Radio Paradise

Recently Active Forum Topics:

Page: Previous 1, 2, 3 ... 1266, 1267, 1268 ... 1430, 1431, 1432 Next

Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar

Location: Gilead

Posted: Dec 30, 2016 - 6:39pm
I am again genuinely afraid of a nuclear holocaust.

Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar

Location: Gilead

Posted: Dec 30, 2016 - 6:36pm

Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar

Location: Gilead

Posted: Dec 30, 2016 - 6:26pm
Donald Trump’s War Against Facts

haresfur

haresfur Avatar

Location: The Golden Triangle
Gender: Male

Posted: Dec 30, 2016 - 5:07pm

Isabeau wrote:

Its the Republican Primary Directive: Prevent the Donor Class or Corporations from having to pay any Taxes.

Yet no one has the stones to speak publicly of what Pay$ for that bloated MIC and support for 'selective' religious nation states...

Here's the thing. Even if you believe in Reaganomics (which I don't) it is guaranteed to become less effective the more you push it. You can't reduce the tax rate below 0 so they are running out of tax to cut. Supply side economics still needs demand to work, and yo u can't sustain demand when you are reducing real income for the lower and middle classes.

The best way to increase investment is to do what Australia does and require employers to put 10% of employees salary into the employee's SuperFund (similar to a 401 K). That's a lot of investment and a lot of long-term security for workers. However, you also need to manage the economy for stability so that people don't get screwed by the business class inducing and taking advantage of extreme fluctuations.

Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar

Location: Gilead

Posted: Dec 30, 2016 - 4:08pm
This guy gets more unbelievable by the day.

Isabeau

Isabeau Avatar

Location: sou' tex
Gender: Female

Posted: Dec 28, 2016 - 12:39pm

Skydog wrote:

Kudlow's answer to everything is tax cuts, I am sick of hearing that crap.
Over the last 15 years I have heard economists and Wall Street brokers and bankers say that every link in the chain for ecomonic growth is okay except one, and that is consumer buying power.
Americans haven't gotten a raise since the 1990's and people like Kudlow thinks tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations will solve everything.
Let's say I own a business and am doing fine, if Trump gives me a tax break am I going to hire more people? No, they won't be needed because everyday people haven't got anything extra so they won't be spending more, and all these companies will just pocket the tax break.
Or they will do what they have been doing for the last 15 years and buy back their own stock and do more mergers and acquistions.
Trump and the GOP want to turn the other 49 states into Kansas, check them out, Kansas gave tax breaks to business and rich folks thinking that it will bring economic growth but they found out all you get is deficits.
Put the money into the peoples hands and then let the companies compete for it,

Skydog

Skydog Avatar

Posted: Dec 28, 2016 - 10:58am

Red_Dragon wrote:

Larry Kudlow, infamous voodoo economist and leading candidate to to head the Trump Administration's Council of Economic Advisors,

Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar

Location: Gilead

Posted: Dec 28, 2016 - 9:36am

Larry Kudlow, infamous voodoo economist and leading candidate to to head the Trump Administration's Council of Economic Advisors, says today in a National Review column:

“Why shouldn’t the president surround himself with successful people? Wealthy folks have no need to steal or engage in corruption.”

Wealthy folks have no need to steal or engage in corruption.

Wealthy folks have no need to steal...

...or engage in corruption.

Wealthy folks have no need to steal.

Wealthy folks have no need to engage in corruption.

Well, you know, the sons of bitches might not NEED to steal or wallow in corruption, but they sure do it ANYWAY.

Apparently Larry missed the part where we just spent 8 years recovering from a massive economic recession that crippled the entire world and that disaster was directly and irrefutably caused by greedy and corrupt rich people. Some of which are now being appointed to senior positions in the Trump administration.

This, this right here, is the logic of Trump voters: That a billionaire born into wealth, a New York real estate tycoon, a hotel and casino developer, a guy who builds exclusive golf course country clubs for his rich friends, a guy who's been married to a string of models, a Reality TV star and the one from hell you don't want to end up working for, a guy who flies around the world on his own jumbo jet and who literally — literally — craps in a gold plated toilet on top of a tower with his name splashed across the front in fifty foot high letters and who has never not one day of his life ever served this country, this draft dodging, tax avoiding conman who's cheated thousands of honest laborers out of a paycheck, yeah THAT guy and his cabinet of billionaires, conspiracy nuts, religious freaks, and cashiered generals is going to look out for THEIR best interests.

Those people actually seem to believe despite ALL EVIDENCE TO THE CONTRARY that the wealthy are somehow above theft and corruption.

The wealthy are above theft and corruption.

To paraphrase H. L. Mencken: those people deserve everything coming to them and they deserve to get it good and hard

~Jim Wright

Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar

Location: Gilead

Posted: Dec 28, 2016 - 4:52am
haresfur wrote: Consumer confidence is a trailing, not leading, economic indicator. So it tells you that the economy has been doing ok for a while but says nothing about the future. I was more interested in his referring to himself in the third person than in his misunderstanding of economic indicators.

haresfur

haresfur Avatar

Location: The Golden Triangle
Gender: Male

Posted: Dec 28, 2016 - 12:30am
Red_Dragon wrote: Consumer confidence is a trailing, not leading, economic indicator. So it tells you that the economy has been doing ok for a while but says nothing about the future.

Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar

Location: Gilead

Posted: Dec 27, 2016 - 7:20pm

Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar

Location: Gilead

Posted: Dec 27, 2016 - 9:50am
Trump repeating some behaviors he criticized in Clinton

Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar

Location: Gilead

Posted: Dec 24, 2016 - 7:50pm

kcar

Posted: Dec 24, 2016 - 5:37pm

islander wrote:

I have never said that Trump wasn't president or didn't deserve it. I don't think he is presidential, but that is something entirely different, I don't contest his right to take the seat.

This whole right wing argument (and yes it is a right wing argument) about California is simply stupid. No one has said let's not count Florida, or Texas, or any other state that went for trump. I have a feeling you would be entirely against the electoral college if the situation were reversed.

Yes. Well said.

People were kvetching about the electoral college back in 2000 as well. It becomes a sore spot whenever the electoral vote and popular vote disagree. Personally, I wish that more electoral voters had defected from Trump as a reflection of the man's lack of fitness to be president, but any form of democracy is occasionally going to give you unpleasant surprises. If you're complaining about the electoral college, there's a good chance your candidate wasn't as strong as you thought.

Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays to you all!

haresfur

haresfur Avatar

Location: The Golden Triangle
Gender: Male

Posted: Dec 24, 2016 - 5:07pm

sirdroseph wrote:

And yet Donald Trump is our President, no small thing, this happened somehow. As far as popular vote goes, one word... California. Believe me I am no fan of Trump, but I have the opposite view than most concerning the electoral college, in my view, this election highlights the necessity for keeping it in place because......Kalifornia.

As far as being offended, it seems the offense was manifested through voting, no?

Yeah because the low population states have no extra check and balance in the senate where their power is inordinate with respect to their population

.

So by historical happenstance of how lines were drawn when they were formed, a bunch of states get all kinds of extra power already. I'm in favour of geographical considerations being accounted for in governance but they already have that.

The presidential election is the only one where everyone is voting on the same slate of candidates and as Scott pointed out, is the only one where people who have a minority opinion in their region can have some actual say, however small.

ScottFromWyoming

ScottFromWyoming Avatar

Location: Powell
Gender: Male

Posted: Dec 24, 2016 - 4:31pm

sirdroseph wrote:

And yet Donald Trump is our President, no small thing, this happened somehow. As far as popular vote goes, one word... California. Believe me I am no fan of Trump, but I have the opposite view than most concerning the electoral college, in my view, this election highlights the necessity for keeping it in place because......Kalifornia.

As far as being offended, it seems the offense was manifested through voting, no?

Everyone talks like California votes as one monolithic entity. Hillary took California by 4.5 million votes, yes. But that pendulum swings. The GOP took California 5 or 6 elections in a row; it's sort of alternated like that every couple of decades. I agree with the GOP that if it were a popular vote, California's right wing would vote for the GOP candidate more often (whereas now if they show up they might be voting Libertarian or Constitution or some protest vote). I agree with Trump, that the GOP would spend more time and money there, and have a fighting chance of picking up an easy million votes even if the state is overall going to go to the Democrats. That is, there were probably a million GOP votes left on the table there because what's the point? Vs. trying to pick up that many in Ohio, where Trump won by 450,000 votes... beating yourself up to get more out of Ohio is probably a waste of time. Wyoming would still be ignored, but my lone vote would count for something.

islander

islander Avatar

Location: West coast somewhere
Gender: Male

Posted: Dec 24, 2016 - 4:12pm

sirdroseph wrote:

sirdroseph

sirdroseph Avatar

Location: Not here, I tell you wat
Gender: Male

Posted: Dec 24, 2016 - 10:37am

islander wrote:

Yeah, I'm still not convinced. He lost the popular vote by a huge margin, and just barely squeaked in on the electoral. I'll give him the win, but I'll still call him out as a bully on a regular basis when warranted.

I do get the irony of forcing women to perform for him giving his history and language. If he's (or his supporters) are offended, then maybe they need a safe space?

islander

islander Avatar

Location: West coast somewhere
Gender: Male

Posted: Dec 24, 2016 - 10:24am

sirdroseph wrote:

islander wrote:

Don't be a stupid smarty....

It would be hilarious if they did this. I wonder how everyone would react?

Oh I don't know, do something like have even more incentive to vote for idiots like Trump because their adversaries are even more annoying for calling everyone who doesn't agree with them Nazis and racist? Or in other words, you want Trump? Cause that is how you got Trump.

sirdroseph

sirdroseph Avatar

Location: Not here, I tell you wat
Gender: Male

Posted: Dec 24, 2016 - 10:14am

islander wrote:

Don't be a stupid smarty....

It would be hilarious if they did this. I wonder how everyone would react?

Page: Previous 1, 2, 3 ... 1266, 1267, 1268 ... 1430, 1431, 1432 Next