explain what it's been explained to death. they make their money from an economic system that has been rigged since the 80's. what's so difficult to understand.
-
Hello, this board in now turned off and no new posting.
Please REGISTER at Anabolic Steroid Forums, and become a member of our NEW community!
-
Check Out IronMag Labs® KSM-66 Max - Recovery and Anabolic Growth Complex
Romney Wants to Sacrifice Our Health to Become President
- Thread starter Arnold
- Start date
explain what it's been explained to death. they make their money from an economic system that has been rigged since the 80's. what's so difficult to understand.
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2010
- Messages
- 14,048
- Reaction score
- 681
- Points
- 113
It is not just healthcare he has no plan for.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/19/opinion/krugman-snow-job-on-jobs.html?_r=0
[h=1]Snow Job on Jobs[/h][h=6]By PAUL KRUGMAN[/h]Mitt Romney talks a lot about jobs. But does he have a plan to create any?
You can defend President Obama?s jobs record ? recovery from a severe financial crisis is always difficult, and especially so when the opposition party does its best to block every policy initiative you propose. And things have definitely improved over the past year. Still, unemployment remains high after all these years, and a candidate with a real plan to make things better could make a strong case for his election.
But Mr. Romney, it turns out, doesn?t have a plan; he?s just faking it. In saying that, I don?t mean that I disagree with his economic philosophy; I do, but that?s a separate point. I mean, instead, that Mr. Romney?s campaign is telling lies: claiming that its numbers add up when they don?t, claiming that independent studies support its position when those studies do no such thing.
Before I get there, however, let me take a minute to talk about Mr. Romney?s claim that he knows how to fix the economy because he?s been a successful businessman. That would be a dubious claim even if he were honestly representing his business career, because the skills needed to run a business and those needed to manage economic policy are very different. In any case, however, his portrait of his own experience is so misleading that it takes your breath away.
For Mr. Romney, who started as a business consultant and then moved into the heady world of private equity, insists on portraying himself as a plucky small businessman.
I am not making this up. In Tuesday?s debate, he declared, ?I came through small business. I understand how hard it is to start a small business.? In his speech at the Republican convention, he declared, ?When I was 37, I helped start a small company.?
Ahem. It?s true that when Bain Capital started, it had only a handful of employees. But it had $37 million in funds, raised from sources that included wealthy Europeans investing through Panamanian shell companies and Central American oligarchs living in Miami while death squads associated with their families ravaged their home nations. Hey, doesn?t every plucky little start-up have access to that kind of financing?
But back to the Romney jobs plan. As many people have noted, the plan has five points but contains no specifics. Loosely speaking, however, it calls for a return to Bushonomics: tax cuts for the wealthy plus weaker environmental protection. And Mr. Romney says that the plan would create 12 million jobs over the next four years.
Where does that number come from? When pressed, the campaign cited three studies that it claimed supported its assertions. In fact, however, those studies did no such thing.
Just for the record, one study concluded that America might gain two million jobs if China stopped infringing on U.S. patents and other intellectual property; this would be nice, but Mr. Romney hasn?t proposed anything that would bring about that outcome. Another study suggested that growth in the energy sector might add three million jobs in the next few years ? but these were predicted gains under current policy, that is, they would happen no matter who wins the election, not as a consequence of the Romney plan.
Finally, a third study examined the effects of the Romney tax plan and argued (implausibly, but that?s another issue) that it would lead to a large increase in the number of Americans who want to work. But how does that help cure a situation in which there are already millions more Americans seeking work than there are jobs available? It?s irrelevant to Mr. Romney?s claims.
So when the campaign says that these three studies support its claims about jobs, it is, to use the technical term, lying ? just as it is when it says that six independent studies support its claims about taxes (they don?t).
What do Mr. Romney?s economic advisers actually believe? As best as I can tell, they?re placing their faith in the confidence fairy, in the belief that their candidate?s victory would inspire an employment boom without the need for any real change in policy. In fact, in his infamous Boca Raton ?47 percent? remarks, Mr. Romney himself asserted that he would give a big boost to the economy simply by being elected, ?without actually doing anything.? And what about the overwhelming evidence that our weak economy isn?t about confidence, it?s about the hangover from a terrible financial crisis? Never mind.
To summarize, then, the true Romney plan is to create an economic boom through the sheer power of Mr. Romney?s personal awesomeness. But the campaign doesn?t dare say that, for fear that voters would (rightly) consider it ridiculous. So what we?re getting instead is an attempt to brazen it out with nakedly false claims. There?s no jobs plan; just a plan for a snow job on the American people.
can you say Voodoo economics repackaged, it's the only play in the GOP economic handbook. the same failed policies of the last 2 of 3 GOP admins. anything that further increases inequality such as more supply-side tax cuts does more damage in the long term than any short term economic gains. more asset bubble/burst cycles of greater intensity only cause recessions which in turn cause permanent wealth transfers UP the ladder...
wouldn't change a thing in that country or to FoxConn if Apple went away. the wage share for FoxConn's side is a mere 25M a year when on the US side for the same amount of employees minus the production labor it's almost 750M. now if you took away ALL the US company's that outsource to China and other country's in SE Asia that would make a dent.
every time I install some Cisco gear for a client some part of it somewhere even just a bracket, etc. has FoxConn stamped into it. but they all do it, the top 30 large firms in the US outsource as much labor as they can to the US prison industrial complex then to country's in SE Asia. pretty much any firm that has to do with electronics outsources their labor to either both or one of them. the prison industrial complex in the US assembles many, many electronic/electrical products for defense contractors.
On the same not the gov't could have given every one 2 million dollars in this country and still have money left in Obama's stimulus package. But I honestly dont think all that money would help most these people in this country. They would end right back in poverty in a matter of years.
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2011
- Messages
- 3,999
- Reaction score
- 1,028
- Points
- 113
- Age
- 47
what??
311,591,917 people in the United States give out 623,183,834 dollars. 787,000,000,000 dollars i think is what he got to spend. I may be lost on this one, but to me I am just lost where all this damn money goes.
The government spent approximately $1.03 trillion on 83 means-tested federal welfare programs in fiscal year 2011 alone ? a price tag that makes welfare that year the government?s largest expenditure, according to new data released by the Republican side of the Senate Budget Committee.
Read more: Govt spent $1.028 trillion on welfare in FY 2011 | The Daily Caller
1.03 trillion on welfare where lol does this money go to...
The government spent approximately $1.03 trillion on 83 means-tested federal welfare programs in fiscal year 2011 alone ? a price tag that makes welfare that year the government?s largest expenditure, according to new data released by the Republican side of the Senate Budget Committee.
Read more: Govt spent $1.028 trillion on welfare in FY 2011 | The Daily Caller
1.03 trillion on welfare where lol does this money go to...
Well see it used to be the top 400 households (the elite) lived in castles. They ruled the ppl with an iron fist. They ruled with fear and terror. You only had 2 classes back then. The Aristocrat class and the poor.
Firstly, let's delve into the mindset of these people. (The power elite) They are a group of people who have incredible desire for power and wealth. And they will do anything to get it. They think that they own this world and everyone in it. They believe that God gave them this world to rule.
Now they used to rule as stated above; such as being a king or emperor and ruling the poor with fear or other means. The only problem with this method is the people knew they were supressed. They were always looking for a way out. So this was not a sustainable method of getting power. So they needed a new way to trick the people. Then came along the financier's which we still have today. Banks back in medieval times used to work like this: someone would bring their gold in and the banker would give them a slip stating how much gold they deposited. And back in those days the King's were busy waging war against their neighbors to get more power or whatever the reason was.
So one day a thought came into the mind of one of the banker's which started the present day method of Fiat money. The banker realized that all of the people would not withdraw their gold at the same time. So he told the King to print paper money and then make a Fiat that "this was now the new form of currency." So now the King has control of the people's money. They are now paid in dollars and not Gold. And the King can now print more money than the people earn.? See before there was only enough Gold for what the people produced. So there was only enough Gold for real labor. Now with the Fiat money the King can print off as much money as he wants and spend money on wars without the people knowing that their labor is being stolen through inflation.
This is still the system we run today! Money is created out of thin air and only backed by US people's sweat. The modern day financiers' do not care if we EVER pay back the debt we have incurred. As long as they can keep the press rolling.
Meanwhile, they sit back and have control of MNC (multi-national corp.) purchase new's stations, papers, etc. to control information. They make their profits through the stock market and fancy methods (like derivatives hat produce nothing!) and pay a lower tax rate than the average citizen and in the case of MNC's sometimes no taxes at all! So it isn't the poor people that some of you are blaming that don't work. It's the rich that don't want to work! They want to rig the system in their favor and rely on the sweat of American's to keep the system going. And until we realize what is happening and claim what is rightfully ours it will continue to happen...
Firstly, let's delve into the mindset of these people. (The power elite) They are a group of people who have incredible desire for power and wealth. And they will do anything to get it. They think that they own this world and everyone in it. They believe that God gave them this world to rule.
Now they used to rule as stated above; such as being a king or emperor and ruling the poor with fear or other means. The only problem with this method is the people knew they were supressed. They were always looking for a way out. So this was not a sustainable method of getting power. So they needed a new way to trick the people. Then came along the financier's which we still have today. Banks back in medieval times used to work like this: someone would bring their gold in and the banker would give them a slip stating how much gold they deposited. And back in those days the King's were busy waging war against their neighbors to get more power or whatever the reason was.
So one day a thought came into the mind of one of the banker's which started the present day method of Fiat money. The banker realized that all of the people would not withdraw their gold at the same time. So he told the King to print paper money and then make a Fiat that "this was now the new form of currency." So now the King has control of the people's money. They are now paid in dollars and not Gold. And the King can now print more money than the people earn.? See before there was only enough Gold for what the people produced. So there was only enough Gold for real labor. Now with the Fiat money the King can print off as much money as he wants and spend money on wars without the people knowing that their labor is being stolen through inflation.
This is still the system we run today! Money is created out of thin air and only backed by US people's sweat. The modern day financiers' do not care if we EVER pay back the debt we have incurred. As long as they can keep the press rolling.
Meanwhile, they sit back and have control of MNC (multi-national corp.) purchase new's stations, papers, etc. to control information. They make their profits through the stock market and fancy methods (like derivatives hat produce nothing!) and pay a lower tax rate than the average citizen and in the case of MNC's sometimes no taxes at all! So it isn't the poor people that some of you are blaming that don't work. It's the rich that don't want to work! They want to rig the system in their favor and rely on the sweat of American's to keep the system going. And until we realize what is happening and claim what is rightfully ours it will continue to happen...
Who in your opinion are "people who produce?"
Isn't your solution creating an economy more greatly based on consumption? I'm not sure what left's solution is other stimulating the economy today. Is that not just making it worse in the long run?
he's notorious for doing that. he points out the "problems". but refuses to give solutions.
mean means average in statistics so I was wrong how exactly?
there aren't any solutions. which is why the collapse of the US economy is inevitable and the rise of the police state in the US. it is why the country's in Europe have not allowed what has happened in the US to occur by keeping tax rates elevated on high earners post WWII and why they do not allow their financial sectors to prey on their citizens.
do you drive a car with out oil seizing the engine if you really cared about it? same principle...
ON THE DISTRIBUTIONAL EFFECTS OF BASE-BROADENING INCOME TAX REFORM
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/UploadedPDF/1001628-Base-Broadening-Tax-Reform.pdf
"ABSTRACT
This paper examines the tradeoffs among three competing goals that are inherent in a revenue-neutral income tax reform?maintaining tax revenues, ensuring a progressive tax system, and lowering marginal tax rates?drawing on the example of the tax policies advanced in presidential candidate Mitt Romney?s tax plan. Our major conclusion is that any revenue-neutral individual income tax change that incorporates the features Governor Romney has proposed would provide large tax cuts to high-income households, and increase the tax burdens on middle- and/or lower-income taxpayers."
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/UploadedPDF/1001628-Base-Broadening-Tax-Reform.pdf
"ABSTRACT
This paper examines the tradeoffs among three competing goals that are inherent in a revenue-neutral income tax reform?maintaining tax revenues, ensuring a progressive tax system, and lowering marginal tax rates?drawing on the example of the tax policies advanced in presidential candidate Mitt Romney?s tax plan. Our major conclusion is that any revenue-neutral individual income tax change that incorporates the features Governor Romney has proposed would provide large tax cuts to high-income households, and increase the tax burdens on middle- and/or lower-income taxpayers."
By people who produce I mean people willing to work hard, or who have a good idea and whose only impediment is a lack of funds. The top and the bottom both have people who are just consumers and produce nothing. At the bottom you have the welfare bums and at the top you have the trust fund babies. Neither of these groups of people provide anything to society and we would truck along much better without them. I don't think that economy would be based on consumption, it would be pro-innovation and would lead to the cream rising to the top, rather than just everyone who is a member of the lucky sperm club. I think our government policy should be based on survival of the fittest with a safety net for people who fall to help them get back up on their feet. Our current system seems to do everything to fight this.
the problem with that is there just are not that many new products that are truly innovative and change things for the better instead of just making life different and/or easier which isn't always better for the consumer. with the exception of the Information Age/computers, etc. what is really different in 2012 than in 1980 besides the obvious fucked up economy, etc.
the US ranks at the bottom of the OECD for Corruption Perception
http://files.transparency.org/content/download/101/407/file/2011_CPI_EN.pdf
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2010
- Messages
- 5,540
- Reaction score
- 2,556
- Points
- 0
All presidents and politicians lie. they haven't told the truth since day one so why would anyone expect them to start now. most couldn't handle the truth if they were ever told it anyway. imagine if the POTUS actually told the masses they were fucked, that would surely go over well and help what's left of the bullshit US economy.
in terms of Mitt Romney and how he made his wealth only those with no money or those that are extremely naive thinks a person can obtain such wealth with out hurting some people. I grew up with people like Mitt and much wealthier in my neighborhood and they are all the same. they all lie, cheat and steal....
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2010
- Messages
- 5,540
- Reaction score
- 2,556
- Points
- 0
^^^^Come on Lam, one can even move his way laterally across the middle class and still hurt people in the process. F*cking people isn't exclusive to the wealthy.
No kidding, poor people and crime go together.
crime by the poor effect the individual and family of the victim, etc. as they are always personal. crimes by the rich effect millions and billions. take the fruad committed by the US financial sector it effect the entire globe, billions of people and according to the FSB and BIS has caused between 20-60T in PERMANENT losses of global GDP...surely no difference there
the poor person who commits a crime can never, ever have such an impact because of the crimes they commit, so yes there is a huge difference between crimes of the rich and poor.
Last edited:
you've obviously never done any research on the subject as that is one of the most asinine statements you've ever made. and of course the great idiot DOMS agrees with you.
Standard Donkey
Registered
did i miss something? when did our health become the government's responsibility?
why they started to allow the private sector who produces our food to put chemicals in everything we eat and drink they "might" bear some responsibility. if you think ingesting chemicals every day for the entire lifespan has a positive effect on the health status you know absolutely nothing about health or science.
Standard Donkey
Registered
