Now if we could only Ditch Mitch McCo...

Now if we could only Ditch Mitch McConnell

Posted in the Owensboro Forum

First Prev
of 3
Next Last
truth

Princeton, KY

#1 Nov 7, 2012
I would be thrilled.
amen

Princeton, KY

#2 Nov 7, 2012
truth wrote:
I would be thrilled.
Since he was unsuccessful in getting rid of Obama, maybe he will be more open to compromise. Tired of all this partisan bs.
your name here

Owensboro, KY

#3 Nov 7, 2012
He said 2008 was his last election, but he is a lair so who knows.

Level 1

Since: Jun 12

United States

#4 Nov 8, 2012
your name here wrote:
He said 2008 was his last election, but he is a lair so who knows.
While Obama and Boehner were making conciliatory speeches and extending olive branches after the election, Mitch was still doing his normal bomb throwing. Will he never learn that America can only move forward when we work together instead?
65rolyatwr

Denver, CO

#5 Nov 8, 2012
when will the dims learn that working together does not mean imposing your will on the other party? There are answers, but Dims refuse to even look at them. For example...cut spending!, dims won't even consider spending cuts without adding tax increases. Tax increases are not needed, just cut the damn spending! then they will come back and say The republicans won't work with them, so they won't consider any spending cuts.

Level 1

Since: Jun 12

Owensboro, KY

#6 Nov 8, 2012
65rolyatwr wrote:
when will the dims learn that working together does not mean imposing your will on the other party? There are answers, but Dims refuse to even look at them. For example...cut spending!, dims won't even consider spending cuts without adding tax increases. Tax increases are not needed, just cut the damn spending! then they will come back and say The republicans won't work with them, so they won't consider any spending cuts.
Yes, tax increases are needed, and more and more of your fellow republicans are finally starting to admit it.
65rolyatwr

Denver, CO

#7 Nov 8, 2012
no, tax increases are never needed. QUIT SPENDING is the only answer. Tax increases takes money out of the economy, slowing GDP growth, and therefore slowing the money coming into the treasury. Any Economist knows this, too bad no politicians does.

Level 1

Since: Jun 12

Owensboro, KY

#8 Nov 8, 2012
65rolyatwr wrote:
no, tax increases are never needed. QUIT SPENDING is the only answer. Tax increases takes money out of the economy, slowing GDP growth, and therefore slowing the money coming into the treasury. Any Economist knows this, too bad no politicians does.
No, in fact, a huge number of economists disagree completely.
65rolyatwr

Denver, CO

#9 Nov 8, 2012
rwtaylor56 wrote:
<quoted text>
No, in fact, a huge number of economists disagree completely.
unsubstantiated "liberal constipation"

Level 1

Since: Jun 12

Owensboro, KY

#10 Nov 8, 2012
65rolyatwr wrote:
<quoted text>unsubstantiated "liberal constipation"
No, just facts you choose to ignore.
65rolyatwr

Denver, CO

#11 Nov 8, 2012
substantiate them if you think it is facts.
Afraidoftheocrac y

West Paducah, KY

#12 Nov 8, 2012
I know this, 60% of people want tax increases on earners above $250,000. Why is it so hard for repubs to understand that trickle down economics don't work. During Bush's presidency tax rates were cut on top earners with the explanation that, as top earners, their massive tax savings would " trickle down"to the rest of us. After 8 years of trying this under Bush, isn't it clear to everyone what happened to the economy by 2008?
Contrast this to tax rates under Clinton. 22 million jobs created, a balanced budget. Stock market boom, a job everywhere.What is there not to see???
After all people, we're only talking about raising the tax rate 4%, to 39% as opposed to today's 35%. You'd think after looking at those two scenario's, it would be clear to everyone. Sadly, no. Repubs don't want to stop the fight. I'm afraid things will go downhill from here. But if that happens because of continued repub intransigence, I think their days are numbered.
65rolyatwr

Denver, CO

#13 Nov 8, 2012
because "trickle Down Economics does work. The person who is credited for bringing Trickle down Economics to the forefront had this record:
In The End of Prosperity, supply side guru Art Laffer and Wall Street Journal chief financial writer Steve Moore point out that this Reagan recovery grew into a 25-year boom, with just slight interruptions by shallow, short recessions in 1990 and 2001. They wrote:

We call this period, 1982-2007, the twenty-five year boom–the greatest period of wealth creation in the history of the planet. In 1980, the net worth–assets minus liabilities–of all U.S. households and business … was $25 trillion in today’s dollars. By 2007,… net worth was just shy of $57 trillion. Adjusting for inflation, more wealth was created in America in the twenty-five year boom than in the previous two hundred years.

As a result, while the Reagan recovery averaged 7.1% economic growth over the first seven quarters, the Obama recovery has produced less than half that at 2.8%, with the last quarter at a dismal 1.8%. After seven quarters of the Reagan recovery, unemployment had fallen 3.3 percentage points from its peak to 7.5%, with only 18% unemployed long-term for 27 weeks or more. After seven quarters of the Obama recovery, unemployment has fallen only 1.3 percentage points from its peak, with a postwar record 45% long-term unemployed.

BTW, the 25 year period covered the years Clinton was in office, yes Clinton benefited from the TRICKLE DOWN ECONOMICS!

Level 2

Since: Jan 12

Richmond, KY

#14 Nov 8, 2012
65rolyatwr wrote:
no, tax increases are never needed. QUIT SPENDING is the only answer. Tax increases takes money out of the economy, slowing GDP growth, and therefore slowing the money coming into the treasury. Any Economist knows this, too bad no politicians does.
bill clinton raised taxes , got rid of the deficit,built a booming economy. don' say it can't be done.

Level 2

Since: Jan 12

Richmond, KY

#15 Nov 8, 2012
65rolyatwr wrote:
because "trickle Down Economics does work. The person who is credited for bringing Trickle down Economics to the forefront had this record:
In The End of Prosperity, supply side guru Art Laffer and Wall Street Journal chief financial writer Steve Moore point out that this Reagan recovery grew into a 25-year boom, with just slight interruptions by shallow, short recessions in 1990 and 2001. They wrote:
We call this period, 1982-2007, the twenty-five year boom–the greatest period of wealth creation in the history of the planet. In 1980, the net worth–assets minus liabilities–of all U.S. households and business … was $25 trillion in today’s dollars. By 2007,… net worth was just shy of $57 trillion. Adjusting for inflation, more wealth was created in America in the twenty-five year boom than in the previous two hundred years.
As a result, while the Reagan recovery averaged 7.1% economic growth over the first seven quarters, the Obama recovery has produced less than half that at 2.8%, with the last quarter at a dismal 1.8%. After seven quarters of the Reagan recovery, unemployment had fallen 3.3 percentage points from its peak to 7.5%, with only 18% unemployed long-term for 27 weeks or more. After seven quarters of the Obama recovery, unemployment has fallen only 1.3 percentage points from its peak, with a postwar record 45% long-term unemployed.
BTW, the 25 year period covered the years Clinton was in office, yes Clinton benefited from the TRICKLE DOWN ECONOMICS!
reagan also grew the deficit 6 fold during his tenure( cbo.gov .). Bill clinton had to put that baby to bed too! Also as I recall bush the first said"no new taxes" until he was blue in the face and what did he end up doing? RAISING TAXES
Real Truth

Owensboro, KY

#16 Nov 8, 2012
65rolyatwr wrote:
when will the dims learn that working together does not mean imposing your will on the other party? There are answers, but Dims refuse to even look at them. For example...cut spending!, dims won't even consider spending cuts without adding tax increases. Tax increases are not needed, just cut the damn spending! then they will come back and say The republicans won't work with them, so they won't consider any spending cuts.
Lying again????

Obama offered a 10 to 1 spending cuts to tax increases and the Republicans flipped him the 'bird'.
Real Truth

Owensboro, KY

#17 Nov 8, 2012
65rolyatwr wrote:
no, tax increases are never needed. QUIT SPENDING is the only answer. Tax increases takes money out of the economy, slowing GDP growth, and therefore slowing the money coming into the treasury. Any Economist knows this, too bad no politicians does.
Reagan increased taxes 18 times, are you saying Reagan was WRONG???
your name here

Owensboro, KY

#18 Nov 8, 2012
65rolyatwr wrote:
<quoted text>
unsubstantiated "liberal constipation"
Ben Stien must now be a liberal since even he stated we must start increasing taxes on the rich starting at 2-3 million per year and working the way down.
your name here

Owensboro, KY

#19 Nov 8, 2012
65rolyatwr wrote:
because "trickle Down Economics does work. The person who is credited for bringing Trickle down Economics to the forefront had this record:
In The End of Prosperity, supply side guru Art Laffer and Wall Street Journal chief financial writer Steve Moore point out that this Reagan recovery grew into a 25-year boom, with just slight interruptions by shallow, short recessions in 1990 and 2001. They wrote:
We call this period, 1982-2007, the twenty-five year boom–the greatest period of wealth creation in the history of the planet. In 1980, the net worth–assets minus liabilities–of all U.S. households and business … was $25 trillion in today’s dollars. By 2007,… net worth was just shy of $57 trillion. Adjusting for inflation, more wealth was created in America in the twenty-five year boom than in the previous two hundred years.
As a result, while the Reagan recovery averaged 7.1% economic growth over the first seven quarters, the Obama recovery has produced less than half that at 2.8%, with the last quarter at a dismal 1.8%. After seven quarters of the Reagan recovery, unemployment had fallen 3.3 percentage points from its peak to 7.5%, with only 18% unemployed long-term for 27 weeks or more. After seven quarters of the Obama recovery, unemployment has fallen only 1.3 percentage points from its peak, with a postwar record 45% long-term unemployed.
BTW, the 25 year period covered the years Clinton was in office, yes Clinton benefited from the TRICKLE DOWN ECONOMICS!
It never worked, it was the massive run up of the National Debt by Republican presidents that made it look like it worked.
your name here

Owensboro, KY

#20 Nov 8, 2012
65rolyatwr wrote:
no, tax increases are never needed. QUIT SPENDING is the only answer. Tax increases takes money out of the economy, slowing GDP growth, and therefore slowing the money coming into the treasury. Any Economist knows this, too bad no politicians does.
The Laffer Curve has been disproven time and time again.

Only the uninformed like you still believe it.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Owensboro Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
J Wilson 12 min GETATME 9
Jobs 14 min Want to find new ... 1
Ed dowdy 30 min Yeah 8
Chucky Bukner 35 min TuffBatch 1
lying cheating wife update (Nov '12) 36 min SamSmith271987-gmail 27
When to get child support? 36 min Now 4
News Man wanted for rape in Owensboro (Aug '14) 50 min SamSmith271987-gmail 21

Owensboro Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Owensboro Mortgages