You didn build that !

Not only is Obama's plan not bigger deficits in the short term his demonstrated record is to have lowered the deficit each year he has been in office... it is still waaaay to high and adding to the debt like whoaah but facts is facts and if we start from wrong facts then we go in wrong directions.

The last Democrat in office 8 years left us with a surplus, the last republican said hey lets lower taxes it will increase growth and revenue and solve all the problems we dont have... it was only 12 years ago it didnt work then it certainly wont work for romney ryan it will do the same thing - short term windfall for the finacial industry, this time an energy bubble (as opposed to the housing bubble of last time) and massive increases of the national debt.

...

as to daves list of economists that represent the "half" of the community of economists that believe the new deal lengthened the great depression ..forgive my plagerism on some of this, I haven’t the time to go into the intricacies of each of the views and writings of these individuals, most of which changed over the years.   If you only named three I might have considered giving them better treatment

Milton Friedman

From his own mouth..
"The other part of the new deal policy was relief and recovery … providing relief for the unemployed, providing jobs for the unemployed, and motivating the economy to expand … an expansive monetary policy. Those parts of the New Deal I did support. (…) Because it was a very exceptional circumstance. We'd gotten into an extraordinarily difficult situation, unprecedented in the nation's history. You had millions of people out of work. Something had to be done; it was intolerable. And it was a case in which, unlike most cases, the short run deserved to dominate."

Robert E Lucas

Mr. Lucas believes Ben Bernanke acted properly to prop up the system. He doesn't even find fault with Mr. Obama's first stimulus plan. "If you think Bernanke did a great job tossing out a trillion dollars, why is it a bad idea for the executive to toss out a trillion dollars? It's not an inappropriate thing in a recession to push money out there and trying to keep spending from falling too much, and we did that."

Leonard Rapping

Early in his career, Dr. Rapping held a laissez-faire view of government's role in the economy but grew to believe capitalism needed regulation. He wrote that a free-rein market is subject to "the confusion and chaos of the gladiatorial arena." He criticized President Ronald Reagan's supply-side economics, calling it a policy that "transfers money from the poor to the rich."

Shales is the conservative shill that wrote the fictional piece “the common man” because it would make her rich. She is a columnist, provides no serious economic study of her claims and her work is generally debunked as bunk, but waved around by every prominent republican as the “proof that the new deal didn’t work”

Robert higgs works for the Koch brothers (cato institute) and has yet to produce anything that is worth reading (and that includes his repeated critiques of the bush administration, and if you cant critize bush correctly what good are ya).

Gene Smiley works for a conservative think tank

Hazlitt is a severely conservative Austrian school type, he came to economics as a vehicle to justify his preconceived conservative ideals, but was a serious scholar and not to be trivialized, he is one of two people I would have accepted as a correct answer for my question (but two is hardly half of the economists).

Cole and Ohanian produce trivial work along the lines of Amity Shales- they rewrite history to prove their theories, don’t belong near the same page on the Internet of Friedman, Lucas, or Rapping.   

So you found one serious economist (who happened to be wrong but adds to the discussion), 2 guys paid to say what they are saying, 3 “economists” from minor schools that have had their work roundly debunked both by their peers and history, and then threw in the names of three great economists who did not say what you say they said. Who were they living would certainly laugh in the face of your premise.

The vast majority of economists accept what the people who voted for FDR 4 times knew, the new deal did not lengthen the great depression. Completely unregulated capitalism has been proven to fail just as socialism has been proven to fail. When the adults in the room can accept both of those historical facts then we can talk about proper levels of regulation, spending, and taxation.   When one side needs to rewrite history (and misquote great economists) to justify their position there just might be something wrong with that position.   

Point taken, perhaps not bigger deficits, just more deficits. I happen to think that the deficits will grow as the economy continues to sputter, either from reduced revenues, or more stimulus spending. The Federal Reserve's actions are only going to help the bankers in the end. I truly hope that the next president and congress take a long term view.

I can't resist any more!
Since no one can defend the bible's scripture except by saying they blindly accept what is printed in this comic book, offer any tangible scientific proof that anything in it ever existed, or make any sense of the outrageous conflicting messages, I am not surprised you have chosen to overlook any part you choose.
BTW, since some of you are cannibals by your own admission, I thought this would be interesting. I have tried many exotic dishes, but find cannibalism tasteless.

In John’s gospel, Jesus summarized the reasons for receiving Communion when he said:

"Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you; he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is real food, and my blood is real drink. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, (1) and I in him. As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats me will live because of me. This is the bread which came down from heaven, not such as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live forever" (John 6:53–58).


(1) The Dude abides!

Science, the new bible...for more than 300 years.

The Reverend John B.
Officially 47% Dig Boy!
Did I mention that my parents were also 47%ers the last 10 years of their lives. Good thing for you, you can still speak english here!

And for those of you who believe Republicans are fiscally conservative, cutting taxes to create jobs is called supply side economics...that's what Reagan did....didn't work....Bush Sr. did it....didn't work....and Bush Jr. did it....didn't work.

Supply side is the equivalent of taking your floundering business and cutting the price of your work when you're already doing work at or near cost. Yeah...you get more jobs but it just means you sink slower.

If ANYONE on here is in doubt that Supply Side Economics is a complete bust, pick up almost any recent economics text book and see what it has to say about it. Or let me save you some time. Just go to Wikipedia and find Supply Side Economics. Look under the section that says: U.S. Monetary and Fiscal Experience.

And THIS is the path Romney wants to take.....AGAIN?

I've noticed the other side is gettin real quiet Joe.

62 wood wrote: GlassSeeker wrote: 62 wood wrote: You look at it as a civil right..... I see it as a risk to our future well-being. . It certainly does not pose any risk to my future. How does letting a gay veteran marry another man pose a risk to "our" future well being??????????? Please explain. HIV and AIDS.

Which I am fighting today. I have asked my doctor, the best in the business, AIDS is not a gay thing anymore. It is a hedrosexual thing now. Which off course I got from many whores around the day and never ever thougt I would catch. I just worried about getting a woman pregant. More than anything else.

But this crap "Dont ask dont tell"!! Is morally wrong. It is not a meat party, and is not excepted in my relgion or does the bible do either.

davidg wrote: GlassSeeker wrote: The buildings that Solyndra was in were pre existing. I've seen them there empty years before Solyndra was there. Nope, Solyndra built it to build solar panels.....at taxpayer expense! "You don't pick the winners and losers, you just picks the losers". Quote by Mitt Romney to Obama during the first presidental debate.    Article on Solyndra Building....Sold for 30% of original value

And david, he spent on 90 billion dollars on solar energy. And said could have hired 2,000 teachers. Romney off course said you spent the money and the all went BANKRUPT. I could have spent the same amount and put 40,000 teachers to work.

There full of malarky. And lies.

As I said it does not pose any risk to my future.

Lee, why would you not have used condoms to protect yourself?

You were worried about getting a woman( a whore, I assume) pregnant but you did nothing to prevent it?

And I guess you agree then with President Obama who helped get rid of Don't ask don't tell.

I do wish you the best in your fight against HIV/AIDS.

Oh....wow....didn't even get Lee's comments until after I posted...

Lee...Reagan did not fix us with taxes. A little study in economics will tell you that Greenspan was the genius of that day. Reagan was spending money like he was a Congressman. He spent more money in his first 4 years than all 39 presidents before him combined. This country saw a total collapse in 87 largely due to retroactive capital gains taxes and his successor didn't do much of anything but make it worse. Perhaps you don't remember the real estate environment in TX in 87 but I do. I'm sorry Lee...you will be hard pressed to find an economist of any merit that believes supply side works. You've bought the rhetoric.

Biden handled the question of abortion perfectly, he stated his personal belief then said he would never impose his personal religious beliefs on any other American.

Ryan assurred everyone that he and Romney fully intend to impose their religious beliefs on society. This, I believe will lose them the election.

you are using ssi to buy a boat? are you getting too much?

GlassSeeker wrote: Lee, I am just curious, your situation must put you in the 47%, correct?

No I am not dependent on the goverment. I am not one of those who are dependent and count on it day in and day out. I have payed into social security almost 20 yrs. It is an insurance plan, and will use it until I am released to return to work. Which will probally be spring.

Appears Biden won the debate by quite a margin.

you sound like a democrat ..my point exactly

TX Wind wrote: peter1234 wrote: you are using ssi to buy a boat? are you getting too much? Dang! It's not like he's going out to by a 2013 6 figure boat. Like he said...it's his money. Maybe he's managed to situate himself so that he can live on next to nothing because I can assure you....SSI ain't all that. And here's my 2 cents: If a guy visits death like that and walks out and says life's priority is a ski boat, then who the hell am I to question that? Hang in there Lee. So are you in Katy or Ft. Worth now?

You got that right. They calculated what I have put in, there is your payment. Cant live off SSI. Heck no! A thousand a month sucks.

The one in the picture I am sick I lost it, but needed the money. I love ski boats. Born and raised around direct drive inboards. Got to have another one. Thats my love and hobby.

I am in ft worth. Thank you...

peter1234 wrote: you sound like a democrat ..my point exactly.. I really dont care that he is doing this and I know he is a republican it is just what i see so many times in my job , people collecting from one thing or another and spending it on things they shouldnt .

Now hold on a minute...if he had paid that money into his own fund you would be perfectly fine with that. Is he abusing the system? Doesn't sound like it. Does he have a boat now? Uh...no...he sold the other one. BECAUSE HE'S TAKING CARE OF BUSINESS FIRST! And what the hell do you know about where he gets his money? Maybe he covers bills with SSI and does whatever he can on the side and saves that. Might even leverage himself into his own business...oh my....wouldn't want someone to create any jobs would we? That's how people get off SSI genius. It's darn sure not gonna happen on some rinky dink min. wage job.

You sound like a Republican....can't see the forest for the trees and always ready to tell people how they should and should not live, what they should and should not buy....

Well I don't know you, or what you've been through in this life but I can tell you this. I've watched my daughter hang on the wire of life and death at 3 years old. Have you ever watched a 3 yr old have a heart attack? Well I have! And I can promise you sir, it will change the way you look at the world and it typically don't make you lean more to the right. I can only IMAGINE what it's like to go through what he's dealing with and if saving for a ski boat is what keeps him going then I say do it. Or is he just not suffering enough to suit you and your conservative point of view?