These guys are such fucking fakes,first of all,they claim to be "Alternative Media" when they have that globalist money gurbbing Al Gore endorsing them,then they claim to be "the biggest alternative media on the internet" when it's a fact that Alex Jones and many others are WAY bigger...what fucking jokes,just corporate news spin offs.
Lucky thing republicans don't remember very well. I suppose anybody who doesn't feel patronized by FOX "news" would believe shit like jcmartinez87 believes.
This Cenk guy doesn't know what the hell he's talking about. The budget was never balanced under the Clinton administration nor was a surplus created. The National Debt went up every year while Clinton was in office. How is that possible with surpluses? Most idiots like Cenk don't understand that the national debt is comprised of two parts: the Public Debt and Intra-Governmental Debt. The two balanced out did NOT create a surplus. Clinton only reported the numbers from the Public Debt.
@fanadfilms Yeah it was a BUDGET surplus retard, meaning that if Bush hadn't cut taxes, he would have inhereted a 300 billion dollar surplus from Clinton in his first year. Obama on the other hand, according to the CBO in jan. 09, inhereted a 1.2 trillion dollar deficit from bush if no aditional legislation was passed. The actual deficit for 2009 was 1.4T. Sorry kid, you are, like most conservatards, ass backwards wrong.
@durhamdf Wow, Retard is the best you have? Didn't get the memo that it was all BS and that had Clinton been in the private sector, he'd have gone to federal prison for cooking the books? There was no surplus. Look at the debt. It went up every year of Clinton's presidency. If you go to Treasury Direct, you'll see that the debt increased under Clinton. Ergo, since the debt increased, we borrowed; if we borrowed, there was no surplus. Kid? Suck your Dumocrat ass.
@fanadfilms not true at all, Cenk is a Liberal, he is constantly finding fault with the moderate democrats. I think he is living in fairyland as well, but on this point he is dead on. I am a true fiscal conservative (and a social liberal) and it drives me crazy hearing these "conservatives" complain about our runaway national debt when over the past decade they doubled the national debt after a decade of unsustainable growth when they should have been paying it down and deflating bubbles!
@durhamdf Dude, go to the Treasury web site and see what the debt was. If the debt was increasing, which it was (with the exception of one year), you can't have a surplus. I've talked to many economists and the laugh at the Myth of the Clinton Surplus. Hell, the guy lied about everything; why would you believe him on this?
@fanadfilms Cenk is constantly giving Obama shit, like most liberals, for not keeping his campaign promises especially when it comes to foreign policy or for moving too slow/too timid in executing these policies to make good on campaign promises. I a not trying to argue that Cenk isn't coming from a consistently liberal point of view (he is). I am just saying that in this instance he is dead on, Bush inhereted a budget surplus, Obama inhereted a 1.2 T budget deficit and a massive recession.
@durhamdf There WAS no surplus. Clinton INCREASED the debt. If the debt INCREASED, there cannot have been a surplus. When I heard him announce it, I knew he was lying. And vis-a-vis this great recession. that was caused by Carter/Clinton and the CRA, and the Democrats bullying banks into making loans they never should have made. Read Meltdown by Thomas E. Woods, Jr.
@fanadfilms Let me explain this terms even you can understand. When Bush took office, with the budget that Clinton left him and without any additional legislation spending or cutting taxes Bush would have had a 300 billion dollar surplus in his first year in office. He took that budget surplus and ran up 8 straight years of deficits adding ~5 trillion to the national debt. When Obama took office, without any additional spending legislation the budget deficit would have been 1.2 Trillion (CBO).
@fanadfilms Let me explain this in terms even YOU can understand. Go to treasury direct d o t g o v
You can see that the debt increased. There was no surplus. Additionally, if there was ever a surplus, it should have been immediately applied to the principal on the debt. It was not. It's a great big canard (that's LIE for you poorly educated) . Clinton lied all the time. He never told the truth. He's incapable of telling the truth.
@fanadfilms kid are you retarded? Did you read my comment? Try and keep up little boy. IF BUSH HADN'T INCREASED SPENDING OR LOWERED TAXES IN HIS FIRST YEAR THE BUDGET HE INHERETED WOULD HAVE GIVEN HIM A 300 BILLION DOLLAR SURPLUS( CBO). BUT HE LOWERED TAXS/INCREASED SPENDING SO THIS SURPLUS NEVER HAPPENED. When Obama took office without any additional spending or tax cuts, the deficit would have been 1.2 Trillion dollars (CBO). Jesus kid take one macroeconomics class QUICK!
@durhamdf You know, fucktard, if you were saying this shit to my face, you wouldn't have one. You're a fucking idiot. BUSH HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS ARGUMENT, you fucking asshole!!! There was no surplus to inherit. You're a fucking idiot. Go the fuck away, bitch!!!
@fanadfilms lol look out everyone, an internet tough guy. Apparently basic logic and reason isn't your strong suit. When Bush left office, he left a budget that would have produced a $1.2 Trillion dollar deficit in Obama's first year if no legislation was passed under Obama. When Clinton left office, he left Bush a budget that WOULD have given Bush a $300 billion dollar surplus if Bush hadn't cut taxes/increased spending. This isn't my opinion retard it is a fact that you could easily look up!
@durhamdf Look, moron, you are fighting the info from leading economists, not from me. And you're the idiot who can't stop using ad hominem attacks. There was NO surplus. Saying it over and over won't make it so. And I have looked it up. I went to the government web site that tracks the National Debt. The Debt went up EVERY year but one under Clinton. There can be no surplus.
@fanadfilms lol I am an econ major fucknuts, I have a much better understanding of mainstream (keynesian) economics than your retarded ass. For the 50th time, there was no ACTUAL surplus because bush cut taxes/ increased spending. IF HE HADN'T DONE THIS HE WOULD HAVE HAD A 300 BILLION DOLLAR SURPLUS. Obama on the other hand inhereted a 1.2 Trillion dollar deficit even if he had vetoed every piece of legislation in his first year. Sorry kid, you're ass backwards wrong, stop wasting my time
@durhamdf Hey, fucktard, I don't give a shit about your major. Having been through college, I know that when you're in college, you don't know shit. And I get my info from major Austrian economists with whom I'm acquainted. I think, since they have PhD's, they probably know more about this shit than your collegiate ass.
Clinton did not have a surplus. It never happened. They were robbing SS to get money and using GovBonds to make it appear to be a surplus. You're an idiot.
@fanadfilms Yeah I am sure coming from whatever clown college you attended you probably still "don't know shit"! WHo are these austrian economist? What university do they work for? Because last time I checked only a hand full of clown colleges even teach the Austrain schools retarded philosophies. Retard, Clinton left Bush a budget that would have produced a 300 billion dollar surplus, but this surplus never happened because conervatard Bush cut taxes/ increased spending at the worst time!
@durhamdf You think just restating the same BS will make it true? Why not talk to people at the Von Mises Institute. They'll tell you what an idiot you are. People like Tom Woods, Tom DiLorenzo and Walter Block will tell you what you don't know.
@fanadfilms HAHAHAHH yeah mises institute, thank you for proving my point! LOL every single school that teaches Autrian Economics is a clown college like Mises and a hand full of city colleges in the deep south! WHy don't you stick to the standard austrian response and just say it is a conspiracy! aHHAHAH. Just look it up little girl, If Bush hadn;t cut taxes/increased spending in his first year his Clinton's budget would have produced a 300 billion surplus. Unfortunately Bush failed econ101
@durhamdf It's not worth talking to you at this point. I can see that you are blinded by Keynesian Economics and that makes you foolish. It was a Keynesian model that gave us the Great Depression, and the current insanity. Later, loser. Please don't teach.
@fanadfilms HAHAHHAHAH jesus kid you are a fucking moron! Keynesian economics didn't exist before the great depression fucktard. THe classical economists (Austrians fall in this category) were in charge all throughout the 19th and early 20th centuries and we had 7 depression with full blown bank runs/ failures and market panics during their rule. Since Keynesian economics was sddopted as the mainstream (well after the great depression) we haven't had a single depression or financial collapse!
@durhamdf Listen, you fucking childish asshole. I know it didn't exist in Name, but it did in practice. You are fucking obtuse moron, just like your C@cksucking idiot that runs this particular channel.
@fanadfilms NO before keynesian economcs came into the mainstream it was the classical free market economists that were in control. It was the 7 depressions from 1819 to the great depression, under the watch of the free market economists, that caused the rise of the idea of a strong Fed exercising expansionary monetary policy to lessen then impacts of recessions and prevent them from turning into full blown depresssions (i.e. keynesian economics). Get your history straight buddy...
@durhamdf Listen, dick-breath, kid I am not. You're fucking communist prick. How's the president's cock taste? Or is that a state secret? h t t p : / / mises . org / books / panic1819. pdf
@fanadfilms lol Mises was a moron, that is why his school is a fucking clown college! Wow mises university, you could get a job at IHOP with a degree from that fine institution! The only schools that promote the Keynesian theories are Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Cornell, Brown, USC, California, Stanford, georgetown, etc... Maybe grow a brain yourself and maybe open up a fucking history book and learn that the Austrians lost this argument 70 years ago and have lived in obscurity ever since!
@durhamdf No, dude, he was a great man, and a great intellect. It's the people like you who fall into the moron camp. It's like the idiots who think that Lincoln was great, and FDR fixed the country. You're all out of your freaking minds.
@fanadfilms Lol my guess is you are just another neo con retard who is dissilusioned with the laundry list of failures of your party over the previous decade. I on the other hand was an econ major who briefly studied the neoclassical economists like Hayek and Mises. Hayek was a smart guy although I dissagree with most of his positions. Mises was a fascist, barely an economist (no degree in economics) and a fucking moron. This is why you won't see any of his works taught in any major universities
@durhamdf Yeah, that's exactly what i am. You morons love to just call people names, put them in certain camps, because it makes it easier not to deal with your own stupidity. I'm a long-time member of the LP and work closely on campaigns for office. When America wakes up, it might be too late because morons like you keep lying to them. Asshole.
@durhamdf My guess is that you didn't take your smart pills today, or ever. But, again, as most of you are, you're always wrong. I'm not a neocon or a Republican. I was, in fact, a Democrat, but Carter cured me and I went to the only logical party, the Libertarian Party. And since you're a socialist/Marxist/Communist, you couldn't possibly understand the concept of freedom. See, freedom doesn't require a government; your side does. I think you're the NeoCons.
@fanadfilms HAHAHH and you are the kind of retard that thinks socialism/marxism/and communism are the same thing! You are even worse than a neo con, you're a plutocrat, an anarcho capitalist, a corporate fascist. You have absolutely no concept of economic theory or history. That's why you go around saying retarded things like Keynesians caused the great depression when keynesian economics didn't exist for another decade. Sorry fucktard, crawl back into whatever hole you came from like a good boy
@durhamdf Oh, you had to go there. All are similar hands clothed in the same glove. You know, truly, if you were in front of me, I'd just have to smack you for GP. You're a stone-cold idiot. You make me Zzzzzzzzz. As for the Keynesians, the term had not been coined, you fuck-head, but that doesn't mean they didn't do the same things. Relativity existed before Einstein coined the term. You people are so stupid. All you can do is throw divisive shit around like NeoCons, or Righties. whatever.
Respond to this video... You don't even have the courage to put your face there. You don't put your location. You hide everything except your stupidity.
@fanadfilms lol my name is my username fucktard either respond to something I said or shut the fuck up and troll your retarded misunderstandings of mainstream economic theory elsewhere
@fanadfilms and your a little troll with absolutely no understanding of ANY economic theories...seriously go take some community college courses in macroeconomics because you sound like a fucking retard. You are the reason the rest of the world thinks all Americans are a bunch of inbred hicks. THANKS!
@durhamdf Just fuck off, cunt. You're boring me. It's you Keynesians who are ruining the world and complaining that the Austrians are wrong. I study with smart economists, like Woods, DiLorenzo and Block. Your philosphy got us into this mess. How the fuck do you think doing the same thing will get us out? I'm Irish, fuckhead. Where are you from? Fantasy Fagland?
@fanadfilms "I study with smart economists, like Woods, DiLorenzo and Block" You are 30 and go to a third rate piece of shit university like Mises U? HAHAH and yes I had to google those names, I had no clue,just like 99% of the economic community, who those retards were. Your philosophy got us a depression every 20 years in the 19th century and a non-existant middle class. Keynesian philosophy has brought us 0 depression or bank runs and turned us into the undisputed economic hegemon fucktard!
@durhamdf I graduated in 1981, sperm breath. And it was UCLA. You probably go to Cock Sucker U. You had to google their names because you have your face buried in some fags ass too much.
Fuckhead, it was Keynesians BS that gave us the Great Depression. The Depression of 1920 was worse and solved in a year because of Austrian thinking. You really are stupid. Where are you from? Dumbshitastan?
@fanadfilms You keep making a retard of yourself little boy. So you went to UCLa but now you "study" with the mises institute? LOL! Do you mean you watch a bunch of mises institute youtube videos? Because that isn't "studying with smart economists"! HAHAHA. Secondly, again fucktard, open up a history book, Keynesian economics didn't exist until the 40's. You went to UCLA and when people clown your retarded ass you call them fags? Nobody believes you little boy, keep spewing bullshit it's funny
@durhamdf You clueless dick head. I studied music in college. You don't have to go to college to study. College is highly over-rated. "And Two, you dropped a hundred and fifty grand on a fuckin education you coulda got for a dollah fifty in late chahges at the public library" Good Will Hunting. Again, ignorant fuck, just because a term hasn't been coined, doesn't mean that the thing didn't exist. Relativity existed before Einstein coined the term. You're an idiot.
@fanadfilms SHHH little boy, I think it is past your bed time anyways. The kid who thinks keynesians are responsible for a depression that occurred a decade before their existence is telling me to open up a history book! LOL! Keep flapping your mouth about things you don't understand, you keep exposing yourself as a complete moron every time you open your mouth
@durhamdf Are you brain damaged? And I'd shut your fucking shit mouth, you cunt. As I said, you fucking idiot, simply because something has not been named, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Like stupid. Let's say no one called it stupid before you displayed all the signs? Simply because they haven't named it stupid, doesn't mean you are not stupid. You clearly are.
@fanadfilms Half of keynesian economics is monetary policy which is impossible with a gold standard fucktard. The classical economists were in charge all throughout the 19th century and into the early 20th centuries and gave us 7 depression with bank runs/failures and massive deflation. If keynesians were in charge during the great depression then why did we have spiraling deflation and why did govt. spending go down from 35' on? Exactly, you don't have a fucking clue what you are talkign about.
@durhamdf That first sentence, you cock sucker, shows your complete ignorance of economics. You don't understand the efficacy of gold. All those depressions were caused by GOVERNMENT, you idiot. Stop contacting me. You're too stupid. Where are you from, dickhead?
The Great Depression was CAUSED by government, not by the private sector. The Depression of 1920 ended because government GOT OUT OF THE WAY!!! Fuck off.
@fanadfilms Sorry buddy, my guess is you were a neo con untill 3 years ago when your parties massive failures finally culminated in the greatest recession since the great depression. And hey fucktard, how could the fed exercise expansionary monetary policy when there was no liquidity of treasuries since the govt. couldn't borrow more than it could pay back in gold reserves. That is why we had massive deflation little one. The roaring 20's=free market chaos resulting in the great depression!
@durhamdf My guess is that you have the IQ of a fly. Only marxist socialists would even use such an arcane term. And anyone who knows me knows that I am a true supporter of liberty. I would be loathed to impress men and women into military service in foreign wars to meet my political objectives. Taxes would be all but non-existence under my leadership. So, you show yourself to be a stupid shit. I'm a Libertarian and was a Democrat. BTW, it's party's (possessive), not parries (plural). Dumb.
@fanadfilms Lol what are you babbling about now? Everyone is a libertarian all the sudden, the second the GOP shits the bed...what a weird coincidence... Do you know what marxism or socialism is dipshit? Because they aren't the same thing. It would be like calling you a libertarian fascist... Sorry buddy, you are following a tiny fringe minority (austrian flunkies) who have been so embarrassed by their centuries of failures that their philosophy is only taught at a hand full of clown colleges!
@durhamdf Dickhead, I'm not in the GOP. I'm a libertarian. It's not a fad. I joined in 1982. Were you even alive then? And stop playing a semantic game, you cunt. Austrian Economics has been proven right. Keynesians are totally repudiated. Look at what's happening now. This is Keynesianism at work, and it's leading to Bankruptcy and hyperinflation. What the US is going to suffer, what Europe IS suffering, is Keynesian.
@fanadfilms HAHAHhA yeah Austrian economics has been "proven right" that is why no real universities teach that retarded bullshit!!! LOL and Keynesian economics, AGAIN, has only given us a middle class capable of buying the products they create, and turned the U.S. from a middle of the ground lead economy to the undisputed economic hegemon. That is why Keynesian economics is taught at every major university and is practiced by every central bank for the last 50 years! Now run along fucktard
@durhamdf There are many universities who teach it. However, most universities are liberal wastelands. Braindead professors (met too many of those) who just cruise through till retirement. You are a moron. This economy is on life support. It's only a matter of time till we default and our currency is retired as the world reserve currency (MAD depression caused by Keynesians). I'd love to glove up with you. You'd go down, bitch.
@fanadfilms LOL so many you can't even list one! LOL Yeah Mises Institute, Liberty University, a handful of city colleges! What a collection of respected institutions! Does the conservatard fear education? LOL Thought you went to UCLA (bullshit)? What economic theory do yo think they teach there fucktard?! You make all Americans sound like morons! THANKS! FYI I have trained 8 years of Muay Thai with Fairtex I would take great pleasure in knocking every last tooth out of your hillbilly mouth.
Just because it's not taught everywhere doesn't prove a thing. There is a lot of false history in our text books and economics philosophy is questionable. Entirely all mainstream Keynesian economist couldn't foresee the economic collapse like others did. They didn't see the collapse of the bretton woods. Keynesian philosophy is young and is being debunked! You fuckin zombie
@baydood510 It doesn't prove by itself that Austrian Economics is clown shoes b/c it is only taught at a handful of clown colleges, but it is a pretty good indication of that fact. And when you connect the fact that no reputable universties teach the garbage to the massive historical failures of classical economics, bank runs/failures. massive financial panics, depressions every 20 years, a non-existent middle class etc..it is pretty obvious that AE is a joke. (contd)...
@baydood510 (contd)...If it wasn't widely accepted in the economic comunity that the Austrian School is a fucking joke used by anarcho capitalist plutocrats as justification for their policies that protect the rich and grind the poor and middle class under the wheels of "progress" then it would be taught at major universities around the globe, plain and simple.
@durhamdf You didn't say shit! In the end they coudn't predict any of the recessions and could not point out exactly what was wrong with our monetary policy. All you say is, "there not credible, drrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr" . yea, yea anarcho capitalist, we love the rich, no university accepts us... (BTW US BERKELEY is considering adding free market econ classes). Your hurt cause your getting a worthless econ degree...haha
@baydood510 Adding a single class is MUCH different than a program! Sorry, Keynesians have been in charge for ~70 years now. In that time we created a middle class capable of buying the products we make, had ZERO depressions and went from a middle ground developed economy to the undisputed economic world leader.Probably why the every other lead economy switched to KE. To sum up, AE gave us depressions/poverty, KE made us the undisputed lead economy/built our middle class based consumer society.
@durhamdf Adding a class, is saying a lot. Other than that, most of what your asserting is debatable. the depression was not caused by AE, the fed caused the depression. The middle class exploded in the 19th century BEFORE the FED and before KE! Your not adding world war 1/2, our military might, and the fact before KE, we already established the world reserve currency. A lot of your history on the great depression is fucked up.
@fanadfilms That guy your arguing with is an idiot. He's just mad he is taking a worthless major, and which all his mainstream professors were clueless on the economic collapse's (bretton woods, stock, housing bubble etc).
@baydood510 LOL and you are the little boy who saw a ron paul video on the Austrian School and now thinks he is an expert. Get a clue retard, I made 80K my 3rd year out of school in the middle of the worst recession since the great depression...real worthless degree....Seriously little boy, run along because you make yourself look like a complete retard everytime you open your mouth and a steady stream of diarrhea comes spewing out.
@durhamdf Ron paul? the only politician who warned about he economic collapse and pin pointed the exact reason why? He has been right for 30 years. I'm becoming an EE which has real value and i would like to attend a free market university for my masters... I guess i'm done wasting my time with you, because all you will say is "Its not credible" and many other red herring fallacys. Have a good one! ron paul 2012!
@baydood510 Ron Paul didn't predict a thing. He isn't an economists, he has never taken an economics course in his life. He is a country doctor! It would be like asking Bernanke to check you for prostate cancer! The fact that you retards see these non-economists (ron paul, peter schiff, etc...) as your messiahs shows how moronic your camp is. It also shows that AE isn't a economic movement, it is a political movement. It is just the retarded justifications of anarcho capitalism and plutocracy
@baydood510 He did as all austrian school flunkies do and for the last 30 yrs he predicted the collapse of our financial institutions. It was only a matter of time before the natural downturn of the business cycle would make him look at least somewhat correct and luckily he has you retards to be amazed when this happens. I predict huge growth, now if the economy grows any time in the next 30 years my prediciton will be right! LOL and still waiting for the dollar to collapse and gold to hit 10K
@durhamdf "predicted the collapse of our financial institutions" Umm yeah, my point exactly. Ben Stein etc and the rest of the MSM couldn't see it coming. So much for KE credibility. Somewhat correct? He predicted it exactly on video, look it up retard. I predict huge growth within the next thirty years too? You should have taken public speaking because all you do is spew fallacies. And i am waiting for the collapse as well, although i hope you know it can be stalled further. RP2012 bitch
@baydood510 Ben Stein isn't an economist either little boy. I am guessing you have gotten all your education on this subject from a couple of Youtube videos I have seen as well. Again, everyone with any economic education whatsoever understood that the growth in the housing market during the 00's was unsustainable. See fortune magazine 2002 issue "housing the next bubble". What people didn't know was the effect on the banks and financial industry. Ron paul and his anarcho capitalist (contd)...
@baydood510 (contd)...buddies have been screaming that the sky is falling and the world is coming to an end for the past 30 years! And his prediction for this recession which has turned out to be MUCH milder than depressions we have faced in the past, was that the dollar would collapse, u.s. treasuries would become worthless and gold would hit 10K. Gold stagnated at 1,800, the dollar is strong especially compared to the euro, and demand for u.s. treasuries never slowed for a minute! (contd)...
@baydood510 (contd)...Sorry kid, Paul will never be president as reflected by his shitty approval rating even among republicans. Deregulation got us into this mess, how do you retards think it will get us out? And only BS economist make predicitions, Very few trained economists make predictions beyond a few months since the massive aggregates and billions of variables make them shitty guesses at best. It should tell you something that your economic heros don't have any training in economics! LOL
@durhamdf Well you said a lot. You don't consider the euro crises and how that circumstance is what attracts our treasuries. All in all....lets see what happens. Peace
@baydood510 Or maybe it is that traditionally in times of economic turmoil the world invests in what are considered "risk free" u.s. treasuries. The problem with the wait and see attitude is that the tea bagger congrssional freshman and the GOP have blocked any and all fiscal policy since 2010. What we are seeing now is austerity, billions of dollars of govt. cuts at the state and local level. The same sort of austerity that sent us spiraling back into the great depression in 37'.
@durhamdf you still didnt answer anything. you never do. you just restate your bullshit and demagogue everything. "ron paul said something and its not Exactly the same thing word for word, figure for figure." BS. We haven't even recovered, our debt to GDP just hit 100. You fucking slave zombie idiot. i hope there is a block...
@baydood510 HAHAHAHH not exactly word for word? Do you realize what the collapse of the dollar and u.s. treasuries would mean?! We are talking about the difference between predicting the end of our economy as we know it and the reality of a relatively mild recession. Again, you don't see any real economists making these kinds of retarded predictions because the market has way to many variables for these guesses to be useful. Japan debt to GDP=200%...nobody is trying to claim they are bankrupt...
@durhamdf Mild recession? HAHAHA. Japan also doesn't have huge trade deficits, they still have a manufacturing economy. predicting everything will be okay is just as reckless as predicting it will sink. HAHA talk about contradicting.
@baydood510 Why does it matter if Japan has a strong manufacturing sector? THey still have a debt to GDP ratio that is double our own! And yes, compared to the depressions of the 19th and early 20th century under the classical economic flunkies this recession is relatively mild! We don't see bank runs, massive deflationary spirals, 30% unemployment etc! Again, the point is, ROn Paul is an alarmist moron who predicted the dollar would collapse and U.S. treasuries would become worthless. 0 for 2!
@durhamdf It benefits them or else they would be worse with there decades of economic stagflation. There haven't been banks that gone under since the recession? Now again, Is bank of america not looking hopeless? Have the feds not bailed out trillions to commercial and central banks? unemployment is >10% and that is low balling it. The recession is NOT over, you cant be a real economist. ron paul says the debt, spending is unsustainable. Not that its over NOW? Your deceptive and unreliable.
@baydood510 B of A posted 6 billion in profits for Q3 in 2011...that is a far cry from when the free market economists of the 19th century were in charge and we had major banks failing every 20 years with full blown bank runs! Unemployment is at 8.6%, where do you get your numbers buddy,? You are trying to argue that a depression every 20 years under you laissez faire cranks was more stable than 0 depressions in the ~70 years that Keynesian economics has been mainstream? LOL! (contd)...
@baydood510 (contd)... and anyways, most of this crisis is due to the exact policies you anarcho capitalists have been calling for. That is the repeal of glass steagall and the passing of the CFMA under Bush that led to the creation of tiny mortgage companies that were responsible for half of the Liars Loans that went belly up in 07' & 08'. Now you cranks are suggesting we double down on those same moronic policies, that by the way led to the slowest decade of growth in 50 years!
@durhamdf Lol. You cant speak for them all douche and anarcho capitalist in general are not against reinstating glass steagall act.(ron voted agianst btw) besides, there was widespread fraud during the housing bubble/crisis. fraud is illegal, yet it wasn't prosecuted. if they won't prosecute wall street banks for fraud what makes you think they'll enforce these little, arbitrary regulations?You have no idea what is going on with BofA. ahaha keep watching TV and getting your figures from them
@baydood510 (CONT) btw the glass steagall argument is a red herring. Ofcourse you need glass steagall if you give banks that much power in the first place!! u con job..
@baydood510 So true. He bashes Austrian Economics while extolling the "virtues" of Keynesians. Only an idiot would do that with all the evidence that Keynesians have destroyed us. They've lead us to the precipice of disaster and they can't even see the edge. They won't even know it after they fall in.
@fanadfilms "Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all." – Frederic Bastiat
I think Jefferson was a Republican. He decided to trade-with but not fight for Napoleon. He ran a balanced federal budget. I guess the answer is: 200 years ago.
@Salvysahagun Actually Fannie/Freddie were completely liberal owned and were hands off to any sort of repair by interested people, we can thank the 'banking queen' and his buddy doddsie for that :/
@Drumboy5165 Right at the 1:00 mark, he just makes a blanket statement saying the collapse was brought to us by Republicans, I literally laughed out loud. I think Frank and Dodd had maybe a teenie tiny thing or two to do with it. This pundit is kind of a d-bag.
ALEX JONES CHANNEL BARRY SOETORO LIED!! OBL DIED IN 01 Jerome Corsi: Corsi To File Criminal Charges Against White House Over Obama Birth Certificate 1/4 YOU ARE DONE!!!!!! Obama Birth Certificate Faked In Adobe Illustrator - Official Proof 1 ( Layers ) orangegold1 PRESSCORE DOT CA SEARCH HAARP , SCALAR WEAPONS, AND DIGISONDE. THEY ARE DESTROYING THE FOOD SUPPLY, AND CAUSED FUKUSHIMA.> Japan Tsunami Fukushima Nuclear Disaster 2/2- Leuren Moret - PDX HT TP WELLAWARE1 COM RON PAUL 2012 !!!
... a foundation of cowardice: fear of people with colors, religions, cultures and sex lives that differ from your own; fear of reform in banking, health care, energy; fantasy fears of America being transformed into an Islamic nation, into social/commun/fasc-ism, into a disarmed populace put in internment camps; and more. ... “An open letter to conservatives” tpmcafe talkingpointsmemo
@olzt100 The Federal Reserve prints money, which the constitution does not allow. I understand about CDOs -- 'Inside Job' is a great movie btw! Regardless of bank size, the fall of Bear Stearns & Lehman Brothers was supposedly "so awful" that we HAD TO rescue JP Morgan, AIG & Goldman. I realize it would have created havoc, but they are PRIVATE BUSINESSES, and nobody was helping the troubled homeowners... while THEY raked in giant bonuses!! If the banks were too big to fail, who made them so?
@lemonmagnolia The constitution does not have anything to do with the printing of money. The constitution defines the powers of the federal government, but not neccessarily their limits in all cases. Actually the real key in the banking fiasco was that the loans that were resold as financial instruments were guranteed by the government. The problem was that the private sector sold billions of dollars of loans it would not have approved if the private sector had to hold the loans to maturity.
I'm tired of this "clinton had a 127 billion dollar surplus". that's a big myth. just look at the tricks clinton used when he reported the supposed surplus. in fact, bill clinton increased the national debt every year when he was in office.
2000: 5,674,178,209,886.86
1993: 4,411,488,883,139.38 I'd like to see democrats explain that. Btw, I am not a bush apologist. clinton was bad with the economy, but bush was a lot worse
Obama said in 2006, "increasing America's debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Instead, Obama has increased the national debt to 14 trillion up from 8.2 trillion when he took office. Now Obama said his vote to not raise the debt ceilling back when he was a senator was a mistake and wants Congress to increase the debt on the backs of our children and grandchildren. Obama also said that "leadership means that 'the buck stops here.".
-‘Corporate funded revisionism’- the Reagan legacy was created largely by Washington conservatives in the 1990s, to counter the successes of Bill Clinton’s Admin.
~
From the Heritage Institute, by Steve Forbes second generation heir to Forbes Mag., Pete Coors, heir of the Coors beer empire, and Richard Mellon Scaife, heir of the Mellon industrial and banking fortune, and the Koch Bros. heirs to Koch Industries ! ... New Robber Barons – the Baby Barons all inherited wealth...
Agenda —“drastically lower -‘their personal and corporate taxes’-, -minimal social services for the needy, -bust unions, -and much less oversight of industries -especially environmental regulation.”
-
Tear Down This Myth: How the Reagan Legacy Has Distorted Our Politics and Haunts Our Future by Will Bunch
Debt/Admin. - Jimmy Carter D 1977–1981_ [55 B$/yr]_ - Ronald Reagan R 1981–1989 [212 B$/yr] _ - George H. W. Bush R 1989–1993 [300 B$/yr] _ - Bill Clinton D 1993–2001 [150 B$/yr] _ - George W. Bush R 2005–2009 [750 B$/yr] _
Comparing apples and oranges, and getting prunes !
-
Never had the -‘exported Indust./Jobs factor’- as we do now ! US manufacturing have been exporting [10’s thousands] of plants. Are Amer. Investors really gonna take a chance ?
... once you have established ludicrous -‘Welfare to monopoly’- oil companies [100 yr.], Energy, Agri., corporate farms, chemical, pharmaceuticals, etc.-
Businesses are unlikely to gamble unless, they get into the Wealth-Fare, game - Too !!
Like Wall St.’s contribution to the housing scandal, [knowingly sold -‘shitty packages-‘] with AIG insuring them; the BIGGEST loosing element of Bush’s TARP and ESSA.
AIG is still faltering - at less than 1/10th of one percent, of what it was in 2000.
-
Investors sitting on trillions ... looking for other -‘fools-‘ to bankrupt, again, and again, and ... what’s the next scam ?
Resurgence of the -‘more moral than you’- ‘wedge issues gang/S’- obscuring logic and common sense; hypocritically contradicting the elimination of -‘real’- waste, fraud and abuse - corporate subsidies/Zero taxation [Wealth-Fare] !
To pay off WW2 debt Ike had the Max Tax Rate set at 91%
And this resulted in a Balanced Budget
Because the debt was being paid down & the budget balanced JFK felt comfortable cutting the Max Tax Rate to 70%
Today the debt is worse & the richest individuals are paying a lower tax rate than the middle-class & under these conditions JFK would NEVER recommend more tax cuts for the super-rich!
@DillonDee1 : No, Eisenhower balanced budgets by ending the Korean war and cutting military spending - which then made up some 3/4 of all federal spending, not tax hikes. Most Americans paid war-time tax all the way through 1964 (when JFK's taxcut was implemented during LBJ). Ike's balanced budget ended when his spending *went up* in 1958 while the war-time income tax remained the same.
The Super-Rich aren't defined as making more than 250,000 a year. Thats not wealthy. Millionaires and Billionaires make far more than 250,000 a year. Thats why they're billionaires. JFK believed in cutting taxes to stimulate the economy. He made a lengthly speech about this in late 1962. Once the tax cut was put into place in 1964, millions of jobs were created. JFK would never have advocated deficit spending like Obama does, and JFK would never have advocated slashing the military either.
@3dartistguy -- only 1.9% of the ppl make over $250k, but I too couint the super-rich as those making considerably more.
Look at the Forbes 400 & you'll see ppl who've more revenue in one day than most middle-class ppl make in a lifetime. And yet many are paying around 15%. in taxes
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
The president isn't talking about millionaries. Obama thinks a millionaire makes 250,000 or more a year. Thats not a millionaire or billionaire. Anywho, thats none of any bodies business. they earn that money. The president is talking about redistribution, and thats socialism. we are not a socialist country. They need to cut back on entitlements. raising taxes will make the economy worse because employers will cut back to make a profit. why do you think unemployment has skyrocketed under Obama?
Small business owners are middle class....when their taxes on their businesses go up, they cut back on personnel in order to make up their profit margin...it would be terribly unfair not only to small bussiness but also to people who need and want jobs. Obama doesn't realize that his talk of tax increases on small business affects employment. Unemployment has sky rocketed under his adminstration and again, the talk over raising taxes on small business is the result of that. thats UNFAIR.
@3dartistguy -- I've lived in about 10 Texas towns & known 100s of small businessmen & none of them was making over $250k per yr & even had they been making a bit more the proposed tax increase would only apply to the amt over $250k
@3dartistguy -- I have been the owner of a company w/ over 100 employees. For me to have received a tax cut would not make me hire another worker. Now tax cuts on the poor & middle-class would have increased demand for my products & cause me to employ more. Okay, you can return to you cubicle now.
@3dartistguy -- where there is welfare fraud there should be prosecution, but I do think a bigger problem is welfare kings - those doctors who file fraudulent claims
There are millions of young girls who delieberely get themselves pregnant to have a child just so they can get a welfare check....there was a case of one woman on the old Donahue show that admitted she had 19 children and openly bragged on national television that she had all those kids because they were income to her....
@3dartistguy -- If I recall correctly it was 14 kids, but anyway you could take all the women who've had kids to get more welfare & total up the amount & it still wouldn't come close to 1 welfare scam.
I'm talking about EXXON who made $15 Billion in 1 yr - so you'd expect them to pay $5 billion in income tax - but they paid ZERO & even received billions of our tax dollars & paid one Exec $500 million. Do you really believe EXXON headquarters is a PO BOX in the Caymans? .
Followed by 10 other -‘tax increases’, By 1987 They had completely reversed the tax cut, in the lowest tax bracket [raised it]; but continued the highest tax bracket cuts, from 70-28%. -- showing their true motives - -‘flatten the taxes’- for the wealthy - shifting the burden to the poorer..
The result 30 years of all the wealth gushing upward - 80% to the top 10%. -- Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1987 ...
That gigantic crash was not brought to you by the Republicons. Come on Cenk...you dumbass. Demorat/Republicon= same sh!@ different pile. Who brought that crash you might be wondering? Bill Clinton of coarssseee. What about this gigantic debt. Medicare, SS, Medicaid, and yes the military. Progressives really screwed us but so have the Republicons, and Autocrats.
WAKE UP and smell what CENKOFF is shoveling. Bi-partisan BS.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Pop quiz: How much money can the president spend? How much money can the president tax? The answer to both is zero. ALL spending and ALL taxing is the exclusive resposibilty and power of congress. You can look it up, it's right there in the constitution. Ironically for the young turk, in almost every example where he'd like to prove a point, the opposing party was in control of congress. Reagan had Dems, Clinton Republicans, both Bush's Dems, Eisenhower Dems, Obama Dems up till now.
@patrickolou - it's right there in the constitution ...-
-... deceptive ....
Reagan House Dem.s delivered budgets lower than he requested all 8 years and the Senate was Repub. 6 of 8 years
-
Clinton had a Dem majority when he initiated the tax increase that generated the jobs/surpluses; then Repub. won their majority in the House - lowered capital gains and left US in a recession.
Bush 1 did have Dem's against him; but enough Repub. in the Senate to cloture and filibuster; and the Veto pen as every pres. !
Bush 2 had a -'rubber stamp Congress for 6 years'-; both tax breaks mostly benefiting the wealthy, both wars, Medicare D - fuck-up, 700 B$ waste of down payments and closing cost for minority home loans that he promoted ... after they had already stated going belly-up ! Bush - can buy a home "even if you have bad credit" ... "as good a home as anybody else "
Obama ... Repub. Senate, cloture and filibustered 400+ bills passed by the House, and 100+ appointments .... 1st 2 years ... terribly compromised Health Care and Wall St. reform.
-
cloture and filibuster; and the Veto pen as every pres. !
Obama agreed to keep tax rates low back last december and the unemployment dropped 2 percent. Reagan and Kennedy both cut taxes which resulted in the highest job creation periods ever, more far than Clinton's tax and spend era ever did.
3dartistguy ... Obama agreed to keep tax rates .... the unemployment dropped ...
- B.S ... Are you hinting at a correlation ??? LOL nonsense ... Even though the first 8 years that [same 3% difference], did not create very many jobs - 2.5 M, unemply. grew ... was loosing over 700K jobs a month, when he left office. Now -‘a promise’- created a miracle.
3dartistguy ...Reagan cut taxes .... resulted in the highest job creation...
- double B.S ...
- Reagan cut taxes - Causing a 2 year recession [10.8% unempl. highest since the 1st Repub. Depression], then they initiated the “largest peacetime TAX INCREASE in US history” .... 1982 TEFRA, [National Review, WSJ, Forbes, Heritage Foundation, etc]
Followed by 10 other -‘tax increases’, By 1987 They had completely reversed the tax cut, in the lowest tax bracket [raised it]; but continued the highest tax bracket cuts, from 70-28%. -- showing their true motives - -‘flatten the taxes’- for the wealthy - shifting the burden to the poorer..
The result 30 years of all the wealth gushing upward - 80% to the top 10%. -- Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1987 ...
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@Trickle4321 : of the Fed, to fix the macroeconomic problem in late 70's, then later re-appointed by Reagan. Volcker's rate hikes (to 25% short-term interest rate hike) artificially created a brief recession, but ended a decade long malaise created by liberal excesses (or welfare & warfare state). The shift in the Fed's monetary policy from short-term rate policy (to accomodate libtards's welfare and warfare utopia) to mid-term policy led to macroeconomic stability (also known as "the Great
These guys are such fucking fakes,first of all,they claim to be "Alternative Media" when they have that globalist money gurbbing Al Gore endorsing them,then they claim to be "the biggest alternative media on the internet" when it's a fact that Alex Jones and many others are WAY bigger...what fucking jokes,just corporate news spin offs.
FredFan8 5 days ago
Lucky thing republicans don't remember very well. I suppose anybody who doesn't feel patronized by FOX "news" would believe shit like jcmartinez87 believes.
oeyesea 1 month ago
slander slander slander
MrMinyNuke 1 month ago
This Cenk guy doesn't know what the hell he's talking about. The budget was never balanced under the Clinton administration nor was a surplus created. The National Debt went up every year while Clinton was in office. How is that possible with surpluses? Most idiots like Cenk don't understand that the national debt is comprised of two parts: the Public Debt and Intra-Governmental Debt. The two balanced out did NOT create a surplus. Clinton only reported the numbers from the Public Debt.
jcmartinez87 2 months ago
The Republican Party.
Sucking slightly less than the other team since 1854.
NYerintransit 2 months ago
This Idiot cannot help lying. He's just balls to the walls stupid. He actually talks about the Clinton Surplus as if it existed. LOL.
fanadfilms 6 months ago
@fanadfilms Yeah it was a BUDGET surplus retard, meaning that if Bush hadn't cut taxes, he would have inhereted a 300 billion dollar surplus from Clinton in his first year. Obama on the other hand, according to the CBO in jan. 09, inhereted a 1.2 trillion dollar deficit from bush if no aditional legislation was passed. The actual deficit for 2009 was 1.4T. Sorry kid, you are, like most conservatards, ass backwards wrong.
durhamdf 6 months ago
@durhamdf Wow, Retard is the best you have? Didn't get the memo that it was all BS and that had Clinton been in the private sector, he'd have gone to federal prison for cooking the books? There was no surplus. Look at the debt. It went up every year of Clinton's presidency. If you go to Treasury Direct, you'll see that the debt increased under Clinton. Ergo, since the debt increased, we borrowed; if we borrowed, there was no surplus. Kid? Suck your Dumocrat ass.
fanadfilms 6 months ago
@durhamdf And this (exploitive deleted) who is "The Young Turk), is a socialist moron. To him, Dems can do no wrong. He's an idiot.
fanadfilms 6 months ago
@fanadfilms not true at all, Cenk is a Liberal, he is constantly finding fault with the moderate democrats. I think he is living in fairyland as well, but on this point he is dead on. I am a true fiscal conservative (and a social liberal) and it drives me crazy hearing these "conservatives" complain about our runaway national debt when over the past decade they doubled the national debt after a decade of unsustainable growth when they should have been paying it down and deflating bubbles!
durhamdf 6 months ago
@durhamdf Dude, go to the Treasury web site and see what the debt was. If the debt was increasing, which it was (with the exception of one year), you can't have a surplus. I've talked to many economists and the laugh at the Myth of the Clinton Surplus. Hell, the guy lied about everything; why would you believe him on this?
fanadfilms 6 months ago
@durhamdf And I've never seen one of his illogical rants where he bags on Dems.
fanadfilms 6 months ago
@fanadfilms Cenk is constantly giving Obama shit, like most liberals, for not keeping his campaign promises especially when it comes to foreign policy or for moving too slow/too timid in executing these policies to make good on campaign promises. I a not trying to argue that Cenk isn't coming from a consistently liberal point of view (he is). I am just saying that in this instance he is dead on, Bush inhereted a budget surplus, Obama inhereted a 1.2 T budget deficit and a massive recession.
durhamdf 6 months ago
@durhamdf There WAS no surplus. Clinton INCREASED the debt. If the debt INCREASED, there cannot have been a surplus. When I heard him announce it, I knew he was lying. And vis-a-vis this great recession. that was caused by Carter/Clinton and the CRA, and the Democrats bullying banks into making loans they never should have made. Read Meltdown by Thomas E. Woods, Jr.
fanadfilms 6 months ago
@fanadfilms Let me explain this terms even you can understand. When Bush took office, with the budget that Clinton left him and without any additional legislation spending or cutting taxes Bush would have had a 300 billion dollar surplus in his first year in office. He took that budget surplus and ran up 8 straight years of deficits adding ~5 trillion to the national debt. When Obama took office, without any additional spending legislation the budget deficit would have been 1.2 Trillion (CBO).
durhamdf 6 months ago
@fanadfilms Let me explain this in terms even YOU can understand. Go to treasury direct d o t g o v
You can see that the debt increased. There was no surplus. Additionally, if there was ever a surplus, it should have been immediately applied to the principal on the debt. It was not. It's a great big canard (that's LIE for you poorly educated) . Clinton lied all the time. He never told the truth. He's incapable of telling the truth.
fanadfilms 6 months ago
@fanadfilms kid are you retarded? Did you read my comment? Try and keep up little boy. IF BUSH HADN'T INCREASED SPENDING OR LOWERED TAXES IN HIS FIRST YEAR THE BUDGET HE INHERETED WOULD HAVE GIVEN HIM A 300 BILLION DOLLAR SURPLUS( CBO). BUT HE LOWERED TAXS/INCREASED SPENDING SO THIS SURPLUS NEVER HAPPENED. When Obama took office without any additional spending or tax cuts, the deficit would have been 1.2 Trillion dollars (CBO). Jesus kid take one macroeconomics class QUICK!
durhamdf 6 months ago
@durhamdf You know, fucktard, if you were saying this shit to my face, you wouldn't have one. You're a fucking idiot. BUSH HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS ARGUMENT, you fucking asshole!!! There was no surplus to inherit. You're a fucking idiot. Go the fuck away, bitch!!!
fanadfilms 6 months ago
@fanadfilms lol look out everyone, an internet tough guy. Apparently basic logic and reason isn't your strong suit. When Bush left office, he left a budget that would have produced a $1.2 Trillion dollar deficit in Obama's first year if no legislation was passed under Obama. When Clinton left office, he left Bush a budget that WOULD have given Bush a $300 billion dollar surplus if Bush hadn't cut taxes/increased spending. This isn't my opinion retard it is a fact that you could easily look up!
durhamdf 6 months ago
@durhamdf Look, moron, you are fighting the info from leading economists, not from me. And you're the idiot who can't stop using ad hominem attacks. There was NO surplus. Saying it over and over won't make it so. And I have looked it up. I went to the government web site that tracks the National Debt. The Debt went up EVERY year but one under Clinton. There can be no surplus.
fanadfilms 6 months ago
@fanadfilms lol I am an econ major fucknuts, I have a much better understanding of mainstream (keynesian) economics than your retarded ass. For the 50th time, there was no ACTUAL surplus because bush cut taxes/ increased spending. IF HE HADN'T DONE THIS HE WOULD HAVE HAD A 300 BILLION DOLLAR SURPLUS. Obama on the other hand inhereted a 1.2 Trillion dollar deficit even if he had vetoed every piece of legislation in his first year. Sorry kid, you're ass backwards wrong, stop wasting my time
durhamdf 6 months ago
@durhamdf Hey, fucktard, I don't give a shit about your major. Having been through college, I know that when you're in college, you don't know shit. And I get my info from major Austrian economists with whom I'm acquainted. I think, since they have PhD's, they probably know more about this shit than your collegiate ass.
Clinton did not have a surplus. It never happened. They were robbing SS to get money and using GovBonds to make it appear to be a surplus. You're an idiot.
fanadfilms 6 months ago
@fanadfilms Yeah I am sure coming from whatever clown college you attended you probably still "don't know shit"! WHo are these austrian economist? What university do they work for? Because last time I checked only a hand full of clown colleges even teach the Austrain schools retarded philosophies. Retard, Clinton left Bush a budget that would have produced a 300 billion dollar surplus, but this surplus never happened because conervatard Bush cut taxes/ increased spending at the worst time!
durhamdf 6 months ago
@durhamdf You think just restating the same BS will make it true? Why not talk to people at the Von Mises Institute. They'll tell you what an idiot you are. People like Tom Woods, Tom DiLorenzo and Walter Block will tell you what you don't know.
fanadfilms 6 months ago
@fanadfilms HAHAHAHH yeah mises institute, thank you for proving my point! LOL every single school that teaches Autrian Economics is a clown college like Mises and a hand full of city colleges in the deep south! WHy don't you stick to the standard austrian response and just say it is a conspiracy! aHHAHAH. Just look it up little girl, If Bush hadn;t cut taxes/increased spending in his first year his Clinton's budget would have produced a 300 billion surplus. Unfortunately Bush failed econ101
durhamdf 6 months ago
@durhamdf It's not worth talking to you at this point. I can see that you are blinded by Keynesian Economics and that makes you foolish. It was a Keynesian model that gave us the Great Depression, and the current insanity. Later, loser. Please don't teach.
fanadfilms 6 months ago
@fanadfilms HAHAHHAHAH jesus kid you are a fucking moron! Keynesian economics didn't exist before the great depression fucktard. THe classical economists (Austrians fall in this category) were in charge all throughout the 19th and early 20th centuries and we had 7 depression with full blown bank runs/ failures and market panics during their rule. Since Keynesian economics was sddopted as the mainstream (well after the great depression) we haven't had a single depression or financial collapse!
durhamdf 6 months ago
@durhamdf Listen, you fucking childish asshole. I know it didn't exist in Name, but it did in practice. You are fucking obtuse moron, just like your C@cksucking idiot that runs this particular channel.
fanadfilms 5 months ago
@fanadfilms NO before keynesian economcs came into the mainstream it was the classical free market economists that were in control. It was the 7 depressions from 1819 to the great depression, under the watch of the free market economists, that caused the rise of the idea of a strong Fed exercising expansionary monetary policy to lessen then impacts of recessions and prevent them from turning into full blown depresssions (i.e. keynesian economics). Get your history straight buddy...
durhamdf 5 months ago
@durhamdf Listen, dick-breath, kid I am not. You're fucking communist prick. How's the president's cock taste? Or is that a state secret? h t t p : / / mises . org / books / panic1819. pdf
Here's someone who actually had a brain.
fanadfilms 5 months ago
@fanadfilms lol Mises was a moron, that is why his school is a fucking clown college! Wow mises university, you could get a job at IHOP with a degree from that fine institution! The only schools that promote the Keynesian theories are Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Cornell, Brown, USC, California, Stanford, georgetown, etc... Maybe grow a brain yourself and maybe open up a fucking history book and learn that the Austrians lost this argument 70 years ago and have lived in obscurity ever since!
durhamdf 5 months ago
@durhamdf No, dude, he was a great man, and a great intellect. It's the people like you who fall into the moron camp. It's like the idiots who think that Lincoln was great, and FDR fixed the country. You're all out of your freaking minds.
fanadfilms 5 months ago
@fanadfilms Lol my guess is you are just another neo con retard who is dissilusioned with the laundry list of failures of your party over the previous decade. I on the other hand was an econ major who briefly studied the neoclassical economists like Hayek and Mises. Hayek was a smart guy although I dissagree with most of his positions. Mises was a fascist, barely an economist (no degree in economics) and a fucking moron. This is why you won't see any of his works taught in any major universities
durhamdf 5 months ago
@durhamdf Yeah, that's exactly what i am. You morons love to just call people names, put them in certain camps, because it makes it easier not to deal with your own stupidity. I'm a long-time member of the LP and work closely on campaigns for office. When America wakes up, it might be too late because morons like you keep lying to them. Asshole.
fanadfilms 5 months ago
@durhamdf My guess is that you didn't take your smart pills today, or ever. But, again, as most of you are, you're always wrong. I'm not a neocon or a Republican. I was, in fact, a Democrat, but Carter cured me and I went to the only logical party, the Libertarian Party. And since you're a socialist/Marxist/Communist, you couldn't possibly understand the concept of freedom. See, freedom doesn't require a government; your side does. I think you're the NeoCons.
fanadfilms 4 months ago
@fanadfilms HAHAHH and you are the kind of retard that thinks socialism/marxism/and communism are the same thing! You are even worse than a neo con, you're a plutocrat, an anarcho capitalist, a corporate fascist. You have absolutely no concept of economic theory or history. That's why you go around saying retarded things like Keynesians caused the great depression when keynesian economics didn't exist for another decade. Sorry fucktard, crawl back into whatever hole you came from like a good boy
durhamdf 4 months ago
@durhamdf Oh, you had to go there. All are similar hands clothed in the same glove. You know, truly, if you were in front of me, I'd just have to smack you for GP. You're a stone-cold idiot. You make me Zzzzzzzzz. As for the Keynesians, the term had not been coined, you fuck-head, but that doesn't mean they didn't do the same things. Relativity existed before Einstein coined the term. You people are so stupid. All you can do is throw divisive shit around like NeoCons, or Righties. whatever.
fanadfilms 4 months ago
Respond to this video... You don't even have the courage to put your face there. You don't put your location. You hide everything except your stupidity.
fanadfilms 4 months ago
@fanadfilms lol my name is my username fucktard either respond to something I said or shut the fuck up and troll your retarded misunderstandings of mainstream economic theory elsewhere
durhamdf 4 months ago
@durhamdf You spermbreath, you're fucking idiot. You don't understand anything. That's obvious. You're a total retard.
fanadfilms 4 months ago
@fanadfilms and your a little troll with absolutely no understanding of ANY economic theories...seriously go take some community college courses in macroeconomics because you sound like a fucking retard. You are the reason the rest of the world thinks all Americans are a bunch of inbred hicks. THANKS!
durhamdf 4 months ago
@durhamdf Just fuck off, cunt. You're boring me. It's you Keynesians who are ruining the world and complaining that the Austrians are wrong. I study with smart economists, like Woods, DiLorenzo and Block. Your philosphy got us into this mess. How the fuck do you think doing the same thing will get us out? I'm Irish, fuckhead. Where are you from? Fantasy Fagland?
fanadfilms 4 months ago
@fanadfilms "I study with smart economists, like Woods, DiLorenzo and Block" You are 30 and go to a third rate piece of shit university like Mises U? HAHAH and yes I had to google those names, I had no clue,just like 99% of the economic community, who those retards were. Your philosophy got us a depression every 20 years in the 19th century and a non-existant middle class. Keynesian philosophy has brought us 0 depression or bank runs and turned us into the undisputed economic hegemon fucktard!
durhamdf 4 months ago
@durhamdf I graduated in 1981, sperm breath. And it was UCLA. You probably go to Cock Sucker U. You had to google their names because you have your face buried in some fags ass too much.
Fuckhead, it was Keynesians BS that gave us the Great Depression. The Depression of 1920 was worse and solved in a year because of Austrian thinking. You really are stupid. Where are you from? Dumbshitastan?
fanadfilms 4 months ago
@fanadfilms You keep making a retard of yourself little boy. So you went to UCLa but now you "study" with the mises institute? LOL! Do you mean you watch a bunch of mises institute youtube videos? Because that isn't "studying with smart economists"! HAHAHA. Secondly, again fucktard, open up a history book, Keynesian economics didn't exist until the 40's. You went to UCLA and when people clown your retarded ass you call them fags? Nobody believes you little boy, keep spewing bullshit it's funny
durhamdf 4 months ago
@durhamdf You clueless dick head. I studied music in college. You don't have to go to college to study. College is highly over-rated. "And Two, you dropped a hundred and fifty grand on a fuckin education you coulda got for a dollah fifty in late chahges at the public library" Good Will Hunting. Again, ignorant fuck, just because a term hasn't been coined, doesn't mean that the thing didn't exist. Relativity existed before Einstein coined the term. You're an idiot.
fanadfilms 4 months ago
@durhamdf You've heard of books? Have you ever actually opened one? Didn't think so. You're the only cunt talking, bitch.
fanadfilms 4 months ago
@fanadfilms SHHH little boy, I think it is past your bed time anyways. The kid who thinks keynesians are responsible for a depression that occurred a decade before their existence is telling me to open up a history book! LOL! Keep flapping your mouth about things you don't understand, you keep exposing yourself as a complete moron every time you open your mouth
durhamdf 4 months ago
@durhamdf Are you brain damaged? And I'd shut your fucking shit mouth, you cunt. As I said, you fucking idiot, simply because something has not been named, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Like stupid. Let's say no one called it stupid before you displayed all the signs? Simply because they haven't named it stupid, doesn't mean you are not stupid. You clearly are.
fanadfilms 4 months ago
@fanadfilms Half of keynesian economics is monetary policy which is impossible with a gold standard fucktard. The classical economists were in charge all throughout the 19th century and into the early 20th centuries and gave us 7 depression with bank runs/failures and massive deflation. If keynesians were in charge during the great depression then why did we have spiraling deflation and why did govt. spending go down from 35' on? Exactly, you don't have a fucking clue what you are talkign about.
durhamdf 4 months ago
@durhamdf That first sentence, you cock sucker, shows your complete ignorance of economics. You don't understand the efficacy of gold. All those depressions were caused by GOVERNMENT, you idiot. Stop contacting me. You're too stupid. Where are you from, dickhead?
The Great Depression was CAUSED by government, not by the private sector. The Depression of 1920 ended because government GOT OUT OF THE WAY!!! Fuck off.
fanadfilms 4 months ago
@fanadfilms Sorry buddy, my guess is you were a neo con untill 3 years ago when your parties massive failures finally culminated in the greatest recession since the great depression. And hey fucktard, how could the fed exercise expansionary monetary policy when there was no liquidity of treasuries since the govt. couldn't borrow more than it could pay back in gold reserves. That is why we had massive deflation little one. The roaring 20's=free market chaos resulting in the great depression!
durhamdf 4 months ago
@durhamdf My guess is that you have the IQ of a fly. Only marxist socialists would even use such an arcane term. And anyone who knows me knows that I am a true supporter of liberty. I would be loathed to impress men and women into military service in foreign wars to meet my political objectives. Taxes would be all but non-existence under my leadership. So, you show yourself to be a stupid shit. I'm a Libertarian and was a Democrat. BTW, it's party's (possessive), not parries (plural). Dumb.
fanadfilms 4 months ago
@fanadfilms Lol what are you babbling about now? Everyone is a libertarian all the sudden, the second the GOP shits the bed...what a weird coincidence... Do you know what marxism or socialism is dipshit? Because they aren't the same thing. It would be like calling you a libertarian fascist... Sorry buddy, you are following a tiny fringe minority (austrian flunkies) who have been so embarrassed by their centuries of failures that their philosophy is only taught at a hand full of clown colleges!
durhamdf 4 months ago
@durhamdf Dickhead, I'm not in the GOP. I'm a libertarian. It's not a fad. I joined in 1982. Were you even alive then? And stop playing a semantic game, you cunt. Austrian Economics has been proven right. Keynesians are totally repudiated. Look at what's happening now. This is Keynesianism at work, and it's leading to Bankruptcy and hyperinflation. What the US is going to suffer, what Europe IS suffering, is Keynesian.
fanadfilms 4 months ago
@fanadfilms HAHAHhA yeah Austrian economics has been "proven right" that is why no real universities teach that retarded bullshit!!! LOL and Keynesian economics, AGAIN, has only given us a middle class capable of buying the products they create, and turned the U.S. from a middle of the ground lead economy to the undisputed economic hegemon. That is why Keynesian economics is taught at every major university and is practiced by every central bank for the last 50 years! Now run along fucktard
durhamdf 4 months ago
@durhamdf There are many universities who teach it. However, most universities are liberal wastelands. Braindead professors (met too many of those) who just cruise through till retirement. You are a moron. This economy is on life support. It's only a matter of time till we default and our currency is retired as the world reserve currency (MAD depression caused by Keynesians). I'd love to glove up with you. You'd go down, bitch.
fanadfilms 4 months ago
@fanadfilms LOL so many you can't even list one! LOL Yeah Mises Institute, Liberty University, a handful of city colleges! What a collection of respected institutions! Does the conservatard fear education? LOL Thought you went to UCLA (bullshit)? What economic theory do yo think they teach there fucktard?! You make all Americans sound like morons! THANKS! FYI I have trained 8 years of Muay Thai with Fairtex I would take great pleasure in knocking every last tooth out of your hillbilly mouth.
durhamdf 4 months ago
Just because it's not taught everywhere doesn't prove a thing. There is a lot of false history in our text books and economics philosophy is questionable. Entirely all mainstream Keynesian economist couldn't foresee the economic collapse like others did. They didn't see the collapse of the bretton woods. Keynesian philosophy is young and is being debunked! You fuckin zombie
baydood510 4 months ago
@baydood510 It doesn't prove by itself that Austrian Economics is clown shoes b/c it is only taught at a handful of clown colleges, but it is a pretty good indication of that fact. And when you connect the fact that no reputable universties teach the garbage to the massive historical failures of classical economics, bank runs/failures. massive financial panics, depressions every 20 years, a non-existent middle class etc..it is pretty obvious that AE is a joke. (contd)...
durhamdf 4 months ago
@baydood510 (contd)...If it wasn't widely accepted in the economic comunity that the Austrian School is a fucking joke used by anarcho capitalist plutocrats as justification for their policies that protect the rich and grind the poor and middle class under the wheels of "progress" then it would be taught at major universities around the globe, plain and simple.
durhamdf 4 months ago
@durhamdf You didn't say shit! In the end they coudn't predict any of the recessions and could not point out exactly what was wrong with our monetary policy. All you say is, "there not credible, drrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr" . yea, yea anarcho capitalist, we love the rich, no university accepts us... (BTW US BERKELEY is considering adding free market econ classes). Your hurt cause your getting a worthless econ degree...haha
baydood510 4 months ago
@baydood510 Adding a single class is MUCH different than a program! Sorry, Keynesians have been in charge for ~70 years now. In that time we created a middle class capable of buying the products we make, had ZERO depressions and went from a middle ground developed economy to the undisputed economic world leader.Probably why the every other lead economy switched to KE. To sum up, AE gave us depressions/poverty, KE made us the undisputed lead economy/built our middle class based consumer society.
durhamdf 4 months ago
@durhamdf Adding a class, is saying a lot. Other than that, most of what your asserting is debatable. the depression was not caused by AE, the fed caused the depression. The middle class exploded in the 19th century BEFORE the FED and before KE! Your not adding world war 1/2, our military might, and the fact before KE, we already established the world reserve currency. A lot of your history on the great depression is fucked up.
baydood510 4 months ago
@fanadfilms That guy your arguing with is an idiot. He's just mad he is taking a worthless major, and which all his mainstream professors were clueless on the economic collapse's (bretton woods, stock, housing bubble etc).
baydood510 4 months ago
@baydood510 LOL and you are the little boy who saw a ron paul video on the Austrian School and now thinks he is an expert. Get a clue retard, I made 80K my 3rd year out of school in the middle of the worst recession since the great depression...real worthless degree....Seriously little boy, run along because you make yourself look like a complete retard everytime you open your mouth and a steady stream of diarrhea comes spewing out.
durhamdf 4 months ago
@durhamdf Ron paul? the only politician who warned about he economic collapse and pin pointed the exact reason why? He has been right for 30 years. I'm becoming an EE which has real value and i would like to attend a free market university for my masters... I guess i'm done wasting my time with you, because all you will say is "Its not credible" and many other red herring fallacys. Have a good one! ron paul 2012!
baydood510 4 months ago
@baydood510 Ron Paul didn't predict a thing. He isn't an economists, he has never taken an economics course in his life. He is a country doctor! It would be like asking Bernanke to check you for prostate cancer! The fact that you retards see these non-economists (ron paul, peter schiff, etc...) as your messiahs shows how moronic your camp is. It also shows that AE isn't a economic movement, it is a political movement. It is just the retarded justifications of anarcho capitalism and plutocracy
durhamdf 4 months ago
@durhamdf Lol didn't predict a thing? Okay.
baydood510 4 months ago
@baydood510 He did as all austrian school flunkies do and for the last 30 yrs he predicted the collapse of our financial institutions. It was only a matter of time before the natural downturn of the business cycle would make him look at least somewhat correct and luckily he has you retards to be amazed when this happens. I predict huge growth, now if the economy grows any time in the next 30 years my prediciton will be right! LOL and still waiting for the dollar to collapse and gold to hit 10K
durhamdf 4 months ago
@durhamdf "predicted the collapse of our financial institutions" Umm yeah, my point exactly. Ben Stein etc and the rest of the MSM couldn't see it coming. So much for KE credibility. Somewhat correct? He predicted it exactly on video, look it up retard. I predict huge growth within the next thirty years too? You should have taken public speaking because all you do is spew fallacies. And i am waiting for the collapse as well, although i hope you know it can be stalled further. RP2012 bitch
baydood510 4 months ago
@baydood510 Ben Stein isn't an economist either little boy. I am guessing you have gotten all your education on this subject from a couple of Youtube videos I have seen as well. Again, everyone with any economic education whatsoever understood that the growth in the housing market during the 00's was unsustainable. See fortune magazine 2002 issue "housing the next bubble". What people didn't know was the effect on the banks and financial industry. Ron paul and his anarcho capitalist (contd)...
durhamdf 3 months ago
@baydood510 (contd)...buddies have been screaming that the sky is falling and the world is coming to an end for the past 30 years! And his prediction for this recession which has turned out to be MUCH milder than depressions we have faced in the past, was that the dollar would collapse, u.s. treasuries would become worthless and gold would hit 10K. Gold stagnated at 1,800, the dollar is strong especially compared to the euro, and demand for u.s. treasuries never slowed for a minute! (contd)...
durhamdf 3 months ago
@baydood510 (contd)...Sorry kid, Paul will never be president as reflected by his shitty approval rating even among republicans. Deregulation got us into this mess, how do you retards think it will get us out? And only BS economist make predicitions, Very few trained economists make predictions beyond a few months since the massive aggregates and billions of variables make them shitty guesses at best. It should tell you something that your economic heros don't have any training in economics! LOL
durhamdf 3 months ago
@durhamdf Well you said a lot. You don't consider the euro crises and how that circumstance is what attracts our treasuries. All in all....lets see what happens. Peace
baydood510 3 months ago
@baydood510 Or maybe it is that traditionally in times of economic turmoil the world invests in what are considered "risk free" u.s. treasuries. The problem with the wait and see attitude is that the tea bagger congrssional freshman and the GOP have blocked any and all fiscal policy since 2010. What we are seeing now is austerity, billions of dollars of govt. cuts at the state and local level. The same sort of austerity that sent us spiraling back into the great depression in 37'.
durhamdf 3 months ago
@durhamdf you still didnt answer anything. you never do. you just restate your bullshit and demagogue everything. "ron paul said something and its not Exactly the same thing word for word, figure for figure." BS. We haven't even recovered, our debt to GDP just hit 100. You fucking slave zombie idiot. i hope there is a block...
baydood510 3 months ago
@baydood510 HAHAHAHH not exactly word for word? Do you realize what the collapse of the dollar and u.s. treasuries would mean?! We are talking about the difference between predicting the end of our economy as we know it and the reality of a relatively mild recession. Again, you don't see any real economists making these kinds of retarded predictions because the market has way to many variables for these guesses to be useful. Japan debt to GDP=200%...nobody is trying to claim they are bankrupt...
durhamdf 3 months ago
@durhamdf Mild recession? HAHAHA. Japan also doesn't have huge trade deficits, they still have a manufacturing economy. predicting everything will be okay is just as reckless as predicting it will sink. HAHA talk about contradicting.
baydood510 3 months ago
@baydood510 Why does it matter if Japan has a strong manufacturing sector? THey still have a debt to GDP ratio that is double our own! And yes, compared to the depressions of the 19th and early 20th century under the classical economic flunkies this recession is relatively mild! We don't see bank runs, massive deflationary spirals, 30% unemployment etc! Again, the point is, ROn Paul is an alarmist moron who predicted the dollar would collapse and U.S. treasuries would become worthless. 0 for 2!
durhamdf 3 months ago
@durhamdf It benefits them or else they would be worse with there decades of economic stagflation. There haven't been banks that gone under since the recession? Now again, Is bank of america not looking hopeless? Have the feds not bailed out trillions to commercial and central banks? unemployment is >10% and that is low balling it. The recession is NOT over, you cant be a real economist. ron paul says the debt, spending is unsustainable. Not that its over NOW? Your deceptive and unreliable.
baydood510 2 months ago
@baydood510 B of A posted 6 billion in profits for Q3 in 2011...that is a far cry from when the free market economists of the 19th century were in charge and we had major banks failing every 20 years with full blown bank runs! Unemployment is at 8.6%, where do you get your numbers buddy,? You are trying to argue that a depression every 20 years under you laissez faire cranks was more stable than 0 depressions in the ~70 years that Keynesian economics has been mainstream? LOL! (contd)...
durhamdf 2 months ago
@baydood510 (contd)... and anyways, most of this crisis is due to the exact policies you anarcho capitalists have been calling for. That is the repeal of glass steagall and the passing of the CFMA under Bush that led to the creation of tiny mortgage companies that were responsible for half of the Liars Loans that went belly up in 07' & 08'. Now you cranks are suggesting we double down on those same moronic policies, that by the way led to the slowest decade of growth in 50 years!
durhamdf 2 months ago
@durhamdf Lol. You cant speak for them all douche and anarcho capitalist in general are not against reinstating glass steagall act.(ron voted agianst btw) besides, there was widespread fraud during the housing bubble/crisis. fraud is illegal, yet it wasn't prosecuted. if they won't prosecute wall street banks for fraud what makes you think they'll enforce these little, arbitrary regulations?You have no idea what is going on with BofA. ahaha keep watching TV and getting your figures from them
baydood510 2 months ago
@baydood510 (CONT) btw the glass steagall argument is a red herring. Ofcourse you need glass steagall if you give banks that much power in the first place!! u con job..
baydood510 2 months ago
@baydood510 So true. He bashes Austrian Economics while extolling the "virtues" of Keynesians. Only an idiot would do that with all the evidence that Keynesians have destroyed us. They've lead us to the precipice of disaster and they can't even see the edge. They won't even know it after they fall in.
fanadfilms 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@durhamdf You people are really dumb. Get into the real world
fanadfilms 6 months ago
@fanadfilms "Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all." – Frederic Bastiat
fanadfilms 4 months ago
I think Jefferson was a Republican. He decided to trade-with but not fight for Napoleon. He ran a balanced federal budget. I guess the answer is: 200 years ago.
ariuszarim 7 months ago
@ariuszarim The last time the debt was zeroed out was under Andrew Jackson.
fanadfilms 6 months ago
@fanadfilms Still, not in either of our lifetimes.
ariuszarim 6 months ago
Republicans had as much to do much with the democrats.
Glass Steagal overhall was bipartisan
Freddie and Fannie subsidies was bipartisan
case closed the problem is government and the answer is people.
Salvysahagun 7 months ago
@Salvysahagun Actually Fannie/Freddie were completely liberal owned and were hands off to any sort of repair by interested people, we can thank the 'banking queen' and his buddy doddsie for that :/
Drumboy5165 7 months ago
@Drumboy5165 Right at the 1:00 mark, he just makes a blanket statement saying the collapse was brought to us by Republicans, I literally laughed out loud. I think Frank and Dodd had maybe a teenie tiny thing or two to do with it. This pundit is kind of a d-bag.
ready2live16 7 months ago
This guy's full of crap. "It's all the Republicans' fault. The Democrats' hands are totally clean". Give me a break. It's absoluetly absurd.
vjohn16 8 months ago
i dont think the founding fathers would have liked to see america turn into a welfare state.
lvll138inrs 8 months ago
@lvll138inrs What did Ben Franklin say? The best thing one can do for someone on welfare is to chase them off of it!! Damn I like Ben Franklin!!
Drumboy5165 7 months ago
As a "Social Moderate, Fiscal Conservative" It's hard to take things like this seriously
TheCmccartn 9 months ago
@TheCmccartn Really did you even WATCH the video!....but repubs
tanman567 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
TheDuaneBrewer 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
... a foundation of cowardice: fear of people with colors, religions, cultures and sex lives that differ from your own; fear of reform in banking, health care, energy; fantasy fears of America being transformed into an Islamic nation, into social/commun/fasc-ism, into a disarmed populace put in internment camps; and more. ... “An open letter to conservatives” tpmcafe talkingpointsmemo
NOBS4321 9 months ago
The wealthy made themselves richer during the Depression. It's
the dumbed down masses that haven't learned the well establish
game of tanking the economy, collecting up everybody's properties
so they own everything, and getting labor for pennies on the dollar.
oliG0Poly 9 months ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
republicans are lying scum...
DNRvideos 9 months ago
@olzt100 The Federal Reserve prints money, which the constitution does not allow. I understand about CDOs -- 'Inside Job' is a great movie btw! Regardless of bank size, the fall of Bear Stearns & Lehman Brothers was supposedly "so awful" that we HAD TO rescue JP Morgan, AIG & Goldman. I realize it would have created havoc, but they are PRIVATE BUSINESSES, and nobody was helping the troubled homeowners... while THEY raked in giant bonuses!! If the banks were too big to fail, who made them so?
lemonmagnolia 10 months ago
@lemonmagnolia The constitution does not have anything to do with the printing of money. The constitution defines the powers of the federal government, but not neccessarily their limits in all cases. Actually the real key in the banking fiasco was that the loans that were resold as financial instruments were guranteed by the government. The problem was that the private sector sold billions of dollars of loans it would not have approved if the private sector had to hold the loans to maturity.
olzt100 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Birth certificate and bin Laden ... all in one week;
tea-baggers gonna have to give the Pres. Obama
“a green-card” !
NOBS4321 10 months ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
Go to my channel !! :)
BLUEKRUZER 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Bush's last budget 1.85 T$ -
Obama's 1st two years : 1.3 T$
and under 1 T$ -
- next two years are projected to be approx 750 B$ per year !
-
Headlines should read –
“OBAMA CUTS BUSH’S SPENDING - by MORE THAN ½” ...-
21tikcah 10 months ago 6
This has been flagged as spam show
I'm tired of this "clinton had a 127 billion dollar surplus". that's a big myth. just look at the tricks clinton used when he reported the supposed surplus. in fact, bill clinton increased the national debt every year when he was in office.
2000: 5,674,178,209,886.86
1993: 4,411,488,883,139.38 I'd like to see democrats explain that. Btw, I am not a bush apologist. clinton was bad with the economy, but bush was a lot worse
Chaaarge 10 months ago
Comment removed
Trickle4321 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@3dartistguy ...DEBT GO UP...
-
exaggerated the lie times 2, 20 cents a posting ???
All capital letters, 40 cents a posting ???
hackit12 10 months ago 11
This has been flagged as spam show
Obama said in 2006, "increasing America's debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Instead, Obama has increased the national debt to 14 trillion up from 8.2 trillion when he took office. Now Obama said his vote to not raise the debt ceilling back when he was a senator was a mistake and wants Congress to increase the debt on the backs of our children and grandchildren. Obama also said that "leadership means that 'the buck stops here.".
3dartistguy 10 months ago
-‘Corporate funded revisionism’- the Reagan legacy was created largely by Washington conservatives in the 1990s, to counter the successes of Bill Clinton’s Admin.
~
From the Heritage Institute, by Steve Forbes second generation heir to Forbes Mag., Pete Coors, heir of the Coors beer empire, and Richard Mellon Scaife, heir of the Mellon industrial and banking fortune, and the Koch Bros. heirs to Koch Industries ! ... New Robber Barons – the Baby Barons all inherited wealth...
Cont
ellipsis4321 10 months ago 12
@~
Agenda —“drastically lower -‘their personal and corporate taxes’-, -minimal social services for the needy, -bust unions, -and much less oversight of industries -especially environmental regulation.”
-
Tear Down This Myth: How the Reagan Legacy Has Distorted Our Politics and Haunts Our Future by Will Bunch
~
ellipsis4321 10 months ago 4
Tax Reform Act of 1986 – top tax rate was lowered from 50% to 28
- bottom rate was raised 11 to 15 percent [higher than they started at in 1981]
Only time in US history ~
that the –‘top rate was reduced’- and the ‘-bottom rate increased ...’-
~
blevr1234 10 months ago 9
This has been flagged as spam show
Three Years out of eight, President Eisenhower achieved a balanced budget. Only LBJ has balanced the budget since--and only once.
Eisenhower - top marginal tax rate [over 3 M$ per year] was 90%
LBJ - top marginal tax rate [over 3 M$ per year] was 70%
NOBS4321 10 months ago 14
blevr1234 10 months ago 8
Bush still to blame for bad economy Rasmussen poll says
hackit12 10 months ago 11
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Who cares, it's just debt.
Houshalter 10 months ago
Boehner's face at 1:55 says either, "I'm going to cry if you ask me hard questions," or, "I have to poop, so hurry the hell up."
thookerov 10 months ago
Political Mythbusters
jamesuslovesu 10 months ago 4
We need to work harder to help support the super rich socialists? That is what god intended?
That is why I am an atheist!!!
cmfluteguy 10 months ago 7
Comparing apples and oranges, and getting prunes !
-
Never had the -‘exported Indust./Jobs factor’- as we do now ! US manufacturing have been exporting [10’s thousands] of plants. Are Amer. Investors really gonna take a chance ?
... once you have established ludicrous -‘Welfare to monopoly’- oil companies [100 yr.], Energy, Agri., corporate farms, chemical, pharmaceuticals, etc.-
Businesses are unlikely to gamble unless, they get into the Wealth-Fare, game - Too !!
cont
blevr1234 10 months ago 12
~
Like Wall St.’s contribution to the housing scandal, [knowingly sold -‘shitty packages-‘] with AIG insuring them; the BIGGEST loosing element of Bush’s TARP and ESSA.
AIG is still faltering - at less than 1/10th of one percent, of what it was in 2000.
-
Investors sitting on trillions ... looking for other -‘fools-‘ to bankrupt, again, and again, and ... what’s the next scam ?
Cont
blevr1234 10 months ago 5
... Repubs. cutting social programs for the poor, unemployed, etc.
- and WITH - the wrong-wing/media -‘smoke and mirrors’-
even cutting -‘un-Repub.’- programs that ARE generating Federal revenue.
-
Won’t even talk about -‘affecting their benefactors’- !
-
Either correct it NOW or at least honestly admit what the -‘Cons’s created for their donors’- with the 1980’s TAX scam
- Federal flat tax. Used to Finance [and still - subsidizing] the exportation of U.S. manufacturing capabilities.
Cont
blevr1234 10 months ago 6
-
honestly admit ... created :
An Oligarchy of psychopaths [Me society], approaching Fascism - Govt./ Corporate ... merger - with -'extreme protectionism'- !
blevr1234 10 months ago 10
This has been flagged as spam show
Clinton didn't 'balance the budget'.
He had a 'brilliant economist' working for him - you can thank Robert Rubin for the short term lending US got its debt on.
Clinton did not have a balanced budget and he didn't have a surplus.
The intra-gov't holdings and total national debt were
$2.46T and $5.8T by the end of Clinton's time.
romanmir01 10 months ago
Resurgence of the -‘more moral than you’- ‘wedge issues gang/S’- obscuring logic and common sense; hypocritically contradicting the elimination of -‘real’- waste, fraud and abuse - corporate subsidies/Zero taxation [Wealth-Fare] !
NOBS4321 10 months ago 32
Put JFK's tax cuts in context.
To pay off WW2 debt Ike had the Max Tax Rate set at 91%
And this resulted in a Balanced Budget
Because the debt was being paid down & the budget balanced JFK felt comfortable cutting the Max Tax Rate to 70%
Today the debt is worse & the richest individuals are paying a lower tax rate than the middle-class & under these conditions JFK would NEVER recommend more tax cuts for the super-rich!
DillonDee1 10 months ago 8
This has been flagged as spam show
@DillonDee1 : No, Eisenhower balanced budgets by ending the Korean war and cutting military spending - which then made up some 3/4 of all federal spending, not tax hikes. Most Americans paid war-time tax all the way through 1964 (when JFK's taxcut was implemented during LBJ). Ike's balanced budget ended when his spending *went up* in 1958 while the war-time income tax remained the same.
tooltalk 10 months ago
The Super-Rich aren't defined as making more than 250,000 a year. Thats not wealthy. Millionaires and Billionaires make far more than 250,000 a year. Thats why they're billionaires. JFK believed in cutting taxes to stimulate the economy. He made a lengthly speech about this in late 1962. Once the tax cut was put into place in 1964, millions of jobs were created. JFK would never have advocated deficit spending like Obama does, and JFK would never have advocated slashing the military either.
3dartistguy 10 months ago
@3dartistguy -- only 1.9% of the ppl make over $250k, but I too couint the super-rich as those making considerably more.
Look at the Forbes 400 & you'll see ppl who've more revenue in one day than most middle-class ppl make in a lifetime. And yet many are paying around 15%. in taxes
This is terribly unfair to the middle-class.
DillonDee1 10 months ago 5
This comment has received too many negative votes show
The president isn't talking about millionaries. Obama thinks a millionaire makes 250,000 or more a year. Thats not a millionaire or billionaire. Anywho, thats none of any bodies business. they earn that money. The president is talking about redistribution, and thats socialism. we are not a socialist country. They need to cut back on entitlements. raising taxes will make the economy worse because employers will cut back to make a profit. why do you think unemployment has skyrocketed under Obama?
3dartistguy 10 months ago
Small business owners are middle class....when their taxes on their businesses go up, they cut back on personnel in order to make up their profit margin...it would be terribly unfair not only to small bussiness but also to people who need and want jobs. Obama doesn't realize that his talk of tax increases on small business affects employment. Unemployment has sky rocketed under his adminstration and again, the talk over raising taxes on small business is the result of that. thats UNFAIR.
3dartistguy 10 months ago
@3dartistguy -- I've lived in about 10 Texas towns & known 100s of small businessmen & none of them was making over $250k per yr & even had they been making a bit more the proposed tax increase would only apply to the amt over $250k
DillonDee1 10 months ago 4
This comment has received too many negative votes show
THE ONLY REASON WHY UNEMPLOYMENT CAME DOWN TWO POINTS IS BECAUSE OBAMA AGREED SMARTLY NOT TO RAISE TAXES ON SMALL BUSINESS, DON';T YOU GET IT???
3dartistguy 10 months ago
@3dartistguy -- I have been the owner of a company w/ over 100 employees. For me to have received a tax cut would not make me hire another worker. Now tax cuts on the poor & middle-class would have increased demand for my products & cause me to employ more. Okay, you can return to you cubicle now.
DillonDee1 10 months ago 4
This comment has received too many negative votes show
So you would rather have your taxes increased to support welfare queens generation after generation?
3dartistguy 10 months ago
@3dartistguy -- where there is welfare fraud there should be prosecution, but I do think a bigger problem is welfare kings - those doctors who file fraudulent claims
DillonDee1 10 months ago 4
There are millions of young girls who delieberely get themselves pregnant to have a child just so they can get a welfare check....there was a case of one woman on the old Donahue show that admitted she had 19 children and openly bragged on national television that she had all those kids because they were income to her....
3dartistguy 10 months ago
@3dartistguy -- If I recall correctly it was 14 kids, but anyway you could take all the women who've had kids to get more welfare & total up the amount & it still wouldn't come close to 1 welfare scam.
I'm talking about EXXON who made $15 Billion in 1 yr - so you'd expect them to pay $5 billion in income tax - but they paid ZERO & even received billions of our tax dollars & paid one Exec $500 million. Do you really believe EXXON headquarters is a PO BOX in the Caymans? .
DillonDee1 10 months ago 5
@3dartistguy hello troll!
mrsockhandy 9 months ago
@3dartistguy get real troll...suck on a shotgun.
mrsockhandy 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
~
Followed by 10 other -‘tax increases’, By 1987 They had completely reversed the tax cut, in the lowest tax bracket [raised it]; but continued the highest tax bracket cuts, from 70-28%. -- showing their true motives - -‘flatten the taxes’- for the wealthy - shifting the burden to the poorer..
The result 30 years of all the wealth gushing upward - 80% to the top 10%. -- Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1987 ...
ftp://ftp.bls [DOT] gov/pub/special.requests/lf/aat1.txt
Cont
Trickle4321 10 months ago 9
Comment removed
Trickle4321 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Ron Paul 2012
nsideirish 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
That gigantic crash was not brought to you by the Republicons. Come on Cenk...you dumbass. Demorat/Republicon= same sh!@ different pile. Who brought that crash you might be wondering? Bill Clinton of coarssseee. What about this gigantic debt. Medicare, SS, Medicaid, and yes the military. Progressives really screwed us but so have the Republicons, and Autocrats.
WAKE UP and smell what CENKOFF is shoveling. Bi-partisan BS.
EndTheFedRes 10 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Pop quiz: How much money can the president spend? How much money can the president tax? The answer to both is zero. ALL spending and ALL taxing is the exclusive resposibilty and power of congress. You can look it up, it's right there in the constitution. Ironically for the young turk, in almost every example where he'd like to prove a point, the opposing party was in control of congress. Reagan had Dems, Clinton Republicans, both Bush's Dems, Eisenhower Dems, Obama Dems up till now.
patrickolou 10 months ago
@patrickolou - it's right there in the constitution ...-
-... deceptive ....
Reagan House Dem.s delivered budgets lower than he requested all 8 years and the Senate was Repub. 6 of 8 years
-
Clinton had a Dem majority when he initiated the tax increase that generated the jobs/surpluses; then Repub. won their majority in the House - lowered capital gains and left US in a recession.
Cont
Trickle4321 10 months ago 10
~~
Bush 1 did have Dem's against him; but enough Repub. in the Senate to cloture and filibuster; and the Veto pen as every pres. !
Bush 2 had a -'rubber stamp Congress for 6 years'-; both tax breaks mostly benefiting the wealthy, both wars, Medicare D - fuck-up, 700 B$ waste of down payments and closing cost for minority home loans that he promoted ... after they had already stated going belly-up ! Bush - can buy a home "even if you have bad credit" ... "as good a home as anybody else "
Cont
Trickle4321 10 months ago 7
Comment removed
hackit12 10 months ago
~~
Obama ... Repub. Senate, cloture and filibustered 400+ bills passed by the House, and 100+ appointments .... 1st 2 years ... terribly compromised Health Care and Wall St. reform.
-
cloture and filibuster; and the Veto pen as every pres. !
- it's right there in the constitution ...-
Trickle4321 10 months ago 7
This has been flagged as spam show
Obama agreed to keep tax rates low back last december and the unemployment dropped 2 percent. Reagan and Kennedy both cut taxes which resulted in the highest job creation periods ever, more far than Clinton's tax and spend era ever did.
3dartistguy 10 months ago
3dartistguy ... Obama agreed to keep tax rates .... the unemployment dropped ...
- B.S ... Are you hinting at a correlation ??? LOL nonsense ... Even though the first 8 years that [same 3% difference], did not create very many jobs - 2.5 M, unemply. grew ... was loosing over 700K jobs a month, when he left office. Now -‘a promise’- created a miracle.
LOL
ftp://ftp.bls [DOT] gov/pub/special.requests/lf/aat1.txt
cont
Trickle4321 10 months ago 7
3dartistguy ...Reagan cut taxes .... resulted in the highest job creation...
- double B.S ...
- Reagan cut taxes - Causing a 2 year recession [10.8% unempl. highest since the 1st Repub. Depression], then they initiated the “largest peacetime TAX INCREASE in US history” .... 1982 TEFRA, [National Review, WSJ, Forbes, Heritage Foundation, etc]
Cont
Trickle4321 10 months ago 8
This has been flagged as spam show
~
Followed by 10 other -‘tax increases’, By 1987 They had completely reversed the tax cut, in the lowest tax bracket [raised it]; but continued the highest tax bracket cuts, from 70-28%. -- showing their true motives - -‘flatten the taxes’- for the wealthy - shifting the burden to the poorer..
The result 30 years of all the wealth gushing upward - 80% to the top 10%. -- Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1987 ...
ftp://ftp.bls [DOT] gov/pub/special.requests/lf/aat1.txt
Cont
Trickle4321 10 months ago 6
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@Trickle4321 : of the Fed, to fix the macroeconomic problem in late 70's, then later re-appointed by Reagan. Volcker's rate hikes (to 25% short-term interest rate hike) artificially created a brief recession, but ended a decade long malaise created by liberal excesses (or welfare & warfare state). The shift in the Fed's monetary policy from short-term rate policy (to accomodate libtards's welfare and warfare utopia) to mid-term policy led to macroeconomic stability (also known as "the Great
tooltalk 10 months ago