Republicans go longer without caving, that at any time in living memory

[Little-Acorn]

Kudoes to the House Republicans.

They have presented a united front against any tax increases. And to the surprise of Democrats and Republican voters alike, they have stuck to it!

So far.

I'm delighted by this newfound courage the Republicans are showing. Of course, if they turn around and fold next week, it will all be for nought, and they will deserve to get kicked out just as much as the Democrats do. But so far, they are performing magnificently.

Shiela Jackson Lee has announced that Obama is being stood up to, because he is black. Of course. She isn't capable of seeing anything else.

But she's right as far as one thing goes: Only this President has been flatly and consistently refused in his de rigeur requests that we raise taxes. In the past, Republicans have caved. Every time. To every President. Only this time have they stood firm.

So far.

Kudoes to the House Republicans! Keep up the good work!

Or else. It is what you were sent to Congress for, remember?

If you don't, we do. Get it?

[red states rule]

http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/gv071411dAPR20110714044518.jpg

[J.T]

Kudoes to the House Republicans.

They agreed to meaningful budget cuts in our greatest expenditures (http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?31792-Cut-the-Spending)?




I'm delighted by this newfound courage the Republicans are showing.
They're going to cut military hostilities spending?

If lower marginal tax rates improve things so much, how do you explain today's shithole to the prosperity of 60 years ago?

[J.T]

So, uh... how do you explain this?

http://i.huffpost.com/gen/267149/MARGINAL-TAX-RATES.jpg

[fj1200]

If lower marginal tax rates improve things so much, how do you explain today's shithole to the prosperity of 60 years ago?

Are you advocating reliving WWII?


So, uh... how do you explain this?

http://i.huffpost.com/gen/267149/MARGINAL-TAX-RATES.jpg

You first.

http://media.hoover.org/sites/default/files/imagecache/large/images/tax_rates_graph_ranson.jpg

[Dilloduck]

Over what--global warming ?

[J.T]

Are you advocating reliving WWII?
http://media.hoover.org/sites/default/files/imagecache/large/images/tax_rates_graph_ranson.jpg

:lol:

So you're saying that all we need is a few good pogroms? Another Kristallnacht? How many windows do we need to smash to get back into the black?



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gG3AKoL0vEs

[fj1200]

:lol:

So you're saying that all we need is a few good pogroms? Another Kristallnacht? How many windows do we need to smash to get back into the black?

I'm amazed at how confused you can become over a bar graph.




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gG3AKoL0vEs

So you are saying that we should start a war and bomb all of our global competitors back to the stone age so that we can enjoy a new American renaissance. Dramatic, let's see how it works out for you. :rolleyes:

[J.T]

:lol:

Are you wholly incapable of honesty, or are you just too stupid to grasp the most simple of concepts?

Watch the video as many times at it takes for you to get it.

[fj1200]

:lol:

Are you wholly incapable of honesty, or are you just too stupid to grasp the most simple of concepts?

Watch the video as many times at it takes for you to get it.

That seems to be your fallback when you are unable to explain your position in any rational manner.

Your video? 3 1/2 minutes I don't want to waste my life over when you are unable to grasp the information provided in a graph.

[J.T]

That seems to be your fallback when you are unable to explain your position in any rational manner.

It's simple enough. You don't get richer breaking everything in your house. It's really not that complicated.


A young hoodlum, say, heaves a brick through the window of a baker’s shop. The shopkeeper runs out furious, but the boy is gone. A crowd gathers, and begins to stare with quiet satisfaction at the gaping hole in the window and the shattered glass over the bread and pies. After a while the crowd feels the need for philosophic reflection. And several of its members are almost certain to remind each other or the baker that, after all, the misfortune has its bright side. It will make business for some glazier. As they begin to think of this they elaborate upon it. How much does a new plate glass window cost? Two hundred and fifty dollars? That will be quite a sun. After all, if windows were never broken, what would happen to the glass business? Then, of course, the thing is endless. The glazier will have $250 more to spend with other merchants, and these in turn will have $250 more to spend with still other merchants, and so ad infinitum. The smashed window will go on providing money and employment in ever-widening circles. The logical conclusion from all this would be, if the crowd drew it, that the little hoodlum who threw the brick, far from being a public menace, was a public benefactor. Now let us take another look. The crowd is at least right in its first conclusion. This little act of vandalism will in the first instance mean more business for some glazier. The glazier will be no more unhappy to learn of the incident than an undertaker to learn of a death. But the shopkeeper will be out $250 that he was planning to spend for a new suit. Because he has had to replace the window, he will have to go without the suit (or some equivalent need or luxury). Instead of having a window and $250 he now has merely a window. Or, as he was planning to buy the suit that very afternoon, instead of having both a window and a suit he must be content with the window and no suit. If we think of him as part of the community, the community has lost a new suit that might otherwise have come into being, and is just that much poorer.
The glazier’s gain of business, in short, is merely the tailor’s loss of business. No new “employment” has been added. The people in the crowd were thinking only of two parties to the transaction, the baker and the glazier. They had forgotten the potential third party involved, the tailor. They forgot him precisely because he will not now enter the scene. They will see the new window in the next day or two. They will never see the extra suit, precisely because it will never be made. They see only what is immediately visible to the eye.


http://freedomkeys.com/window.htm


I don't want to waste my life over when you are unable to grasp the information provided in a graph.
The graph shows that our most prosperous era in recent history featured much higher rates of taxation than we see today, which debunks the claim that lower taxes magically make everyone rich. It also featured a smaller wealth gap and less crony capitalism and neofascism.

[J.T]

I'm amazed at how confused you can become over a bar graph.


That was you, genius. remember, you claimed that sinking ships, killing our men, and breaking windows made us rich.

Why can't you be honest?

[Kathianne]

It's simple enough. You don't get richer breaking everything in your house. It's really not that complicated.



http://freedomkeys.com/window.htm

The graph shows that our most prosperous era in recent history featured much higher rates of taxation than we see today, which debunks the claim that lower taxes magically make everyone rich. It also featured a smaller wealth gap and less crony capitalism and neofascism.

Assuming, (always a problem) the baker and glazier make the same wage.

[logroller]

Dramatic, let's see how it works out for you. :rolleyes:

I do believe we are seeing that drama play out. Ongoing series of wars--check. Financial system crash--check. Increased spending--check. Now if we can just reinstate the draft and get those taxes raised. :rolleyes:

[fj1200]

It's simple enough. You don't get richer breaking everything in your house. It's really not that complicated.

http://freedomkeys.com/window.htm

Why the deflection away from your claims?


The graph shows that our most prosperous era in recent history featured much higher rates of taxation than we see today, which debunks the claim that lower taxes magically make everyone rich. It also featured a smaller wealth gap and less crony capitalism and neofascism.

And yet you don't comment on evidence that directly refutes your claims.


That was you, genius. remember, you claimed that sinking ships, killing our men, and breaking windows made us rich.

Why can't you be honest?

No. You pine for the 50's which followed... well you might remember if YOU could be honest.

[J.T]

Assuming, (always a problem) the baker and glazier make the same wage.
Doesn't matter whether they do or not. The resources that must be used to fix the damage cannot be otherwise spent or invested. The baker loses the wealth needed to fix the window and cannot use it to buy anything else or invest it into his business. He has only the window instead of both the window and whatever else that money would have purchased.

Breaking windows and blowing up ships destroys wealth. You don't get rich by breaking everything in your house. Go ahead, break everything you own, then go buy replacements. Then see how much money you have left compares to when you started.

While you're at it, have some else take the same amount of wealth and either buy more things they want or invest it wisely.

Compare the results.

[J.T]

Why the deflection away from your claims?


Why can't you be honest? You claimed that you can get rich by breaking all the windows in your house. It has been demonstrated that you are wrong, plain and simple.



And yet you don't comment on evidence that directly refutes your claims.

You mean your 'current policy retroactively changes past results through magic' hypothesis? :laugh:

[fj1200]

Why can't you be honest? You claimed that you can get rich by breaking all the windows in your house. It has been demonstrated that you are wrong, plain and simple.

Never did. Keep ignoring THAT truth.


You mean your 'current policy retroactively changes past results through magic' hypothesis? :laugh:

I'm not sure how else to show you that your dreamworld is just that. You pine for the 50's but everything you want instituted happened after the 20's creating the environment, protectionism/high tax rates/increasing regulatory burdens, effectively destroying the vitality of our economic framework.