US on track to borrow most money since 2008 financial crisis: report

Bush Ties Policy to Record Home Ownership
Touting his tax cuts as the economy's savior — and pointing to the strong housing market as proof — Bush said "more people own their own home now than ever." More than 50 percent of minorities owned their own homes in the last three months of 2003 for the first time ever, the president said.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/2004/03/26/bush-ties-policy-to-record-home-ownership.html

Tax cuts responsible for housing market = tax cuts responsible for housing bubble.

Same boorish bullshit; different day.

giphy.gif
 
How is it a myth you willful idiot. Look at the fucking history. We have has numerous tax cuts since JFK and revenue keeps climbing through the roof.

JFK died before any tax cuts were passed. So right away you start off completely wrong.

Secondly, revenue grew from 1964-68 because LBJ increased government spending by 50%

Revenue in 1983 was below 1982.

Revenue from 2001-2004 was below revenue for 2000.

KS repealed their tax cuts in 2017 and saw massive deficits turn into massive surpluses.

Nothing you say is accurate or correct. Not even close. You're utterly wrong about all of it.

Every single political decision you've made in your life has been wrong. Every. Single. One.
 
the fact that you don't even realize your argument is that the Government should keep more of our money thereby everything will be better,

WE are the government; the government is us.

And you're not getting to keep more of what you earned from tax cuts. You're getting less and you're going into debt because that's what happened this year and throughout Bush.
 
They had nothing to do with the tax cuts you ignoramus. That was due to recession and 9-11.

Bullshit excuses.

GDP growth for 2001 was positive, even with the 6-month recession and 9/11...so there was nothing to recover from.

Secondly, 9/11 had no material impact on the nation's economy whatsoever, and you've yet to provide even a shred of evidence it did. You use it as an excuse for four shitty years of poor growth? LOL!
 
1. The 2001 recession didn't start until April 2001, three months after Bush had been President, and was so weak that GDP for 2001 was still positive. So there was nothing to recover from.

Fucking lying moron:

2001 Recession

The 2001 recession lasted eight months (March-November 2001). It was caused by the Y2K scare in 2000. This created a boom and subsequent bust in dot-com businesses. The 9/11 attack worsened it.

The economy contracted in two quarters: Q1 -1.1 percent and Q3 -1.7 percent. Unemployment reached 5.7 percent during the recession, but rose even further to 6 percent in June 2003. This often happens in recessions, as unemployment is a lagging indicator. Most employers wait until they are sure the economy is back on its feet again before hiring permanent employees.

https://www.thebalance.com/the-history-of-recessions-in-the-united-states-3306011

2. 9/11 had no material affect on the economy whatsoever. In fact, the DJIA recovered all their 9/11 losses by November 2001.

Fucking lying moron:
The 9/11 attacks worsened the 2001 recession, which had begun in March 2001. The economy had contracted 1.1 percent in the first quarter but had bounced up 2.1 percent in the second quarter. The attacks made the economy contract 1.3 percent in the third quarter, extending the recession. The Y2K scare caused the 2001 recession. It created a boom and subsequent bust in internet businesses.
https://www.thebalance.com/how-the-9-11-attacks-still-affect-the-economy-today-3305536

3. Bush had four years of shit growth before his housing bubble started. That's not because of a 6-month mild recession in 2001 that didn't even contract GDP for the year.

Thar she blows with bullshit!!

giphy.gif
 
LINK us up dumbfuck. That said, the Federal history doesn't support your lunatic assertions.

LOL!

Federal revenues were below 1982 levels in 1983.

Federal revenues were below 2000 levels from 2001-2004

Here's the actual budget from Kansas with and without the tax cuts:

StarkNumbers.jpg
 
Deficits are completely caused by tax cuts, and the people of Kansas learned that lesson first hand. That's why they voted to repeal the tax cuts last year. Once they did, their budgets suddenly went from massive deficits to massive surpluses:

No they are not you repugnant moron on steroids; they are the result of SPENDING more than you take in. If you had had more than a remedial grade school education you would know this.

So that brings us back to some facts about you; did you attend college and what is your nationality? Or still too big of a cowardly liar and pussy to say?
 
WRONG!

The deficit DECLINED during Obama's 8 years.

FY Deficit (in billions)
2009: $1,412.7
2017: $665.4

At one point, Obama got the deficit down to just $438B in 2015.


You're conflating the deficit with the debt and you do that to try and spike the debate. You obviously know the difference between the deficit and debt, but you're deliberately pretending you're not right here in order to prolong this debate to try and make yourself look better than you actually are.

Weak sauce.

ROFLMAO You really are a fucking retard. You live on planet moron.

Obama Has Presided Over 5 of 6 Largest Deficits in U.S. History
https://www.cnsnews.com/news/articl...presided-over-5-6-largest-deficits-us-history
 
Your own article states it doesn't show cause and effect.

YOUR ASSERTION is that raising the MW kills jobs.

That was why I posted that article.

So can you just admit that your original assertion was really a load of horseshit you were repeating because you didn't want to accept new information that undermined it, please?
 
The 2001 recession lasted from April to October and was so weak that GDP for 2001 didn't even decline.

So there was nothing to recover from since GDP was still expanding, even with a 6-month recession and 9/11.

Also, 9/11 didn't impact the economy in any meaningful way. The DJIA regained all its 9/11 losses by November 2001.

You're a fraud.

Translation; you don't give a shit what the facts are because you are a raving idiot.

giphy.gif
 
Your guy Bush was the one who tied his tax cuts to the housing market:

Bush Ties Policy to Record Home Ownership
Touting his tax cuts as the economy's savior — and pointing to the strong housing market as proof — Bush said "more people own their own home now than ever." More than 50 percent of minorities owned their own homes in the last three months of 2003 for the first time ever, the president said.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/2004/03/26/bush-ties-policy-to-record-home-ownership.html

So there you have Bush saying his tax cuts were responsible for the strong housing market. Hence, his tax cuts are responsible for the housing crisis. That's what he campaigned on!

giphy.gif
 
You're filled with so much insecurity that the best response you can muster is just copying what I wrote and changing a few words.

So lazy.

You're filled with so much stupidity it is hard to figure out how you escaped from your asylum.

What college did you attend and what is your nationality?
 
Then why did even liberal economists say it doesn't show cause and effect?

I didn't post it to prove that raising it creates jobs...I posted it to prove that your assertion about raising it killing jobs was bullshit.

So what's sad is that even when provided with information that contradicts your long-held conventional wisdom, rather than owning up to the fact that your "conventional wisdom" could actually be wrong, you try to make this about something it's not.

Your assertion was that raising the MW kills jobs, and I provided you with evidence from only 4 years ago across 13 states that shows it doesn't.

Now, an adult would take that new information and say to themselves "you know what? I guess I was wrong, and that I should probably question the "conventional wisdom" that led me to being wrong". But you're not an adult. Instead, you ignore that information and stick to your conventional wisdom -that has already been proven wrong- and dig in your heels only because your ego won't let you own up to being incorrect.

I would have respect for you people if you were capable of admitting you were wrong and changing your thinking. But you don't do that because of whatever bullshit entitlement complex you have.

Grow the fuck up.
 
leave it to a liberal to soapbox a higher minimum wage argument.The idea of minimum wage jobs is for it to be a beginning, young people to do menial jobs while educating themselves, or people temporarily using them as a stop-gap. It was never meant to be a living wage. ou do understand that concept? right?

LOL!

You trying to redefine the intent of the minimum wage does not suddenly validate the argument that raising it kills jobs.
 
That's not what the study showed. It costs jobs at the lower level and not because people were moving up. It's not like I'm stating something new that those at the margain get hurt

That is precisely what the study showed. You all tried to de-contextualize it by crying crocodile tears over the drop in low-wage employment while ignoring the corresponding hike in higher-wage employment over the same period.

Just more dishonest bullshit from feces-flinging Conservative monkeys.
 
Back
Top