President Obama plans to return five percent of his salary to Treasury.

[Sava]

Is the GOP really responsible for Obama's incompetence and inability to govern?

He's doing the best job any dem president could in the face of historically destructive obstruction

[PLATO]

When consumers spend less during recessions, increased government spending can help alleviate the situation. Taxes generate revenue which help pay down that awful debt you seem to hate so much.

Why don't you stop repeating bumper sticker slogans and use your ****ing brain?

And all things being equal, a figure like $1 billion is more useful to the economy when 100,000 people are using it to purchase goods and services rather than it sitting in some rich guy's bank account in the Caymans.

Trust me Sava, I do use my brain. Spending a dollar so you can collect 40 cents in taxes isn't going to pay down the debt.

A tried and true economic principle is the multiplier effect. Go look it up and see what the difference is between a government spent dollar and a privately spent dollar is.

Finally, your last point does have some merit, but you should ask yourself why would a billionair rather keep his $1billion in the Caymans instead of investing it in the economy to earn a higher rate of return.

Unfortunately, being a tool to the current liberal philosophy that you are does not require you to actually think through these issues, but telling someone else to "use your ****ing brain" coming from you is laughable.

[PLATO]

It took me ten seconds to google for it. You couldn't be arsed, could you? Here it is.

No...that is a link to the one term president(which I said "yes" to). Show me a link to where republican leadership said "Their number one priority was not do anything about our economy or government spending"

[MrFun]

PLATO, the second part ties in with the first part. One of the same. Obviously, if their number one priority in 2008 was to make Obama a one-term president, then it follows that economic recovery was not their priority.

[PLATO]

He's doing the best job any dem president could in the face of historically destructive obstruction

Problem is that he is the obstructionist. You can't refuse to budge on issues and when the opposing party won't blindly go along with you, call them obstructionist.

Do you really look at the proposals that come from the White House or do you just spout the "party line" ALL the time?

[Kidlicious]

A tried and true economic principle is the multiplier effect. Go look it up and see what the difference is between a government spent dollar and a privately spent dollar is.

1) Food stamps.
2) Unemployment Insurance.
3) Infrastructure.

[Sava]

Trust me Sava, I do use my brain.

Really? You own-goal yourself with the next sentence:

Spending a dollar so you can collect 40 cents in taxes isn't going to pay down the debt.

Bravo. It's a bit wordy to fit on a bumper sticker, but I'm sure it would get applause at an RNC event.

A tried and true economic principle is the multiplier effect. Go look it up and see what the difference is between a government spent dollar and a privately spent dollar is.

It's not like the government gives the money to itself. Where do you think government spending goes? To private business... or given to citizens in the form of programs which allow them to spend more of their money in the private economy.

You aren't doing much to help your "I'm not retarded" cause.

Finally, your last point does have some merit, but you should ask yourself why would a billionair rather keep his $1billion in the Caymans instead of investing it in the economy to earn a higher rate of return.

Even if rich guys spent all their cash in the economy, it would be a somewhat equal result... only then, we should measure the overall moral impact of such spending. What's better for the country, a billion dollars spent on a private island, fleet of boats, harem of sex slaves? or a billion dollars spent on education or health care? You know... teaching children so that they end up being productive members of society instead of stealing cars and shooting infants in the head.

Unfortunately, being a tool to the current liberal philosophy that you are does not require you to actually think through these issues, but telling someone else to "use your ****ing brain" coming from you is laughable.

If my statements seem to be in agreement with liberal tools, it's purely coincidental. Even broken clocks are right. But being anti-librul for the sake of it is absolutely retarded.

So yeah, use your ****ing brain. You don't do anything but repeat talking points... just like MrFun. You don't offer anything in the way of facts. Just blah blah bull****

I do that too, but I'm a lot funnier than you.

[DinoDoc]

Obviously, if their number one priority in 2008 was to make Obama a one-term president, then it follows that economic recovery was not their priority.

From your Youtube vid: Uploaded on Dec 7, 2010

[MRT144]

What a bunch of whiners.

[PLATO]

You are BUTT Stupid Sava. That post was nothing short of moronic and shows a total lack of understanding of economic principles.

You should run for public office...you would probably win.

[PLATO]

PLATO, the second part ties in with the first part. One of the same. Obviously, if their number one priority in 2008 was to make Obama a one-term president, then it follows that economic recovery was not their priority.

Oh, I see what you are saying. Okay, that is arguably true in that context, but to say that it wasn't "a" priority is incorrect.

[Sava]

That post was nothing short of moronic and shows a total lack of understanding of economic principles.

Your excellent argument has me convinced. Well done.

I admit defeat.

[Kidlicious]

You are BUTT Stupid Sava. That post was nothing short of moronic and shows a total lack of understanding of economic principles.

You should run for public office...you would probably win.

I think you are confusing good stimulus policy with bad stimulus policy like cutting taxes for the rich and corporations. For example, the stimulus for accelerated depreciations is 0.29, but many people think it's much higher.

[Sava]

I think you are confusing good stimulus policy with bad stimulus policy like cutting taxes for the rich and corporations. For example, the stimulus for accelerated depreciations is 0.29, but many people think it's much higher.

Don't confuse him with facts.

[PLATO]

I think you are confusing good stimulus policy with bad stimulus policy like cutting taxes for the rich and corporations. For example, the stimulus for accelerated depreciations is 0.29, but many people think it's much higher.

Yes, but the estimate of .29 (I had actually read the estimate as being .27 back in 2008 when it was proposed) is based upon the assumption that most of the investment would have been made anyway. In a growing economy, I believe that is true. In a recession, I think that the estimate should be higher. Still, I do believe that you are correct in assuming that it would not even generate a dollar for dollar benefit.

The type of investment that I am talking about is more on the oreder of creating new companies and hiring workers for existing companies. Both of which many investors are still reluctant to do...thus the question of "Why?"