Romney

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by onmyknees

I don't know where you obtained your goofy pie chart.....My data comes from Ernst & Young one of the country's foremost non partisan accounting firms.

---

Non-partisan? Fail! LMFAO! Of course the very "non-partisan" Chamber of Commerce has no agenda. And it's hilarious that you're willing to embrace Keynesianism when you think it serves the talking points Fox News fed you. "Your data" are as full of shit as you are. If they're "your data" why don't you try to summarize them yourself instead of cutting and pasting. OMK tries to put on big-boy pants but once again shits himself.

If there's any relationship between high taxes on the rich and job growth it suggests that higher taxes are associated with better job growth.

Interesting discussion about Romney w/ Thom Hartmann:

Hartmann Vs. Matthew Vadum - The Importance of Romney's Bain Departure.- YouTube

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BluegrassCat

Non-partisan? Fail! LMFAO! Of course the very "non-partisan" Chamber of Commerce has no agenda. And it's hilarious that you're willing to embrace Keynesianism when you think it serves the talking points Fox News fed you. "Your data" are as full of shit as you are. If they're "your data" why don't you try to summarize them yourself instead of cutting and pasting. OMK tries to put on big-boy pants but once again shits himself.

If there's any relationship between high taxes on the rich and job growth it suggests that higher taxes are associated with better job growth.

---

Well, there were high levels of growth in the 50s, 60s and early 70s. When there were high taxes on the fiscally rich.
But you also need to abide by market principles, too.
Which means: markets function properly, as it were, when investment income stays in the country, when sellers bear the full cost of what they produce and when savings is invested in real wealth, not phantom wealth. Those are the three key benchmarks as to how markets are supposed to work.
But growth isn't a good thing. Because you cannot have perpetual growth on a finite planet.
A system based on endless production and consumption isn't sustainable. It's not.
You cannot have endless growth.... I mean, at some point, with respect to population growth, you run out of physical space.
Anyway, it's absolutely insane to think that we can keep growing and growing, endlessly producing and consuming. I mean, even all our waste/garbage will catch up to us at some point.
The planet cannot take this type of despoliation forever.

Paul Ehrlich - Cowboy Economy or Spaceship Economy - YouTube

David Suzuki speech-Calgary, Alberta - YouTube

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BluegrassCat

Non-partisan? Fail! LMFAO! Of course the very "non-partisan" Chamber of Commerce has no agenda. And it's hilarious that you're willing to embrace Keynesianism when you think it serves the talking points Fox News fed you. "Your data" are as full of shit as you are. If they're "your data" why don't you try to summarize them yourself instead of cutting and pasting. OMK tries to put on big-boy pants but once again shits himself.

If there's any relationship between high taxes on the rich and job growth it suggests that higher taxes are associated with better job growth.

---

LMFAO.....Our resident economics professor and incurable sycophant reminds me a lot of his idol....their strong suits are not economics, but if we just give them 4 more years...they'll get it down !!!!!!!

Here's a sad sack who sometime ago posts the results a poll conducted by some tiny college because he agreed with the findings. Nothing wrong with that when you're easily fooled.... When asked to provide the control data and footnotes of this poll, ( who did they poll, when did they poll) he either was unable to or chose not to...just take his word....he's that smart. Yet he out of hand dismisses an in depth comprehensive and conclusive study by one of the worlds leading accounting firms with nothing more than a few sentences. Yes...he's that smart....but would you expect anything less from an intellectual dud who belongs to a party whose leader strenuously assures us the penalty for not obtaining health care in NOT a tax, then sends his Solicitor General to The Supreme Court to argue it is a tax, Then moments after the decision is handed down, reverts back to telling us it's not a tax. Can you see how he might just be distracted by shiny objects ? What a moron. My guess is he either didn't read this particular study...or didn't understand it.
And for the record, here's some facts relevant to the firm that worked for months compiling data that he laughingly dismisses...because you guessed it.....he's that smart.
So who ya gonna believe....Ernst and Young or Barry and Bluegrass and 40 straight months of over 12% real unemployment and the worst recovery since The Depression? And don't forget...Barry and Bluegrass are the same economic wizards that told us if we passed the stimulus, we'd be below 6% unemployment by 2012. :confused::confused:


Ernst & Young was ranked . No. 1 in the Forbes Magazine's The Best Accounting Firms to Work For in 2012, claiming that EY treats its employees better than other big firms.
The firm was ranked No. 1 in BusinessWeek's annual list of Best Places To Launch a Career for 2008.
The firm was ranked No. 44 in the Fortune list of 100 Best Companies to Work For, and the highest among the Big Four, for 2009.
Ernst & Young was ranked 4th in Universum's America's Ideal Employers list 2011 and 3rd in its Global Top Employers list.
The firm was No. 34 in ComputerWorld's 100 Best Places To Work For In IT for 2009.
The firm was also placed among the top 50 places in the Where Women Want to Work awards for 2007.
The firm was named as one of the 10 Best Companies for Working Mothers by Working Mothers magazine in 2006.
Over the past decade contributed more to House Republicans, but more to Senate Democrats.


PS.........This just in....jobless claims just surged last week by 34,000 and consumer confidence is down for the 3rd straight month...but hey what would Barry and Bluegrass say? "The Private Sector is doing just fine" !!!

I guess the President's magic wand isn't working -isn't that what you expect from the incumbent in the White House? And isn't that how you expect President Romney to rescue the national economy? It doesn't matter that you are not an Economics Professor, but your versions of the causes of the USA's economic problems have never addressed core underlying issues which most President's could not control -they may establish frameworks or regimes of regulation, taxation, subsidy and so on, but the USA is part of a global economy and there is only so much a President can do -in the UK we have the kind of government you want there, and our Prime Minister Cameron has just said that we should expect austerity measures to last until 2020, as good an admission of failure from the top as you will get, from a country that doesn't even approach the figures on economic growth you have had under Obama. Needless to say, austerity means posh boys having to slum it with Mumm instead of Louis Roederer. You won't read it but you can find the report here:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/poli...austerity.html

As for Ernst & Young, you forgot to mention in your list that they audited four of the feeder funds that were part of Bernie Madoff's famous firm...at one point they were sued for negligence, malpractice and breach of contract-ok the suit was dropped, but it doesn't explain how such Titans of high finance could be duped by some bloke sitting in an office on 53 and 3rd reading Superman comics when he/they were supposed to be investing their clients money...eh?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by onmyknees

Ernst & Young was ranked . No. 1 in the Forbes Magazine's The Best Accounting Firms to Work For in 2012, claiming that EY treats its employees better than other big firms.
The firm was ranked No. 1 in BusinessWeek's annual list of Best Places To Launch a Career for 2008.
The firm was ranked No. 44 in the Fortune list of 100 Best Companies to Work For, and the highest among the Big Four, for 2009.
Ernst & Young was ranked 4th in Universum's America's Ideal Employers list 2011 and 3rd in its Global Top Employers list.
The firm was No. 34 in ComputerWorld's 100 Best Places To Work For In IT for 2009.
The firm was also placed among the top 50 places in the Where Women Want to Work awards for 2007.
The firm was named as one of the 10 Best Companies for Working Mothers by Working Mothers magazine in 2006.

---

Totally HIGH-larious that you cut-and-pasted the section from Ernst & Young's Wikipedia page about what a great place it is to work, and failed even to mention the very next section of the Wikipedia article, which details the many fines, judgements, and cease and desist orders levied against EY for things like negligence, falsifying court documents, fraud, violating securities laws, etc -- all things seemingly more relevant to the discussion at hand than the quality of EY's HR department.

You're not even very good at trolling.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by onmyknees

Here's a sad sack who sometime ago posts the results a poll conducted by some tiny college because he agreed with the findings. Nothing wrong with that when you're easily fooled.... When asked to provide the control data and footnotes of this poll, ( who did they poll, when did they poll) he either was unable to or chose not to...just take his word....he's that smart.

---

Oh dear what a sad little troll you are! University of Michigan = some tiny college. LMFAO! I guess we shouldn't expect more from you. Where did you get your B.A.? At Rikers?

So you're ignorant, that's forgivable, but you're also a liar. I gave you the link to the study's exact methodology. Here it is again liar. http://electionstudies.org/studypage..._2009panel.htm Of course we know what happened. You couldn't figure it out given your 8th grade education and so you lied about it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by onmyknees

Yet he out of hand dismisses an in depth comprehensive and conclusive study by one of the worlds leading accounting firms with nothing more than a few sentences. Yes...he's that smart....but would you expect anything less from an intellectual dud who belongs to a party whose leader strenuously assures us the penalty for not obtaining health care in NOT a tax, then sends his Solicitor General to The Supreme Court to argue it is a tax, Then moments after the decision is handed down, reverts back to telling us it's not a tax. Can you see how he might just be distracted by shiny objects ? What a moron. My guess is he either didn't read this particular study...or didn't understand it.
And for the record, here's some facts relevant to the firm that worked for months compiling data that he laughingly dismisses...because you guessed it.....he's that smart.
So who ya gonna believe....Ernst and Young or Barry and Bluegrass and 40 straight months of over 12% real unemployment and the worst recovery since The Depression? And don't forget...Barry and Bluegrass are the same economic wizards that told us if we passed the stimulus, we'd be below 6% unemployment by 2012.

---

I asked you to explain "your data." Apparently you can't. No surprise there, you obviously didn't read it and couldn't understand it anyway. Someone told you it supported your extremist ideology so you rush to copy and paste it over here. Do you ever get sick of carrying the water for your masters?

I asked you to explain your belief in Keynesiasm here for tax cuts but not for fiscal stimulus. You couldn't because you don't understand what you're regurgitating. You're a puppet. I provided evidence that there's no positive effect on employment from tax cuts for the rich. Your silence is deafening.

And as the other posters noted, you hilariously proved my point by dishonestly copying the authors' "bonafides" while ignoring their very serious problems. Why don't you find some evidence that Michigan's National Election Study is flawed? (I know you won't because there's no link at the DailyCaller telling you about it).

Thanks for the laughs puppet. Now don't you have a PO to report to?

Even a birdbrain can repeat what he hears on the radio, but if you ask him what it means.......he has no answer.

Romney profited from the 2008 crash somehow, either by last minute inside information, or not paying taxes at all because he lost money, or he played the system and profited on other people's losses somehow. Stuff that happened that even McCain's boys didn't see.
I also think Obama knows there is real dirt here, or you wouldn't hear him personally calling for them to be released, if he wasn't sure what was in there he would have used his attack dogs to embarass Romney. Whatever is in there is more than embarassing, it's damning, and you're going to hear Democrats refer to it over and over, every time the Republicans mention the economy.

.

R*Money
(RoMney)

Needs to :ignore: & :salad if he wants to win.

.