I'm an Econ/Math Major, and CS Minor. You're model is too simple, and you're perception leaves reality out of scope. If I had never heard of electricity, how could I demand it? If we do not provide a climate for innovation, we are sacrificing demand for those lost innovations. It's hilarious you mention business in California, because if you had actually done your research you'd find out how many of them are moving their business to Texas where taxes are low.
I doubt that it would surprise anyone to find out that every single budget proposal that Dems have submitted since Jan 2009 has been voted against by every single Repub senator and every single Repub congressman. Now he is blaming Dems for his failure to do his own job. Put something on table? What for? Maybe this demand might have a shred of legitimacy if there was any prior cooperation but all every member of his caucus has ever done is say no! Guy has zero credibility and ton of hubris.
Raising the debt ceiling is the easy part, but what are we going to do to cut spending? Sounds to me like the Democrats have NO intentions of curtailing expenditures. If they had interest they'd have debated the first bill put forth by the house: Cut, Cap and Balance. When you hear the Democrats talk about that, they make it sound like a balanced budget is a bad thing.
Even if we raise the debt ceiling and avert the so-called crisis, we'll still be downgraded due to our spending.
Where are the other ideas? Disgusting. I'm so tired of politicians manufacturing "hard hitting" speeches like this. The debt ceiling had been raised an innumerable number of times before. It's a crisis needlessly created by republicans so that they can twist dem's arms into making unpopular cuts, which they will later be able to blame the dems for. Oh, but Ignore insane military spending & oil subsidies, & don't make the rich contribute.
everybody, love your country; this forced a compromise, drama or not, it's America's ability to overcome adversity time and time again. We elected Obama, a hisorical moment, we will work this out too; no one likes negotiating, but the outcome is usually fair.
Only in this fucked up version of reality can a republican stand in front of the American people and say that he's the one who has stuck his neck out.
Is my country so blinded by emotion that we can't see that Obama's presidency has been more conservative than Reagan's first term? Can a Republican really take credit for "negotiating" when his bill contains no revisions to the tax code?
"If they can get you asking the wrong questions they don't have to worry about the answers," Thomas Pynchon
It throws me for a loop how the Republicans can stand there on the House and Senate floors with a straight face and tell the American people that the Democrats are trying to raise their taxes and we don't see what goes on behind closed doors well maybe stuff like that does go on but I am sure they are not much better. I wish Politicians in Washington would cut the petty political games and do what their constituents sent them there to do, REPRESENT THEM!!!!
Fiscal year 2011 started in October of last year when the democants still had enough power to pass any g-damn budget they wanted (up to the end of the year) but failed to. Why? They had NO plan! The plan after the 'shellacking' they took in Nov was to push the tough decisions on to the GOP then demonize for their own failures.
Boehner is being neutered? CNN shows 66% of Americans supported Republicans' Cut Cap & Balance plan ... 74% of Americans support a Balanced Budget Amendment.
Boehner's dismal record? Hardly. If you want to see "dismal", take a look at the worsened economic conditions on virtually every front since O'Dumbo, the inexperienced & incompetent Chicago-Thug clown, took office.
@industrialsun: Boehner obviously got the necessary votes. There were Republican members, as everyone knows, who wanted certain provisions. That's called being an individual & using your own head -- not simply towing the party line. Besides, I'd like for you to explain the difference in Harry Reid not having the votes in the Senate & putting off the vote that was supposed to take place at 1 a.m.
@industrialsun: "Dow Jones Industrial Average in January 2009 was under 7,000 and today is over 12,000 (or is that not considered a 'front') and unemployment rate has been declining since October 2009".
The Dow Jones hit the highest level in history under Bush -- what's your point? Back then, Liberals were complaining it was only making Wall Street fat cats rich. LOL.
What's more hysterical is that you're clueless on "real" unemployment numbers -- people who no longer receive unemp benefits
@industrialsun: Without the ability to use bold or italics, that's typically how people emphasis a word on YouTube.
With all that's going on in our country, you did not really just make an issue over the use of quotation marks, did you? That had to be from too much Cuervo, right?
@industrialsun: 4 yrs of Democrats in Congress, Obama in 3rd year, Trillions spent, and we have:
Record Unemployment (longest stretch since Great Depression) .. Weak Housing Mkt (worse than Great Depression) .. Record Poverty Rate .. Misery Index .. Bankruptcies .. Gas Prices .. Business Closures .. Bank Failures .. Welfare .. Low Avg Salaries .. Low US Credit standing .. Car Repos .. Inflation .. Record Debt .. Record Deficit
... but the Dow's good; Obama's policies are working ... LOL
@industrialsun: My gosh .... I ask again, are you drinking? I'm baffled by your comments.
Did I say no one ever had a car repo'd? No, I did not. I'm pointing to 'Record' car repossessions in 2011. You know .. 2 years after that massive stimulus was signed in addition to all other trillions in spending to create a "robust" economy?
Anyone who has any economic sense understands that Liberals' initiative within the housing market caused the economic crisis -- on top of insane spending levels
He stuck his neck out a mile for a bill that was DOA. I give it to him he has balls. Too bad he seems to have zero control over the GOP, maybe thats where he should stick his neck out.
Get me a shovel....it is getting really deep in here. Can you say "Compromise" John??? I have yet to see any "Fair" plan on your part. You can't point fingers when you are doing exactly what you are accusing Obama of. Get your nose out of the tea party ass and do your damn job.
Boehner has presented & passed 3 bills. Where's the Democrats' plan? For shit's sake, Democrats haven't even proposed a budget in over 820 days. And now Harry Senile Reid won't even allow the merits of the Republican plan to be debated in the Senate
Obama the dumbass doesn't have a plan either. Just gum-flapping w/no specifics. The CBO director even had to come out and say, "we don't score speeches without specifics".
@2010GOP Did any of those bills involve increasing taxes on the wealthiest Americans? Where do the Republicans get the idea that you can put a bite in the deficit, much less the debt, if you will not restore revenue to at least the levels seen in the Reagan Administration? You can't do it with cuts alone. Period. The wealthy seemed to get by paying more taxes in the 80s - why can't they now?
@industrialsun This CBO is as much a political organization as any other, certainly with their own opinions. Send the bill to real analysts and consultants who have to survive in the private sector doing what they do and I can guarantee you'll receive much more accurate results. They'd also laugh hysterically being asked to analyze Obama's "plan" based entirely off speeches AKA the smoke he's blowing straight up your ass.
@2010GOP Indeed he did, and you can only imagine what a real analyst would say. They would say we're being downgraded, like they already have said as well. These liberals need to quit sabotaging our economy, and the rest of their diligently devoted sheep need to wake up.
@aaronpeiser Moreover, due to the significance of the deadline we are approaching, real analysts, particularly Moody, have been examining budgets. Reid's plan isn't even good enough to keep our AAA bond rating... Almost on queue, you then have Obama making a speech last week about how it is somehow the Republican's fault we're being downgraded. Is this guy delusional?
Good, John, now you are a giraffe. No wonder you believe that we should be unequal under tax law, that you can generate revenue by cutting spending without taking in more money, and paying our bills and paying penalties will make our economy better.
He did...offering you everything you wanted (MASSive social security/health care cuts & Zero on taxing the mega-rich) and alienating his electoral base.
FFS this speach is one big call for a Waaambulance.
It's amazing that this man, the Speaker of the House, can stand in the well of the House of Representatives and blatantly lie. Anyone, and I mean anyone, Dem, Repub, or Independent who has been following these talks over the last few months knows that Obama offered cuts to both medicare and medicaid as well as a budget that contained almost a 5 to 1 ratio of cuts to revenue raises.
And everyone knows that as soon as revenue was included, Republicans walked the fuck out.
Boehner never negotiated, he tied to dictate to the elected power of the presidency then tied to hang Congress's job on him while never moving an inch... It was the White House who gave proposals with cuts even bigger then Boehner, It was the demarcates who dropped the tax increases on the rich yet Boehner lied and sad they moved the goal posts...It was the Republicans who walked away wanting more at the cost of all America. That is the fact of it all as it stands
...and no tears? I think someone kidnapped the real JB and put in a robot. He should have shed a tear for all his hard work. Hell, give him a raise and a tattoo on his ass that says "Hero". The guy needs to borrow the first George Bush's purse.
@superlucci Yes, because some arbitrary cap on gov't spending is somehow going to help our economy. . . God, some people are so ignorant about basic econ.
@shalcall You are so ignorant on economics yes. You dont believe in having an amendment that cuts spending, when the biggest problem we have right now is spending.
@superlucci No, the biggest problem we have right now is a bunch if ignorant freshman Republicans, voted in by ignorant tea-hadists that are literally threatening certain economic DEPRESSION for the country if they don't get everything they want. They don't realize that SPENDING issues should be brought up during the BUDGETING process, when a shutdown in government won't throw the world economy into a tailspin.
That you don't know this, isn't surprising. Conservatives revel in ignorance.
@superlucci It's not the credit rating downgrade. It's the DEFAULT ON OUR DEBT. I could give a fuck (and so could the credit markets) if S&P, Moody's, or Fitch downgrades U.S. Treasuries. Ask Japan how their sovereign debt is doing after their downgrade (the markets hardly noticed and they have twice the debt we do compared to GDP).
If we actually miss payments on our obligations, be it Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, or pay for any gov't worker, THAT will hurt our interest rates.
What's pushing him? Follow the money, first tea party, behind the tea party, Koch bro.
Kochs invested heavily on tar sand pipeline, it's do or die for the family. One key regulation can ruin their future plan, so they want to make gov. power over them to a dirt.
In a way, its a fight Koch family vs. people of US.
@2010GOP I don't doubt anything you say here, but these are bold claims. Instead of being a dick and calling people names why don't you source your argument?
@shalcall Well he can and he did. The problem is that the things he sourced didn't support what he was saying, so in other words, yes, his argument is bullshit, or at the very least misleading.
@allgoo19 Your are being deceptive when you give a pass on Democrats for funding a campaign and then criticize somebody else for funding the oppositions campaign.
Plus, funding for less government in our lives is a good thing.
@allgoo19 It is a Dems vs Repbs issue. Otherwise you would have called Dems out of them too, but even if you did, it still would be stupid.
If somebody gets money donated to their campaign for things the politicians have been advocating for, how does that make them a puppet in any sense? If I advocate for lowering taxes and then somebody comes up to me and gives me 50k if i continue to advocate for what I say, that does not make me a tool. That means I am rewarded for my hard work
@allgoo19: This is why it's so gut-busting laughable when Maddow rails against "Koch Brothers".
When one actually looks at the facts, it is so beyond absurd. Koch/Private/Protect Own Assets is soooo horrible in Maddow's eyes, yet she's silent on corporations like GE/Billions in Taxpayer Money/Job Destroyer/China/Paid no Taxes/Taxpayer Money to Corp Execs/Obama's "economic" advisory board.
@2010GOP WTF? Jeff Immelt is a Flaming republican . He was the President of the advisory board for By Partisan reasons, in an effort to make the politics of the country work together. So you are tiring to spin the well proven greed of a republican businessman and their lack of care for this country on Obama . Yeah desperate fail buddy desperate fail!!
@superlucci Yeah - instead of having public input and authority over the private sector (via government), why not just have banks and corporations control everything in society? Yeah, that sounds like a great idea.
@superlucci A free market cannot exist on the scale of nation states and global corporations. The best we can hope for at that level is public oversight and regulation to prevent too much power leaving the hands of the citizenry as a whole, to be abused with the sole value and yardstick being one of making profit. That's one of the most valuable qualities of government. For example, we wouldn't need environmental regulation if the envieonment was a shared corporate value..
@fishhead06 In a free market. There is nothing stopping anybody from competing against anybody.
If Wal-mart decides to raise the prices on its goods, then somebody can start a business and undercut them and make profits, since obviously Wal-mart will be losing business.
Global corporations? Under cut them if they are having higher prices than you like.
Regulation prevents growth and it leads to corporatism with corporations wanting special priviledges.
@ViraIVideos Yes you can. If somebody is selling soda cans for 100 dollars a pop, anybody can undercut a corporation like that, there is nothing stopping them from starting up their own business.
EXACTLY! Competition LOWERS prices!!! As long as people are undercutting others, the lowest price will always be available!
If the big business puts the small business, and then raises the price again, somebody else will start up a business and undercut them again.
@ViraIVideos Monopolies occur because government subsidizes them by giving them bail outs and special priveleges.
Free Markets can always stop monopolies, nothing is stopping people from competing with them.
The free market DOESNT stop people buying out because THATS WHAT ITS SUPPOSED TO ALLOW!
Somebody else will simply come along and undercut the big corp IF THEY ARE HAVING HIGH PRICES! Which they wont because of competition stealing their customers away.
@ViraIVideos Wrong. Nobody can stop anybody from competing against one another. No restrictions, so they can undercut the big comps if they go have high prices. But most likely they wont, since in a free market, competition ensures lowest prices.
Competition NEVER dies in a free market, unless somebody gets special privileges from the government.
@superlucci Lol you're really funny because I already addressed this.
If we assume Wal Mart has a monopoly, and someone ATTEMPTS to undercut them, Wal mart goes from HIGH prices BACK to low prices UNTIL the competition is gone.
OR if Wal Mart likes, they can BUY out the competition, known as HORIZONTAL integration.
A MONOPOLY can only be stopped in one way, by government intrusion.
THE FREE MARKET CAN NOT REMOVE A MONOPOLY. I JUST PROVED WHY THEY CAN'T IN 2 WAYS!
When Wal-mart goes and undercuts them, how long do you think they do it for? 6 months maybe? That is 6 months of time where the groceries are at its cheapest, meaning the consumer benefits. And then what happens when Walmart puts the other person out of business? Well Walmart makes a choice to either increase their prices or maintain lower prices. Obviously they will increase their prices.
BUT GUESS WHAT!? If they do that, THEN SOMEBODY ELSE COMPETES WITH THEM!
@ViraIVideos You dont have to have millions of dollars to compete with Wal-mart! Wal-mart has multiple types of goods, you could have 5 people start up 5 business's that relate to 1 particular good that Wal-mart has. Then if people wanted that type of good and knew you had it lower price than Wal-mart, then they would go to you obviously.
You dont have to automatically be big with Wal-mart to compete with them
@ViraIVideos There doesnt need to be an infinite amount of money in order for competition. All you need is to have 1 company think it can pull higher prices on its customers, only to find out somebody knew that and created a business that is taking away your customers. Now you have to lower prices to get them back or buy them out. Either way its good for the consumer. Because then somebody else can start up a business to compete.
There will never be a "Once everyone is gone" scenario.
@ViraIVideos The ability to compete with Wal-mart takes smarts and common sense but more than above all else, is to simply have the motivation and will to succeed.
If Wal-mart has incredibly high prices right now, then anybody who knows how to run a business which is obviously a ton of people since small business's are the lifeblood of this economy, and they will make HUGE profits off of it because Wal-mart is raising its prices, until it trys to lower prices or buy out again
@ViraIVideos OBVIOUSLY A COMPANY WOULD LOVE MONOPOLY! But in a free market, they cant be a monopoly unless government gives them special privileges, then it doesnt become a free market anymore, it becomes corporatism!
If it buys out competition then great! Somebody else will just compete with Walmart then! Its a never ending cycle of competition which keeps Wal-mart in check!
Nothing can stop anybody from competing against Wal-mart in a free market! Unless its the government!
@ViraIVideos You dont need to have unlimited capital to have a free market!
Its always getting circulated around in 1 way or another, mainly through people buying goods.
Your problem is that you think there is a limit to the amount of people that can compete with Wal-mart, and the answer is there isnt. As long as humans continue to reproduce, and our self interest is our main motive, there will always be people for competing against Wal-mart.
@superlucci Oh yeah ?? Go read the article called "In a few hands", published by "The Economist" on
Nov 2nd 2000. It is on the internet and it seems, again, that reality disagree with you my friend. Here is a counsel, if you want to understand economy, stop watching Friedman videos on Youtube and go buy an University's published book of introduction to economy. You gonna be blown away by the total lack of consensus on Friedman's ideas and the vast amount of criticism he received from its peers.
@ViraIVideos Unlimited competition is ALWAYS possible! Innovation year after year continues to grow and people want more and more and are willing to continue to trade for things. Hell, we had the closest thing to a free market Pre Great Depression, so how the hell do yopu think we lasted that long?
You dont need unlimited wealth. This is not a zero sum game!
Finite money never means finite competition. Everybody can innovate, and everytime they innovate, the public will buy it. Endless cycle
@ViraIVideos I cant learn something from somebody who doesnt know what he is talking about.
Free markets CANNOT keep a monopoly due to nobody stopping anybody from competing with it. Your assuming that if somebody buys someone else up, that means there is a monopoly. When thats not the case. Another business will start up and repeat the cycle. There will always be competition, therefore the lowest prices will always be available.
Only government intervention can produce monopolies.
@superlucci hahahaha! How funny. You know what Milton Friedman said to a government official when told his theory had been proven wrong by empirical studies? « Well, it's that reality is obviously wrong! »
This is the problem with neoliberals : they always forget that free market don't exist and can't exist and that governments and regulators have to address reality, not theory.
@superlucci hahaha. "Minimum Wages and Employment: A Case Study of the
Fast-Food Industry in New Jersey and Pennsylvania: Reply" By DAVID CARD AND ALAN B. KRUEGER* Published in 2000.
It shows a case where reality has, without any doubt, behave in the opposite way of what Friedman theory says it should have. I took the reply because it is an answer to a criticism made by neoliberal economists. Result:Card & Kruger brilliantly demonstrate that these folks falsified their data... How funny isn't?
@superlucci Minimum wage is like a tide that raises all boats except the obscenely wealthy. Don't tell me the rich are going to dispose of their own garbage, fuckhole. Give people more money at the bottom and they will spend up. Trickle down is global ( and trickling OUT in the case of the US ), but bubble up is LOCAL.
@j0hnwi11iams No its not like a tide. When you raise minimum wage you discriminate even more than before simply because people who do not constitute the minimum wage now become unemployed.
Disposing garbage has nothing to do with what we are talking about.
You arent giving money, you are STEALING money, and while you STEAL money from the rich, you discriminate even more on the people at the bottom because they cant work for a lesser wage.
@j0hnwi11iams And why do you think they go overseas? Its because they can make a profit over there due to less regulations and less taxes.
It doesnt matter how low you make taxes, if they can still not spend as much over there than here, they will go over there. Thats why if you lower their taxes to such an extent that doing business here is cheaper, then you get their business, obviously.
@ViraIVideos What are you talking about? Demand solely dictating growth is an Economic Law? Are you trolling? Take any macro class beyond a "principles" course in your undergraduate and you'll realize Keynesian Economics, your mantra, is barely even regarded as serious economics anymore. You are so beyond brainwashed it's not even funny. Supply in fact creates demand, and the Keynesian "stimulus" you have a hard-on for is simply converted into inflation by rational expectations.
@aaronpeiser Lol, you created a Straw man and attacked it.
When have even USED the word Keynesian? What makes you think I believe or follow that type of economic theory?
The truth is, If i have a factory fully of goods, and I put the factory in the middle of the pacific, with no consumers, I will starve and go out of business.
DEMAND dictates the will to buy. The will to buy rewards supply. Supply is needed to meet Demand.
Demand dictates all forms of economics. Supply is subservient to it.
@ViraIVideos Are you really so ignorant not to know what Keynesian Economics is? Go look it up. This "demand only" economics, whatever you want to call it, is failed and disregarded economics. Demand means nothing without supply. What is there to demand? You are absolutely brainwashed. Supply creates demand. If I supply cheaper products, I stimulate demand for new innovations to taking advantage of the adjusted prices. Quit touting you're irrelevant, obviously forgotten, "principles" course.
@aaronpeiser I know what kenesian economics is. But that has more to do with increasing the buying power of the average consumer through government investment, than demand side buying potential.
Keynesian economics is named after it's founder, and is successfully used to stimulate the masses spending potential. That's it. It has nothing to do with the principles of Supply and Demand.
The fact is, you can supply products all you want, there needs to be a DEMAND to buy them. Ignorant is yourself
@ViraIVideos The point is that supply and demand are both important, one does not necessarily dominate the other. The main premise and reality behind Keynesian economics is that demand must be must be manipulated through government fiscal policy to stabalize the business cycle. Ask any actual economist and he will agree. If you take just one "intermediate" macro class you'll learn that economics has matured vastly beyond this school of thought in realizing the link to inflation. (IS-LM model)
There's an obvious difference between lobbying to prevent Govt intrusion on your private business to protect assets that you earned
-vs-
Lobbying to get your hands directly on taxpayer money in a bailout ... then pay no taxes ... on top of getting taxpayers to give your employees money for their personal use ... while you're the head Obama's "Economic Advisory Board .. all that taxpayer money, yet kill jobs here in order to send 2 large industries to China
@allgoo19: So you blast Koch for wanting Govt (especially Democrats w/no business or economic experience) to not impose senseless "feel good" regulation. Meanwhile...
You say nothing about GE .. who received a taxpayer funded $50 billion bailout .. whose CEO heads Obama's "Economic Advisory Board" .. who receives numerous Govt contracts .. who recently sent 2 large industries to China .. who paid no taxes last year ... and who was one of the "chosen" to receive Obama slush fund money
All talk, no action. Democrats put something on the table already, idiot: you said no because it took too much money from your rich donors. Gets so old...
Why do the Republicans ALWAYS ignore the contributions of the Bush Crime Family to this mess? Why do they REFUSE to allow the very folks who got us into this mess pay more in taxes?
I can't beleive the ignorance you Dems are showing. Just keep racking up the debt at a record pace, no problem. When is it going to stop? You people have your heads in the sand. Yes, raise the debt limit, BUT we must stop this reckless continuous spending. ALL OF IT! That's all the Repubs are trying to so. STOP the incredible pace of spending. What the hell is wrong with that?
@brianremington Because it's THEIR reckless spending that put you in this mess, and they don't want to fix THEIR mistake. Wars and huge tax cut for the rich is making things worst, and NO they are NOT JOB CREATORS. They want to make the poor, the sicks, the elderly pay for the gift to their wealthy friends.
Bush tax cuts were an equal .50 across the board, not "huge cuts to the rich" like you Libtards are brainwashed with. Also, newsflash dummy, we're in 5 wars now under Obama. And, some more facts:
"After Bush tax cuts, 2003-2007, 8 million jobs were created, average salaries increased, and revenues increased $785 billion -- the largest 4 year revenue increase in American history" - US Treasury, US Labor Bureau
@brianremington That's the problem, the Republicans have deluded themselves into thinking that spending cuts and spending cuts alone will solve all the problems involved with the federal deficit and they're not cutting spending in places where it can be cut like our military budget. I can guarantee you that nobody in the United States is opposed to cutting spending, I can guarantee you that they are opposed to Washington cutting...
@brianremington ... taxes for the wealthy while asking senior citizens to ditch medicare.
The Democrats have invited the Republicans to negotiation talks several times for this issue. On Wednesday, speaker Boehner left the negotiations and now we're left with this mess.
This is a completely manufactured crisis created by YOUR party Boehner. Obama and the Dems put out lots of plans, but you asshole Tea Baggers with your anti-tax cult fetish just couldn't take "yes" for an answer.
OK, this has grown very tiredsome now. We all know what will happen. They will cut at least 2,7 trillion, most of it from entitlements, while the rich will keep their tax cuts or even get them enhanced. We all know this will happen, because Wall Street WILL NOT let their henchmen fail to raise the debt ceiling.
We're not adding more debt by raising the debt ceiling. The money has already been appropriated by Congress. Why do you want the United States to be known as a deadbeat who can't pay its bills?
hmm... That's what Geithner, Bernanke, Blankfein, Dimon, Zoellick, Soetoro,, Krugman, all say.
The gubbermint has defaulted before, in fact they default every single day they devalue the dollar through inflation.
The US known as a dead beat is an improvement, over what it is considered now.
No need to worry, as history has shown - the Treasury will honor their debt to the banking cartels, even if they have to steal your pension funds to do so.
@FDASARO How blatantly ignorant can you be? Just because Obama says something, doesn't mean it's even close to being the truth. We are very much adding MORE debt. We're in fact adding debt to pay debt we already have. We are, in this sense, allowing ourselves to apply for another credit card to pay our current credit card's minimum payment. When are Obama and Reid going to quit playing politics and get on board with a REAL long term solution for the wealth of our country?
I'm an Econ/Math Major, and CS Minor. You're model is too simple, and you're perception leaves reality out of scope. If I had never heard of electricity, how could I demand it? If we do not provide a climate for innovation, we are sacrificing demand for those lost innovations. It's hilarious you mention business in California, because if you had actually done your research you'd find out how many of them are moving their business to Texas where taxes are low.
aaronpeiser 6 months ago
Comment removed
aaronpeiser 6 months ago
Comment removed
aaronpeiser 6 months ago
Comment removed
aaronpeiser 6 months ago
ECONOMIC TERRORIST. Ditch the old or we fuck everyone. You are going to pay for that, asshole.
j0hnwi11iams 6 months ago
Keynesian economics didn't just die, it was MURDERED by filthy republicans.
j0hnwi11iams 6 months ago
I doubt that it would surprise anyone to find out that every single budget proposal that Dems have submitted since Jan 2009 has been voted against by every single Repub senator and every single Repub congressman. Now he is blaming Dems for his failure to do his own job. Put something on table? What for? Maybe this demand might have a shred of legitimacy if there was any prior cooperation but all every member of his caucus has ever done is say no! Guy has zero credibility and ton of hubris.
industrialsun 6 months ago
Blatant LIES. What the fuck!
ojfhfghdc8r48ty0 6 months ago
A mile from the right-wing fringe. Which is still about 50 miles from the center.
xTheOxx 6 months ago
Alcoholics often don't have good memories.
nabiji 6 months ago
Raising the debt ceiling is the easy part, but what are we going to do to cut spending? Sounds to me like the Democrats have NO intentions of curtailing expenditures. If they had interest they'd have debated the first bill put forth by the house: Cut, Cap and Balance. When you hear the Democrats talk about that, they make it sound like a balanced budget is a bad thing.
Even if we raise the debt ceiling and avert the so-called crisis, we'll still be downgraded due to our spending.
skinnydipinacid 6 months ago
Where are the other ideas? Disgusting. I'm so tired of politicians manufacturing "hard hitting" speeches like this. The debt ceiling had been raised an innumerable number of times before. It's a crisis needlessly created by republicans so that they can twist dem's arms into making unpopular cuts, which they will later be able to blame the dems for. Oh, but Ignore insane military spending & oil subsidies, & don't make the rich contribute.
ByTheBirchTree 6 months ago
If he'd a stuck it out a mile I would have had a shot at it, he's so full a shit it aint even funny
huskerbird1 6 months ago
everybody, love your country; this forced a compromise, drama or not, it's America's ability to overcome adversity time and time again. We elected Obama, a hisorical moment, we will work this out too; no one likes negotiating, but the outcome is usually fair.
jcamp20 6 months ago
Only in this fucked up version of reality can a republican stand in front of the American people and say that he's the one who has stuck his neck out.
Is my country so blinded by emotion that we can't see that Obama's presidency has been more conservative than Reagan's first term? Can a Republican really take credit for "negotiating" when his bill contains no revisions to the tax code?
"If they can get you asking the wrong questions they don't have to worry about the answers," Thomas Pynchon
Ematched 6 months ago
It throws me for a loop how the Republicans can stand there on the House and Senate floors with a straight face and tell the American people that the Democrats are trying to raise their taxes and we don't see what goes on behind closed doors well maybe stuff like that does go on but I am sure they are not much better. I wish Politicians in Washington would cut the petty political games and do what their constituents sent them there to do, REPRESENT THEM!!!!
railfanstreator94 6 months ago
Comment removed
industrialsun 6 months ago
Comment removed
vidann1 6 months ago
Well, now - this is clearly a call for Joe Wilson to step in:
"YOU LIE, YOU F*CKER!"
SoINeedAName48 6 months ago
@SoINeedAName48 I think the tanning bed has fried his lil alcoholic brain. I was actually waiting for him to cry.
vidann1 6 months ago
You're damn right!
Fiscal year 2011 started in October of last year when the democants still had enough power to pass any g-damn budget they wanted (up to the end of the year) but failed to. Why? They had NO plan! The plan after the 'shellacking' they took in Nov was to push the tough decisions on to the GOP then demonize for their own failures.
Pathetic.
jtbpnw 6 months ago
Shut up asshole, you have gotten practically everything you wanted and if anyone is holding you back it's your own caucus.
newdimensionfilms 6 months ago 7
Comment removed
industrialsun 6 months ago
@industrialsun:
Boehner is being neutered? CNN shows 66% of Americans supported Republicans' Cut Cap & Balance plan ... 74% of Americans support a Balanced Budget Amendment.
Boehner's dismal record? Hardly. If you want to see "dismal", take a look at the worsened economic conditions on virtually every front since O'Dumbo, the inexperienced & incompetent Chicago-Thug clown, took office.
2010GOP 6 months ago
Comment removed
industrialsun 6 months ago
@industrialsun: Boehner obviously got the necessary votes. There were Republican members, as everyone knows, who wanted certain provisions. That's called being an individual & using your own head -- not simply towing the party line. Besides, I'd like for you to explain the difference in Harry Reid not having the votes in the Senate & putting off the vote that was supposed to take place at 1 a.m.
2010GOP 6 months ago
@industrialsun: "Dow Jones Industrial Average in January 2009 was under 7,000 and today is over 12,000 (or is that not considered a 'front') and unemployment rate has been declining since October 2009".
The Dow Jones hit the highest level in history under Bush -- what's your point? Back then, Liberals were complaining it was only making Wall Street fat cats rich. LOL.
What's more hysterical is that you're clueless on "real" unemployment numbers -- people who no longer receive unemp benefits
2010GOP 6 months ago
Comment removed
industrialsun 6 months ago
@industrialsun: Without the ability to use bold or italics, that's typically how people emphasis a word on YouTube.
With all that's going on in our country, you did not really just make an issue over the use of quotation marks, did you? That had to be from too much Cuervo, right?
2010GOP 6 months ago
@industrialsun: 4 yrs of Democrats in Congress, Obama in 3rd year, Trillions spent, and we have:
Record Unemployment (longest stretch since Great Depression) .. Weak Housing Mkt (worse than Great Depression) .. Record Poverty Rate .. Misery Index .. Bankruptcies .. Gas Prices .. Business Closures .. Bank Failures .. Welfare .. Low Avg Salaries .. Low US Credit standing .. Car Repos .. Inflation .. Record Debt .. Record Deficit
... but the Dow's good; Obama's policies are working ... LOL
2010GOP 6 months ago
Comment removed
industrialsun 6 months ago
@industrialsun: My gosh .... I ask again, are you drinking? I'm baffled by your comments.
Did I say no one ever had a car repo'd? No, I did not. I'm pointing to 'Record' car repossessions in 2011. You know .. 2 years after that massive stimulus was signed in addition to all other trillions in spending to create a "robust" economy?
Anyone who has any economic sense understands that Liberals' initiative within the housing market caused the economic crisis -- on top of insane spending levels
2010GOP 6 months ago
He stuck his neck out a mile for a bill that was DOA. I give it to him he has balls. Too bad he seems to have zero control over the GOP, maybe thats where he should stick his neck out.
SuperPerfectMan 6 months ago
Cancerous fake tan.
AsAboveSoBelow01 6 months ago
typically republican - accusing others of what they do them selves!
tristbjorn 6 months ago
Get me a shovel....it is getting really deep in here. Can you say "Compromise" John??? I have yet to see any "Fair" plan on your part. You can't point fingers when you are doing exactly what you are accusing Obama of. Get your nose out of the tea party ass and do your damn job.
justjulie37 6 months ago 2
@justjulie37: WTF are you talking about?
Boehner has presented & passed 3 bills. Where's the Democrats' plan? For shit's sake, Democrats haven't even proposed a budget in over 820 days. And now Harry Senile Reid won't even allow the merits of the Republican plan to be debated in the Senate
Obama the dumbass doesn't have a plan either. Just gum-flapping w/no specifics. The CBO director even had to come out and say, "we don't score speeches without specifics".
LOL .. Democrats = Dumbasses
2010GOP 6 months ago
@2010GOP BLAH BLAH BLAH......You can spew all your bullshit to someone who will listen to it
justjulie37 6 months ago
@justjulie37: ROFL! Those are called FACTS. Go ahead and challenge those facts --- many of us could use some more laughs, compliments of Libtards
2010GOP 6 months ago
@2010GOP Glad I could amuse you. The GOP wouldn't know facts if they came up and bit them in their lying asses.
justjulie37 6 months ago
@justjulie37: 2nd REQUEST -- which of my comments are lies?
Did Boehner not pass 3 bills in the House?
In 820+ days, have Democrats passed a budget?
Did Harry Reid allow debate on Republicans' latest bill?
Did the CBO Director not say that Obama had no specifics & that they don't score "speeches"?
2010GOP 6 months ago
@2010GOP Did any of those bills involve increasing taxes on the wealthiest Americans? Where do the Republicans get the idea that you can put a bite in the deficit, much less the debt, if you will not restore revenue to at least the levels seen in the Reagan Administration? You can't do it with cuts alone. Period. The wealthy seemed to get by paying more taxes in the 80s - why can't they now?
fishhead06 6 months ago
@2010GOP Republicunts just as dumb, make no mistake.
fl00ders 6 months ago
Comment removed
industrialsun 6 months ago
@industrialsun This CBO is as much a political organization as any other, certainly with their own opinions. Send the bill to real analysts and consultants who have to survive in the private sector doing what they do and I can guarantee you'll receive much more accurate results. They'd also laugh hysterically being asked to analyze Obama's "plan" based entirely off speeches AKA the smoke he's blowing straight up your ass.
aaronpeiser 6 months ago
@aaronpeiser: Actually, the CBO director did say that.
On Obama's so-called plan, CBO Director Doug Elmendorf said, "We cannot analyze without specifics. We don't score speeches".
LOL
2010GOP 6 months ago
@2010GOP Indeed he did, and you can only imagine what a real analyst would say. They would say we're being downgraded, like they already have said as well. These liberals need to quit sabotaging our economy, and the rest of their diligently devoted sheep need to wake up.
aaronpeiser 6 months ago
@aaronpeiser Moreover, due to the significance of the deadline we are approaching, real analysts, particularly Moody, have been examining budgets. Reid's plan isn't even good enough to keep our AAA bond rating... Almost on queue, you then have Obama making a speech last week about how it is somehow the Republican's fault we're being downgraded. Is this guy delusional?
aaronpeiser 6 months ago
Good, John, now you are a giraffe. No wonder you believe that we should be unequal under tax law, that you can generate revenue by cutting spending without taking in more money, and paying our bills and paying penalties will make our economy better.
Momsincharge 6 months ago
"A lot of people can never say yes." -- Yeah, Boehner, you and your party wouldn't have anything to do with such nonsense. Oh, wait...
MercuryShining 6 months ago
"Put Something On The Table!!!"
He did...offering you everything you wanted (MASSive social security/health care cuts & Zero on taxing the mega-rich) and alienating his electoral base.
FFS this speach is one big call for a Waaambulance.
bshieldsbb01 6 months ago 2
OMG its the exact opposite,how he keeps a straight face???
interfan63 6 months ago
At least he didn't stick out his you-know-what a mile.
whoo689 6 months ago
No one wants to see that... except maybe his wife.
whoo689 6 months ago
LIEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
EdwardP88 6 months ago
It's amazing that this man, the Speaker of the House, can stand in the well of the House of Representatives and blatantly lie. Anyone, and I mean anyone, Dem, Repub, or Independent who has been following these talks over the last few months knows that Obama offered cuts to both medicare and medicaid as well as a budget that contained almost a 5 to 1 ratio of cuts to revenue raises.
And everyone knows that as soon as revenue was included, Republicans walked the fuck out.
shalcall 6 months ago 13
Boehner never negotiated, he tied to dictate to the elected power of the presidency then tied to hang Congress's job on him while never moving an inch... It was the White House who gave proposals with cuts even bigger then Boehner, It was the demarcates who dropped the tax increases on the rich yet Boehner lied and sad they moved the goal posts...It was the Republicans who walked away wanting more at the cost of all America. That is the fact of it all as it stands
AmericanResponses 6 months ago
...and no tears? I think someone kidnapped the real JB and put in a robot. He should have shed a tear for all his hard work. Hell, give him a raise and a tattoo on his ass that says "Hero". The guy needs to borrow the first George Bush's purse.
Philinspaces 6 months ago
Do you guys understand that Boehner's plan has a Cut Cap Spending Amendment attached to it?
THe democrats get their beloved debt ceiling increased, while the Repubs be the father of the house and put a cap on our damn spending
superlucci 6 months ago
@superlucci Yes, because some arbitrary cap on gov't spending is somehow going to help our economy. . . God, some people are so ignorant about basic econ.
shalcall 6 months ago
@shalcall You are so ignorant on economics yes. You dont believe in having an amendment that cuts spending, when the biggest problem we have right now is spending.
Your an idiot
superlucci 6 months ago
@superlucci No, the biggest problem we have right now is a bunch if ignorant freshman Republicans, voted in by ignorant tea-hadists that are literally threatening certain economic DEPRESSION for the country if they don't get everything they want. They don't realize that SPENDING issues should be brought up during the BUDGETING process, when a shutdown in government won't throw the world economy into a tailspin.
That you don't know this, isn't surprising. Conservatives revel in ignorance.
shalcall 6 months ago
@shalcall We needed a downgrade. This will show us the pain to understand that Democrats have fucked us over.
The republicans have passed several budgets, only to see the Democrats deny it and not even pass their own budget within their own Senate.
This down credit rating is overhyped.
You level in ignorance like its a damn hobby of yours.
Obama's plans have reduced us to this.
superlucci 6 months ago
@superlucci It's not the credit rating downgrade. It's the DEFAULT ON OUR DEBT. I could give a fuck (and so could the credit markets) if S&P, Moody's, or Fitch downgrades U.S. Treasuries. Ask Japan how their sovereign debt is doing after their downgrade (the markets hardly noticed and they have twice the debt we do compared to GDP).
If we actually miss payments on our obligations, be it Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, or pay for any gov't worker, THAT will hurt our interest rates.
shalcall 6 months ago
Hey Boehner, go in a corner and cry emo boy.
1noen1 6 months ago
Boehner looks desperate.
What's pushing him? Follow the money, first tea party, behind the tea party, Koch bro.
Kochs invested heavily on tar sand pipeline, it's do or die for the family. One key regulation can ruin their future plan, so they want to make gov. power over them to a dirt.
In a way, its a fight Koch family vs. people of US.
allgoo19 6 months ago
@allgoo19: "Koch Brothers" <-- LMAO!
Where's your concern w/numerous corporations, heavily donating to Democrats, some of who rcv'd bailout money, UNLIKE Koch?
Where's your concern on the recent FEC report showing high-powered K-Street Lobbyists found a loophole donating millions w/90% going to Democrats?
Where's your concern w/Obama's slush-fund of Billions going to his "favorite" Corporate Executives' personal bank accounts?
You brainwashed lunatic -- dig your empty head out of your ass
2010GOP 6 months ago
@2010GOP I don't doubt anything you say here, but these are bold claims. Instead of being a dick and calling people names why don't you source your argument?
strylowskia90 6 months ago
@strylowskia90:
High-powered K-Street Lobbyists; 90% of heavy donations to Democrats: tinyurl . com / 64duwjy
Obama giving billions to his "favorite" Corporate Executives, for their personal bank accounts:
ama-assn . org / amednews / m / 2011 / 04 / 11 / gsb0411 . htm
2010GOP 6 months ago
@strylowskia90 He can't source his "argument" because it's bullshit.
shalcall 6 months ago
@shalcall Well he can and he did. The problem is that the things he sourced didn't support what he was saying, so in other words, yes, his argument is bullshit, or at the very least misleading.
strylowskia90 6 months ago
@2010GOP ""Koch Brothers" <-- LMAO!
I read your comment, basically your point is "Other corporates are doing the same, what's the big deal?", correct?
You are not denying Koch's intention, correct also?
allgoo19 6 months ago
@allgoo19 Your are being deceptive when you give a pass on Democrats for funding a campaign and then criticize somebody else for funding the oppositions campaign.
Plus, funding for less government in our lives is a good thing.
superlucci 6 months ago
@superlucci "Your are being deceptive when you give a ..'
I didn't say anything about Dems or Repubs, did I?
allgoo19 6 months ago
@allgoo19 Lets put 2 and 2 together shall we?
If you criticize Republicans for not doing something...who is the only party left to you to defend?
Democrats, your a democrat, your not fooling anybody.
superlucci 6 months ago
@superlucci "Lets put 2 and 2 together shall we?"
Is this really Dems. vs. Repubs issue?
You don't think no Dems getting money from Kochs directly or indirectly, do you?
Of course, many of them do.
It's about Koch family vs. people of US. regardless of party line.
allgoo19 6 months ago
@allgoo19 It is a Dems vs Repbs issue. Otherwise you would have called Dems out of them too, but even if you did, it still would be stupid.
If somebody gets money donated to their campaign for things the politicians have been advocating for, how does that make them a puppet in any sense? If I advocate for lowering taxes and then somebody comes up to me and gives me 50k if i continue to advocate for what I say, that does not make me a tool. That means I am rewarded for my hard work
superlucci 6 months ago
@superlucci "It is a Dems vs Repbs issue. ."
You don't deny that some of Dems. getting money from Kochs, do you?
allgoo19 6 months ago
@allgoo19: This is why it's so gut-busting laughable when Maddow rails against "Koch Brothers".
When one actually looks at the facts, it is so beyond absurd. Koch/Private/Protect Own Assets is soooo horrible in Maddow's eyes, yet she's silent on corporations like GE/Billions in Taxpayer Money/Job Destroyer/China/Paid no Taxes/Taxpayer Money to Corp Execs/Obama's "economic" advisory board.
Who CANNOT see the absurdity?
2010GOP 6 months ago
@2010GOP "When one actually looks at the facts, it is so beyond absurd. Koch/Private/Protect .."
We are talking about this particular video about Boehner's persistence, aren't we?
Which part of this story GE is taking?
allgoo19 6 months ago
@2010GOP WTF? Jeff Immelt is a Flaming republican . He was the President of the advisory board for By Partisan reasons, in an effort to make the politics of the country work together. So you are tiring to spin the well proven greed of a republican businessman and their lack of care for this country on Obama . Yeah desperate fail buddy desperate fail!!
AmericanResponses 6 months ago
@superlucci "funding for less government in our lives is a good thing."
Which part of history are you talking about?
Less gov. was more successful, economically?
When?
allgoo19 6 months ago
@allgoo19 The 19th century.
superlucci 6 months ago
@superlucci Yeah - instead of having public input and authority over the private sector (via government), why not just have banks and corporations control everything in society? Yeah, that sounds like a great idea.
fishhead06 6 months ago
@fishhead06 Thats called corporatism, I am for a free market, where there is no monopoly
superlucci 6 months ago
@superlucci A free market cannot exist on the scale of nation states and global corporations. The best we can hope for at that level is public oversight and regulation to prevent too much power leaving the hands of the citizenry as a whole, to be abused with the sole value and yardstick being one of making profit. That's one of the most valuable qualities of government. For example, we wouldn't need environmental regulation if the envieonment was a shared corporate value..
fishhead06 6 months ago
@fishhead06 In a free market. There is nothing stopping anybody from competing against anybody.
If Wal-mart decides to raise the prices on its goods, then somebody can start a business and undercut them and make profits, since obviously Wal-mart will be losing business.
Global corporations? Under cut them if they are having higher prices than you like.
Regulation prevents growth and it leads to corporatism with corporations wanting special priviledges.
superlucci 6 months ago
@superlucci You can't undercut a corporation with 50 billion dollars in it's pocket.
They undercut you until you get out of business, then they raise prices.
That's why in America Monopolies are illegal.
A monopoly can undercut anyone and then re raise prices when all competition ceases.
ViraIVideos 6 months ago
@ViraIVideos Yes you can. If somebody is selling soda cans for 100 dollars a pop, anybody can undercut a corporation like that, there is nothing stopping them from starting up their own business.
EXACTLY! Competition LOWERS prices!!! As long as people are undercutting others, the lowest price will always be available!
If the big business puts the small business, and then raises the price again, somebody else will start up a business and undercut them again.
Competition leads to lower prices.
superlucci 6 months ago
@ViraIVideos A monopoly cannot occur in a free market.
superlucci 6 months ago
@superlucci Oh, here we go. More recycled Ayn Rand.
industrialsun 6 months ago
@industrialsun You cant debate it.
superlucci 6 months ago
@superlucci Monopolies occur because of Vertical and horizontal integration.
Free markets can not stop vertical and horizontal integration.
If I have the money to buy another company, I buy it. How does the free market stop that?
If you have enough market share, you become a Monopoly.
How does a free market stop the inevitable Monopoly conundrum? Answer= It can't.
ViraIVideos 6 months ago
@ViraIVideos Monopolies occur because government subsidizes them by giving them bail outs and special priveleges.
Free Markets can always stop monopolies, nothing is stopping people from competing with them.
The free market DOESNT stop people buying out because THATS WHAT ITS SUPPOSED TO ALLOW!
Somebody else will simply come along and undercut the big corp IF THEY ARE HAVING HIGH PRICES! Which they wont because of competition stealing their customers away.
superlucci 6 months ago
@ViraIVideos You dont just need money to become a monopoly.
Only the government can provide a monopoly.
And even if nobody was competing against Wal-mart, they would be having the lowest prices available.
superlucci 6 months ago
@superlucci Lol :D
Apparently you never passed a Bachelors level Economics class.
Horizontal and Vertical integration CREATE monopolies. That's a fact, not an opinion. It's the only way to create a monopoly in a free market.
MONOPOLIES BY DEFINITION raise prices once all competition is removed. THERE IS NO INCENTIVE to keep prices low if no one is competing with you.
If Wal mart had NO competition they would increase their margins. Go get an MBA.
ViraIVideos 6 months ago
@ViraIVideos Wrong. Nobody can stop anybody from competing against one another. No restrictions, so they can undercut the big comps if they go have high prices. But most likely they wont, since in a free market, competition ensures lowest prices.
Competition NEVER dies in a free market, unless somebody gets special privileges from the government.
superlucci 6 months ago
@superlucci Lol you're really funny because I already addressed this.
If we assume Wal Mart has a monopoly, and someone ATTEMPTS to undercut them, Wal mart goes from HIGH prices BACK to low prices UNTIL the competition is gone.
OR if Wal Mart likes, they can BUY out the competition, known as HORIZONTAL integration.
A MONOPOLY can only be stopped in one way, by government intrusion.
THE FREE MARKET CAN NOT REMOVE A MONOPOLY. I JUST PROVED WHY THEY CAN'T IN 2 WAYS!
MERGERS AND PRICE CUTS!
ViraIVideos 6 months ago
@ViraIVideos EXACTLY!
When Wal-mart goes and undercuts them, how long do you think they do it for? 6 months maybe? That is 6 months of time where the groceries are at its cheapest, meaning the consumer benefits. And then what happens when Walmart puts the other person out of business? Well Walmart makes a choice to either increase their prices or maintain lower prices. Obviously they will increase their prices.
BUT GUESS WHAT!? If they do that, THEN SOMEBODY ELSE COMPETES WITH THEM!
superlucci 6 months ago
@superlucci GET A DEGREE IN FINANCE!!!
In order to compete with Wal-mart you have to have MILLIONS of dollars for STOCK/Inventory, operating capital, and INVESTORS!!!
THERE IS NOT AN INFINITE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE THAT HAVE THIS!!!
ONCE EVERYONE THAT CAN COMPETE WITH WAL MART HAS DONE SO AND LOST, THE GAME IS OVER!
In your example there is a never ending amount of people with cash and the ABILITY to compete with wal mart.
I can disprove it with one statement, YOU GO COMPETE WITH THEM! YOU CAN'T!
ViraIVideos 6 months ago
@ViraIVideos You dont have to have millions of dollars to compete with Wal-mart! Wal-mart has multiple types of goods, you could have 5 people start up 5 business's that relate to 1 particular good that Wal-mart has. Then if people wanted that type of good and knew you had it lower price than Wal-mart, then they would go to you obviously.
You dont have to automatically be big with Wal-mart to compete with them
superlucci 6 months ago
@ViraIVideos There doesnt need to be an infinite amount of money in order for competition. All you need is to have 1 company think it can pull higher prices on its customers, only to find out somebody knew that and created a business that is taking away your customers. Now you have to lower prices to get them back or buy them out. Either way its good for the consumer. Because then somebody else can start up a business to compete.
There will never be a "Once everyone is gone" scenario.
superlucci 6 months ago
@ViraIVideos The ability to compete with Wal-mart takes smarts and common sense but more than above all else, is to simply have the motivation and will to succeed.
If Wal-mart has incredibly high prices right now, then anybody who knows how to run a business which is obviously a ton of people since small business's are the lifeblood of this economy, and they will make HUGE profits off of it because Wal-mart is raising its prices, until it trys to lower prices or buy out again
superlucci 6 months ago
@ViraIVideos Go type in Milton Friedman Monopolies on youtube and learn!
superlucci 6 months ago
@superlucci WHY WOULD A MONOPOLY ALLOW COMPETITION????
It HURTS their revenue and profit if they GIVE UP market share!!!
A MONOPOLY WOULD NEVER ALLOW COMPETITION TO OCCUR IF IT COULD STOP IT!!
IT would either BUY OUT THE COMPETITION OR UNDERCUT IT until the competition went out of business.
I'm sorry, but you're clearly not meant for economics. The basic fundamentals of BUSINESS are not in your blood.
If you ran a company your competitors would eat you apart.
ViraIVideos 6 months ago
@ViraIVideos OBVIOUSLY A COMPANY WOULD LOVE MONOPOLY! But in a free market, they cant be a monopoly unless government gives them special privileges, then it doesnt become a free market anymore, it becomes corporatism!
If it buys out competition then great! Somebody else will just compete with Walmart then! Its a never ending cycle of competition which keeps Wal-mart in check!
Nothing can stop anybody from competing against Wal-mart in a free market! Unless its the government!
superlucci 6 months ago
@superlucci FREE MARKETS DO NOT MEAN YOU HAVE UNLIMITED CAPITAL!!!
CAPITAL and CASH is LIMITED in a free market.
ONCE everyone that CAN compete has done so and FAILED, the GAME IS OVER and there IS A winner!!!
Your world of INFINITE COMPETITION is pure fantasy.
NO SUCH WORLD EXISTS WITH INFINITE COMPETITION AND INFINITE WEALTH.
GET OUT OF LALA LAND!
ViraIVideos 6 months ago
@ViraIVideos You dont need to have unlimited capital to have a free market!
Its always getting circulated around in 1 way or another, mainly through people buying goods.
Your problem is that you think there is a limit to the amount of people that can compete with Wal-mart, and the answer is there isnt. As long as humans continue to reproduce, and our self interest is our main motive, there will always be people for competing against Wal-mart.
superlucci 6 months ago
@ViraIVideos Unlimited Competition is ALWAYS possible.
It does exist, go check out Hong Kong and look up their free market and see why they always have people coming there.
You need to seriously watch some Milton Friedman. Be amazed.
superlucci 6 months ago
@superlucci Oh yeah ?? Go read the article called "In a few hands", published by "The Economist" on
Nov 2nd 2000. It is on the internet and it seems, again, that reality disagree with you my friend. Here is a counsel, if you want to understand economy, stop watching Friedman videos on Youtube and go buy an University's published book of introduction to economy. You gonna be blown away by the total lack of consensus on Friedman's ideas and the vast amount of criticism he received from its peers.
sentenced988 6 months ago
@sentenced988 Friedman was a handwaver when it came to externalities. He was a simpleton.
j0hnwi11iams 6 months ago
@j0hnwi11iams Milton Friedman was a genius.
superlucci 6 months ago
@superlucci Unlimited competition is IMPOSSIBLE. IT implies UNLIMITED WEALTH AND FINANCING TO BUILD BUSINESSES!!
That's IMPOSSIBLE!!
If you can't see how crazy a belief that is, I can't be more logical or explain it to you.
FINITE MONEY means FINITE COMPETITION.
Milton Friedman and Ayn Rand can not DISPROVE that obvious fact.
Once all POSSIBLE competition is dealt with, NOTHING else is left.
ViraIVideos 6 months ago
@ViraIVideos Unlimited competition is ALWAYS possible! Innovation year after year continues to grow and people want more and more and are willing to continue to trade for things. Hell, we had the closest thing to a free market Pre Great Depression, so how the hell do yopu think we lasted that long?
You dont need unlimited wealth. This is not a zero sum game!
Finite money never means finite competition. Everybody can innovate, and everytime they innovate, the public will buy it. Endless cycle
superlucci 6 months ago
@ViraIVideos Go look up the zero sum game by Milton Friedman, and then come back to me.
THERE IS NEVER AN END TO COMPETITION! UNLESS GOVERNMENT FORCIBLY ENDS IT!
superlucci 6 months ago
@ViraIVideos Free market is the solution to destroy monopolies!
superlucci 6 months ago
@superlucci I can't teach something to someone who isn't willing to learn it.
Free markets create Monopolies, as I already said, with Horizontal and Vertical integration....
No theory exists currently that can stop this from occurring naturally.
You would win the Nobel Prize for Economics if you could successfully disprove my above statement.
It is economic law, as simple as that. It's as elementary as the law of Supply and Demand. You can't disprove it.
ViraIVideos 6 months ago
@ViraIVideos I cant learn something from somebody who doesnt know what he is talking about.
Free markets CANNOT keep a monopoly due to nobody stopping anybody from competing with it. Your assuming that if somebody buys someone else up, that means there is a monopoly. When thats not the case. Another business will start up and repeat the cycle. There will always be competition, therefore the lowest prices will always be available.
Only government intervention can produce monopolies.
superlucci 6 months ago
@superlucci hahahaha! How funny. You know what Milton Friedman said to a government official when told his theory had been proven wrong by empirical studies? « Well, it's that reality is obviously wrong! »
This is the problem with neoliberals : they always forget that free market don't exist and can't exist and that governments and regulators have to address reality, not theory.
sentenced988 6 months ago
@sentenced988 LOL!
You honestly think you know more than Friedman. Oh boy, this is gooooood.
And buy a university's published book on the economy? A liberal version? LOL!
Lol. No.
superlucci 6 months ago
@superlucci hahaha. "Minimum Wages and Employment: A Case Study of the
Fast-Food Industry in New Jersey and Pennsylvania: Reply" By DAVID CARD AND ALAN B. KRUEGER* Published in 2000.
It shows a case where reality has, without any doubt, behave in the opposite way of what Friedman theory says it should have. I took the reply because it is an answer to a criticism made by neoliberal economists. Result:Card & Kruger brilliantly demonstrate that these folks falsified their data... How funny isn't?
sentenced988 6 months ago
@sentenced988 Minimum wage discriminates against people who dont have the skills required to be paid that much.
You get rid of minimum wage and you increase employment. Dummy
superlucci 6 months ago
@superlucci Minimum wage is like a tide that raises all boats except the obscenely wealthy. Don't tell me the rich are going to dispose of their own garbage, fuckhole. Give people more money at the bottom and they will spend up. Trickle down is global ( and trickling OUT in the case of the US ), but bubble up is LOCAL.
j0hnwi11iams 6 months ago
@j0hnwi11iams No its not like a tide. When you raise minimum wage you discriminate even more than before simply because people who do not constitute the minimum wage now become unemployed.
Disposing garbage has nothing to do with what we are talking about.
You arent giving money, you are STEALING money, and while you STEAL money from the rich, you discriminate even more on the people at the bottom because they cant work for a lesser wage.
superlucci 6 months ago
@j0hnwi11iams And why do you think they go overseas? Its because they can make a profit over there due to less regulations and less taxes.
It doesnt matter how low you make taxes, if they can still not spend as much over there than here, they will go over there. Thats why if you lower their taxes to such an extent that doing business here is cheaper, then you get their business, obviously.
superlucci 6 months ago
@j0hnwi11iams That's correct. Supply side economics is a joke.
All economics is DEMAND based, not Supply based.
Shoving a THOUSAND workers and products into a factory doesn't make it profitable.
The DEMAND to buy goods makes it profitable.
Supply side, trickle down economics, is a political theory, it doesn't hold up to Economic standards, history, or theory.
Demand and not Supply, dictates growth. It's an Economic Law.
If no one demands goods, businesses fail, regardless of Supply.
ViraIVideos 6 months ago
@ViraIVideos What are you talking about? Demand solely dictating growth is an Economic Law? Are you trolling? Take any macro class beyond a "principles" course in your undergraduate and you'll realize Keynesian Economics, your mantra, is barely even regarded as serious economics anymore. You are so beyond brainwashed it's not even funny. Supply in fact creates demand, and the Keynesian "stimulus" you have a hard-on for is simply converted into inflation by rational expectations.
aaronpeiser 6 months ago
@aaronpeiser Lol, you created a Straw man and attacked it.
When have even USED the word Keynesian? What makes you think I believe or follow that type of economic theory?
The truth is, If i have a factory fully of goods, and I put the factory in the middle of the pacific, with no consumers, I will starve and go out of business.
DEMAND dictates the will to buy. The will to buy rewards supply. Supply is needed to meet Demand.
Demand dictates all forms of economics. Supply is subservient to it.
ViraIVideos 6 months ago
@ViraIVideos Are you really so ignorant not to know what Keynesian Economics is? Go look it up. This "demand only" economics, whatever you want to call it, is failed and disregarded economics. Demand means nothing without supply. What is there to demand? You are absolutely brainwashed. Supply creates demand. If I supply cheaper products, I stimulate demand for new innovations to taking advantage of the adjusted prices. Quit touting you're irrelevant, obviously forgotten, "principles" course.
aaronpeiser 6 months ago
@aaronpeiser I know what kenesian economics is. But that has more to do with increasing the buying power of the average consumer through government investment, than demand side buying potential.
Keynesian economics is named after it's founder, and is successfully used to stimulate the masses spending potential. That's it. It has nothing to do with the principles of Supply and Demand.
The fact is, you can supply products all you want, there needs to be a DEMAND to buy them. Ignorant is yourself
ViraIVideos 6 months ago
@ViraIVideos The point is that supply and demand are both important, one does not necessarily dominate the other. The main premise and reality behind Keynesian economics is that demand must be must be manipulated through government fiscal policy to stabalize the business cycle. Ask any actual economist and he will agree. If you take just one "intermediate" macro class you'll learn that economics has matured vastly beyond this school of thought in realizing the link to inflation. (IS-LM model)
aaronpeiser 6 months ago
@aaronpeiser They are not equal. Supply is only important when demand necessitates it.
It's simple logic that any Philosophy or Computer Programming major would understand.
If I don't ask for "X" and you supply "X" , "X" = Lost revenue.
If I ask for "X" and you supply "X", "X"= Profit and Growth.
If I ask for X and you don't have X, X = Lost Potential profit and Growth.
LACK Of supply is simply an INEFFICIENCY of profit making potential.
BUT LACK OF DEMAND is BANKRUPTCY AND FAILURE!!
ViraIVideos 6 months ago
@aaronpeiser Simply put, I'm not a Keynesian economics junkie.
I simply know the laws of economics.
Supply MEETS demand. Without demand, supply meets nothing.
Economics as it has been noted before is the way in which people MEET their needs.
No need, no supply needed.
Honestly you need to go back to Econ 101, if you actually think Supply dictates demand.
Me owning something does not dictate others want to buy it or CAN buy it.
ViraIVideos 6 months ago
@superlucci Friedman was a handwaver when it came to externalities. He was a small narrow minded idiot.
j0hnwi11iams 6 months ago
@ViraIVideos I dont have to prove it. It already has.
By Milton Friedman, look him up
superlucci 6 months ago
@fishhead06 However if a corporation has its goods sold at the lowest possible amount, then why would you be complaining?
Profit is what motivated us to come this far. You cannot take away the self interest in people.
You think that if government steps in, it can make everything better.
superlucci 6 months ago
@allgoo19: Uhh.. No.
There's an obvious difference between lobbying to prevent Govt intrusion on your private business to protect assets that you earned
-vs-
Lobbying to get your hands directly on taxpayer money in a bailout ... then pay no taxes ... on top of getting taxpayers to give your employees money for their personal use ... while you're the head Obama's "Economic Advisory Board .. all that taxpayer money, yet kill jobs here in order to send 2 large industries to China
2010GOP 6 months ago
@allgoo19: So you blast Koch for wanting Govt (especially Democrats w/no business or economic experience) to not impose senseless "feel good" regulation. Meanwhile...
You say nothing about GE .. who received a taxpayer funded $50 billion bailout .. whose CEO heads Obama's "Economic Advisory Board" .. who receives numerous Govt contracts .. who recently sent 2 large industries to China .. who paid no taxes last year ... and who was one of the "chosen" to receive Obama slush fund money
Got it
2010GOP 6 months ago
All talk, no action. Democrats put something on the table already, idiot: you said no because it took too much money from your rich donors. Gets so old...
bernlin2000 6 months ago
Why do the Republicans ALWAYS ignore the contributions of the Bush Crime Family to this mess? Why do they REFUSE to allow the very folks who got us into this mess pay more in taxes?
By the way, I didn't vote for Obama . . .
Mightyfee 6 months ago 2
I can't beleive the ignorance you Dems are showing. Just keep racking up the debt at a record pace, no problem. When is it going to stop? You people have your heads in the sand. Yes, raise the debt limit, BUT we must stop this reckless continuous spending. ALL OF IT! That's all the Repubs are trying to so. STOP the incredible pace of spending. What the hell is wrong with that?
brianremington 6 months ago
@brianremington Because it's THEIR reckless spending that put you in this mess, and they don't want to fix THEIR mistake. Wars and huge tax cut for the rich is making things worst, and NO they are NOT JOB CREATORS. They want to make the poor, the sicks, the elderly pay for the gift to their wealthy friends.
moestietabarnak 6 months ago in playlist recent
@moestietabarnak: "Wars and huge tax cut for the rich"
Bush tax cuts were an equal .50 across the board, not "huge cuts to the rich" like you Libtards are brainwashed with. Also, newsflash dummy, we're in 5 wars now under Obama. And, some more facts:
"After Bush tax cuts, 2003-2007, 8 million jobs were created, average salaries increased, and revenues increased $785 billion -- the largest 4 year revenue increase in American history" - US Treasury, US Labor Bureau
2010GOP 6 months ago
@2010GOP And that had nothing to do with a housing bubble?
Sounds like someone is desperately deluding themselves.
shalcall 6 months ago
@brianremington That's the problem, the Republicans have deluded themselves into thinking that spending cuts and spending cuts alone will solve all the problems involved with the federal deficit and they're not cutting spending in places where it can be cut like our military budget. I can guarantee you that nobody in the United States is opposed to cutting spending, I can guarantee you that they are opposed to Washington cutting...
strylowskia90 6 months ago
@brianremington ... taxes for the wealthy while asking senior citizens to ditch medicare.
The Democrats have invited the Republicans to negotiation talks several times for this issue. On Wednesday, speaker Boehner left the negotiations and now we're left with this mess.
strylowskia90 6 months ago
Why didn't he just stick his boehner out?
seemoretube 6 months ago
That's one crazy long neck.
SherriSLC 6 months ago
Sad watching a man fall apart, except when that same man has caused considerable hardship on the bulk of the populace.
dafttool 6 months ago 10
@dafttool I was thinking the same
atcaleb 6 months ago
wah wah wah wah wah wah
This is a completely manufactured crisis created by YOUR party Boehner. Obama and the Dems put out lots of plans, but you asshole Tea Baggers with your anti-tax cult fetish just couldn't take "yes" for an answer.
FDASARO 6 months ago 2
ummm, Obama hardly ever says no, so this is a lode of bullshit.
DiceWarwick 6 months ago
You sure did asshole, get ready to cry yourself to sleep.
Geo408 6 months ago
OK, this has grown very tiredsome now. We all know what will happen. They will cut at least 2,7 trillion, most of it from entitlements, while the rich will keep their tax cuts or even get them enhanced. We all know this will happen, because Wall Street WILL NOT let their henchmen fail to raise the debt ceiling.
bleunt 6 months ago
Let's solve the debt ceiling by adding more debt....
Honey, we're broke, should I order the lobster or should I blow up a hospital full of brown people?
Mr. Soetoro, you have droned 6 countries this year, which one is going to be seven?
Ben, get those printing presses rolling - Timmy, start making shit up again - Barry, pretend you are doing something...
jag10 6 months ago
@jag10 who allowed Marcus Bachmann an account on Youtube?
Extreme719Ballin 6 months ago
@jag10
We're not adding more debt by raising the debt ceiling. The money has already been appropriated by Congress. Why do you want the United States to be known as a deadbeat who can't pay its bills?
FDASARO 6 months ago 5
@FDASARO
Not adding debt, by adding more debt?
hmm... That's what Geithner, Bernanke, Blankfein, Dimon, Zoellick, Soetoro,, Krugman, all say.
The gubbermint has defaulted before, in fact they default every single day they devalue the dollar through inflation.
The US known as a dead beat is an improvement, over what it is considered now.
No need to worry, as history has shown - the Treasury will honor their debt to the banking cartels, even if they have to steal your pension funds to do so.
jag10 6 months ago
@FDASARO How blatantly ignorant can you be? Just because Obama says something, doesn't mean it's even close to being the truth. We are very much adding MORE debt. We're in fact adding debt to pay debt we already have. We are, in this sense, allowing ourselves to apply for another credit card to pay our current credit card's minimum payment. When are Obama and Reid going to quit playing politics and get on board with a REAL long term solution for the wealth of our country?
aaronpeiser 6 months ago
The Tan Man Speaks!
valhala56 6 months ago
Awww, its the saddest tangerine in Washington =[
danlee89KS 6 months ago 4
YOU LIE!
shet0011 6 months ago
A lot of people in this town can never say yes...
I know! They're called "Republicans."
Tanfeliz 6 months ago 6