Sequester so catastrophic that the DOW hits record high.

[Matt1970]

^^^ And yet he still fails at basic math, but keep holing up someone who tells you they can take a much higher percentage of your money and you are still making the same.

Here is why I will not deal with this baffoon.

And this is why a second Obama administration, should there be one, must focus its attention on more broadly distributing the gains from growth. This doesn't mean "redistributing" from rich to poor, as in a zero-sum game. To the contrary, the rich will do far better with a smaller share of a robust, growing economy than they're doing with a large share of an economy that's barely moving forward.

We are going to tax the shit out of you but because the economy will be better it will actually have the reverse effect on you

This will require real tax reform -- not just a "Buffett" minimal tax but substantially higher marginal rates and more brackets at the top, with a capital gains rate matching the income-tax rate. It also means a larger Earned Income Tax Credit, whose benefits extend high into the middle class. That will enable many Americans to move to a 35-hour workweek without losing ground -- thereby making room for more jobs.

It means Medicare for all rather than an absurdly-costly system that relies on private for-profit insurers and providers.

It will require limiting executive salaries and empowering workers to get a larger share of corporate profits. The Employee Free Choice Act should be an explicit part of the second-term agenda.
We are going to limit the salaries of executives, tax the living shit out of the money they are allowed to keep, require you to pay workers more money for less work and magically this will all make the economy better.

This is why I give no credibility to Robert Reich or anyone who believes this magical fairytale.

You ever hear the phrase it takes money to make money? Once you tax the shit out of someone they no longer have the money they need to make more money. That means there is now no longer the ability to collect the tax revenue you once did and now the lower classes you planned to use the money towards will no longer benefit. Socialists never really look beyond the first round of confiscation to see the long term effects.

Fuckin idiots.

 

[Moonbeam]

Matt1970: And yet he still fails at basic math, but keep holing up someone who tells you they can take a much higher percentage of your money and you are still making the same.

Mo: I just gave you an example of how that can be done. You can't just yell, 'fails at math'. You have to prove it. You fail at thinking.

Ma: Here is why I will not deal with this baffoon.

Mo; Is a buffoon is an idoit who makes a spelling mistake calling somebody else stupid?

Ma: And this is why a second Obama administration, should there be one, must focus its attention on more broadly distributing the gains from growth. This doesn't mean "redistributing" from rich to poor, as in a zero-sum game. To the contrary, the rich will do far better with a smaller share of a robust, growing economy than they're doing with a large share of an economy that's barely moving forward.

Mo: I get it, a 90% share of a thousand is better than a 50% share of two thousand, and he's the one who fails at math. Do you even think a second about what you say?

We are going to tax the shit out of you but because the economy will be better it will actually have the reverse effect on you

Mo: Naturally you only see what you can see so the very little you see doesn't look like much. I understand that.

Ma: This will require real tax reform -- not just a "Buffett" minimal tax but substantially higher marginal rates and more brackets at the top, with a capital gains rate matching the income-tax rate. It also means a larger Earned Income Tax Credit, whose benefits extend high into the middle class. That will enable many Americans to move to a 35-hour workweek without losing ground -- thereby making room for more jobs.

It means Medicare for all rather than an absurdly-costly system that relies on private for-profit insurers and providers.

It will require limiting executive salaries and empowering workers to get a larger share of corporate profits. The Employee Free Choice Act should be an explicit part of the second-term agenda.
We are going to limit the salaries of executives, tax the living shit out of the money they are allowed to keep, require you to pay workers more money for less work and magically this will all make the economy better.

This is why I give no credibility to Robert Reich or anyone who believes this magical fairytale.

Mo: No the reason you give no credibility to Reich is that you think that just because you think something makes it true. Only an idiot does that. You can't argue for anything. All you do is spout magical fairytale as if it had some meaning. You live in a magical fairytale because you can't self analyze your own bull shit. All you do is shout, I'm right I'm right I'm right like a horses ass.

Ma: You ever hear the phrase it takes money to make money? Once you tax the shit out of someone they no longer have the money they need to make more money.

Mo: Right, it takes money to make money so the government raises taxes, and now has the money to make more money, according to your logic. So the government builds a better house with a road to drive up to it, pays the folk for building it, and lets them use it for free to ship their goods. Win win win win win win . You suffer from a myopic understanding, stuck of the irrelevant and missing the big picture. You are like a monkey who has reached into a bottle to grab a hand full of fruit and are imprisoned by the tenacity of your aim. Let go of the rotten fruit you dunce.


Ma: That means there is now no longer the ability to collect the tax revenue you once did and now the lower classes you planned to use the money towards will no longer benefit. Socialists never really look beyond the first round of confiscation to see the long term effects.

Mo: You don't have the understanding to know what things mean. You only know what they mean to you and you are lousy at figuring things out.

Ma: Fuckin idiots.

Mo: Hehehehehe

 

[Moonbeam]

Dear Matt, you couldn't punch your way out of a paper bag but you sure the hell are trying.

 

[Matt1970]

Dear Matt, you couldn't punch your way out of a paper bag but you sure the hell are trying.

It's a wet paper bag you dumbass.

 

[OverVolt]

Wall street and main street have been unrelated for a long time now.

 

[Moonbeam]

It's a wet paper bag you dumbass.

If it is you've been punching it with your ears.

 

[cybrsage]

It's a wet paper bag you dumbass.

Be kind to him, he is mentally broken. Making fun of him is like making fun of kids with down syndrome.

 

[Moonbeam]

Be kind to him, he is mentally broken. Making fun of him is like making fun of kids with down syndrome.

You see what a pig you are, announcing that making fun of me, while you make fun of me, would make you, the person making such fun, the same kind of scum that would make fun of somebody with Down Syndrome. You are a monster, Zorg.

Doing what you just did is a fine example of what it means to be mentally broken. You are only a tick that tries to attach itself and suck blood, a filthy parasite. You teach people bad mental habits and should be squished. And I am sure there is a dog around here somewhere that has the teeth for it.

I'm sure that in your lustful conniving and beady little eyes the topic of the thread is surely 'get Moonbeam, but it's actually not and a little thread Nazi like you with your rules up your ass should know that it about the relation of the Dow to the sequester. Did you have anything to contribute to that, you blow fly?

 

[Siddhartha]

Can you show me a country that paid off it's debt that was over 100% of it's GDP?

1. Cut spending which causes a recession.
2. Debt goes up because of the recession.
Sounds like the makings of a loop to me.

But I think most sane voters will catch on to the Republicans' austerity mania\fantasy and the GOP will take a big hit for it in 2014.

 

[Matt1970]

a pig you are
scum
Down Syndrome.
You are a monster, Zorg.
You are only a tick
a filthy parasite.
thread Nazi
you blow fly?

Yawn

 

[marvdmartian]

Seeing as the economic effects of the sequestration and furlough haven't really been felt yet (since the government is required to give notice prior to actually furloughing employees), let's wait and see how well the Dow does, once we have a sudden drop in the take home pay of close to a million employees.

While the pre-tax income drop is only 20%, many employees will see a take home pay drop of 25-35%. That means no more "fun money" available, since they'll be concentrating solely on paying monthly bills.

That should put a dent in the Dow, I'd imagine.

 

[Bowfinger]

Robert Reich:

Why There’s a Bull Market for Stocks And Bear Market for Workers

Tuesday, March 5, 2013

Today the Dow Jones Industrial Average rose above 14,270 – completely erasing its 54 percent loss between 2007 and 2009.

The stock market is basically back to where it was in 2000, while corporate earnings have doubled since then.

Yet the real median wage is now 8 percent below what it was in 2000, and unemployment remains sky-high.

Why is the stock market doing so well, while most Americans are doing so poorly? Four reasons:

First, productivity gains. Corporations have been investing in technology rather than their workers. They get tax credits and deductions for such investments; they get no such tax benefits for improving the skills of their employees. As a result, corporations can now do more with fewer people on their payrolls. That means higher profits.

Second, high unemployment itself. Joblessness all but eliminates the bargaining power of most workers – allowing corporations to keep wages low. Public policies that might otherwise reduce unemployment – a new WPA or CCC to hire the long-term unemployed, major investments in the nation’s crumbling infrastructure – have been rejected in favor of austerity economics. This also means higher profits, at least in the short run.

Third, globalization. Big American-based corporations have been expanding and hiring around the globe where markets are growing fastest – even while the U.S. market is lackluster. Tax policies and trade policies have encouraged them.

Finally, the Fed’s easy-money policies. They’ve pushed investors into the stock market because bond yields are so low. On Tuesday, the yield on the 10-year U.S. Treasury note was just 1.9%.

All of this spells widening inequality in America, because the people who invest the most in the stock market have high incomes. Those who rely most on wages have lower incomes.

Corporate profits are claiming a larger share of national income than at any time in 60 years, while the portion of total income going to employees is near its lowest since 1966.

As my colleague Immanuel Saez recently found, all the economic gains between 2009 and 2011 (the last year for which data were available) went to the richest 1 percent of Americans. The bottom 99 percent has continued to lose ground.

And yet the tax code continues to give preference to capital gains over ordinary income — a huge boon to investors.

The sequestration is likely to make all this worse, since it will slow the U.S. economy and keep unemployment higher than otherwise.

It will also hurt the most vulnerable. Some $1.9 billion in low-income rental subsidies are being eliminated, affecting 125,000 people. Cuts to the Department of Agriculture will eliminate rental assistance for another 10,000 low-income rural people. Meanwhile, 100,000 formerly homeless Americans are likely to be removed from their current emergency shelters.

More than 3.8 million Americans receiving long-term unemployment benefits will have their monthly payments reduced by as much as 9.4 percent, and lose an average of $400 in benefits over their period of joblessness.

The Department of Education’s Title I program, which helps schools serving more than a million disadvantaged students, will be cut $715 million, and $400 million will be cut from Head Start, the preschool program for poor children. And major cuts will be made in the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children, which provides nutrition assistance and education.

The health of an economy is not measured by the profits of corporations headquartered within it or the value of its stock market. It depends, rather, on how many of people have jobs and whether those jobs pay decent wages.

By this measure, we are a long way from economic health. Rarely before in American history have public policies so blatantly helped the most fortunate among us, so cruelly harmed the least fortunate, and exposed so many average working Americans to such widespread insecurity.

I just wanted to bump this again since some people may have missed how thoroughly the nonsense in OP has been shredded. This is but one of the best examples of many posts showing the OP is clueless.

 

[Matt1970]

I just wanted to bump this again since some people may have missed how thoroughly the nonsense in OP has been shredded. This is but one of the best examples of many posts showing the OP is clueless.

This ought to be enough right here. This is nothing more than the whining from a butt-hurt liberal.

Second, high unemployment itself. Joblessness all but eliminates the bargaining power of most workers – allowing corporations to keep wages low. Public policies that might otherwise reduce unemployment – a new WPA or CCC to hire the long-term unemployed, major investments in the nation’s crumbling infrastructure – have been rejected in favor of austerity economics. This also means higher profits, at least in the short run.

This is enough to prove Reich is not even close to having an un-biased opinion, but here, I will do another one.

First, productivity gains. Corporations have been investing in technology rather than their workers. They get tax credits and deductions for such investments; they get no such tax benefits for improving the skills of their employees. As a result, corporations can now do more with fewer people on their payrolls. That means higher profits.

This has been going on for decades. How can something that has been going on for decades only now have an effect on the stock market?

 

[Bowfinger]

This ought to be enough right here. This is nothing more than the whining from a butt-hurt liberal.

The only butt-hurt I see is yours. You're butt-hurt that so many people have shown how dumb your OP is. You started with an ignorant premise, driven solely by your unmitigated partisanship, and people mocked you for its absurdity. Boo hoo. A man with integrity and maturity would simply acknowledge his error and move on. You, instead, double down.

This is enough to prove Reich is not even close to having an un-biased opinion, but here, I will do another one.

That you dislike something doesn't make it false, or even biased. Do you disagree that high unemployment reduces the bargaining power of workers? If so, you fail basic Economics. It's a simple and non-controversial observation.

This has been going on for decades. How can something that has been going on for decades only now have an effect on the stock market?

You're attacking a straw man. Reich doesn't suggest this has only recently affected the stock market. You just invented that. Reich is noting that it is one of the factors that helps Wall Street surge even while Main Street still struggles.

 

[waggy]

I want to be made fun of next.

ok! your ugly and your mamma dresses you funny!

 

[Matt1970]

The only butt-hurt I see is yours. You're butt-hurt that so many people have shown how dumb your OP is. You started with an ignorant premise, driven solely by your unmitigated partisanship, and people mocked you for its absurdity. Boo hoo. A man with integrity and maturity would simply acknowledge his error and move on. You, instead, double down.



That you dislike something doesn't make it false, or even biased. Do you disagree that high unemployment reduces the bargaining power of workers? If so, you fail basic Economics. It's a simple and non-controversial observation.



You're attacking a straw man. Reich doesn't suggest this has only recently affected the stock market. You just invented that. Reich is noting that it is one of the factors that helps Wall Street surge even while Main Street still struggles.

He has to because the stock market wasn't up untill recently. Is he suggesting the stock market was up in 2008 because of it? You are clearly only seeing what you want to see.

 

[Bowfinger]

He has to because the stock market wasn't up untill recently. Is he suggesting the stock market was up in 2008 because of it? You are clearly only seeing what you want to see.

With all due respect Matt, you are a simple-minded moron. Automation is not the only factor that affects profitability. It is but one of many factors. The stock market has been trending upwards since its inception, though it always has short term ups and downs.

 

[Matt1970]

With all due respect Matt, you are a simple-minded moron. Automation is not the only factor that affects profitability. It is but one of many factors. The stock market has been trending upwards since its inception, though it always has short term ups and downs.

Why is it you Liberals must resort to name calling when someone has a different opinion that you? You are no better than Moonbeam. Nobody asked him why the market was up for the last 40 years and 3 out of his 4 reasons have been going on for decades. They will have no bearing on recent changes in the market.

 

[Bowfinger]

Why is it you Liberals must resort to name calling when someone has a different opinion that you? ...

I can't speak for liberals, but I often turn to name calling when repeated attempts to use facts and reason fail. At that point it becomes a game of mockery rather than an attempt at productive discussion.

Further, how about you take a little personal responsibility for your behavior? Much as it may pain you to accept, when you act like a moron people are going to come to believe you're a moron. Your steadfast refusal to argue with substance, your mindless and uncritical parroting of talking points, your ridiculous evasion of Reich's points -- those are not the behaviors of someone with adequate intellectual horsepower. If you don't like wearing the dunce cap, start educating yourself before you post.

 

[Matt1970]

I can't speak for liberals, but I often turn to name calling when repeated attempts to use facts and reason fail. At that point it becomes a game of mockery rather than an attempt at productive discussion.

Further, how about you take a little personal responsibility for your behavior? Much as it may pain you to accept, when you act like a moron people are going to come to believe you're a moron. Your steadfast refusal to argue with substance, your mindless and uncritical parroting of talking points, your ridiculous evasion of Reich's points -- those are not the behaviors of someone with adequate intellectual horsepower. If you don't like wearing the dunce cap, start educating yourself before you post.

Oh bullshit. Reich is using excuses that have been happening for decades for the reason why the market is up as of recent. Your attacking someone for pointing that out changes nothing and your refusal to accept them is your problem. And yes, you can speak for yourself.

 

[Moonbeam]

Matt1970: This ought to be enough right here. This is nothing more than the whining from a butt-hurt liberal.

M: This is you being an imbecile. You can't just say that something should be enough right here and have it be enough right here. All you are doing is saying you have the feeling that something should be self evident to others because it is evident to you. You believe that 'you' having an opinion automatically makes it right. What you see is only what you have been programmed to see. Announcing like an idiot, that somebody is a acting like butt-hurt because they don't buy your programming is itself butt-hurt imbecility. You are projecting.


Ma: This is enough to prove Reich is not even close to having an un-biased opinion, but here, I will do another one.

Mo: Again you just make a statement of your opinion as if it were true and all you have to do is say it to be true. You have to actually give logical evidence for you belief. The fact that you do not do this is why I call you an imbecile. Believing that you are right about something because you believe it is ridiculous.

Ma: This has been going on for decades. How can something that has been going on for decades only now have an effect on the stock market?

Mo: Congratulations, Matt. This is real dialog. You make a real and concrete point that others can think about and debate. You have stepped out from behind you massive ego shield and made yourself vulnerable to being shown you could be wrong. I am very happy for you and for me this has not been a waste. You have also opened the door to learning. If in fact you are wrong you may have an opportunity to see why. You might actually grow as you change your thinking. That would be a great thing too. It's the start of thinking for yourself instead of adopting a posture and defending it to the death. This is such a big achievement in my mind, that I don't even what to debate whether or not it's correct. I just want to thank you for stepping out on the field. Nice throw. And yes, I am serious.

 

[cybrsage]

You see what a pig you are
You are a monster
You are only a tick...a filthy parasite.
You...should be squished.
you blow fly?

Interesting, you have moved past just your normal insults and into wishing me bodily harm. That goes beyond what is expected from your broken genetics and is rapidly approaching the level of a crime. You should stop while you are behind.

 

[cybrsage]

I just wanted to bump this again since some people may have missed how thoroughly the nonsense in OP has been shredded. This is but one of the best examples of many posts showing the OP is clueless.

Moonie is not the OP, but you are right in using just about any of his posts as good a good example of nonsense and that Moonie is clueless.

 

[Matt1970]

Matt1970: This ought to be enough right here. This is nothing more than the whining from a butt-hurt liberal.

M: This is you being an imbecile. You can't just say that something should be enough right here and have it be enough right here. All you are doing is saying you have the feeling that something should be self evident to others because it is evident to you. You believe that 'you' having an opinion automatically makes it right. What you see is only what you have been programmed to see. Announcing like an idiot, that somebody is a acting like butt-hurt because they don't buy your programming is itself butt-hurt imbecility. You are projecting.


Ma: This is enough to prove Reich is not even close to having an un-biased opinion, but here, I will do another one.

Mo: Again you just make a statement of your opinion as if it were true and all you have to do is say it to be true. You have to actually give logical evidence for you belief. The fact that you do not do this is why I call you an imbecile. Believing that you are right about something because you believe it is ridiculous.

Ma: This has been going on for decades. How can something that has been going on for decades only now have an effect on the stock market?

Mo: Congratulations, Matt. This is real dialog. You make a real and concrete point that others can think about and debate. You have stepped out from behind you massive ego shield and made yourself vulnerable to being shown you could be wrong. I am very happy for you and for me this has not been a waste. You have also opened the door to learning. If in fact you are wrong you may have an opportunity to see why. You might actually grow as you change your thinking. That would be a great thing too. It's the start of thinking for yourself instead of adopting a posture and defending it to the death. This is such a big achievement in my mind, that I don't even what to debate whether or not it's correct. I just want to thank you for stepping out on the field. Nice throw. And yes, I am serious.

I am not saying my opinion is gold, but someone blaming recent trends on the stock market on stuff that has been going on for decades doesn't raise a little doubt in your mind? Answer my question rather than posting 3 more paragraphs on how I am a moron and all Conservatives are brain dead.

 

[cybrsage]

I am not saying my opinion is gold, but someone blaming recent trends on the stock market on stuff that has been going on for decades doesn't raise a little doubt in your mind? Answer my question rather than posting 3 more paragraphs on how I am a moron and all Conservatives are brain dead.

You are quite the optimist if you actually expect him to do that.