Lol, the Hildabeast said what???

[HawgZWylde]

Appearing at a Boston rally for Democrat gubernatorial candidate Martha Coakley on Friday, Hillary Clinton told the crowd gathered at the Park Plaza Hotel not to listen to anybody who says that “businesses create jobs.”

“Don’t let anybody tell you it’s corporations and businesses create jobs,” Clinton said.

“You know that old theory, ‘trickle-down economics,’” she continued. “That has been tried, that has failed. It has failed rather spectacularly.”

“You know, one of the things my husband says when people say ‘Well, what did you bring to Washington,’ he said, ‘Well, I brought arithmetic,’” Clinton said, which elicited loud laughs from the crowd.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PyUoCiWsTfI

"You didn't build that business"

Lol, and as for Blue Dress Billy? He brought arithmetic's called fuzzy numbers and a box of cigars...

[DEVOREFLYER]

The unanswered question is did BJ Clinton have safe sex? Was the Cigar naked or did it have a wrapper??

Follow up question for Monica spit or swallow????

Follow up question for BJ did ya smoke a/the Cigar after sex????

[HawgZWylde]

The unanswered question is did BJ Clinton have safe sex? Was the Cigar naked or did it have a wrapper??

Follow up question for Monica spit or swallow????

Follow up question for BJ did ya smoke a/the Cigar after sex????

Lol, I wonder how a sitting president would be able to go buy a box of "jackets" without 100 other people knowing about it? I mean it's not like the pres can simply walk into Rite Aide and buy em off the counter. But hey, the Blue dress was indeed stained soooo, lol...

[Bucket]

Lol, I wonder how a sitting president would be able to go buy a box of "jackets" without 100 other people knowing about it? I mean it's not like the pres can simply walk into Rite Aide and buy em off the counter. But hey, the Blue dress was indeed stained soooo, lol...

Lol looks more like a hilla-seal to me

[DEVOREFLYER]

Ya the Hildabeast looks like a "Texas Two Bagger" to me.
You know one bag for her head and one bag for yours just in-case her bag falls off.:Shocked:

[HawgZWylde]

Ya the Hildabeast looks like a "Texas Two Bagger" to me.
You know one bag for her head and one bag for yours just in-case her bag falls off.:Shocked:

Sorry man, the only way would be to have a custom Ebola type suit where the "jacket" would HAVE to be connected to the suit. Oh, and there would HAVE to be a Google glass type thingy on the goggles so I could watch "something else", bags or not. LOL...

[HawgZWylde]

Why would any business owner vote for that? Especially after the last six years of "you didn't build that" type thinking in power? Why would they want more of that? And Her Hilariousness and Blue Dress Billy are even more corrupt than Obola? Is that possible?

[etucker1959]

Why would any business owner vote for that? Especially after the last six years of "you didn't build that" type thinking in power? Why would they want more of that? And Her Hilariousness and Blue Dress Billy are even more corrupt than Obola? Is that possible?

A business owner would never vote for her after hearing her say that. However their employees just might, especially if he was give a tax break to stimulate his business. Or update his equipment or maybe pay his employees a living wage. Instead he just pocketed the money and said, "THANK YOU VERY MUCH" to whom ever in the government, "THOUGHT" this was a good idea. Just like Madame Hillary said, "TRICKLE DOWN ECONOMICS" has been tried and proven to be a failure!!!!!

[HawgZWylde]

A business owner would never vote for her after hearing her say that. However their employees just might, especially if he was give a tax break to stimulate his business. Or update his equipment or maybe pay his employees a living wage. Instead he just pocketed the money and said, "THANK YOU VERY MUCH" to whom ever in the government, "THOUGHT" this was a good idea. Just like Madame Hillary said, "TRICKLE DOWN ECONOMICS" has been tried and proven to be a failure!!!!!


"TRICKLE DOWN ECONOMICS" has been tried and proven to be a failure!!!!!

You know tucker I do a lot of political blogging all over the internet and I hear this time and again from those on the left. What I never hear is the left explain what they interpret that to mean and how it has failed. America has produced the most successful amount of people in worlds history, no other can be proven to come close. If one educates and works hard they can be just as successful as the next. Even the poor here have it better than 99% of the rest of the world. It wasn't until or immigration laws were changed to allow the dirt poor and uneducated to migrate en mass and the progressing injection of socialism that our population of poor began to increase exponentially. Now, with this progressive socialist/fascist administration the middle class is disappearing faster than the Dodo bird.

My question for you is this; What is "trickle down economics" and how is it failing? What has taken place that is causing it to fail?

[Lady Quagga]

When an American company exploits legal offshore loopholes to increase profits without changing their core business model, "trickle down economics" has failed.

[DEVOREFLYER]

Let me try to put it in the simplest of terms for our lefty friends to understand.

Necessities: There are only three things humans need to survive and it has always been this way from the beginning of time. Take any one of the three away and you will not survive. It’s really that simple and they are “Food, Water and Shelter”.

Luxuries: Everything beyond the three listed above are really luxuries and you can survive without luxuries though most everyone today would be quite miserable.

Disposable income: Any income that is above the amount needed to provide for the necessities is used to buy luxuries.

Savings and investment: Savings and investment occurs when disposable income exceeds an individual’s luxury needs.

Business: Any business that does not provide a product that fills the three basic needs (Necessities) is in the luxury business.

When disposable income decreases (Taxes, inflation, job loss) luxury purchases decrease and the recessionary cycle begins.

Trickle down is the process of money changing hands many times in the economic cycle.
Example: Joe’s widget company makes one product only and buys materials from several vendors to make the product. His money (profit) is used to pay those vendors. Those vendors have employees as does Joe and those employees spend their income (wages) on necessities and luxuries. Joe and his vendors also pay rent and utilities, insurance and other overhead costs to providers that also have employees. And the cycle continues as long as business is good (profit making) employment grows and wages increase. When business is bad the cycle reverses.

Entrepreneurs make new jobs and new industries and new products (luxuries). The question from a public-policy perspective is how to best encourage them. The truth is that the government does a really bad job choosing whom to support — either through direct subsidies, protection against foreign competition, the provision of tax incentives, or any sort of industrial policy that favors some entrepreneurs over others (crony capitalism).

Worse yet, the possibility of successfully lobbying for subsidies, tax incentives, or protection from competitors means that it is often more profitable to direct one’s entrepreneurial efforts (and profits) not toward developing new products or better methods, but rather toward figuring out better ways to game the system; better ways to lobby Congress, get increased corporate welfare, get higher tax subsidies, and so on.

In a perfect world all firms would face the same tax rates, get zero corporate welfare, and be equally forced to compete with competitors domestic and foreign. This would force all entrepreneurial efforts to be directed to where they should be: the creation of new and better goods and services or the production of existing goods and services at lower costs using fewer resources and without Government intervention and unnecessary regulation.

[Lady Quagga]

In a perfect world all firms would face the same tax rates, get zero corporate welfare, and be equally forced to compete with competitors domestic and foreign. This would force all entrepreneurial efforts to be directed to where they should be: the creation of new and better goods and services or the production of existing goods and services at lower costs using fewer resources and without Government intervention and unnecessary regulation.

Therein lies the rub. Ultimately at the heart of any economic theory is the human factor. And when it comes to personal gain, humans are by-and-large greedy, self-serving, imputing, duplicitous bastards. Combine that with the fact that you cannot have a "one-size-fits-all" economic policy because of the various and ever-changing consumer, commercial, industrial, social, and environmental demands which occur at local, state, national, and global levels, it is impossible to compete on equal economic terms, be it on Main Street or Wall Street.

[HawgZWylde]

When an American company exploits legal offshore loopholes to increase profits without changing their core business model, "trickle down economics" has failed.

When taxes, regulations, mandates and labor costs take enough of a company's profits where investors won't buy into it they must do what they have to otherwise said company cannot grow. The others are just plain greedy. Crony capitalism must end, but so does America's welfare state as it is. And by allowing millions upon millions more poor and uneducated to immigrate, will set the stage for a socialist takeover because capitalism cannot stand once the takers exceed the makers. No, that's not what common core math teaches, that's what reality teaches...

[HawgZWylde]

Therein lies the rub. Ultimately at the heart of any economic theory is the human factor. And when it comes to personal gain, humans are by-and-large greedy, self-serving, imputing, duplicitous bastards. Combine that with the fact that you cannot have a "one-size-fits-all" economic policy because of the various and ever-changing consumer, commercial, industrial, social, and environmental demands which occur at local, state, national, and global levels, it is impossible to compete on equal economic terms, be it on Main Street or Wall Street.

With that being said, what would you recommend we do? You mention corporations must make core changes, but what about government because the way it's currently going now, we will not be free or prosperous. What core changes do you think should occur, and how should it be done?

[Lady Quagga]

When taxes, regulations, mandates and labor costs take enough of a company's profits where investors won't buy into it they must do what they have to otherwise said company cannot grow.

That is an unacceptable excuse for dodging your corporate taxes. As I indicated in this thread and another, these offshore loophole deferments are done with zero changes to their core business (i.e., the additional revenues gained do not go back into corporate investment or growth). And the "we're only doing this because we are taxed too high excuse" doesn't hold water, especially for some of the worst offenders, whose effective tax rates fall far below 15% after the various tax incentives they receive. What's worse, we end up paying more so that they can enjoy this privilege, since those deferred taxes are effectively placed in stocks and (the ultimate slap in Joe Taxpayer's face) T-bills.

I have no problem with moderate regulation - left to their own devices, corporations would (and have) left environmental disasters in their wake of resource exploitation. And as far as labor costs are concerned, call me quaint, but I think it would be nice to be able to live with at least basic comforts in the communities you pour your blood, sweat, and tears in.

[HawgZWylde]

That is an acceptable excuse for dodging your corporate taxes. As I indicated in this thread and another, these offshore loophole deferments are done with zero changes to their core business (i.e., the additional revenues gained do not go back into corporate investment or growth). And the "we're only doing this because we are taxed too high excuse" doesn't hold water, especially for some of the worst offenders, whose effective tax rates fall far below 15% after the various tax incentives they receive. What's worse, we end up paying more so that they can enjoy this privilege, since those deferred taxes are effectively placed in stocks and (the ultimate slap in Joe Taxpayer's face) T-bills.

I have no problem with moderate regulation - left to their own devices, corporations would (and have) left environmental disasters in their wake of resource exploitation. And as far as labor costs are concerned, call me quaint, but I think it would be nice to be able to live with at least basic comforts in the communities you pour your blood, sweat, and tears in.


"we're only doing this because we are taxed too high excuse" doesn't hold water, especially for some of the worst offenders, whose effective tax rates fall far below 15% after the various tax incentives they receive. What's worse, we end up paying more so that they can enjoy this privilege, since those deferred taxes are effectively placed in stocks and (the ultimate slap in Joe Taxpayer's face) T-bills.

Agreed. The government in corroboration with Wall Street have created a crooked playing field. Why not level the playing field by reducing the tax rate then eliminate the cronyism and make all pay the agreed to lower rate? Why must America have the highest corporate tax rate in the world who some must fully pay while others do not? But that's only one part of the problem. I have no qualms for moderate, common sense regulation either. No one wants to eat, drink and breath poison. There are certainly some who wouldn't care, but the majority do. What we have taking place now is a government whose ideology is to regulate, tax and mandate to equalize all and punish success. Except themselves and it's cronies...

[etucker1959]

You know tucker I do a lot of political blogging all over the internet and I hear this time and again from those on the left. What I never hear is the left explain what they interpret that to mean and how it has failed. America has produced the most successful amount of people in worlds history, no other can be proven to come close. If one educates and works hard they can be just as successful as the next. Even the poor here have it better than 99% of the rest of the world. It wasn't until or immigration laws were changed to allow the dirt poor and uneducated to migrate en mass and the progressing injection of socialism that our population of poor began to increase exponentially. Now, with this progressive socialist/fascist administration the middle class is disappearing faster than the Dodo bird.

My question for you is this; What is "trickle down economics" and how is it failing? What has taken place that is causing it to fail?

The trickle down economics that I'm referring too and the Hildabeast. Is the kind where you give a big tax break to a business or an individual hoping it will help their business or themselves. The trickle down part is, "with the tax money they saved" they in turn would do something constructive with it. Such as hiring new employees or spending it in a way that helps the economy in general. What they have found instead, these businesses or individuals just pocketed the money and helped no one but themselves!!!! So in effect nothing trickled down to anyone else, except the businesses or individuals who got the tax break!!!

[City Dad]

Who was that noted Leftist who called it "Voodoo Ecconomics?" Oh, wait... never mind.

[etucker1959]

Who was that noted Leftist who called it "Voodoo Ecconomics?" Oh, wait... never mind.

Oh City Dad, you're so clever some people might not know what you're talking about. So let me explain it to them. (I know Seal and DS just fell off their chairs again) lol The Voodoo Economic term was thrown around in the early 1980's against Ronald Reagan Economic ideas. The first person I heard use that term was none other then "George Bush," when he was running against Ronald Reagan for the Republican Party nomination.

[Lady Quagga]

Who was that noted Leftist who called it "Voodoo Ecconomics?" Oh, wait... never mind.

http://www.80s.com/saveferris/images/class/sher4.jpg

[seal]

Oh City Dad, you're so clever some people might not know what you're talking about. So let me explain it to them. (I know Seal and DS just fell off their chairs again) lol The Voodoo Economic term was thrown around in the early 1980's against Ronald Reagan Economic ideas. The first person I heard use that term was none other then "George Bush," when he was running against Ronald Reagan for the Republican Party nomination.

Thank you teacher!

You will be happy to know that I broke my coccyx when I fell off my chair.