.

Well, is all this actually bad?

That depends on your perspective.

From the perspective of the automakers, it's good. Because it gets Uncle off their backs -- at least, temporarily -- and increases their profit margin, since they simply pass on the costs of the more expensive powertrains (including maintenance costs) to customers.

From our perspective, as consumers, it's not such a good deal. We pay more up front -- and while that will be somewhat mitigated by reduced fuel consumption, those savings may -- and probably will be -- swept away by down-the-road maintenance and repair costs. Smaller, higher-stressed engines tend not to last as long as larger, less stressed engines. A force-fed (turbocharged or supercharged) engine is not likely to be a trouble-free 150,000 mile engine. Maybe these new-generation turbo'd and supercharged engines are built tougher -- and will last longer. Or at least, as long as a similarly powerful, but less stressed, V-8. We'll see. If they don't, look out. Replacing a turbo on a late model car is typically a $2,000-plus job. Many of these CAFE-engineered new cars have two of them.

That's that. Another thing is that the fuel economy gains are often not very impressive -- on an individual vehicle basis. For instance, the current Ford F-truck's available 5 liter V-8 rates 15 city, 21 highway. Not great. But the EcoBoost 3.5 liter V-6 (which makes about the same power as the V-8) comes in just slightly better, with a 16 city, 22 highway rating.

You'd think that extra 1-2 MPG would be irrelevant, but it's crucial…. CAFE-wise. Ford sells on the order of half a million F-trucks each year. If each one costs Ford (and thus, customers) even as little as $300 more in gas guzzler taxes per vehicle, when multiplied by half a million, that becomes real money, real quickly.

http://spectator.org/archives/2012/08/24/goodbye-v-8s-the-engines-that