Jump to content

Redistributing the wealth!


tennesseeboy

Recommended Posts

Oh, it will get even better with the reign of the Democrats

Bulletin....the Republicans have spent the country into insolvency. Saying the Dems would be worse is like trying to defend a hurricane by saying a tornado would be worse.

 

PTR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bulletin....the Republicans have spent the country into insolvency. Saying the Dems would be worse is like trying to defend a hurricane by saying a tornado would be worse.

 

PTR

 

Weather Update: Republicans and Democrats are part of the same storm front

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How many Carbon Credits® does it cost to produce a powdered whig?

 

I'm not at all certain about that.

 

However, wasn't the $5.3 BILLION raised and spend on the recent elections a stimulus package in it's own right? Oh, it wasn't a stimulus package per-se, it just kept the major networks and newspapers from losing more money than they would have without the ad revenue. That's a lot of cash.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, it will get even better with the reign of the Democrats

 

Finally you understand! :ph34r:

 

My fear is that the Republicans were the tornado.

 

Linkage, check his links to see the accuracy of his points

 

I referred to a study done in December 2006 by University of Nevado-Reno economics professor Elliott Parker, who compared the economic performance of Republican and Democratic presidencies from 1929 through the end of 2005 using data from the U.S. Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Economic Analysis. Dr. Parker concluded:

 

But we can reasonably conclude that these government statistics provide evidence that directly contradicts the argument that the economy does better on average under Republican administrations. With lagged effects and other causes considered, the difference may be insignificant, but the economy may actually perform worse under Republicans.

 

_________________________________________

 

Just recently, I came across a New York Times piece written by Princeton economics/public affairs professor Alan S. Blinder. A former vice chairman of the Federal Reserve, Blinder wrote on August 31:

 

Many Americans know that there are characteristic policy differences between the two parties. But few are aware of two important facts about the post-World War II era, both of which are brilliantly delineated in a new book, “Unequal Democracy,” by Larry M. Bartels, a professor of political science at Princeton. Understanding them might help voters see what could be at stake, economically speaking, in November.

 

I call the first fact the Great Partisan Growth Divide. Simply put, the United States economy has grown faster, on average, under Democratic presidents than under Republicans.

 

The stark contrast between the whiz-bang Clinton years and the dreary Bush years is familiar because it is so recent. But while it is extreme, it is not atypical. Data for the whole period from 1948 to 2007, during which Republicans occupied the White House for 34 years and Democrats for 26, show average annual growth of real gross national product of 1.64 percent per capita under Republican presidents versus 2.78 percent under Democrats.

 

That 1.14-point difference, if maintained for eight years, would yield 9.33 percent more income per person, which is a lot more than almost anyone can expect from a tax cut…

 

Over in China ...

 

Too true. <_<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...