what is the real reason for Republican Hate?

ksu_aviator said:

he didn't give a speech without saying he would cut taxes for 95% of Americans and Cut spending with a scalpel.

Click to expand...

and? he did not attempt to do precisely what he said he would do? you know that he did, don't you? and you know why and at whose hands he failed, don't you? yeah... those good republicans who refused to allow for tax INCREASES on those who have been BENEFITING from the recession.

that chart above... you note one of the indicators the writer chose... the CPI... NOT the Consumer Price Index, but Consumer Price INFLATION? now, you... I... Mack from Hackensack... for us... inflation is a BAD thing. but not for every one. Borrowers, especially BIG, long term borrowers, Rich folk and The Gummint... benefit as it essentially reduces debt paid off during inflationary periods. Propery holders, the value goes up as the value of money goes down. Of course, they benefit during deflation, too.... just a matter of when to sell and when to buy.

who is benefitting now? the stock market has risen for each of the last successive 6 quarters. who benefits? YOU GUESSED! the rich, those good old republican fat cats. but we do not want to tax them, do we? because... well... just BECAUSE.

geo.

Geo Patric said:

and? he did not attempt to do precisely what he said he would do? you know that he did, don't you? and you know why and at whose hands he failed, don't you? yeah... those good republicans who refused to allow for tax INCREASES on those who have been BENEFITING from the recession.

Click to expand...

That's just delusional. Obama never tried to cut spending. He increased it exponentially. As for the tax cuts he promised...I never saw them. There was a credit that you had to pay back at the end of the year....but that clearly wasn't a tax cut. And even though my salary went backwards for the first time in my career, my total tax liability went up with no changes to my life other than I had to find a new job because one of those evil rich people that you love to hate had to sell his house and his airplane just to keep his business going. Now, I don't blame him, I'd have done the same thing. But you are delusional if you think that it is the evil, rich republicans that are benefiting.

that chart above... you note one of the indicators the writer chose... the CPI... NOT the Consumer Price Index, but Consumer Price INFLATION? now, you... I... Mack from Hackensack... for us... inflation is a BAD thing. but not for every one. Borrowers, especially BIG, long term borrowers, Rich folk and The Gummint... benefit as it essentially reduces debt paid off during inflationary periods. Propery holders, the value goes up as the value of money goes down. Of course, they benefit during deflation, too.... just a matter of when to sell and when to buy.

who is benefitting now? the stock market has risen for each of the last successive 6 quarters. who benefits? YOU GUESSED! the rich, those good old republican fat cats. but we do not want to tax them, do we? because... well... just BECAUSE.

geo.

Click to expand...

I just can't take you seriously after that. The rich are the only people that benefit from the stock market? What happened to all those stories about the poor retiree's that lost their savings...and union pensions that are dry? Are you telling me that a stock market recovery is a bad thing? Come on.

ksu_aviator said:

Look at the policies and what they did for the country. When Reagan cut taxes it ended the recession

Click to expand...

more unfounded opinion based on republican myth. debt is NOT just what you have spent, but what you have spent over and above what you have. In national economies, that is spending vs revenue as taxed GDP. When Carter entered office, the debt ratio was 35.8%. He increased spending 0.28% (almost negligible) but... when he left, the debt ratio was. 32.5% a DECREASE of 3.3%.

source - Congressional Budget Office using data on federal debt from the Department of the Treasury and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. Estimates of gross domestic product (GDP) come from the Bureau of the Census

Reagan? INCREASED the Debt/GDP ratio by 11.3% in his first term. He did better in the second, INCREASING it by only 9.3%. he simply did not consider it a problem

In discussing the deficit, many of Reagan's economic advisers recalled, he frequently repeated his favorite anecdote about the boy who looked at a pile of manure and assumed he must have received a new pony. One aide recalled the president's views on the deficit 'going through three stages.- one, they won’t occur; two, they'll be temporary; three, when they stick they serve a good purpose-they keep the liberals from new spending programs. Oh, sure, that was Reagan."

But the paradox of antigovernment ideology and massive federal spending remained. On Reagan's watch, the federal government grew larger and larger; it cost more dollars, employed more bureaucrats, sustained more agencies, departments, and programs.

Reagan hesitated little about racking up ever larger deficits. During Reagan's presidency, one distinguished economist noted, the U.S. government spent $1,413 billion more than it received in revenues. . . . [One[ critic lambasted Reagan as "the king of the deficit-makers and undisputed master of the national debt mountain." American society, he warned, was devouring its seed corn instead of planting it.

One aide recalled the president's views on the deficit 'going through three stages.- one, they won’t occur; two, they'll be temporary; three, when they stick they serve a good purpose-they keep the liberals from new spending programs. Oh, sure, that was Reagan."

Click to expand...

CNN Money

In case you hadn't noticed, most presidents have an opposing congress. They have all worked together to create a massive problem.

Click to expand...

so, of course you condemn the president... when he is a democrat... and the congress... when the president is a republican.

you cannot win this.... the facts do not support the notion of fiscally responsible republicans... they simply do not.

geo.

ksu_aviator said:

I just can't take you seriously after that. The rich are the only people that benefit from the stock market? What happened to all those stories about the poor retiree's that lost their savings...and union pensions that are dry? Are you telling me that a stock market recovery is a bad thing? Come on.

Click to expand...

well, i would not blame you for taking a quick retreat... as i say, you cannot win. the facts do not support your claims.

i did not say only the rich benefit from the stock market. i said the rich benefit from inflation. they do. no, i am not telling you that the recovery is a bad thing. i am telling you that the recovery of the stock market in an indicaton that YOUR contention that this democratic president is BAD for the economy is false. and I am telling you that the recovery of the stock market with no corresponding recovery in employment, in fact, accompanied rather by a decrease in employment and wages and benefits spurred by the same people who are benefiting from the stock market indicates an increase in benefit and POWER to the rich and no benefit to the middle class and screw the poor altogether.

geo.

Geo Patric said:

that you find it difficult does not mean that there is anything wrong with it. lemme know any time you find it difficult. i can explicate.

Click to expand...

Please... don't explicate in public.

.

SE102 said:

Now that I have a tummy full of hurricane, sweet nectar of the proletariat, I demand evidence that liberals (and would even settle for democratic voters) are predominantly state dependent. Anyone?

Click to expand...

Isn't that essentially by definition? If one works, is self reliant, and is not completely kooky doesn't one naturally identify with conservatives?

Geo Patric said:

more unfounded opinion based on republican myth. debt is NOT just what you have spent, but what you have spent over and above what you have. In national economies, that is spending vs revenue as taxed GDP. When Carter entered office, the debt ratio was 35.8%. He increased spending 0.28% (almost negligible) but... when he left, the debt ratio was. 32.5% a DECREASE of 3.3%.

Click to expand...

Only in politics can increasing spending and debt be considered a decrease.

source - Congressional Budget Office using data on federal debt from the Department of the Treasury and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. Estimates of gross domestic product (GDP) come from the Bureau of the Census

Reagan? INCREASED the Debt/GDP ratio by 11.3% in his first term. He did better in the second, INCREASING it by only 9.3%. he simply did not consider it a problem

CNN Money


so, of course you condemn the president... when he is a democrat... and the congress... when the president is a republican.

you cannot win this.... the facts do not support the notion of fiscally responsible republicans... they simply do not.

geo.

Click to expand...

None of this is contradictory to what I posted. You ignored the portions where Democrats forced Reagan to raise spending completely. You missed the article where Reagan reluctantly and begrudgingly admitted he signed the budget. You ignore everything of substance and try to twist my words into something they are not. You may exude confidence, but you clearly are just pulling shtick out of your butt and hoping something doesn't stink.

Geo Patric said:

well, i would not blame you for taking a quick retreat... as i say, you cannot win. the facts do not support your claims.

i did not say only the rich benefit from the stock market. i said the rich benefit from inflation. they do. no, i am not telling you that the recovery is a bad thing. i am telling you that the recovery of the stock market in an indicaton that YOUR contention that this democratic president is BAD for the economy is false. and I am telling you that the recovery of the stock market with no corresponding recovery in employment, in fact, accompanied rather by a decrease in employment and wages and benefits spurred by the same people who are benefiting from the stock market indicates an increase in benefit and POWER to the rich and no benefit to the middle class and screw the poor altogether.

geo.

Click to expand...

I'm not retreating from anything. What you posted was completely nonsensical. No one benefits from inflation. No one. You can hedge against inflation with precious metals, but the preponderance of wealth is lost during inflation.

ksu_aviator said:

Only in politics can increasing spending and debt be considered a decrease.

Click to expand...

no, it is considered that way by any rational person. to spend less of what you have by increasing what you have to a greater degree is a good idea. that is WHY you try to get more in the first place... so you can spend more. there is no point in it otherwise.

. You ignored the portions where Democrats forced Reagan to raise spending completely. You missed the article where Reagan reluctantly and begrudgingly admitted he signed the budget.

Click to expand...

Waayyllll... (he said in that quavering old man voice) to quote the great miscommunicator... "There you go again"... condemn a democrat for the same things you praise the republican for.

well, lemme tell you, pally, i am not the only one who thinks Reagan absolutely failed to curtain spending and increased it instead. Consider what The Mises Institute (a sturdy conservative economic vanguard) had to say way back in 1988.

Reagan abandoned the free-market position and acquiesced in further crippling of the economy and our liberties. In fact, the number of free-market achievements by the administration are so few that they can be counted on one hand—with fingers left over.

Even Ford and Carter did a better job at cutting government. . . . there has been a 60% increase in government spending, thanks mainly to Reagan's requested budgets, which were only marginally smaller than the spending Congress voted.

[There] has been unprecedented government debt. Reagan has tripled the Gross Federal Debt, from $900 billion to $2.7 trillion. Ford and Carter in their combined terms could only double it. It took 31 years to accomplish the first postwar debt tripling, yet Reagan did it in eight.

Click to expand...

sorry... bleat that republican nonsense all you like. facts are facts. EVERY republican has spent more as a percentage of revenue than democrats. EVERY republican has increased the size of government. EVERY republican has left a deficit, where all but one democrat has left a surplus.

facts are facts. learn to live with the truth.

geo.

ksu_aviator said:

] What you posted was completely nonsensical. No one benefits from inflation. No one.

Click to expand...

organizations and individuals that owe truckloads of debt

Click to expand...

Mises Institute.

Inflation Greases The Gears Of Capitalism

While workers probably wouldn’t be willing to accept less money in absolute terms, they would be far more accepting of flat wages for a year or two while inflation ranges 3-4%, which is effectively a pay cut in real terms.

[inflation] leaves room for negative real interest rates to boost economic activity. If interest rates are 2% at a time when inflation is 4%, borrowers are essentially being paid to borrow money. Since interest rates can never go below 0% in nominal terms, this sly economic tool would not be possible in a world without inflation.

persistent moderate inflation allows firms with marginal pricing power push through price increases under the guise of inflation. If inflation is non-existent, any attempt to raise prices by firms will certainly be noticed and heavily scrutinized; however, if the public comes to expect that prices will rise over time due to inflation, it will be easier to raise prices.

Who Benefits From Inflation?

• The Government - The most obvious beneficiary of higher inflation, at least in the short term, is the government. Since they control the printing presses, the government will always be able to pay its debt, at least domestically since higher inflation effectively reduces the long-term cost of borrowing money.
  
• Borrowers - Anyone borrowing money for a long term for a fixed rate (such as a mortgage) benefits from inflation because, again, it effectively reduces the cost of future interest payments. That $2000 per month mortgage payment may seem like a lot today, but 20 years from now it will be worth a lot less. Your income will have risen to keep up with the constantly-increasing cost of living while your fixed-rate debt will have remained constant.
  
• Owners Of Real Assets - Owners of real physical assets such as real estate, gold, timber, farm land, mines, etc tend to do very well during inflationary periods since the price of these assets (and the commodities they produce in the case of mines and farm and timber land) tends to rise along with inflation.

Click to expand...

amateur asset allocator

every cloud has a silver lining... for someone.

unlike many who engage in this playground, i do no just make **** up to suit my own preferences.

geo.

BDBoop said:

Sir, if anybody knows how to tell it like it is, I'm thinkin it's you.

Click to expand...

That's always been my claim to fame around here.

Read 'em and weep. It is what it is and that's all that it is. And that's all that I speak about. Cursed with being a realist anchored in reason and logic. Not a lotta fun at parties, I must admit. Stupid people are the last to realize their stupidity. I just try to make it a bit simpler for them to understand. Even then, it only works on occassion. Usually they just pout, throw and insult or two and storm out of the room with their ass handed to them on a plate. LOL! I do so love it. Yes, even I find folly in the realm of reality.

The O'Reilly spin stops here. :mrgreen:

My room mate (we're of the same bent politically) has often said "If the Republicans did everything Obama is doing, it would be just fine." I think there could be some truth to that: bad ideas are always better when they're your own.

I wish he could be doing better, sure. Do I think things would be better had Mc Cain won the election? I'm not sure.