Quote:

---

Originally posted by Wishimay:
yet we export BILLIONS of barrels of oil??

Hello? Is this thing ON?

---

Quote:

---

First, part of the fiscal cliff deal involved letting the Obama payroll tax cut — a significant, useful form of economic stimulus — expire. (Republicans only like tax cuts that go to people with high incomes.) This led to a surprisingly large tax hike in 2013, focused on workers:


Second, GOP opposition to unemployment insurance has been the biggest factor in a very rapid decline in unemployment benefits despite continuing weak job markets:


This hurts the unemployed a lot, but it also hurts the economy, because the unemployed are already living on the edge, and surely must have been forced into spending cuts as benefits expired.

The combination of the payroll tax hike and the benefit cuts amounts to about $200 billion of fiscal contraction at an annual rate, or 1.25 percent of GDP, probably with a significant multiplier effect. Add this to the effects of sharp cuts in discretionary spending and the effects of economic uncertainty, however measured, and I don’t think it’s unreasonable to suggest that extortion tactics may have shaved as much as 4 percent off GDP and added 2 points to the unemployment rate.

In other words, we’d be looking at a vastly healthier economy if it weren’t for the GOP takeover of the House in 2010.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Wishimay:
. . . the American people just don't want to disturb their illusion . . .

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:
There's extensive evidence www.cjr.org/behind_the_news/the_backfire_effect.php that facts not only don’t win arguments, they make people dig in even deeper: “When your deepest convictions are challenged by contradictory evidence, your beliefs get stronger.”

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Wishimay:
The problem is there hasn't been ANY resolution and there WON'T BE...
It's damn near impossible for Ma and Pa shops to earn ANYTHING. Every time someone does find a way to make money they legislate the crap out if it, or government will "inadvertently" screw them out of it because the government is in the pocket of these corporations who will never allow competition, which in turn pay third world wages and make increasingly third world products.

The sad part is, 3/4ths of this country are physically not intelligent enough to survive without them. My kid's principal feeds his kids at McDonalds EVERY NIGHT because they don't know how to cook! And he acts PROUD of it! And we keep reinforcing it by NOT teaching children basics. We teach them to be reliant on corporations for everything and the cycle of shit continues...

Yanno, I'm not sure anything could ever be changed, because the American people just don't want to disturb their illusion of fairytale evenings by having to think or act at all... It doesn't actually matter who is in charge here, it's always going to be the corporations...

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SC_FF_FAN:
I'm starting to sway towards the idea each candidate gets a fixed amount from the Govt (cannot use any other funds), a website, a couple debate spots on TV, and then we have a vote.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Wishimay:
Once again, missin da point Whoz...

I've never been reliant on anything but myself and hubby (even though I do technically qualify for disability I've never even given a moments thought about actually DOING it.)

I'm saying we should ALL try to be reliant on ourselves and stay away from the monopolizing corporations AND government. Unfortunately, we also CAN'T as an intelligent society allow those who are truly less fortunate with no resources to suffer. Well, I can't. Some people don't seem to mind suffering...

Case in point- a fair lot of little people require multiple surgeries to get along and it has always been a pre-existing condition, forcing them or their families to pay doubly through pain and monetarily in time in healthcare where ONE can bankrupt you. I myself should have been diagnosed with R.A. ten years ago, but my doctor didn't write it up because he knew my husband was not in a good job and I would not be covered as it would be pre-existing. They COULD HAVE FIXED ME TEN YEARS AGO!!!! I've lived in hell for ten years I didn't have to because I wasn't RICH. And you're OK with that???

For what it's worth, I DO avoid corporations as much as possible. This computer I'm on is secondhand, as are most of our clothes, and I buy generic, produce local, and our ground beef comes from an actual local farmer. I'd love to even have our own chickens, but hubbys not for that...


And if'll make YOU feel better, since hubs works in coal he may not have a job in five years. Why don't YOU get a different job if you aren't happy?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SC_FF_FAN:
I've always wondered why staunch Republicans love Reagan's trickle down effect analogy, because it supports a big disparity between the rich and poor. Many Americans work hard, but seem to be losing ground so the frog in the boiling water analogy starts to kick in along with the trickle economics strategy. We need a balance between business owners and the employees, but it seems like those who have money get the laws in their favor. One of my pet peeves is a business that outsources jobs overseas gets US Govt protection and a tax break for the expenses of moving over there plus not pay taxes for sales overseas.

I guess in the US, we go by the golden rule; he who has the gold, rules.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by GWEK:

Not that I think it works well. Increasingly, the problem is extremism and ignorance.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by whozit:


I'm happy where I'm at, I'm afraid I may lose my job.

---