Pages: 1 2

 

2010-02-24 13:22:52
SealXo
Member
+309|6822
As a new republican to the senate you promised to end the supermajority and oppose bullshit bills. So what do you do? Say youre going to vote for this shitty fucking jobs bill, along with 4 other republicans, to pass it.

FUCK YOU SCOTT BROWN

your a little specter asshole traitor is what you are. what the fuck is this jobs bill im so pissed about
?

"Small Business Tax Cuts" and "Highway Spending" are among the major topics.

Lets take small business for example to show just how stupid this tax cut shit it.

Small manufacturing business with 4 office employees and 20 warehouse employees is losing ~400k as of this fiscal year. Three years ago it was making 400k in profit. So, what is this bills solution. A 5,000$ tax cut! YES JESUS FUCKING CHRIST 5 THOUSAND DOLLARS SHIT SON. i think im going to go out and buy a flat screen tv or some shit!

WRONG

it would cost about 10k to train some new asshole AND one new shop floor manager isn't going to somehow make up for some 400k loss.

So, fuck small business, that shits out of the picture. Lets take my dad- A recently unemployed middle aged CPA!. Well dad, it looks like a job opened up to repave the 5 freeway through LA- Oh shit. You're white collar, 55 years old, and your an accountant. Well, looks like you're fucked! Theyd rather hire some low class immigrant who already does that shit. Maybe you could enjoy an early retirement with a 600k equity line, or your nice built up 401k.... JUST KIDDING ITS GONE. well you could always take some out of my college fund. OH WAIT.

Scott Brown is a faggot, and this Jobs Bill hates the middle class. Prove me wrong

Last edited by SealXo (2010-02-24 13:25:03)

2010-02-24 13:27:00
13/f/taiwan
Member
+940|5985
Wow a politician who lies. Never saw that coming now did ya.
2010-02-24 13:29:16
Chou
Member
+737|7077
Promises are a marketing trick, you really think the elected have all that power to make them changes?
2010-02-24 13:30:59
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5644|London, England
The price tag is small. I really don't see what the big deal is. Government isn't supposed to create jobs anyway. At least they stopped funding all the union state jobs Baby steps.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2010-02-24 13:32:19
Doctor Strangelove
Real Battlefield Veterinarian.
+1,758|6754
I thought that the republicans were supposed to be in favor of tax cuts and small business?

Also, infrastructure spending is hardly a bad thing. Roads don't maintain themselves you know.








But I do agree, Scot Brown is probably gay.























Just like you.
2010-02-24 13:37:41
SealXo
Member
+309|6822
im in favor of results
2010-02-24 13:40:40
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5644|London, England

SealXo wrote:

im in favor of results
Then listen to the man before you lash out at him:

http://audio.wrko.com/m/audio/29183579/ … s-vote.htm
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2010-02-24 14:21:43
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,056|7058|PNW

JohnG@lt wrote:

The price tag is small. I really don't see what the big deal is. Government isn't supposed to create jobs anyway. At least they stopped funding all the union state jobs Baby steps.
Government could actually help create jobs by cutting their administrative positions and dropping unnecessary fees/regulations for businesses. Unfettered as such, businesses could afford to expand and take on new people. As it is now, some businesses can't afford to keep employees on during the off-season (outdoor construction), if they don't outright shut down.

Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2010-02-24 14:22:00)

2010-02-24 14:24:13
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5644|London, England

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

The price tag is small. I really don't see what the big deal is. Government isn't supposed to create jobs anyway. At least they stopped funding all the union state jobs Baby steps.
Government could actually help create jobs by cutting their administrative positions and dropping unnecessary fees/regulations for businesses. Unfettered as such, businesses could afford to expand and take on new people. As it is now, some businesses can't afford to keep employees on during the off-season (outdoor construction), if they don't outright shut down.
My point was that the government doesn't have the power to outright create jobs. Sure, it can move around resources and employ people in a certain sector, but it comes at the expense of jobs in another sector. If you create one government job, you are removing at least one private sector job because it requires taxation to create the gov job.

Last edited by JohnG@lt (2010-02-24 14:25:54)

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2010-02-24 14:38:09
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,056|7058|PNW

JohnG@lt wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

The price tag is small. I really don't see what the big deal is. Government isn't supposed to create jobs anyway. At least they stopped funding all the union state jobs Baby steps.
Government could actually help create jobs by cutting their administrative positions and dropping unnecessary fees/regulations for businesses. Unfettered as such, businesses could afford to expand and take on new people. As it is now, some businesses can't afford to keep employees on during the off-season (outdoor construction), if they don't outright shut down.
My point was that the government doesn't have the power to outright create jobs. Sure, it can move around resources and employ people in a certain sector, but it comes at the expense of jobs in another sector. If you create one government job, you are removing at least one private sector job because it requires taxation to create the gov job.
My point was that the government could create jobs by shrinking and cutting excessive taxes and regulations for businesses. Unfettered as such, the business sector could afford to expand and take on far more people than the government could provide jobs for in the long run.

Unfortunately for us, administrators with the power to cut government jobs aren't going to really want to cut their own jobs, or make enemies of other government administrators whose jobs they'd actually consider cutting.
2010-02-24 14:40:55
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5644|London, England

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:


Government could actually help create jobs by cutting their administrative positions and dropping unnecessary fees/regulations for businesses. Unfettered as such, businesses could afford to expand and take on new people. As it is now, some businesses can't afford to keep employees on during the off-season (outdoor construction), if they don't outright shut down.
My point was that the government doesn't have the power to outright create jobs. Sure, it can move around resources and employ people in a certain sector, but it comes at the expense of jobs in another sector. If you create one government job, you are removing at least one private sector job because it requires taxation to create the gov job.
My point was that the government could create jobs by shrinking and cutting excessive taxes and regulations for businesses. Unfettered as such, the business sector could afford to expand and take on far more people than the government could provide jobs for in the long run.

Unfortunately for us, administrators with the power to cut government jobs aren't going to really want to cut their own jobs, or make enemies of other government administrators whose jobs they'd actually consider cutting.
We're saying the same thing, just taking different routes to do so
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2010-02-25 06:20:17
Iconic Irony
Bare Back Rough Rider
+189|5562|San Angelo, TX
Scott Brown is a pretty cool guy who doesn't afraid of anything.
2010-02-25 06:26:49
Jenspm
penis
+1,716|7018|St. Andrews / Oslo

So to sum it all up:

- Seal's dad is unemployed
- Mr. Brown supports a tax cut for small businesses
- Seal's dad doesn't wanna be a concrete worker

???
https://static.bf2s.com/files/user/26774/flickricon.png https://twitter.com/phoenix/favicon.ico
2010-02-25 07:02:44
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6815|Global Command

Jenspm wrote:

So to sum it all up:

- Seal's dad is unemployed
- Mr. Brown supports a tax cut for small businesses
- Seal's dad doesn't wanna be a concrete worker

???
No, it's about Rhinos stuffing explosives up their asses and blowing themselves up, aka wishing thinking.
2010-02-25 07:03:13
Mekstizzle
WALKER
+3,611|6907|London, England

Jenspm wrote:

So to sum it all up:

- Seal's dad is unemployed
- Mr. Brown supports a tax cut for small businesses
- Seal's dad doesn't wanna be a concrete worker

???
- Laws don't help Seal's dad, therefore it must hate Seal's dad and everyone who belongs to the same class has him
2010-02-25 10:11:47
PureFodder
Member
+225|6571
Isn't the vast majority of the money going towards creating new jobs actually going to get pissed away into the general employment/unemployment cycle?

Something like 4 million people are hired and fired each month in the US. Most of this money will go towards subsidising jobs that would have been created anyway. It's also too small to realistically encourage many businesses that wouldn't hire anyone to change their minds.

The infrastructure bit may be a bit more sensible though.
2010-02-25 17:49:54
DrunkFace
Germans did 911
+427|6967|Disaster Free Zone

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

The price tag is small. I really don't see what the big deal is. Government isn't supposed to create jobs anyway. At least they stopped funding all the union state jobs Baby steps.
Government could actually help create jobs by cutting their administrative positions and dropping unnecessary fees/regulations for businesses. Unfettered as such, businesses could afford to expand and take on new people. As it is now, some businesses can't afford to keep employees on during the off-season (outdoor construction), if they don't outright shut down.
There's only one reason businesses can't afford to take on new employees - Lack of sales.
There's only one reason businesses don't keep employees on during the off-season - Lack of sales.
There's only one reason businesses shut down - Lack of sales.

Reducing fees and regulations ain't going to increase sales. Reducing them may be a good idea but it doesn't attack the core problem in all failing businesses. On the other hand creating jobs, specifically in the sector of people who have the highest marginal propensity to consume will have the greatest benefit for businesses due to increased market potential and sales. This in turn will keep more people in the retail and service industries employed, creating higher demand for white collar workers to manage them.
2010-02-25 18:00:53
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5644|London, England

DrunkFace wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

The price tag is small. I really don't see what the big deal is. Government isn't supposed to create jobs anyway. At least they stopped funding all the union state jobs Baby steps.
Government could actually help create jobs by cutting their administrative positions and dropping unnecessary fees/regulations for businesses. Unfettered as such, businesses could afford to expand and take on new people. As it is now, some businesses can't afford to keep employees on during the off-season (outdoor construction), if they don't outright shut down.
There's only one reason businesses can't afford to take on new employees - Lack of sales.
There's only one reason businesses don't keep employees on during the off-season - Lack of sales.
There's only one reason businesses shut down - Lack of sales.

Reducing fees and regulations ain't going to increase sales. Reducing them may be a good idea but it doesn't attack the core problem in all failing businesses. On the other hand creating jobs, specifically in the sector of people who have the highest marginal propensity to consume will have the greatest benefit for businesses due to increased market potential and sales. This in turn will keep more people in the retail and service industries employed, creating higher demand for white collar workers to manage them.
Sounds like trickle down economics to me
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2010-02-25 19:30:23
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|6961|Canberra, AUS

JohnG@lt wrote:

DrunkFace wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:


Government could actually help create jobs by cutting their administrative positions and dropping unnecessary fees/regulations for businesses. Unfettered as such, businesses could afford to expand and take on new people. As it is now, some businesses can't afford to keep employees on during the off-season (outdoor construction), if they don't outright shut down.
There's only one reason businesses can't afford to take on new employees - Lack of sales.
There's only one reason businesses don't keep employees on during the off-season - Lack of sales.
There's only one reason businesses shut down - Lack of sales.

Reducing fees and regulations ain't going to increase sales. Reducing them may be a good idea but it doesn't attack the core problem in all failing businesses. On the other hand creating jobs, specifically in the sector of people who have the highest marginal propensity to consume will have the greatest benefit for businesses due to increased market potential and sales. This in turn will keep more people in the retail and service industries employed, creating higher demand for white collar workers to manage them.
Sounds like trickle down economics to me
is there actually a problem with his logic?
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
2010-02-25 19:35:29
SealXo
Member
+309|6822
trickle down economics is how the free market/capitalism work.

obama laughs at the phrase.

therefore, obama hates the free market.

and even if you gave every person in the US a 600$ 'tax credit', theyre most likely going to pay bills with it.

my resolution is spend less, save more. if the dollar didn't take a 20% hit people would be better off. If AIG wasn't bailed out cuz of the good ol boys club at goldman/the whitehouse, wed be better off. if we eliminated medicare and medicade fraud - wed be better off. if we eliminated government employee fraud/waste, wed be perfect

Nation Suicide by Martin L Gross- excellent book on government waste by the way as are all of his books

Keynesian economics by FDR clearly failed, because we never got out of the hole. and now that were at the bottom of the hole, digging deeper isnt going to get us out either.

if the federal governemnt didnt own 70% of the state aka the colony of alaska and dub the land a wildlife reserve even though its a tundra oil and natural gas wasteland, we would be energy independent.  more money in the hands of americans

Last edited by SealXo (2010-02-25 19:41:06)

2010-02-25 19:40:48
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5644|London, England

Spark wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

DrunkFace wrote:


There's only one reason businesses can't afford to take on new employees - Lack of sales.
There's only one reason businesses don't keep employees on during the off-season - Lack of sales.
There's only one reason businesses shut down - Lack of sales.

Reducing fees and regulations ain't going to increase sales. Reducing them may be a good idea but it doesn't attack the core problem in all failing businesses. On the other hand creating jobs, specifically in the sector of people who have the highest marginal propensity to consume will have the greatest benefit for businesses due to increased market potential and sales. This in turn will keep more people in the retail and service industries employed, creating higher demand for white collar workers to manage them.
Sounds like trickle down economics to me
is there actually a problem with his logic?
Absolutely not. It's just been labeled 'voodoo economics' by the Democrats in the US
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2010-02-25 19:42:48
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5644|London, England

SealXo wrote:

trickle down economics is how the free market/capitalism work.

obama laughs at the phrase.

therefore, obama hates the free market.

and even if you gave every person in the US a 600$ 'tax credit', theyre most likely going to pay bills with it.

my resolution is spend less, save more. if the dollar didn't take a 20% hit people would be better off. If AIG wasn't bailed out cuz of the good ol boys club at goldman/the whitehouse, wed be better off. if we eliminated medicare and medicade fraud - wed be better off. if we eliminated government employee fraud/waste, wed be perfect

Nation Suicide by Martin L Gross- excellent book on government waste by the way as are all of his books

Keynesian economics by FDR clearly failed, because we never got out of the hole. and now that were at the bottom of the hole, digging deeper isnt going to get us out either.

if the federal governemnt didnt own 70% of the state aka the colony of alaska and dub the land a wildlife reserve even though its a tundra oil and natural gas wasteland, we would be energy independent.  more money in the hands of americans
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2010-02-25 20:04:59
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|6961|Canberra, AUS
trickle down economics is how the free market/capitalism work.

obama laughs at the phrase.

therefore, obama hates the free market.
speaking of logic...

Keynesian economics by FDR clearly failed, because we never got out of the hole. and now that were at the bottom of the hole, digging deeper isnt going to get us out either.
and this makes absolutely no sense to me at all. wasn't the "golden period" of american economic growth after fdr's policies were implemented?
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
2010-02-25 20:11:25
SealXo
Member
+309|6822
ww2

most of the shit he passed was ineffective and or deemed unconstitutional

Last edited by SealXo (2010-02-25 20:11:57)

2010-02-25 20:17:05
Flaming_Maniac
prince of insufficient light
+2,490|6993|67.222.138.85
Your most recent statements are a minefield of logical fallacies.

1 - Assuming all else true, Keynes by FDR failed. Not the economic theory as a whole. By any standard the political implementation was weak at best.

2 - WW2 dragging us out of the Great Depression doesn't mean Keynesian economics failed.

3 - We clearly did get out of the hole. It even looked like things were getting better well before WWII - but then as soon as things began to look up, the White House immediately switched back to the old way of thinking and undid all the progress they had made.

4 - The free market works with zero government intervention. Hence "free". Trickle down economics is not "how capitalism works".

 

Pages: 1 2

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard