Alaska Darin Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 1) Wow, just wow. I was under the impression the founders lived in the pre-industrial world of the 18th century. I'm not surprised they had different views about the world. You do realize things have changed in the world a tad bit since 1789, don't you? So because technology has evolved, it's really smart to cede more power to a faceless entity with virtually no accountability? Brilliant deduction, as usual. I fail to see how government has "evolved". Perhaps you can explain how the impoverished of today are significantly better off at the hands of their masters today than they were in the days of "nobleman-vs-serfs". Especially considering the largesse supposedly being "redistributed". 2) This is beyond stupid. Are you actually saying that a handful of politicians in the Senate represent Liberal opion across the country? You are completely out of touch with reality So now you're admitting that those you've hired to do your bidding aren't in line? Thanks for making my argument, dumbass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 So now you're admitting that those you've hired to do your bidding aren't in line? Thanks for making my argument, dumbass. Un-!@#$ing-believable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
East Brady Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 I'd disagree with that. My bias is that US military spending props up the dollar. My guess it's the longer term concern of retirement & healthcare entitlements, coupled with low savings rates. Ha Ha Ha Ha, sooo who shall we kill next? It seems that your beloved monetary policy is teetering on the brink. Should we shed a tear for the swine banker currently rattling his tin cup on the hill? Should we shed a tear for the swine banker at BS, 10$ a share? Would you rather we shed a tear when he jumps from the buildings or puts a pistol to his head? Maybe you could explain your beloved FED's monetary policy which has led to a flat line of mom& pops "real wages" for the past 30 odd years. While the DOW has risen, your beloved banker has dined at the public trough. Is it any wonder that mom & pop have no savings? What is it like to be so naive that you readily lick the hand of your master as he lies, cheats, and steals from the public? Are you so ignorant that you are unable realize it is the very policy that you so happily support which is leading you, down the road to the nanny state for which you despise? Maybe you can look down your nose at mom &pop again. Then, you can point the finger of blame at them for your pathetic policies that have placed you and your beloved bankers in this predicament. After all, it was about your profit margin. If your lucky, they may be able to purchase your dumb ass another 3-4 years of time. Have you noticed? They are parking the trucks at this very moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 Ha Ha Ha Ha, sooo who shall we kill next? It seems that your beloved monetary policy is teetering on the brink.Should we shed a tear for the swine banker currently rattling his tin cup on the hill? Should we shed a tear for the swine banker at BS, 10$ a share? Would you rather we shed a tear when he jumps from the buildings or puts a pistol to his head? Maybe you could explain your beloved FED's monetary policy which has led to a flat line of mom& pops "real wages" for the past 30 odd years. While the DOW has risen, your beloved banker has dined at the public trough. Is it any wonder that mom & pop have no savings? What is it like to be so naive that you readily lick the hand of your master as he lies, cheats, and steals from the public? Are you so ignorant that you are unable realize it is the very policy that you so happily support which is leading you, down the road to the nanny state for which you despise? Maybe you can look down your nose at mom &pop again. Then, you can point the finger of blame at them for your pathetic policies that have placed you and your beloved bankers in this predicament. After all, it was about your profit margin. If your lucky, they may be able to purchase your dumb ass another 3-4 years of time. Have you noticed? They are parking the trucks at this very moment. I see the meds kicked in. Riddle me this mom & pop savior. Name a better system than the US and prove it by pointing to where it has worked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 Ha Ha Ha Ha, sooo who shall we kill next? It seems that your beloved monetary policy is teetering on the brink.Should we shed a tear for the swine banker currently rattling his tin cup on the hill? Should we shed a tear for the swine banker at BS, 10$ a share? Would you rather we shed a tear when he jumps from the buildings or puts a pistol to his head? Maybe you could explain your beloved FED's monetary policy which has led to a flat line of mom& pops "real wages" for the past 30 odd years. While the DOW has risen, your beloved banker has dined at the public trough. Is it any wonder that mom & pop have no savings? What is it like to be so naive that you readily lick the hand of your master as he lies, cheats, and steals from the public? Are you so ignorant that you are unable realize it is the very policy that you so happily support which is leading you, down the road to the nanny state for which you despise? Maybe you can look down your nose at mom &pop again. Then, you can point the finger of blame at them for your pathetic policies that have placed you and your beloved bankers in this predicament. After all, it was about your profit margin. If your lucky, they may be able to purchase your dumb ass another 3-4 years of time. Have you noticed? They are parking the trucks at this very moment. Because we all know that when the DOW (?) goes up only the banker makes money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverNRed Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 Ha Ha Ha Ha, sooo who shall we kill next? It seems that your beloved monetary policy is teetering on the brink.Should we shed a tear for the swine banker currently rattling his tin cup on the hill? Should we shed a tear for the swine banker at BS, 10$ a share? Would you rather we shed a tear when he jumps from the buildings or puts a pistol to his head? Maybe you could explain your beloved FED's monetary policy which has led to a flat line of mom& pops "real wages" for the past 30 odd years. While the DOW has risen, your beloved banker has dined at the public trough. Is it any wonder that mom & pop have no savings? What is it like to be so naive that you readily lick the hand of your master as he lies, cheats, and steals from the public? Are you so ignorant that you are unable realize it is the very policy that you so happily support which is leading you, down the road to the nanny state for which you despise? Maybe you can look down your nose at mom &pop again. Then, you can point the finger of blame at them for your pathetic policies that have placed you and your beloved bankers in this predicament. After all, it was about your profit margin. If your lucky, they may be able to purchase your dumb ass another 3-4 years of time. Have you noticed? They are parking the trucks at this very moment. Wow, this is seriously one of the most unhinged posts I've ever seen on this board. It's kinda weird that "real wages" have been going down for "30 years" while the standard of living in this country remains so good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 Wow, this is seriously one of the most unhinged posts I've ever seen on this board. It's kinda weird that "real wages" have been going down for "30 years" while the standard of living in this country remains so good. Who the hells been buying all those gas guzzlers and big screens then? Must be all those fat cat bankers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverNRed Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 Who the hells been buying all those gas guzzlers and big screens then? Must be all those fat cat bankers. There are two Americas: One where people buy expensive HDTV's.....and the wealthy one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 There are two Americas: One where people buy expensive HDTV's.....and the wealthy one. Funny.....I don't have an HDTV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 Ha Ha Ha Ha, sooo who shall we kill next? It seems that your beloved monetary policy is teetering on the brink.Should we shed a tear for the swine banker currently rattling his tin cup on the hill? Should we shed a tear for the swine banker at BS, 10$ a share? Would you rather we shed a tear when he jumps from the buildings or puts a pistol to his head? Maybe you could explain your beloved FED's monetary policy which has led to a flat line of mom& pops "real wages" for the past 30 odd years. While the DOW has risen, your beloved banker has dined at the public trough. Is it any wonder that mom & pop have no savings? What is it like to be so naive that you readily lick the hand of your master as he lies, cheats, and steals from the public? Are you so ignorant that you are unable realize it is the very policy that you so happily support which is leading you, down the road to the nanny state for which you despise? Maybe you can look down your nose at mom &pop again. Then, you can point the finger of blame at them for your pathetic policies that have placed you and your beloved bankers in this predicament. After all, it was about your profit margin. If your lucky, they may be able to purchase your dumb ass another 3-4 years of time. Have you noticed? They are parking the trucks at this very moment. Uh...what? I forgot my Tasmanian Devil to English dictionary today. I want to see you and molson get in to an argument some day. Good times... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
East Brady Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 I see the meds kicked in. Riddle me this mom & pop savior. Name a better system than the US and prove it by pointing to where it has worked. From the N.Y. Times, gee I wonder why they can't make the payment? Average family income, adjusted for inflation, has continued to advance at a good clip, a fact Mr. Bush has cited when speaking about the economy. But these gains are a result mainly of increases at the top of the income spectrum that pull up the overall numbers. Even for workers at the 90th percentile of earners — making about $80,000 a year — inflation has outpaced their pay increases over the last three years, according to the Labor Department. “There are two economies out there,” Mr. Cook, the political analyst, said. “One has been just white hot, going great guns. Those are the people who have benefited from globalization, technology, greater productivity and higher corporate earnings. “And then there’s the working stiffs,’’ he added, “who just don’t feel like they’re getting ahead despite the fact that they’re working very hard. And there are a lot more people in that group than the other group.” In 2004, the top 1 percent of earners — a group that includes many chief executives — received 11.2 percent of all wage income, up from 8.7 percent a decade earlier and less than 6 percent three decades ago, according to Emmanuel Saez and Thomas Piketty, economists who analyzed the tax data. REAL WAGES 1964-2004 Average Weekly Earnings (in 1982 constant dollars) For all private nonfarm workers Year Real $ Change 1964 302.52 1965 310.46 2.62% 1966 312.83 0.76% 1967 311.30 -0.49% 1968 315.37 1.31% 1969 316.93 0.49% 1970 312.94 -1.26% 1971 318.05 1.63% 1972 331.59 4.26% 1973 331.39 -0.06% 1974 314.94 -4.96% 1975 305.16 -3.11% 1976 309.61 1.46% 1977 310.99 0.45% 1978 310.41 -0.19% 1979 298.87 -3.72% 1980 281.27 -5.89% 1981 277.35 -1.39% 1982 272.74 -1.66% 1983 277.50 1.75% 1984 279.22 0.62% 1985 276.23 -1.07% 1986 276.11 -0.04% 1987 272.88 -1.17% 1988 270.32 -0.94% 1989 267.27 -1.13% 1990 262.43 -1.81% 1991 258.34 -1.56% 1992 257.95 -0.15% 1993 258.12 0.07% 1994 259.97 0.72% 1995 258.43 -0.59% 1996 259.58 0.44% 1997 265.22 2.17% 1998 271.87 2.51% 1999 274.64 1.02% 2000 275.62 0.36% 2001 275.38 -0.09% 2002 278.91 1.28% 2003 279.94 0.37% 2004 277.57 -0.84% Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Gee, I wonder why they can't make the payment, Idiots? Tell me some more about your favorite Monetary policy. You do realize in '64 there was most likely one wage earner per household, don't you? Who's buying all the big screens? Have you figured it out yet, Dumb ass? Should they cry while the bank crumbles? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 In 2004, the top 1 percent of earners — a group that includes many chief executives — received 11.2 percent of all wage income, up from 8.7 percent a decade earlier and less than 6 percent three decades ago, according to Emmanuel Saez and Thomas Piketty, economists who analyzed the tax data. Just curious. Where does that 88.8% of all US income that 99% of us are sharing put us compared to other countries? Gee, I wonder why they can't make the payment, Idiots? Yes, most of them. Only an idiot continues to run up credit card debt to fund consumer purchases and sign on to a mortgage with payment terms that their earnings can't support. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 From the N.Y. Times, gee I wonder why they can't make the payment? Average family income, adjusted for inflation, has continued to advance at a good clip, a fact Mr. Bush has cited when speaking about the economy. But these gains are a result mainly of increases at the top of the income spectrum that pull up the overall numbers. Even for workers at the 90th percentile of earners — making about $80,000 a year — inflation has outpaced their pay increases over the last three years, according to the Labor Department. “There are two economies out there,” Mr. Cook, the political analyst, said. “One has been just white hot, going great guns. Those are the people who have benefited from globalization, technology, greater productivity and higher corporate earnings. “And then there’s the working stiffs,’’ he added, “who just don’t feel like they’re getting ahead despite the fact that they’re working very hard. And there are a lot more people in that group than the other group.” In 2004, the top 1 percent of earners — a group that includes many chief executives — received 11.2 percent of all wage income, up from 8.7 percent a decade earlier and less than 6 percent three decades ago, according to Emmanuel Saez and Thomas Piketty, economists who analyzed the tax data. REAL WAGES 1964-2004 Average Weekly Earnings (in 1982 constant dollars) For all private nonfarm workers Year Real $ Change 1964 302.52 1965 310.46 2.62% 1966 312.83 0.76% 1967 311.30 -0.49% 1968 315.37 1.31% 1969 316.93 0.49% 1970 312.94 -1.26% 1971 318.05 1.63% 1972 331.59 4.26% 1973 331.39 -0.06% 1974 314.94 -4.96% 1975 305.16 -3.11% 1976 309.61 1.46% 1977 310.99 0.45% 1978 310.41 -0.19% 1979 298.87 -3.72% 1980 281.27 -5.89% 1981 277.35 -1.39% 1982 272.74 -1.66% 1983 277.50 1.75% 1984 279.22 0.62% 1985 276.23 -1.07% 1986 276.11 -0.04% 1987 272.88 -1.17% 1988 270.32 -0.94% 1989 267.27 -1.13% 1990 262.43 -1.81% 1991 258.34 -1.56% 1992 257.95 -0.15% 1993 258.12 0.07% 1994 259.97 0.72% 1995 258.43 -0.59% 1996 259.58 0.44% 1997 265.22 2.17% 1998 271.87 2.51% 1999 274.64 1.02% 2000 275.62 0.36% 2001 275.38 -0.09% 2002 278.91 1.28% 2003 279.94 0.37% 2004 277.57 -0.84% Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Gee, I wonder why they can't make the payment, Idiots? Tell me some more about your favorite Monetary policy. You do realize in '64 there was most likely one wage earner per household, don't you? Who's buying all the big screens? Have you figured it out yet, Dumb ass? Should they cry while the bank crumbles? Still haven't figured out how to link? How about answering the question? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 Still haven't figured out how to link? How about answering the question? Damn you for quoting that whole post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 Damn you for quoting that whole post. I wanted everyone to feel my pain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 I wanted everyone to feel my pain. Oh great, so you put a buttet through your brain we're supposed to do the same? Thanks alot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 Oh great, so you put a buttet through your brain we're supposed to do the same? Thanks alot. What the hell kind of perverted sexual toy is a buttet, and why the hell would you put one through your brain? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 What the hell kind of perverted sexual toy is a buttet, and why the hell would you put one through your brain? To understand what East Brady is talking about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted March 24, 2008 Share Posted March 24, 2008 What the hell kind of perverted sexual toy is a buttet, and why the hell would you put one through your brain? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
East Brady Posted March 25, 2008 Share Posted March 25, 2008 Still haven't figured out how to link? How about answering the question? Which question is that????????? Hint.................................................................Smartass?????????? Maybe you should answer the questions I've posed to you. Why should I link it , then you'd claim ignorance. Does it not state, US DEPARTMENT OF LABOR??? Explain your theory on the great monetary policy that has left millions behind, you know, the people that are referred to by various names. Explain this: In constant dollars 1982; 1978................avg. earned 310.41 2004...............avg. earned 277.57 I'm not going to play your stupid little game of comparing, us to them. You are not a very bright guy are you, do you enjoy being nothing more than a step and fetch-it??? Should I pity you in the near future when we are paying for all the crap that your monetary policy is leading to? Or, should I laugh at your stupidity as you stomp your feet in anger at the coming tax increase and higher prices at the store?? What's it like to be a pompous ass???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts