-->
@RationalMadman
Which news sources would you accept?
If you hosted a debate, which candidates would you invite?
Posts
Total:
100
-->
@Reece101
There is no fucking way to believe 2-4, what is 1? Which Bill and Act?
-->
@RationalMadman
I think it was H.R. 2810
-->
@Greyparrot
Nooooooope. It's your claim so it's your burden to meet.
-->
@dustryder
Nah bro. Dems haven't created private-sector jobs since JFK. Go fish.
-->
@Greyparrot
Nah bro. Dems haven't created private-sector jobs since JFK. Go fish.
You are either being super hyperbolic, or are disconnected from reality. Obama was in charge during a huge recovery and expansion of the economy. Trump then inherited that strong economy that developed under Obama, and it is now slowing and preparing to go into recession. Obama got America through a huge recession caused in large part by republican policies. Then shortly after he finished fixing problems we went back to a republican damaging things again.
-->
@HistoryBuff
Cute. Give me an example of legislation that stimulates private job creation.
-->
@Greyparrot
Tax increases and stifling regulation. Duh.
-->
@HistoryBuff
Wasn't that the slowest recovery since the Great Depression?
I don't know if you credit Obama with creating jobs. The Great Recession officially began in December of 2007. The only place it could go during the eight years would be up.
I of course judge Trump and Obama differently because one started their term during a recession and one didn't. But Trump has broken records in unemployment and has had huge growth, versus Obama's super slow recovery.
-->
@Greyparrot
It's always been there, but it's certainly intensifying. Mass hysteria is interesting to observe.
-->
@bmdrocks21
I was waiting for the tax and stimulus plans where the government attempts to re-allocate resources from proven producers of needed goods and services to whoever they feel like subsidizing at the moment.
-->
@Greyparrot
I've heard that stimulus packages don't really do anything(let's assume it was financed through debt instead of taxes). Does that about sum it up?
-->
@bmdrocks21
All debt is eventually taxed, and usually financed by the poor through inflation.
-->
@bmdrocks21
Wasn't that the slowest recovery since the Great Depression?
So the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression had the slowest recovery since the Great Depression? I really don't know what your point is.
I of course judge Trump and Obama differently because one started their term during a recession and one didn't. But Trump has broken records in unemployment and has had huge growth, versus Obama's super slow recovery.
I wouldn't judge them the same either. One inherited an economy trashed by his republican predecessor. The other inherited a booming economy from his predecessor. Trump's economy has basically continued the upward trend that went through Obama's tenure.
-->
@Greyparrot
Cute. Give me an example of legislation that stimulates private job creation.
Minimum wage increases create more demand and stimulate growth. Green energy tax incentives fosters growth and job creation in cutting edge technology.
What has trump done that fostered job creation? And no, giving a massive payday to billionaires did not create jobs.
-->
@HistoryBuff
And these two terrible recoveries were led by Democrats who increased taxes and spending. Compared to Ronald Reagan's, Obama's recovery was quite pitiful. That would be my point to start.
I probably hate Bush about as much as you, but as far as I know, the mortgage bubble wasn't their fault. Correct me if I am wrong, obviously, but I am not aware of any Democrats that suggested bills that would have prevented it. I don't imagine that the government forcing banks to accept subprime loans helped, and that is certainly not a Republican policy idea.
Minimum wage increases create more demand and stimulate growth.
That last clip is interesting as it lays out how the minimum wage discriminates against the unskilled poor and minorities.
Green energy tax incentives fosters growth and job creation in cutting edge technology.
so easy.
-->
@bmdrocks21
-->
@Greyparrot
Yeah, it really disgusts me that fools like Bernie Sanders are trying to push for a $15 minimum wage just because it is popular. They get some pseudo-moral argument out of it to get elected. He doesn't even believe it. He wasn't paying his staff that wage, and when he did, he cut their hours!
I worked at a restaurant. I'd say about 90% of people working there didn't do $15/hour worth of work. I can't imagine how the next generation would get jobs after their "free" college when they have zero applicable work experience....
-->
@bmdrocks21
I mean we already ran this social experiment in Seattle. What is there to discuss?
Attacking job creators and job producers costs jobs and cuts existing job hours. Whodathunk?
It's so sad because people who have job skills are benefitting as people drop out of the competition for jobs above the minimum wage. People with job skills can easily displace unskilled labor for a lower stress job at a decent pay. That means more opportunity for all levels of workers with job skills, but the poor unskilled labor are basically screwed with no path to employment and no opportunity for getting their foot on rung one of job ladder.
Union labor loves this because their union members don't have to worry about labor competition, so they have more leverage to squeeze people out of the job market and raise the wages for the elite few that remain.
As usual in nearly all Democrat-run dystopic cities, the poor get the shaft and breadlines.
-->
@Greyparrot
Your 1st link is referencing work done by the Employment Policies Institute. This is a think tank whose "staff work for Berman and Company, which is a public affairs firm owned by Richard Berman, who lobbies for the restaurant, hotel, alcoholic beverage and tobacco industries."
Imagine that, a think tank that is almost entirely funded by a large business lobbyist thinks that paying workers enough for them to live on is a bad idea that will "cost jobs".
That last clip is interesting as it lays out how the minimum wage discriminates against the unskilled poor and minorities.
It in no way laid out how minimum wage discriminates against the unskilled poor and minorities. 2 guys said it does, but gave absolutely no reason or evidence that it is true. Why do you think that video is evidence of anything?
so easy.
You found an example of fraud. Do you have any idea how many cases of fraud happen in the private sector every day? I mean Trump, the man you trust to "drain the swamp", has been involved in lots of fraud cases. Why do you think that 1 case of fraud is evidence that all green technology is bad? If that is the case then every industry in the world is bad.
-->
@bmdrocks21
For people like me with job skills, minimum wage is awesome, but I don't want to live in a nation filled with homeless, living in tents like California because there are zero opportunities for the unwashed masses of poor.
I actually have a heart.
-->
@HistoryBuff
Why do you think that 1 case of fraud is evidence that all green technology is bad?
There isn't anything bad about green technology. When the government gets to pick winners and losers in the free market FDR style, the entire nation suffers.
-->
@Greyparrot
There isn't anything bad about green technology. When the government gets to pick winners and losers in the free market FDR style, the entire nation suffers.
Please don't just provide links. You need to actually say why the link is relevant and what you are arguing. The link should just be a reference for someone to go and check your source.
The government mandating how much wheat can be produced 90 years ago has nothing to do with incentivizing private businesses to develop green tech. If you think there is some relation, tell me why. Don't expect other people to do your research for you.
-->
@HistoryBuff
Don't be silly. The government shouldn't be in the business of business. Leave it to the pros.
Fascism economy is so FDR ago. We don't need an Obama transformation or revival of that.
-->
@Greyparrot
Of course they get breadlines. Then they know who to vote for if they want to keep living....
"It's funny, sometimes American journalists talk about how bad a country is, that people are lining up for food. That is a good thing!...."
-Bernie Sanders
-->
@Greyparrot
Don't be silly. The government shouldn't be in the business of business. Leave it to the pros.
Of course government needs to be involved in business. What an odd thing to say. If they weren't involved they couldn't function as a government. A huge portion of the lives of people are dependent on the company they work for. If there are no laws around what those companies can and can't do then they effectively become the overlords of their employees. Corporations would become more powerful than the government.
Additionally, corporations do not have the good of the country, the people or the planet in mind when they make decisions. If dumping toxic waste into the water supply would make them money, they would do it. Lots of companies already have. The government is the only entity that exists to look after the good of the people and not to make the most money. If the government just sat back and let companies do whatever they want it would lead to catastrophe. And with the oncoming effects of global warming already being felt, it arguably already has.
-->
@HistoryBuff
You're not going to have job creation destroyed if the government wants to play the role of a tort lawyer punishing specific people that hurt the public.
The public wouldn't support those businesses anyway.
In fact, we are one of the only countries in the world that have lowered CO2 emissions due mostly to public shaming and free-market businesses responding to their consumers.
What does destroy job creation is when the government decides what can be produced and what Americans must consume. Also when they arbitrarily fix prices for labor and products. Even if there is zero corruption in doing so <cough> it still destroys jobs and opportunities. It's also totalitarian and undemocratic.
And Fascist.
-->
@Greyparrot
The public wouldn't support those businesses anyway.
That doesn't work any more. 50 years ago when alot of the companies you were dealing with were smaller that worked. Companies feared public backlash if they did something shitty. That simply isn't the case any more. Most companies are doing shitty things every single day. And when you have that many companies do that much shitty stuff, there simply isn't enough public attention to punish them. And even if they do get some negative publicity, it almost always goes away when the public gets distracted by some new outrage.
Only the government has the ability to keep companies in line. The public simply cannot police them. Nor should they have to. That is one of the reasons societies create governments.
In fact, we are one of the only countries in the world that have lowered CO2 emissions due mostly to public shaming and free-market businesses responding to their consumers.
There are lots of factors that helped with this including government regulations and shifts to renewable energy. Those renewable energy sources got huge boosts in tech from government grants and tax rebate programs. So government policy was a huge part of those reduced CO2 emissions.
What does destroy job creation is when the government decides what can be produced and what Americans must consume.
Other than things that are toxic or dangerous, who is trying to control what americans can produce or consume? That seems like straw man.
Also when they arbitrarily fix prices for labor and products.
They aren't fixing prices for products. They aren't particularly fixing prices for labor either, they are just setting a floor. You are free to pay your employees as much as you want, but you are not free to pay them so little they can't afford to survive. If a minimum wage didn't exist, alot of companies would pay their employees so little they would be driven into poverty.
Even if there is zero corruption in doing so <cough> it still destroys jobs and opportunities.
If your business "opportunity" requires you to pay someone so little that they would not be able to live, then your opportunity sucks. It does not destroy jobs or opportunities. It does prevent employers from pushing people into poverty.
It's also totalitarian and undemocratic. And Fascist.
You think that if an elected government passes laws to protect it's people that it is undemocratic, totalitarian and Fascist? I don't think you know what any of those words mean.