Posted by moy23 on 12/5/2017 8:50:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 8:33:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 12/5/2017 8:03:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 12/5/2017 7:20:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 12/5/2017 6:29:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 6:16:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 12/5/2017 6:02:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 5:54:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 12/5/2017 5:52:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 5:28:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 12/5/2017 4:18:00 PM (view original):
Buh bye conyers!!!

Interesting that you think an elected official should be removed from office if he has a history of sexual harassment allegations.

Using taxayer money to pay off settlements... I DEFINITELY have an issue with that.

That's how the rules were set up. It's wrong, but it's not like Conyers came up with that arrangement.

He should be removed from office. Moore shouldn't be eligible for the Senate. Trump should be removed from office.

There's no PROOF of any wrongdoing for Moore or Trump.

You libs love to label people guilty before they are even tried. Darren Wilson, The Freddie Gray cops, the Eric Garner cop, etc.

You've been wrong EVERY time.

Trump has paid sexual harassment settlements.

Moore's accusers are credible and their stories have been corroborated.

Really? Which sexual harassment settlement did he pay? I'll even allow you to go back 40 years.

Moore sounds like he couldn't even get to second base.... as a 30 year old. And again.... I don't care what a candidate did 40 years ago... That's before I was even born.

so, just because you weren't born, its okay that Moore was allegedly going after underage girls? And because he "couldn't even get to second base" it was no big deal? I bet you'd care if it was a democrat!

Voters get a chance to decide.... Its not like Moore is in office (Yet).

I personally do not give a **** about 40 years ago. I don'y care if clinton or trump dodged a draft, or obama smoked weed in college. I just don't care.

Weird. I care if the president endorses a pedophile for office.

SUPPOSEDLY
ALLEGEDLY
REPORTEDLY

You and Trump are the last people on earth calling those women liars.

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 7:16:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 7:15:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 12/5/2017 5:08:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 5:01:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 12/5/2017 4:41:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 3:55:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 12/5/2017 2:51:00 PM (view original):
He hasn't failed yet. He's actually looking pretty good with the upward trends in the economy. The left wrote him off as a failure before he had even taken office, which to be fair the right did the same with Obama.

He’s riding Obama’s economy.

Nope. You can't have 8 years of mediocrity and then when a new admin comes in and rolls back your damaging regulations still get credit for a boost after you've left. Obama's economy failed. As I've said, had Obama's economy progressed throughout his tenure then he could take credit, but it didn't.

You have blinders on.

We have given you facts that support mediocrity. I'm not going to repost them, but you are more than welcome to go back through the pages and find them. You have supplied nothing that is an indicator of economic growth under Obama that is anywhere close to other post-recession recoveries. I don't have blinders, I have facts.

Who is this "we" you're referring to?

As I said before, growth was slower for Obama than it was for Reagan because Reagan was able to spend significantly more (relative GDP) than Obama was.

Don;t be dumb and act like the growth we're seeing now has anything to do with Trump. I promise that if the economy was tanking, you and moy and all the other MAGA cult members would be running around rightfully blaming Obama because his last fiscal year just ended and the economy is not a Ferrari the starts and stops on a dime. The thing is a giant tanker that actually moves long after the input was made.

S&P over the last 5 years:



The growth isn't because of Trump.

Here's GDP over the last ten years:

Bumping this in case strikeout comes back.

K?

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 9:09:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 12/5/2017 8:50:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 8:33:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 12/5/2017 8:03:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 12/5/2017 7:20:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 12/5/2017 6:29:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 6:16:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 12/5/2017 6:02:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 5:54:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 12/5/2017 5:52:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 5:28:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 12/5/2017 4:18:00 PM (view original):
Buh bye conyers!!!

Interesting that you think an elected official should be removed from office if he has a history of sexual harassment allegations.

Using taxayer money to pay off settlements... I DEFINITELY have an issue with that.

That's how the rules were set up. It's wrong, but it's not like Conyers came up with that arrangement.

He should be removed from office. Moore shouldn't be eligible for the Senate. Trump should be removed from office.

There's no PROOF of any wrongdoing for Moore or Trump.

You libs love to label people guilty before they are even tried. Darren Wilson, The Freddie Gray cops, the Eric Garner cop, etc.

You've been wrong EVERY time.

Trump has paid sexual harassment settlements.

Moore's accusers are credible and their stories have been corroborated.

Really? Which sexual harassment settlement did he pay? I'll even allow you to go back 40 years.

Moore sounds like he couldn't even get to second base.... as a 30 year old. And again.... I don't care what a candidate did 40 years ago... That's before I was even born.

so, just because you weren't born, its okay that Moore was allegedly going after underage girls? And because he "couldn't even get to second base" it was no big deal? I bet you'd care if it was a democrat!

Voters get a chance to decide.... Its not like Moore is in office (Yet).

I personally do not give a **** about 40 years ago. I don'y care if clinton or trump dodged a draft, or obama smoked weed in college. I just don't care.

Weird. I care if the president endorses a pedophile for office.

SUPPOSEDLY
ALLEGEDLY
REPORTEDLY

You and Trump are the last people on earth calling those women liars.

SUPPOSEDLY
ALLEGEDLY
REPORTEDLY


Provide Proof!

You already said what happened 40 years ago doesn’t matter to you. Why would proof change your mind?

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 9:06:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 12/5/2017 8:52:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 8:34:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 12/5/2017 8:11:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 7:36:00 PM (view original):
And, if we're going to discuss what caused the recession, the only thing that "forced" banks to give loans to people that couldn't afford those loans was capitalism.

Banks certainly took advantage of sub-prime.... but then again greenspan kept the rates low... and consumers signed the biggest loan they will ever take in their lives without actually thinking it through....

Everyone is at fault... and there is one word to sum it up...

GREED.


I recall that I couldn't ride the train into the city without hearing people talking about flipping real estate at the time... it was insane. No matter where I went it was all the talk.

I’m not saying individuals getting the loans weren’t also to blame. But they also didn’t get a huge bailout like the banks did.

Yep, I hate bailouts. People talk about how disastrous it would be for the global economy without them, but I think the economy would recover. Let them fail. Because of the bailouts we're starting to see loans being handed out like candy again. It's a recipe for disaster. It's notable that I am extreme. I am totally against debt of any kind.

That is extreme. Almost no businesses would exist without debt.

See, I disagree. I think with more emphasis put on savings and slower, safer growth they would, but I am not going to judge those who have debt. I just choose not to have it.

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 9:07:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 7:16:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 7:15:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 12/5/2017 5:08:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 5:01:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 12/5/2017 4:41:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 3:55:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 12/5/2017 2:51:00 PM (view original):
He hasn't failed yet. He's actually looking pretty good with the upward trends in the economy. The left wrote him off as a failure before he had even taken office, which to be fair the right did the same with Obama.

He’s riding Obama’s economy.

Nope. You can't have 8 years of mediocrity and then when a new admin comes in and rolls back your damaging regulations still get credit for a boost after you've left. Obama's economy failed. As I've said, had Obama's economy progressed throughout his tenure then he could take credit, but it didn't.

You have blinders on.

We have given you facts that support mediocrity. I'm not going to repost them, but you are more than welcome to go back through the pages and find them. You have supplied nothing that is an indicator of economic growth under Obama that is anywhere close to other post-recession recoveries. I don't have blinders, I have facts.

Who is this "we" you're referring to?

As I said before, growth was slower for Obama than it was for Reagan because Reagan was able to spend significantly more (relative GDP) than Obama was.

Don;t be dumb and act like the growth we're seeing now has anything to do with Trump. I promise that if the economy was tanking, you and moy and all the other MAGA cult members would be running around rightfully blaming Obama because his last fiscal year just ended and the economy is not a Ferrari the starts and stops on a dime. The thing is a giant tanker that actually moves long after the input was made.

S&P over the last 5 years:



The growth isn't because of Trump.

Here's GDP over the last ten years:

Bumping this in case strikeout comes back.

K?

You're S&P chart is blank. I haven't taken the time to do the math, but I would assume your 2nd chart shows roughly 2% annual growth.

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 9:26:00 PM (view original):
You already said what happened 40 years ago doesn’t matter to you. Why would proof change your mind?

A **** stain on a blue dress, dna tested.

Posted by strikeout26 on 12/5/2017 9:30:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 9:07:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 7:16:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 7:15:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 12/5/2017 5:08:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 5:01:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 12/5/2017 4:41:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 3:55:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 12/5/2017 2:51:00 PM (view original):
He hasn't failed yet. He's actually looking pretty good with the upward trends in the economy. The left wrote him off as a failure before he had even taken office, which to be fair the right did the same with Obama.

He’s riding Obama’s economy.

Nope. You can't have 8 years of mediocrity and then when a new admin comes in and rolls back your damaging regulations still get credit for a boost after you've left. Obama's economy failed. As I've said, had Obama's economy progressed throughout his tenure then he could take credit, but it didn't.

You have blinders on.

We have given you facts that support mediocrity. I'm not going to repost them, but you are more than welcome to go back through the pages and find them. You have supplied nothing that is an indicator of economic growth under Obama that is anywhere close to other post-recession recoveries. I don't have blinders, I have facts.

Who is this "we" you're referring to?

As I said before, growth was slower for Obama than it was for Reagan because Reagan was able to spend significantly more (relative GDP) than Obama was.

Don;t be dumb and act like the growth we're seeing now has anything to do with Trump. I promise that if the economy was tanking, you and moy and all the other MAGA cult members would be running around rightfully blaming Obama because his last fiscal year just ended and the economy is not a Ferrari the starts and stops on a dime. The thing is a giant tanker that actually moves long after the input was made.

S&P over the last 5 years:



The growth isn't because of Trump.

Here's GDP over the last ten years:

Bumping this in case strikeout comes back.

K?

You're S&P chart is blank. I haven't taken the time to do the math, but I would assume your 2nd chart shows roughly 2% annual growth.

The link keeps breaking.

I’m sure you can infer the point, though. The economy has been growing consistently for a almost a decade. Nothing has changed this year.

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 9:50:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 12/5/2017 9:30:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 9:07:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 7:16:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 7:15:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 12/5/2017 5:08:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 5:01:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 12/5/2017 4:41:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 3:55:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 12/5/2017 2:51:00 PM (view original):
He hasn't failed yet. He's actually looking pretty good with the upward trends in the economy. The left wrote him off as a failure before he had even taken office, which to be fair the right did the same with Obama.

He’s riding Obama’s economy.

Nope. You can't have 8 years of mediocrity and then when a new admin comes in and rolls back your damaging regulations still get credit for a boost after you've left. Obama's economy failed. As I've said, had Obama's economy progressed throughout his tenure then he could take credit, but it didn't.

You have blinders on.

We have given you facts that support mediocrity. I'm not going to repost them, but you are more than welcome to go back through the pages and find them. You have supplied nothing that is an indicator of economic growth under Obama that is anywhere close to other post-recession recoveries. I don't have blinders, I have facts.

Who is this "we" you're referring to?

As I said before, growth was slower for Obama than it was for Reagan because Reagan was able to spend significantly more (relative GDP) than Obama was.

Don;t be dumb and act like the growth we're seeing now has anything to do with Trump. I promise that if the economy was tanking, you and moy and all the other MAGA cult members would be running around rightfully blaming Obama because his last fiscal year just ended and the economy is not a Ferrari the starts and stops on a dime. The thing is a giant tanker that actually moves long after the input was made.

S&P over the last 5 years:



The growth isn't because of Trump.

Here's GDP over the last ten years:

Bumping this in case strikeout comes back.

K?

You're S&P chart is blank. I haven't taken the time to do the math, but I would assume your 2nd chart shows roughly 2% annual growth.

The link keeps breaking.

I’m sure you can infer the point, though. The economy has been growing consistently for a almost a decade. Nothing has changed this year.

By your logic the Bill Clinton economy was really just an extension of the Reagan economy. Juss sayin'

Posted by strikeout26 on 12/5/2017 9:28:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 9:06:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 12/5/2017 8:52:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 8:34:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 12/5/2017 8:11:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 7:36:00 PM (view original):
And, if we're going to discuss what caused the recession, the only thing that "forced" banks to give loans to people that couldn't afford those loans was capitalism.

Banks certainly took advantage of sub-prime.... but then again greenspan kept the rates low... and consumers signed the biggest loan they will ever take in their lives without actually thinking it through....

Everyone is at fault... and there is one word to sum it up...

GREED.


I recall that I couldn't ride the train into the city without hearing people talking about flipping real estate at the time... it was insane. No matter where I went it was all the talk.

I’m not saying individuals getting the loans weren’t also to blame. But they also didn’t get a huge bailout like the banks did.

Yep, I hate bailouts. People talk about how disastrous it would be for the global economy without them, but I think the economy would recover. Let them fail. Because of the bailouts we're starting to see loans being handed out like candy again. It's a recipe for disaster. It's notable that I am extreme. I am totally against debt of any kind.

That is extreme. Almost no businesses would exist without debt.

See, I disagree. I think with more emphasis put on savings and slower, safer growth they would, but I am not going to judge those who have debt. I just choose not to have it.

Debt is a tool. If you wanted to start virtually any non-micro business right now, you’d need that tool.

If you ran an existing business and had an opportunity to grow significantly, you’d be a fool to pass out of fear of debt.

And, if you ran the government and found yourself in a recession caused by a lack of demand, you’d have to take on debt for the good of the people, like Reagan and Obama did.

BL.... purely speaking about market growth,... do you think businesses thrive under high regulation or low regulation? I'd love to hear your thoughts.

Posted by moy23 on 12/5/2017 9:57:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 9:50:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 12/5/2017 9:30:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 9:07:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 7:16:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 7:15:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 12/5/2017 5:08:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 5:01:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 12/5/2017 4:41:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 3:55:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 12/5/2017 2:51:00 PM (view original):
He hasn't failed yet. He's actually looking pretty good with the upward trends in the economy. The left wrote him off as a failure before he had even taken office, which to be fair the right did the same with Obama.

He’s riding Obama’s economy.

Nope. You can't have 8 years of mediocrity and then when a new admin comes in and rolls back your damaging regulations still get credit for a boost after you've left. Obama's economy failed. As I've said, had Obama's economy progressed throughout his tenure then he could take credit, but it didn't.

You have blinders on.

We have given you facts that support mediocrity. I'm not going to repost them, but you are more than welcome to go back through the pages and find them. You have supplied nothing that is an indicator of economic growth under Obama that is anywhere close to other post-recession recoveries. I don't have blinders, I have facts.

Who is this "we" you're referring to?

As I said before, growth was slower for Obama than it was for Reagan because Reagan was able to spend significantly more (relative GDP) than Obama was.

Don;t be dumb and act like the growth we're seeing now has anything to do with Trump. I promise that if the economy was tanking, you and moy and all the other MAGA cult members would be running around rightfully blaming Obama because his last fiscal year just ended and the economy is not a Ferrari the starts and stops on a dime. The thing is a giant tanker that actually moves long after the input was made.

S&P over the last 5 years:



The growth isn't because of Trump.

Here's GDP over the last ten years:

Bumping this in case strikeout comes back.

K?

You're S&P chart is blank. I haven't taken the time to do the math, but I would assume your 2nd chart shows roughly 2% annual growth.

The link keeps breaking.

I’m sure you can infer the point, though. The economy has been growing consistently for a almost a decade. Nothing has changed this year.

By your logic the Bill Clinton economy was really just an extension of the Reagan economy. Juss sayin'

Not really, since we hit a small recession in 1990.

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 10:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 12/5/2017 9:28:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 9:06:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 12/5/2017 8:52:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 8:34:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 12/5/2017 8:11:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 7:36:00 PM (view original):
And, if we're going to discuss what caused the recession, the only thing that "forced" banks to give loans to people that couldn't afford those loans was capitalism.

Banks certainly took advantage of sub-prime.... but then again greenspan kept the rates low... and consumers signed the biggest loan they will ever take in their lives without actually thinking it through....

Everyone is at fault... and there is one word to sum it up...

GREED.


I recall that I couldn't ride the train into the city without hearing people talking about flipping real estate at the time... it was insane. No matter where I went it was all the talk.

I’m not saying individuals getting the loans weren’t also to blame. But they also didn’t get a huge bailout like the banks did.

Yep, I hate bailouts. People talk about how disastrous it would be for the global economy without them, but I think the economy would recover. Let them fail. Because of the bailouts we're starting to see loans being handed out like candy again. It's a recipe for disaster. It's notable that I am extreme. I am totally against debt of any kind.

That is extreme. Almost no businesses would exist without debt.

See, I disagree. I think with more emphasis put on savings and slower, safer growth they would, but I am not going to judge those who have debt. I just choose not to have it.

Debt is a tool. If you wanted to start virtually any non-micro business right now, you’d need that tool.

If you ran an existing business and had an opportunity to grow significantly, you’d be a fool to pass out of fear of debt.

And, if you ran the government and found yourself in a recession caused by a lack of demand, you’d have to take on debt for the good of the people, like Reagan and Obama did.

I actually do not disagree with you here, at least on an individual business case. debt is necessary if you want to expand your business. I can't think of any business that can do it without additional debt.

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 9:50:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 12/5/2017 9:30:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 9:07:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 7:16:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 7:15:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 12/5/2017 5:08:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 5:01:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 12/5/2017 4:41:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 12/5/2017 3:55:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 12/5/2017 2:51:00 PM (view original):
He hasn't failed yet. He's actually looking pretty good with the upward trends in the economy. The left wrote him off as a failure before he had even taken office, which to be fair the right did the same with Obama.

He’s riding Obama’s economy.

Nope. You can't have 8 years of mediocrity and then when a new admin comes in and rolls back your damaging regulations still get credit for a boost after you've left. Obama's economy failed. As I've said, had Obama's economy progressed throughout his tenure then he could take credit, but it didn't.

You have blinders on.

We have given you facts that support mediocrity. I'm not going to repost them, but you are more than welcome to go back through the pages and find them. You have supplied nothing that is an indicator of economic growth under Obama that is anywhere close to other post-recession recoveries. I don't have blinders, I have facts.

Who is this "we" you're referring to?

As I said before, growth was slower for Obama than it was for Reagan because Reagan was able to spend significantly more (relative GDP) than Obama was.

Don;t be dumb and act like the growth we're seeing now has anything to do with Trump. I promise that if the economy was tanking, you and moy and all the other MAGA cult members would be running around rightfully blaming Obama because his last fiscal year just ended and the economy is not a Ferrari the starts and stops on a dime. The thing is a giant tanker that actually moves long after the input was made.

S&P over the last 5 years:



The growth isn't because of Trump.

Here's GDP over the last ten years:

Bumping this in case strikeout comes back.

K?

You're S&P chart is blank. I haven't taken the time to do the math, but I would assume your 2nd chart shows roughly 2% annual growth.

The link keeps breaking.

I’m sure you can infer the point, though. The economy has been growing consistently for a almost a decade. Nothing has changed this year.

The point is it was growing slower than it has at any point post recession in our country's history by %. It was growing at a 2% rate. That's not good.

And the slight increase from high 2s to low 3s is still on Obama.