So who here still thinks the Stimulus was a good idea because you're stupid

[joshh]

You mean how I completely defended my statements and you've yet to admit you were wrong to attack me over it? I'm sorry I can't use logical fallacies for all my arguments

No not all just most. And now you're trying to make up for it by beating it into me. Like a child would do. Need a binky?

[BraveUlysses]

No not all just most. And now you're trying to make up for it by beating it into me. Like a child would do. Need a binky?

for someone who keeps crying about moral compasses, you sure seem to lack one when it's convenient

[joshh]

It can't happen on a regular pay check unless you change you dependents. But it can happen on a tax return. Depending on several variables.

That's exactly what my Tax lady just said.

[joshh]

for someone who keeps crying about moral compasses, you sure seem to lack one when it's convenient

Oh you mean even though I said I would admit wrong if I really was. More kiddie shit for a kid.

[BraveUlysses]

It can't happen on a regular pay check unless you change you dependents. But it can happen on a tax return. Depending on several variables.

That's exactly what my Tax lady just said.

I already covered withholding, smartguy. Yes, it can vary.

Withholding is irrelevant in this discussion.

The amount you pay in federal income taxes a given year is based solely on how much you made in the entire year, minus exemptions and deductions.

Oh you mean even though I said I would admit wrong if I really was. More kiddie shit for a kid.

Stubborn, curmudgeonly old troll. I can do this too!

Sounds like it's pretty hard for you to admit you're wrong.

[joshh]

I already covered withholding, smartguy. Yes, it can vary.

Withholding is irrelevant in this discussion.

The amount you pay in federal income taxes a given year is based solely on how much you made in the entire year, minus exemptions and deductions.



Stubborn, curmudgeonly old troll. I can do this too!

Sounds like it's pretty hard for you to admit you're wrong.

Have you put a tampon in it yet?

[Bimmerman325i]

I'm against the bailouts, but there is something I find utterly hilarious about the debates raging over its effectiveness.

Conservatives ignore the bailout and stimulus spending that Bush enacted (with a Democratic congressional majority), which didn't work, and focus on how awful the bailout and stimulus spending that Obama enacted is (zomgz! socializmz!), which also, surprisingly, didn't work.

Liberals ignore the failures of Obama's stimulus spending (zomgz! givez it enuf timez!) and focus on how Bush left Obama with a huge mess, ignoring the Bush administration's attempts to fix the problem (which, again, was with a Democratic congressional majority).

Seems like both sides have huge blinders on. Both parties presided over bailouts and stimulus spending, neither of which worked. Obama has been President for two years, and can't keep blaming the Republicans for the economic mess, regardless of what he has or has not done. Democrats were in control of Congress when shit went down, so it isn't strictly Bush's fault.

Both parties are to blame, but both parties are bundles of utter shit.

EDIT: and, apparently, I missed six pages of bitching each other out over unrelated nonsense.

[uofom3]

I'm against the bailouts, but there is something I find utterly hilarious about the debates raging over its effectiveness.

Conservatives ignore the bailout and stimulus spending that Bush enacted (with a Democratic congressional majority), which didn't work, and focus on how awful the bailout and stimulus spending that Obama enacted is (zomgz! socializmz!), which also, surprisingly, didn't work.

Liberals ignore the failures of Obama's stimulus spending (zomgz! givez it enuf timez!) and focus on how Bush left Obama with a huge mess, ignoring the Bush administration's attempts to fix the problem (which, again, was with a Democratic congressional majority).

Seems like both sides have huge blinders on. Both parties presided over bailouts and stimulus spending, neither of which worked. Obama has been President for two years, and can't keep blaming the Republicans for the economic mess, regardless of what he has or has not done. Democrats were in control of Congress when shit went down, so it isn't strictly Bush's fault.

Both parties are to blame, but both parties are bundles of utter shit.

EDIT: and, apparently, I missed six pages of bitching each other out over unrelated nonsense.

+1

Everyone has their hands in this, but Obama has to man up and accept the fact that because he is the sitting president he has to take the reigns. We have a dem controlled congress and white house - so this is now on their shoulders and massive deficit spending and entitlement programs are not going to solve this. The only way we spend this out is if businesses and people spend to increase the velocity of money and loosen up the system.

Ironically, corporations are hoarding cash. This isn't always a bullish indicator but with over a trillion USD on the sidelines with corporations there is certain capacity there to hire people and buy capital goods. A great example of this is that Intel and Microsoft posted a phenomal second quarter where businesses started spending. They derive a huge amount of their profits from business spending and corporations outside of the U.S. economy. That suggests that things might be loosening up but the cash hoarding is likely because of uncertainty.

This also hasn't even touched on the cash hoarding of individual investors and going into alternate investments such as gold, silver, etc.

[gwb72tii]

cash hoarding is potential, yes, but it is also a symptom of individuals and businesses not knowing what to do with it. this is all on the current administration, the changing of the rules (defrauding gm/chrysler creditors to reward unions), increasing costs and uncertainty (obamacare. yes, it does increase costs, surprise surprise), and cramming laws down the public's throat that the public does not want or understand.
who can plan?
who wants to hire when the consumer refuses to spend money?

side note. average hourly wages are decreasing, which is a HUGE PROBLEM.

this is feeling more and more like a depression

[reelop19]

Conservatives have been the highest oponents of Bushs' spending. Liberals were against it at first but once Obama became Bush on steroids they pretended it was ok and they never were against it. Reports just came out that the bailout helped overseas banks primarily. I say again, we should have let them all fail and we'd be better off today. Kensian economics does not work.