Why was that again?
wow, Bush actually got dumber (economics thread)
- Thread starter LordOpie
- Start date
I'd take clinton over bush any day of the week, but I think both parties are totally worthless. The republicrats are only interested in maintaining the beltway spectacle that keeps us divided into our little camps and prevents us from asking the deep and dangerous questions about how our government and society works.
that's totally true.
Do some research on Ramses II....then check to make sure your question makes sense.
Just be glad we're not Italy, Germany, or Israel:
https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/rankorder/2186rank.html
https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/rankorder/2186rank.html
you have a much greater chance of being killed by Global Warming than starving to death because of the US defict.
We'll default on the debt before we starve. the point is, this whole capitalism/liberalism/freedom thing will be all done if the U.S. fails to keep its financial comittments. The greenback holds it all together even though other countries really wish it didn't.
Default on it? Hell... we'll just print money and pay it off before that. Nothing like a little hyper-inflation to make things exciting.
From the great Wiki..
Ramesses II (also known as Ramesses the Great and alternatively transcribed as Ramses and Rameses *Riʕmīsisu) was an Egyptian pharaoh of the Nineteenth dynasty. He is often regarded as Egypt´s greatest and most powerful pharaoh[1][2]. He was born ca. 1302 BC. At age fourteen, Ramesses was appointed Prince Regent by his father Seti I[3]. He is believed to have taken the throne in his early 20s and to have ruled Egypt from 1279 BC to 1213 BC[4] for a total of 66 years and 2 months. He was once said to have lived to be 99 years old, but it is more likely that he died in his 90th or 92nd year. Ancient Greek writers such as Herodotus attributed his accomplishments to the semi-mythical Sesostris, and he is traditionally believed to have been the Pharaoh of the Exodus due to a tradition started by Eusebius of Caesarea. If he became king in 1279 BC as most Egyptologists today believe, he would have assumed the throne on May 31, 1279 BC based on his known accession date of III Shemu day 27.[5][6] He also transported the Egyptian capital from Thebes to Ra'amses in the Delta.
Seems that there are a few parallels there. Dubya could well be the closest modern day equivalent.
Any clearer, secretnumpty?
Well...of course there are parallels...but I'm pretty sure that anyone with a brain isn't going to refer to Shrubby as "Shrubby the Great".... I'm more into the "sexing of lots of females". It usually takes quite a bit of trying for 1 kid....imagine all the "practice" to get to a hundred!
That and the monuments. I like monuments. No one's going to build a monument for Shrub....at least one that won't get burned down in some sort of Pat Robertson chest thumping way....
why are tax cuts retarded ?
Obviously, taxes are needed so the govt can do it's job.
Ideally, you set the tax rate at a level that will maximize tax revenues. When you lower or raise taxes and wind up with less revenues, then you've made an error. Not admitting the error within six months and changing directions is retarded.
The tax cut in 2001 went into pockets instead of doing the multiplier affect and re-circulating through the economy. People weren't very confident due to the impending recession.
The tax cuts created a spiraling affect that might have forced the recession to occur instead of mellowing it.
did tax revenues increase or decrease after the 2001 tax cuts ?
Are you mildly retarded?
What happens when you cut something? You have less of it.
What is less? It's a decrease.
define mildly. name caller
i agree with the spending part
no, no spring here. i just like to keep more of what i make and not give it to a govt that likes to waste it.
Then I'm guessing you like keeping more of your own money... nothing wrong with that.
But what if increasing taxes actually wound up putting MORE money in your pocket over the same time frame?
im listening.
Well, if you don't have investments, stocks, whathave you, then you really don't have enough money to worry about the govt taking away in taxes.
But if you do have investments, then you should be upset about the tax cuts since it stunted the economy's growth and your investments with it.
Now, sometimes tax cuts are effective, but they weren't this time and instead of reversing them, they kept on rolling.
But if you do have investments, then you should be upset about the tax cuts since it stunted the economy's growth and your investments with it.
Now, sometimes tax cuts are effective, but they weren't this time and instead of reversing them, they kept on rolling.
My international funds have done great. My domestic ones have been **** because I won't invest in oil and large engineering cos (e.g. halliburton, bechtel, etc.)... unfortunately, they're the only INDUSTRIES in the US that have done well. Individual stocks however (Apple, Google) are trucking along just fine.
yeah... my 3 stock fund's avg of 15-25% over the last 4 years suXorzz!111
my international fund is leading the pack... but my common stock fund isn't far behind.
Better be some Chevron and others in there as well!
I am thinking about using some of the profits to buy a H2 with the custom license plate of GBL-WMG
doesnt seem to be a requirement to me.
besides, do you only know what some college professor taught you or do you have some real world experience?
OMG! I'm going to cry, you hurt me so.
I noticed that instead of joining* the discussion, you simply insult.
Seriously, contribute or just shut up cuz you're way beyond boring.
* joining means more than some retarded personal observation that has no bearing to anything other than attempting to puff your fragile ego.
