Originally Posted By vbdad55 <Understanding the sacrcasm I *hope* was intended here, this goes far beyond the wildest dreams of the most hardcore Marxist imaginable. Isn't there SOME sort of middle ground in between the extremes? < yes sarcasm - to a point. Somehwere in between the stance that we just need to wait this thing out - and the far extreme I posted- lies the real answer. he issue is - there is nothing going to popup and tell us what will work for sure ( maybe nothing will) - there is risk to any plan...but staying status quo should not be an option
Originally Posted By mawnck >>staying status quo should not be an option<< ... and screaming "SOCIALIST!" every time something is proposed that the CEOs don't like = status quo.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <Hardly a non-answer. What do you need, X, charts and graphs on the LP board?> A couple of years ago when I posted a link to a chart that showed that sometimes tax cuts lead to increased revenues and sometimes they didn't, he simply ignored it, as it contradicted his mantra. Sometimes they DO work, sometimes they don't - few things in this life are always good or always bad. At any rate, I also think the stimulus package is light on infrastructure (which we need to take care of ANYWAY, fercryinoutloud) and heavy on tax cuts considering the current rates and state of the economy. Obama made all these concessions to the Republicans and still not a single Republican voted for it in the House. I'd take that as a cue to re-work it towards what I really wanted it to be anyway, or at least work towards that in the inevitable House-Senate compromise. As Rachel Maddow put it: "What doesn‘t make sense is what‘s going on with the stimulus bill. The proposed $825 billion stimulus bill that‘s supposed to be the best hope we‘ve got out for getting out of “R” rated horror movie economic territory into a still scary PG-13 horror movie of an economy. The stimulus bill started off life as a giant bipartisan compromise, right? It‘s a third-full of tax breaks. It‘s got no more than 18 percent infrastructure investment. It‘s full of political giveaways to the Republicans—and it‘s still struggling for support? It just doesn‘t make sense." (snip) "So honestly, what gives with the fight over the stimulus package? The election was a de facto referendum on economic policy, and Barack Obama and the Democrats won that referendum. By John McCain‘s own account, the presidential election turned when the economy hit the commode. In other words, the prospect of Republican ideas being put to work to get us out of economic trouble got the Democrats elected. It would be difficult to find a clearer example of political impotence on the economy that the current iteration of the Republican Party and its most recent presidential standard bearer, John McCain in particular. When John McCain fake-suspended his campaign to work on the bailout and said his best ideas for us keeping us out of the next Great Depression were to cut earmarks and cut taxes, he and his party got laughed at and then they got womped. John McCain lost Indiana. John McCain lost North Carolina.' (snip) "You know, but it‘s not just John McCain. Throughout much of last week, Republicans cited a Congressional Budget Office report as evidence that Obama‘s stimulus plan would not work. They said the report showed that most of the money in the stimulus bill wouldn‘t be spent quickly enough; it wouldn‘t get into the economy until after next year. One awkward but very important detail about this CBO report—is that it doesn‘t exist. Yes. The CBO says they ran some numbers on a small portion of an earlier version of the bill but they did no report like what the Republicans are talking about. They did no report on the current bill that is anything like what the Republicans are alleging. It doesn‘t exist, isn‘t there, hasn‘t ever been in existence ever. That minor detail did not stop the “Wall Street Journal‘s” right-wing editorial page today from citing the non-existent report in an editorial against President Obama‘s stimulus bill. “The Journal” called the report‘s nonexistent findings, quote, “highly embarrassing” for those in Congress aka Democrats trying to push the bill through. You know, it is highly embarrassing but I wouldn‘t say it‘s the Democrat in Congress who ought to be embarrassed here. There is bad news on the economy, of course. We have known that was coming. We have known to expect it. We have been bracing for that for quite some time. It is harder to brace ourselves for political economic news that just flat-out doesn‘t make sense or that‘s flat-out just made up. But that is where we are." <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28899557/" target="_blank">http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28899557/</a>
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <With no context on how those results were actually achieved.> Overestimating minor effects while underestimating major effects is not "providing context". <He also neglected to cite the Clinton tax hikes that resulted in revenue gains as well.> I alluded to the Clinton tax increases when I noted that tax increases rarely raise as much as they are projected to.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <A couple of years ago when I posted a link to a chart that showed that sometimes tax cuts lead to increased revenues and sometimes they didn't, he simply ignored it, as it contradicted his mantra.> If I ignored it, it's because it contradicted something I didn't assert. Just like now.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <<A couple of years ago when I posted a link to a chart that showed that sometimes tax cuts lead to increased revenues and sometimes they didn't, he simply ignored it, as it contradicted his mantra.>> <If I ignored it, it's because it contradicted something I didn't assert. Just like now.> Nope. You ignored it because it contradicted you, several people pointed it out, and you did one of your steaming off in a hissy fit for a few weeks things.
Originally Posted By dshyates Repubs sort of remind me of "Rain Man". "Cut taxes, cut taxes............George cut taxes".
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <You ignored it because it contradicted you, several people pointed it out, and you did one of your steaming off in a hissy fit for a few weeks things.> There you go again, revising history.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <<You ignored it because it contradicted you, several people pointed it out, and you did one of your steaming off in a hissy fit for a few weeks things.>> <There you go again, revising history.> Please. You're not fooling anyone and this schtick got tired a long time ago.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <Please. You're not fooling anyone > I'm not the one trying to fool anyone. <and this schtick got tired a long time ago.> So stop already.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 You think posts like that make you look like anything but pathetic? Seriously, dude. Pee Wee Herman and the argument clinic guys are fun to watch but you've fallen into self-parody and don't even seem to know it.
Originally Posted By Mr X Hardly. There isn't a soul on LP who is more entrenched in self-parody than you, Doug. Your "You're projecting" thing is just another aspect of it. You recently accused on of the fairest and most balanced posters here (SuperDry, to be precise) of "projecting". Whatever that means (did you learn that in debate school somewhere?). Maybe you should try a little more of the "getting along" stuff, and the "humor" stuff (I was shocked and surprised to read you cracking a few jokes recently...THAT was fun to read! an actual personality behind the debating techniques! I like!)... Anyway, yeah. You came back (I suppose because the timing was ripe for you to tear into the president on the stimulus package, right?), and I'm happy to see you posting BUT, it'd be great if you posted a little more genuinely as it seems you might be trying to do.
Originally Posted By mawnck >>There isn't a soul on LP who is more entrenched in self-parody than you, Doug.<< ... and the people who keep responding to him. ;-)
Originally Posted By Mr X Obviously you didn't read the rest of my post. I know you like to play the "lone ranger" on LP, the voice of reason or whatever, but some of us are trying to reach out and communicate and there's not much need for posts that consist of "why don't you just all shut up!".
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <You're projecting.> And the self-parody continues. As X was trying to say, and as I've said many times, you DO have valuable things to add here if you'd just cut out the nonsense. Posters like mawnck who haven't been here quite as long probably don't even remember you as anything BUT a self-parody, but it wasn't always the case. I'd really like to see that guy again.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <some of us are trying to reach out and communicate> Reaching out with a closed fist isn't trying to communicate, it's assault. If you want to have intelligent and fair debate, start debating fairly and with intelligence, instead of with distortion and denigration.
Originally Posted By mawnck >>Posters like mawnck who haven't been here quite as long probably don't even remember you as anything BUT a self-parody, but it wasn't always the case. << Are you sure?
