Obama is simply clueless about the economy

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

As much as wealth is being created at the top it's also being sucked from the middle.


-spence

yes, the top continues to create wealth, it's what they do and Obama is fortunate to have them to deamonize as he creates more debt

the s#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&g sound that you hear is from the growing permanent dependent class and according to USA Today last June " That brings to a record $61.6 trillion the total of financial promises not paid for." (Federally) or $535,000 per household

U.S. funding for future promises lags by trillions - USATODAY.com

plus 5.2 Trillion for State and Local unfunded obligations

Obamanomics will continue to shrink the middle, deamonize the top and massively expand the permanent dependent "s#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&g" class as it expands the scope and role of government which is the ultimate objective.....

it won't be "greedy corporations" that cause the downfall of American Society, it will be government unable to control itself or pay it's way....corporations are just a convenient target for those who see private business as nothing more than a source of greater funding for their lunacy

[striperman36]

Sounds again like Roman history

[scottw]

Originally Posted by striperman36

Sounds again like Roman history

there's an awful lot of history being repeated currently and, well....you know the quote...

[striperman36]

Originally Posted by scottw

there's an awful lot of history being repeated currently and, well....you know the quote...

yes we all do. Several quotes

[scottw]

Originally Posted by striperman36

yes we all do. Several quotes

and odd coincidences too

[spence]

Originally Posted by scottw

yes, the top continues to create wealth, it's what they do and Obama is fortunate to have them to deamonize as he creates more debt

Seems like they like it

WASHINGTON, Oct. 19 (UPI) -- Democratic President Barack Obama is blowing away his Republican challengers when it comes to soliciting donations on Wall Street, fundraising figures show.

The Washington Post reported Wednesday its analysis of contribution data reveals Obama has raised more from the financial and banking sector this year than all of the GOP presidential hopefuls combined.

Perhaps it like battered wife syndrome?

Read more: Obama pulling in Wall Street donations - UPI.com

the s#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&g sound that you hear is from the growing permanent dependent class and according to USA Today last June " That brings to a record $61.6 trillion the total of financial promises not paid for." (Federally) or $535,000 per household

U.S. funding for future promises lags by trillions - USATODAY.com

plus 5.2 Trillion for State and Local unfunded obligations

Obamanomics will continue to shrink the middle, deamonize the top and massively expand the permanent dependent "s#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&g" class as it expands the scope and role of government which is the ultimate objective.....
If you read Jim's post you'll see that the shrinking of the middle is much bigger than Obama...as is the debt and dependence.

Perhaps that's Obama's point, that we have "underlying structural problems". Not sure where I've heard that before though...

it won't be "greedy corporations" that cause the downfall of American Society, it will be government unable to control itself or pay it's way....corporations are just a convenient target for those who see private business as nothing more than a source of greater funding for their lunacy

The problem with your assertion is that both democratic and republican politicians resemble your remark.

One might then intuit that ideology has little to do with the problem, and that you're entire premise is fundamentally invalid. You should read his speech again.

-spence

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Seems like they like it



Perhaps it like battered wife syndrome?

Read more: Obama pulling in Wall Street donations - UPI.com




Perhaps that's Obama's point, that we have "underlying structural problems". Not sure where I've heard that before though...


The problem with your assertion is that both democratic and republican politicians resemble your remark.

One might then intuit that ideology has little to do with the problem, and that you're entire premise is fundamentally invalid. You should read his speech again.

-spence

Spence, what about that USA Today article that says we have unfunded liabilities of $62 trillion? Spence, HOW WOULD YOU go about fixing that? Obama says all we need to do is get another $90n billion a year from the billionaires. Do the math. If we get that $90billion a year (a big if) and even if we didn't have to pay interest on the $62 trillion (and we do) it will take 667 years to pay down that debt.

Spence, please please please tell me how we solve this, without huge cuts to those programs? Yet when Paul Ryan offers a way to do this, YOUR SIDE makes a commercial of Ryan pushing old ladies off a cliff. Is that honest debate? Is that honestly trying to solve the problems at hand? No. All that is, is deminizing the opposition because conservatives are the ones being courageous and honest. All you can do, ALL YOU CAN DO, is shriek that we hate poor people. Pathetic.

Let's hear it Spence. How do we get $62 trillion just from the wealthy. Because even if we took every penny from them, even if we taxed them at 100%, it wouldn't add up to anywhere near that number. But I'm sure you must have a valid plan, right??????? Let's hear it. Either offer up a plan that addresses that problem, or keep quiet and learn something. I'm all ears...

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

you're entire premise is fundamentally invalid. -spence

Our premise is that $62 trillion debt can never be paid off in our lifetime. Do you disagree?

And if we can't pay it off in our lifetime, that means we have 2 choices. We either (1) make cuts to reduce that hole, or (2) we do nothing and leaved it ti future generations to worry about.

Irrefutably, conservatives want to make the difficult, but necessary, cuts. Liberals want to punt. Go ahead Spence, you tell me where I'm wrong please.

I hate the idea of having to cut these programs. If we could raise $62 trillion without destroying everything, I'd be all for it. But we can't raise that much $$, and it's not fair to leave this problem for our grandkids. But that's precisely, exactly what this coward Obama wants to do. He's been voting "present" his whole life, and he's doing it again.

Spence, I'm almost done making my pile, I have most of my nest egg free and clear. When the house of cards collapses, I'll have a nice nest-egg with taxes already paid. I'll be out of the IRS' reach. When the IRS comes to you and tells you "sorry, you're now in the 85% income tax bracket", you remember Obama, and remember to thank him.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

Seems like they like it

more like paying homage to the Don of the Chicago Way...I thought you and he had a problem with corporations buying influence through big contributions?


Perhaps it like battered wife syndrome?



Perhaps that's Obama's point, that we have "underlying structural problems". Not sure where I've heard that before though...he's offered no solutions for the "underlying structural" problems to date


The problem with your assertion is that both democratic and republican politicians resemble your remark.

One might then intuit that ideology has little to do with the problem, and that you're entire premise is fundamentally invalid. it has everything to do with ideaology, you couldn't name a Constitutionalist from the democrat side of the aisle and you can't name a democrat who is serious about reigning in spending in any serious way, particularly the entitlement spending that constitututes the majority of that nearly 70 Trillion dollars


You should read his speech again.I read it, it is recycled garbage, a call to raise taxes and expand the role of government to ensure fairness of outcomes because government could infact do that if only it were properly funded, problem is all of it's previous promises to do so are massively unfunded already...all wrapped up in a divisive theme that would be worthty of a Third World Dictator.....I hear there's a possibility of an opening in Venezuala that would be perfect for him

-spence

there was nothing in that speech that would cure the ills that he described, he was making a case for giving him more money to "invest" for us though his expansion of the Nanny State....no thanks