Dumbass Teatards think they've helped the economy. Exactly the opposite, of course
Neoconis_Ignoramus
and national economic policy that they shouldn't even be allowed to
vote on this kind of stuff, let alone debate it. Alas, these morons
think that the U.S. economy runs like your typical trailer-dwelling
teatard's account does. Memo to tetards: it does not.
So, the market reaction today is partly due to the fact that people
who fuckin know things know that this deal is a job killer and a drag
on the economy. But hey, teatards are happy.
The Economic Policy Institute, a top nonpartisan think tank, estimates
that the deal struck this weekend to raise the nation’s debt limit
will end up costing the economy 1.8 million jobs by 2012. Today the
Senate is expected to approve the package passed yesterday by the
House and send it to President Obama. But while the unemployment rate
remains above 9 percent, the deal does nothing to address chronic
joblessness.
The agreement would reduce spending by at least $1 trillion over 10
years, but even the near-term cuts could shrink already sluggish GDP
growth by 0.3% in 2012. According to EPI, the plan “not only erodes
funding for public investments and safety-net spending, but also
misses an important opportunity to address the lack of jobs.” In
particular, the immediate spending cuts and the “failure to continue
two key supports to the economy (the payroll tax holiday and emergency
unemployment benefits for the long term unemployed) could lead to
roughly 1.8 million fewer jobs in 2012.”
Top economists and CEO’s have also weighed in against the deal and
said that GOP concessions to the Tea Party will cost our economy
dearly. Pimco CEO Mohamed El-Erian warned that the deal will lead to
less growth, more unemployment, and more inequality. Nobel Prize-
winning economist Paul Krugman called the plan “a disaster” and “an
abject surrender” that will “depress the economy even further.”
The Center for American Progress’s Michael Ettlinger and Michael
Linden argue that while the deal “goes straight in the wrong
direction,” Congress can redeem itself by using the so-called “super
committee” mandated by the bill to focus on job creation. The
committee, made up of six Republicans and six Democrats, is tasked
with finding an additional $1.5 trillion of deficit reduction over the
next 10 years, and must report a plan by Thanksgiving.
Linden and Ettlinger write, “It’s especially important for the
committee to produce a plan that creates jobs and spurs growth because
the committee’s proposals will come on top of a set of already-
dramatic spending cuts that will have adverse economic consequences.”
ZeroWorship
> These stupid fuckers are so clueless when it comes to macroeconomics
> and national economic policy that they shouldn't even be allowed to
> vote on this kind of stuff, let alone debate it. Alas, these morons
> think that the U.S. economy runs like your typical trailer-dwelling
> teatard's account does. Memo to tetards: it does not.
>
> So, the market reaction today is partly due to the fact that people
> who fuckin know things know that this deal is a job killer and a drag
> on the economy. But hey, teatards are happy.
>
> http://www.thinkprogress.org/
>
>
> The Economic Policy Institute, a top nonpartisan think tank, estimates
> will end up costing the economy 1.8 million jobs by 2012. Today the
> Senate is expected to approve the package passed yesterday by the
> House and send it to President Obama. But while the unemployment rate
> remains above 9 percent, the deal does nothing to address chronic
> joblessness.
>
> The agreement would reduce spending by at least $1 trillion over 10
> years, but even the near-term cuts could shrink already sluggish GDP
> funding for public investments and safety-net spending, but also
> particular, the immediate spending cuts and the �failure to continue
> two key supports to the economy (the payroll tax holiday and emergency
> unemployment benefits for the long term unemployed) could lead to
>
>
> Top economists and CEO�s have also weighed in against the deal and
> said that GOP concessions to the Tea Party will cost our economy
> dearly. Pimco CEO Mohamed El-Erian warned that the deal will lead to
> less growth, more unemployment, and more inequality. Nobel Prize-
> abject surrender� that will �depress the economy even further.�
>
> The Center for American Progress�s Michael Ettlinger and Michael
> Linden argue that while the deal �goes straight in the wrong
> direction,� Congress can redeem itself by using the so-called �super
> committee� mandated by the bill to focus on job creation. The
> committee, made up of six Republicans and six Democrats, is tasked
> with finding an additional $1.5 trillion of deficit reduction over the
> next 10 years, and must report a plan by Thanksgiving.
>
> committee to produce a plan that creates jobs and spurs growth because
> dramatic spending cuts that will have adverse economic consequences.�
nice try but teaparty did not win.
stop listening to npr.
Jerry Okamura
"Neoconis_Ignoramus" wrote in message
news:6cbb368b-854b-4932...@c8g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
These stupid fuckers are so clueless when it comes to macroeconomics
and national economic policy that they shouldn't even be allowed to
vote on this kind of stuff, let alone debate it. Alas, these morons
think that the U.S. economy runs like your typical trailer-dwelling
teatard's account does. Memo to tetards: it does not.
So, the market reaction today is partly due to the fact that people
who fuckin know things know that this deal is a job killer and a drag
on the economy. But hey, teatards are happy.
The Economic Policy Institute, a top nonpartisan think tank, estimates
that the deal struck this weekend to raise the nation�s debt limit
will end up costing the economy 1.8 million jobs by 2012. Today the
Senate is expected to approve the package passed yesterday by the
House and send it to President Obama. But while the unemployment rate
remains above 9 percent, the deal does nothing to address chronic
joblessness.
The agreement would reduce spending by at least $1 trillion over 10
years, but even the near-term cuts could shrink already sluggish GDP
growth by 0.3% in 2012. According to EPI, the plan �not only erodes
funding for public investments and safety-net spending, but also
misses an important opportunity to address the lack of jobs.� In
particular, the immediate spending cuts and the �failure to continue
two key supports to the economy (the payroll tax holiday and emergency
unemployment benefits for the long term unemployed) could lead to
roughly 1.8 million fewer jobs in 2012.�
Top economists and CEO�s have also weighed in against the deal and
said that GOP concessions to the Tea Party will cost our economy
dearly. Pimco CEO Mohamed El-Erian warned that the deal will lead to
less growth, more unemployment, and more inequality. Nobel Prize-
winning economist Paul Krugman called the plan �a disaster� and �an
abject surrender� that will �depress the economy even further.�
The Center for American Progress�s Michael Ettlinger and Michael
Linden argue that while the deal �goes straight in the wrong
direction,� Congress can redeem itself by using the so-called �super
committee� mandated by the bill to focus on job creation. The
committee, made up of six Republicans and six Democrats, is tasked
with finding an additional $1.5 trillion of deficit reduction over the
next 10 years, and must report a plan by Thanksgiving.
Linden and Ettlinger write, �It�s especially important for the
committee to produce a plan that creates jobs and spurs growth because
the committee�s proposals will come on top of a set of already-
dramatic spending cuts that will have adverse economic consequences.�
ZeroWorship
> On Thu, 4 Aug 2011 08:52:38 -1000, "Jerry Okamura"
> <okamu...@hawaii.rr.com> wrote:
>
>> Does the economy do better with a smaller government or a larger government?
>
>
> Taking just ONE program at a national level---Building
> infrastructure---creates jobs, and ends up making commerce and flow of
> goods and services better.
what happened to all those shovel ready jobs 0jr told us about during
porkulus 1?
pilotis
Apparently after handing out the entitlements he only had about 4% left
for them...
ZW
> On Thu, 04 Aug 2011 15:55:23 -0400, ZeroWorship<n...@zw.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>>> Taking just ONE program at a national level---Building
>>> infrastructure---creates jobs, and ends up making commerce and flow of
>>> goods and services better.
>>
>> what happened to all those shovel ready jobs 0jr told us about during
>> porkulus 1?
>
>
> Senate republicans filibustered them
>
> Cloture failed in 90% of the 300+ bills the house passed
>
> Faux snooze probably didn't mention it.
dodge and weave all you can.
where were the shovel ready jobs we we're promised by 0jr?
or was that another lie, like closing Gitmo?
ZW
> On Fri, 05 Aug 2011 06:36:20 -0400, ZW<n...@zw.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 8/5/2011 12:45 AM, Yoor...@Jurgis.net wrote:
>>> On Thu, 04 Aug 2011 15:55:23 -0400, ZeroWorship<n...@zw.invalid>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Taking just ONE program at a national level---Building
>>>>> infrastructure---creates jobs, and ends up making commerce and flow of
>>>>> goods and services better.
>>>>
>>>> what happened to all those shovel ready jobs 0jr told us about during
>>>> porkulus 1?
>>>
>>> Bills were passed in the house to fund them
>>>
>>> Senate republicans filibustered them
>>>
>>> Cloture failed in 90% of the 300+ bills the house passed
>>>
>>> Faux snooze probably didn't mention it.
>>
>> dodge and weave all you can.
>
yes it does.
let me help you, I know 0jr voters aren't very bright.
"After all his talk about �shovel ready jobs,� President Obama admitted
yesterday that there really never were any shovel ready projects nor any
shovel ready jobs.
Does that surprise you? It shouldn�t. We�re willing to bet this guy�s
never owned a shovel. He�s never had a real job. And he certainly wasn�t
ready for the job he has now."
another 0jr lie that you can't refute.
http://www.ihatethemedia.com/obama-no-shovel-ready-jobs-krauthammer-pounces
ZW
> On Fri, 05 Aug 2011 10:50:09 -0400, ZW<n...@zw.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 8/5/2011 10:37 AM, Yoor...@Jurgis.net wrote:
>>> On Fri, 05 Aug 2011 06:36:20 -0400, ZW<n...@zw.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 8/5/2011 12:45 AM, Yoor...@Jurgis.net wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 04 Aug 2011 15:55:23 -0400, ZeroWorship<n...@zw.invalid>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Taking just ONE program at a national level---Building
>>>>>>> infrastructure---creates jobs, and ends up making commerce and flow of
>>>>>>> goods and services better.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> what happened to all those shovel ready jobs 0jr told us about during
>>>>>> porkulus 1?
>>>>>
>>>>> Bills were passed in the house to fund them
>>>>>
>>>>> Senate republicans filibustered them
>>>>>
>>>>> Cloture failed in 90% of the 300+ bills the house passed
>>>>>
>>>>> Faux snooze probably didn't mention it.
>>>>
>>>> dodge and weave all you can.
>>>
>>> Looks like "dodging and weaving"
>>
>> yes it does.
>> let me help you, I know 0jr voters aren't very bright.
>>
>> "After all his talk about �shovel ready jobs,� President Obama admitted
>> yesterday that there really never were any shovel ready projects nor any
>> shovel ready jobs.
>
>
> States have a crumbling infrastructure, roads, bridges, schools, water
> systems, airports, national forests, that are suffering from
> deterioration.
why does your boy Obie say otherwise?
maybe you are going off the reservation.
better check with you superiors before you get in trouble, again.
Jerry Okamura
wrote in message news:0vsl37habn5ueg77p...@4ax.com...
On Thu, 4 Aug 2011 08:52:38 -1000, "Jerry Okamura"
<okamu...@hawaii.rr.com> wrote:
>Does the economy do better with a smaller government or a larger
>government?
Larger.
Taking just ONE program at a national level---Building
infrastructure---creates jobs, and ends up making commerce and flow of
goods and services better.
If the government did not spend money on infrastructure, does that mean
there would be no one spending money on infrastructure? When the government
spends money on infrastructure, who benefits the most, the government,
business, or the people? Aren't those jobs that are created, only temporary
jobs, that are lost, when the government stops spending the money on such
projects?
Jerry Okamura
wrote in message news:17ro3759r9s75nmji...@4ax.com...
On Fri, 5 Aug 2011 11:31:59 -1000, "Jerry Okamura"
<okamu...@hawaii.rr.com> wrote:
>
>
>wrote in message news:0vsl37habn5ueg77p...@4ax.com...
>
>On Thu, 4 Aug 2011 08:52:38 -1000, "Jerry Okamura"
><okamu...@hawaii.rr.com> wrote:
>
>>Does the economy do better with a smaller government or a larger
>>government?
>
>Larger.
>
>Taking just ONE program at a national level---Building
>infrastructure---creates jobs, and ends up making commerce and flow of
>goods and services better.
>
>If the government did not spend money on infrastructure, does that mean
>there would be no one spending money on infrastructure?
Exactly
So, then business would be their own worst enemy?
IF massive infrastructure projects were done by private
companies---the cost of using them would be predicated on profit
motive and amount to a horrendous tax increase on citizens.
What is wrong with that? What should the goal be? To spend as little money
as possible, to get the job done, or to spend as much money as possible to
get the job done?
Bible Studies with Satan
>
>
> wrote in message news:17ro3759r9s75nmji...@4ax.com...
>
> On Fri, 5 Aug 2011 11:31:59 -1000, "Jerry Okamura"
> <okamu...@hawaii.rr.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>wrote in message news:0vsl37habn5ueg77p...@4ax.com...
>>
>>On Thu, 4 Aug 2011 08:52:38 -1000, "Jerry Okamura"
>><okamu...@hawaii.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Does the economy do better with a smaller government or a larger
>>>government?
>>
>>Larger.
>>
>>Taking just ONE program at a national level---Building
>>infrastructure---creates jobs, and ends up making commerce and flow of
>>goods and services better.
>>
>>If the government did not spend money on infrastructure, does that mean
>>there would be no one spending money on infrastructure?
>
> Exactly
>
> So, then business would be their own worst enemy?
>
> IF massive infrastructure projects were done by private
> companies---the cost of using them would be predicated on profit
> motive and amount to a horrendous tax increase on citizens.
Exactly. It's the profit 'tax' which adds unnessary costs to projects. Since
governments are non-profit, there's no rational reason to privatize.
>
> What is wrong with that? What should the goal be? To spend as little money
> as possible, to get the job done, or to spend as much money as possible to
> get the job done?
--
Ezekiel 23:20
ZW
> On Fri, 05 Aug 2011 14:18:35 -0400, ZW<n...@zw.invalid> wrote:
>
>>>> "After all his talk about �shovel ready jobs,� President Obama admitted
>>>> yesterday that there really never were any shovel ready projects nor any
>>>> shovel ready jobs.
>>>
>>> There are a continual mountain of "shovel ready" jobs ya moron
>>>
>>> States have a crumbling infrastructure, roads, bridges, schools, water
>>> systems, airports, national forests, that are suffering from
>>> deterioration.
>>
>> why does your boy Obie say otherwise?
>
> statements, became "inoperative" because in the interim the Republican
> congress was refusing to fund any of them.
them lazy ass dems couldn't pass a budget with a majority in all 3
branches of govt.
and yoogy blames the republicans.....
that's too good, yooogy.
keep it up. that's some funny stuff.
>
> They WERE "shovel ready" at the time he made the statement
>
> That prompted the GOP to filibuster the legislation---which led to the
> "there were never any"
>
> Because the GOP would not fund them
>
> "shovel ready" means they need to be funded---as opposed to projects
> not yet figured out.
>
>
>
>
>
>> =============================================================
>
> On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 16:32:34 -0700 (PDT),
> Kurtis T. Nicklas
>
> <nickl...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
>
>
>> I don't pay much attention to him these days, but I'd wager he's not
>> happy.
>
> You sure as shit paid attention when you got caught
> making all those late-night hang-up phone calls, didn't
> ya, Nickkkkers?
>
> CLICK ! ! !
Buster Norris
exposed, frequently revert to behavior most similar to a zoo monkey
who sits in the cage throwing feces at passersby but saying nothing of
value.
[][][][][][]
The DemocRAT Hall Of Shame http://www.democrathallofshame.com/ asks
"Why do you always LIE?"
[Courtesy of Buster Norris]
On Mon, 25 Jul 2011 16:36:56 -0700, Bible Studies with Satan
<bi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Kickin' Ass and Takin' Names wrote:
>> So -- Sarah Failin's propaganda flick in on pay-per-view.
>Already? They must have pulled it from the theaters after just ONE WEEK!
LIAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Palin film to get wider release
http://www.networknews.info/palin-film-to-get-wider-release-politico/
ARC Entertainment Announces National Rollout of Palin Film �The
Undefeated�
http://theiowarepublican.com/2011/arc-entertainment-announces-national-rollout-of-palin-film-%E2%80%9Cthe-undefeated%E2%80%9D/
Posted from:
The DemocRATs Hall of Shame!
http://www.democrathallofshame.com/
Uno Hu
Buster Norris <bustyo...@rocketmail.com> wrote in message
news:2bsr37dnrn4v3ec7b...@4ax.com
> Summary: A classic usenet zoo monkey. Liars, once they have been
> exposed, frequently revert to behavior most similar to a zoo monkey
> who sits in the cage throwing feces at passersby but saying nothing
of
> value.
So stop throwing shit at people you vile monkey.
Bible Studies with Satan
I plonked that asshole and most of his fake names long ago. I think he spends a
lot of time with his nonsense, but probably doesn't have much else to do in the
mental hospital day room where he spends most of his awake time.
--
Ezekiel 23:20
Mel Horton
> Does the economy do better with a smaller government or a larger
> government?
>
> "Neoconis_Ignoramus" wrote in message
> news:6cbb368b-854b-4932...@c8g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
>
You Japs hate freedom. That's why we crushed you in WW2.
Stay out of my country or we'll give you more than the usual garlic to keep
you away.
You're nothing but filthy sociopaths and racists. I bet that you collect
socialist security, you government loving parasite.
Buster Norris
crackpot. Believes 9/11 was an inside job, has seen UFOs and black
helicopters and is on a first-name basis with ass-probing space
aliens...
[][][][][][]
The DemocRAT Hall Of Shame http://www.democrathallofshame.com/ asks
"Why do you always LIE?"
Posted from:
Buster Norris
exposed, frequently revert to behavior most similar to a zoo monkey
who sits in the cage throwing feces at passersby but saying nothing of
value.
[][][][][][]
The DemocRAT Hall Of Shame http://www.democrathallofshame.com/ asks
"Why do you always LIE?"
[Courtesy of Buster Norris]
On Mon, 18 Jul 2011 11:34:02 -0700, Bible Studies with Satan
<bi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Poor people running out of money, Wal-Mart suffering
I guess you wanted us to think you wrote that............
Pickin' Ass and Swallowin' Loads tries the same thing...........
But you STOLE it from here: