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

[mercury14]

I've read what Democrats post:



And then they accuse everyone else of being a racist.

Yeah, James is racist. He'll even tell you. Thanks for linking my post where I called him on it. But you just smile and ignore it as long as it's a conservative being racist, don't ya?

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Yeah, James is racist. He'll even tell you. Thanks for linking my post where I called him on it. But you just smile and ignore it as long as it's a conservative being racist, don't ya?

Performance art.


His hate burns nowhere as deep as your and your fellows does.

His is a benign blast from the past when everything east of 34th street was nigratown...

busybody is performance art.

What else you got there kimosabe?

People like you and Throb resort to racist nomenclature at the drop of a hat in order to try and shut people up.

I don't see you being harsh with Throb when he call my daughter a gook, in fact, you laugh and carry on with his because he's of your polity. You now calling me out is the rankest hypocrisy.

A_J's corollary #5, “When lacking reason and sound argument, the New Age Liberal charges headlong into ‘debate’ with emotional cries of Hypocrisy. The New Age Liberal is, of course, immune to and incapable of Hypocrisy. That would require hard and fast standards.”

 

[mercury14]

ad hominem

Nice economic argument bro!

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Nice economic argument bro!

You made an economic argument for me to respond to...?



Amazing.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

3 Fallacies in Obama's Public-Sector Stimulus Strategy
Paying people to do busy work won't revive the U.S. economy.

Shikha Dalmia | June 19, 2012 | Reason.com

Poor President Obama. Life under the White House klieg lights must seem soooo unfair. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has been saying since last year that although “private-sector jobs have been doing just fine,” public-sector jobs need help with another $35 billion in stimulus spending, without raising an eyebrow. But the president regurgitates the same line and all hell breaks loose: The blogosphere chortles mercilessly; Twitter chatter roundly lampoons him; and Mitt “I Like Being Able to Fire People” Romney accuses him of being out of touch with ordinary Americans.

Truth is, though, that Obama was asking for it. His statement might be conventional wisdom in his party’s circles. But it nonetheless manages to pack in virtually every “progressive” economic fallacy—and then some.

For starters, his claim that private-sector job growth is hunky-dory is hooey. It is true that private companies have added 4.3 million jobs since February 2010. However, this represents a 2.8 percent rate of job growth compared to the 8 percent average after previous recoveries—despite (or perhaps because of) $800 billion in stimulus spending.

But instead of asking whether the effects of his own policies—like uncertainty over the extension of the Bush tax cuts and the compliance costs of ObamaCare—might be choking the private sector, Obama wants to apply his stimulus therapy to the public sector. This won’t produce overall growth. Indeed, more government spending means a shrinking private sector, and there are three main reasons why.

One. Obama’s talk of a public-sector stimulus is guided by the Keynesian conviction that what’s necessary to restore overall economic growth is large aggregate demand. If local governments are handed money to hire more public workers—teachers, cops, librarians, social workers—these people will consume more goods and services, which will stimulate other industries. Every dollar pumped into their pockets will magically multiply into several more.

It’s a neat theory—but fanciful.

If boosting aggregate demand is what’s needed, why bother creating jobs? Uncle Sam can simply send every unemployed person a generous check with the proviso that it can’t be saved. It must be spent on TVs, cars, dresses, and shoes (that’ll get the female vote). Call it the “Stay at Home and Pamper Yourself” economic recovery plan.

...

Two. But suppose that “free” money appeared like manna from heaven to finance the stimulus spending Obama craves. Then boosting aggregate demand would complement private-sector activity and boost overall growth, right? Wrong.

Harvard Business School researchers Lauren Cohen, Joshua Coval, and Christopher Malloy published a fascinating study last year examining the impact on a state’s economy after its senators or representatives secured powerful committee appointments on Capitol Hill and sent home more federal funds through earmarks, transfers, and government contracts.

They found that this money produced not private-sector growth but retrenchment. Indeed, in every state, virtually every affected firm—large and small—cut payroll, investment, and other expenses. Why? As publicly funded enterprises grew, they crowded out demand and resources from private ones.

...

Three. The public sector doesn’t just indirectly crowd out private job growth but directly clobbers it as well. That, in fact, is why the regulatory state—the main public-sector enterprise—exists. You can argue that its key products (red tape and mandates) are necessary for public safety, but you can’t argue that they lead to job growth. As the regulatory state grows, the private economy shrinks—and that’s exactly what’s been happening on President Obama’s watch.

Investor’s Business Daily writer John Merline points out that since the post-2008 stimulus, the combined budget of America’s regulatory agencies has grown a healthy 16 percent, topping $54 billion. The overall economy? A paltry 5 percent. Employment at federal regulatory agencies has climbed 13 percent since Obama took office. By contrast, employment shrank by 5.6 percent in the private sector.

...

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Have you ever read what conservatives here post about race?

☝ merc's "economic" argument...

Sam Donaldson, who regularly treated President Ronald Reagan with disrespect, feels he knows exactly why Neil Munro of the right-leaning Daily Caller treated Barack Obama with disrespect. During the president’s recent announcement that he had decided to make up laws by himself from now on, effectively granting immunity to some illegal aliens with a wave of his almighty hand, Munro shouted out a question rather than waiting for the president to leave the podium without taking any questions.

Donaldson’s reaction in part: “Many on the political right believe this president ought not to be there – they oppose him not for his polices and political view but for who he is, an African American!”

Well, the old hairpiece has a point. As far as I’m concerned there are only two plausible reasons to oppose President Obama: either because he’s clearly the worst president in American history, or because he’s black.

For me, it’s because he’s black.

Oh, I know, some of you are suspicious. You think that secretly I dislike Obama because he’s increased the federal debt by nearly five trillion dollars and given us our highest deficits since 1946 and yet has made not one serious proposal to reform the entitlements that are clearly causing the problem.

But no, so help me, I just happen to be put off by the whole brown epidermis thing. It gets to me.

Some on the left have unleashed wild accusations that I harbor a primal animosity toward Obama’s shredding of the Constitution, or his opposition to the ideals of the American founding. They think I look at Obama’s membership in a European-style socialist party (about which he lied) or his close relationship with anti-American terrorist William Ayers (about which he lied) or his twenty year tutelage under the racist, anti-American preacher Jeremiah Wright (about which he almost certainly lied) or the several attempts at government encroachments so overweening that they have been struck down 9-0 by a normally divided Supreme Court — and see all that as evidence that this president is less committed to the American project than any leader of this continent since King George.

Wrong! I’m just not down with this whole African-American business. I mean, the guy’s all, like, dark and stuff. What’s that about?

Listen, I don’t mind black people in their proper place. I can accept someone like Thomas Sowell, say, as one of the greatest political philosophers of our time, or Congressman Allen West as a shining example of the best and bravest men this nation can produce. But when it comes to running an administration of incompetence, corruption, arrogance and ignorance, well, doggone it, I feel that’s a job for a white man!

So to Sam Donaldson I say: “You got me. I don’t like Obama because he’s black. You I don’t like because you’re an idiot.”

http://pjmedia.com/andrewklavan/2012/06/18/i-oppose-barack-obama-because-hes-black/?singlepage=true

 

[richard_daily]

Because he's just Der Spiegel.


It's your side of the aisle that is focused like a laser on race.

Witness the antics of this Friday past...

No, he's a racist... so is jamesjohnson... but I only see you using race as a playing card when it's someone that you disagree with.

You seem very sensitive on the issue, but only when it suits your interest. It's very curious... one might almost call it hypocrisy.

 

[richard_daily]

Performance art.


His hate burns nowhere as deep as your and your fellows does.

His is a benign blast from the past when everything east of 34th street was nigratown...

busybody is performance art.

What else you got there kimosabe?

People like you and Throb resort to racist nomenclature at the drop of a hat in order to try and shut people up.

I don't see you being harsh with Throb when he call my daughter a gook, in fact, you laugh and carry on with his because he's of your polity. You now calling me out is the rankest hypocrisy.

A_J's corollary #5, “When lacking reason and sound argument, the New Age Liberal charges headlong into ‘debate’ with emotional cries of Hypocrisy. The New Age Liberal is, of course, immune to and incapable of Hypocrisy. That would require hard and fast standards.”

Do you have some sort of hate densitomiter?

What makes busybody and jamesjohnson performance art?

Please be specific and succinct (rather than your usual self), you will be held to account for your answer later.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Jews are minorities.

Minorities, we have been repeatedly told, cannot, by definition be racists.

You're silent whenever Throb goes after my and my daughter's minority status, so why the hell should I get my panties in a wad if someone merely uses the word nigger?

And to revisit my earlier point, as hateful as their speech is, it pales in comparison that you guys display for your fellow Americans because they simply will not shut the fuck up and become good little Socialists.

 

[unregistered]

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Besides, I've blasted busybody many times...



When I see similar from you guys, then I might begin to reconsider why I left the Democrat Party.

 

[busybody..]

FedEx sees first-quarter profit flat to 10% higher, cites 'headwinds' from greater costs

Their 4th quarter should be better

Just imagine all the SHIT the KNEE GROW and teh KNEE GRASS and the 2 PROZZIES are gonna FED EX outa THE "WHITE HOUSE when they get kicked out


To all of you that think BUSYBODY is a RACIST!!!!!!!!!!!!.................DECAPITATE YOURSELVES

 

[mercury14]

You made an economic argument for me to respond to...?



Amazing.

18,000 posts and you still haven't gotten around to reading the thread title.

 

[mercury14]

☝ merc's "economic" argument...


http://pjmedia.com/andrewklavan/2012/06/18/i-oppose-barack-obama-because-hes-black/?singlepage=true

There you go again, telling people what they believe.

 

[busybody..]

Besides, I've blasted busybody many times...



.

Yes you have, hence, I dubbed thee

ANQUAN OH!FENDY

 

[busybody..]

I recall

Even if no juan else does

THE BARREN JAUN(ITA)

LOONEY LATTE LICKING LEZBO LEFT LAV

she who despises (some)women and (some)gays and (some)blacks


Now there is ART

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Yes you have, hence, I dubbed thee

ANQUAN OH!FENDY

On the other hand, have you ever seen these clowns taking Throb to task over his racism and homophobia?

 

[mercury14]

Jews are minorities.

Minorities, we have been repeatedly told, cannot, by definition be racists.

Who told you this? Nobody? Imaginary people that you made up?

You're silent whenever Throb goes after my and my daughter's minority status, so why the hell should I get my panties in a wad if someone merely uses the word nigger?

You know you shouldn't make references to your own panties. But you shouldn't get them in a bunch whenever someone uses the word 'nigger'. But you you do, based on your own manipulative situational standards.

Why do you wear panties bro?

And to revisit my earlier point, as hateful as their speech is, it pales in comparison that you guys display for your fellow Americans because they simply will not shut the fuck up and become good little Socialists.

Lol wut? Who did this?

 

[unregistered]

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

LT told me.

So has most of our left.

Take Eric Holder and the New Black Panthers...

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Once a month one of them gets the short straw and has to come out with some selective outrage and a big wink.

They don't say anything about Throb because they believe the same damned thing but usually keep it pretty close to the vest, but every once in a while, they slip up and betray their innermost thoughts...

While you're at it, could you come up with a plan to cancel out America's nigger amnesty policy? And who gave Pocahontas and her drunk-ass tribe citizenship?

 

[mercury14]

LT told me.

LT told you minorities can't be racist? I seldom read his posts so I'll take your word for it I guess. Okay that's one guy.

So has most of our left.

You just can't name any of them except LT (sans link)? But "most"? No proof needed, huh?

Take Eric Holder and the New Black Panthers...

Link where Eric Holder said minorities can't be racist.

You shouldn't ever bother talking about the NBP. The only reason you've ever heard of that tiny fringe group is because of your conservative fearmongers.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

There, I just took JAMES to task.



I'm one up on you. And I'm a half-breed, so I shouldn't have to!

 

[mercury14]

They don't say anything about Throb because they believe the same damned thing but usually keep it pretty close to the vest, but every once in a while, they slip up and betray their innermost thoughts...

http://www.motifake.com/image/demotivational-poster/1112/youre-so-stupid-insult-snap-bus-vehicle-demotivational-posters-1323832525.jpg

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Last July 6, 2010, former DOJ official J. Christian Adams testified before the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights that attorneys in the civil rights division were instructed to ignore cases that involve black defendants and white victims. Adams said that “over and over and over again,” the department showed “hostility” toward those cases, including the New Black Panther voter intimidation case. Adams said that some people in the DOJ “argued that the law should not be used against black wrongdoers because of the long history of slavery and segregation. Less charitable individuals called it ‘payback time.’”

...

As reported and applauded by Politico, Holder announced Tuesday that he was fed up with listening to whining whites who claim the justice department deliberately blocks investigations of black on white racism. Predictably, the Establishment media sides with Holder.

“Think about that,” Holder said. “When you compare what people endured in the South in the 60s to try to get the right to vote for African Americans, to compare what people subjected to that with what happened in Philadelphia, which was inappropriate .. .to describe it in those terms I think does a great disservice to people who put their lives on the line for my people,” said Holder, who is black.

Holder noted that his late sister-in-law, Vivian Malone Jones, helped integrate the University of Alabama. “To compare that kind of courage, that kind of action, to say some Black Panther incident is of greater concern to us, historically, I think just flies in the face of history,” Holder said with evident exasperation.”