Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 9/7/2010 9:09:38 AM EDT
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703444804575071281687927918.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_sections_opinion#

It's scary when the word trillion keeps getting used in terms of spending, while showing very little benefit at all.
Link Posted: 9/7/2010 9:13:06 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/7/2010 9:13:42 AM EDT by DriftPunch]
You obviously are cursed with reactionary thought...

Hundreds of billions re-distributed is good regardless of the minimal economic impact...
Hundreds of billions in tax cuts helps the fat cats disproportionately regardless of the more substantial economic impact...

Link Posted: 9/7/2010 9:17:51 AM EDT
Take away the Gov percentage of GDP and the true number is less then zero.
Link Posted: 9/7/2010 9:20:23 AM EDT

Originally Posted By fxntime:
Take away the Gov percentage of GDP and the true number is less then zero.

I agree that attributing a positive number to the "recovery" is very very generous.
Link Posted: 9/7/2010 9:20:24 AM EDT
The only path back to robust growth and prosperity is to stop this agenda dead in its tracks, and then by stages to reverse it.


This is the part that worries me.

Will the republicans sack up and fix it or chuckle and enjoy their newfound power while the sucker dems took the beating for it.
Link Posted: 9/7/2010 9:23:22 AM EDT
Originally Posted By PantherArms762:
republicans chuckle and enjoy their newfound power while the sucker dems took the beating for it.


Judging by past history, this is the more likely scenario.

Link Posted: 9/7/2010 9:50:16 AM EDT
Originally Posted By rfm05:

Originally Posted By fxntime:
Take away the Gov percentage of GDP and the true number is less then zero.

I agree that attributing a positive number to the "recovery" is very very generous.


Ex government spending the GDP has sustained no positive gain since 2008

Top Top