This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - challengerX
Pages: 1 ... 112911301131 11321133 ... 1397
33901
« on: January 29, 2015, 04:35:03 PM »
Give kinder a fish and he'll eat for a minute.
33902
« on: January 29, 2015, 04:30:10 PM »
Give him two, and he'll be really full.
33903
« on: January 29, 2015, 03:45:21 PM »
If you're going to force people to swear allegiance, you're the fascist.
33904
« on: January 29, 2015, 03:40:17 PM »
MOTHERFUCKIN HUSTLER
33905
« on: January 29, 2015, 03:37:09 PM »
Deep
33906
« on: January 29, 2015, 03:31:39 PM »
I don't know man. You might be worse off at a dorm, or you might like it a lot better.
If you ask me I think you need a change.
33907
« on: January 29, 2015, 03:29:45 PM »
Definitely kill her.
33908
« on: January 29, 2015, 03:09:38 PM »
Well do you like it at home?
33909
« on: January 29, 2015, 03:06:57 PM »
Aang > Everybody
Literally one of the best cartoon characters around. best MC for sure
sokka's better in general though
He's a great character too. Toph is a great character too. Katara, Zuko, Iroh is one of the best. Avatar is just fantastic in general.
33910
« on: January 29, 2015, 03:02:44 PM »
Aang > Everybody
Literally one of the best cartoon characters around.
33911
« on: January 29, 2015, 02:56:03 PM »
I don't want to be rude because I like you, but you don't have a fucking clue what you're talking about. The republicans want to do nothing but run America into the ground and have done so almost every time they've been elected.
I like you too, but you're incredibly partisan, at least when it's against Republicans. Republicans, quite clearly, don't want to run the U.S. into the ground, and whether you think their policies will do that is an interesting discussion.
But let's be honest here, the Democrats who've 'endowed' the country with good economic growth have done so largely by adopting centrist/conservative policies; Kennedy's tax-cuts (ruined by the Great Society and LBJ), Clinton's appointment of Robert Rubin as head of the CEA and the maintenance of PAYGO rules. And when Republicans have fucked the economy, it's been because of profligacy a la Bush, which I have a hard time categorising as conservative.
I didn't even come out for the Republicans in my post, anyway, I just said Rubio was better than Hillary.
Of course I'm partisan when there are only two parties and one of them wants to destroy America for everybody who isn't rich. Sorry, but you're wrong. There has almost never been a time conservatism has caused progress for humanity or created a stable economy. They actively deny climate change, it's the party of racists, they're incredibly classist, they hate immigrants. There's nothing good about them.
You're seriously delusional if you think the goal of a party is to ruin a country. There's no logic behind that reasoning.
The logic is they do what benefits them and nobody else, effectively ruining the economy.
You have an unhealthy and ignorant bias Hey Camnator.
that proves Meta's thread correct when liberals are more close-mined than conservatives. That was the most bullshit study I've ever seen and I wouldn't have believed it if it was saying the opposite either.
The Democrats want to make people that work hard feel like the bad guys by taxing them to hell. So people working minimum wage don't work hard? But of course, give the poor millionaires a break.
If you SERIOUSLY think Republicans have never benefited the economy, are racisists, xenophobes, etc I don't think, I know. They're against immigration reform, they're against same sex marriage, republican politicians have said racist things countless times and have tried bringing back Jim Crow laws.
then you're the definition of ignorance and it's disgusting you're acting in a fascist manner
>mfw you randomly string together words trying to insult me
Great, and so do Democrats. You keep ignoring that both parties only care about lining their pockets
To a far lesser extent than the Republicans.
dat fucking damage control. It's pretty evident with your delusional Republican hate that you would jump all over it if it said conservatives were more close-minded No, because I don't need a study to show me something so obvious. It's fact Republicans are anti gay, anti women, anti immigrants, and anti black.
People that don't actively search for jobs and just collect benefits don't do jack shit and Democrats reward that behavior. So because some people take advantage of welfare we should get rid of it completely when people who need it don't abuse it?
News Flash: The purpose of taxation is NOT to hurt and humiliate a specific class like the Democrats want to do to the upper-class, the point of taxation is to raise revenue in a FAIR manner. It's not fair to tax the wealthy more than the poor and middle class?
In fact, a large portion of millionaire only stay such for a short period then others take the position; it's a cycle and heavily taxing the upper-class makes people afraid of working to make money and instead stay middle-class Yes. That must be it. People are afraid of being rich.
No, you don't know. If you think Republicans are all what you claim then you're an uneducated ignorant child that has no business discussing politics when you type like a Mother Jones article
Funny how the majority of discrimination and pro life bullshit is in the hick- I mean Republican states. Don't forget you guys use all the welfare too :^)
I can't understand how you can be this thick-minded
10/10 beginning already providing solid rebuttals No, not a far lesser extent to Republicans. Both are equal. Stop trying to suck up to the Democrats already Gee, I guess that's why the economy tanked with Bush and many other Republicans but did great under Clinton and has recovered pretty well under Obama. It is not fact that Republicans are what you claim. If it was fact then EVERY Republican would hate blacks, gays, immigrants, etc. Guess fucking what? WHAT? Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz are Hispanics that come from immigrant families and are Republicans. And they support the embargo on Cuba and are against immigration reform. Ben Carson and Tim Scott are black and are Republicans. Self hating blacks who think all the problems within the black community are down to laziness. Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachman are women and Republicans. Anti choice. Carl DeMaio and Richard Tisei are gays and Republicans. Token members with shitty economic policies with ties to the Tea Party. You're completely insane to think for one second the Republicans are what you think they are No I'm perfectly sane. Keep twisting my words. Where did I fucking say to get rid of welfare? Point it out You heavily implied it. No, it's not fair. It's the same as punishing a kid for making honor roll Not at all. Here's a better analogy: Bobby has 5 apples. Teddy has 3. Jimmy has 1. They need those apples to eat lunch, but they also have to contribute to the apple pie. Now, what's fair is Bobby gives up 2 apples and Teddy gives up 1. Since Jimmy only has 1 apple and he needs to eat lunch, he's excused from contributing to the apple pie. Yes, they are, especially when they are demonized by the left for working to the American dream "People are afraid of being rich." Kinder- 2015 Pro-life isn't bullshit. If you think people can kill an innocent life then you're disgusting. A fetus isn't a baby. Science confirms this. And the north is far more discriminatory than the south. Like, what sense would it make for majority of blacks to live in the south when it's supposedly racist? Can you comprehend that? Because not all of them were able to go North so they stayed in the South and formed their communities and since they're not being hung from trees anymore they don't need to flee from the South? Actually, we don't use all the welfare
Actually, you do. http://ivn.us/2013/11/07/republican-states-receive-the-most-federal-welfare/
33912
« on: January 29, 2015, 01:53:07 PM »
Yeah. My best friend.
33913
« on: January 29, 2015, 01:46:38 PM »
Like I said, the Chinese made ball caps suck dick. The consumer is getting fucked.
None of what you're saying makes any sense in light of pretty much all the economic trends.
So you're saying poorly made hats in China which are visibly worse looking and more uncomfortable than the American made ones isn't fucking the consumer over?
Come on now.
At which point the consumer buys better quality hats. All of the hats are obviously not made in China, and if the consumer values the quality of the hat enough then he will pay for products by different companies or from different countries.
It's actually the majority of hats made in China. Roughly 80%.
That's the thing, they're the official makers of the on field baseball caps. And the American made ones are literally the same thing the players on field wear, they're extremely light weight, breathable, colors are correct and don't fade, the brim bends and stays bent properly, it looks like a normal hat and not square and douchebag looking.
So it's really fucked up that they're doing this to cut costs and fucking over Americans (employees and consumers) and they're still $35 dollar hate when the quality is far lower in the Chinese made ones.
Outsourcing is terrible.
You seem to be misunderstanding the fact that producers wouldn't outsource if there was a demand for domestic, high-quality hats.
Capitalists don't conspire to make people as poor as they can; they respond to the demand of the consumers as cheaply as they can, wherever it leads.
Obviously it's only a minority that give a shit which is why they get away with this. But apart from that, unemployment could be far lower if all these manufacturing jobs were in their respective countries.
33914
« on: January 29, 2015, 01:42:01 PM »
Left and knife in right.
33915
« on: January 29, 2015, 01:40:13 PM »
Like I said, the Chinese made ball caps suck dick. The consumer is getting fucked.
None of what you're saying makes any sense in light of pretty much all the economic trends.
So you're saying poorly made hats in China which are visibly worse looking and more uncomfortable than the American made ones isn't fucking the consumer over?
Come on now.
At which point the consumer buys better quality hats. All of the hats are obviously not made in China, and if the consumer values the quality of the hat enough then he will pay for products by different companies or from different countries.
It's actually the majority of hats made in China. Roughly 80%. That's the thing, they're the official makers of the on field baseball caps. And the American made ones are literally the same thing the players on field wear, they're extremely light weight, breathable, colors are correct and don't fade, the brim bends and stays bent properly, it looks like a normal hat and not square and douchebag looking. So it's really fucked up that they're doing this to cut costs and fucking over Americans (employees and consumers) and they're still $35 dollar hate when the quality is far lower in the Chinese made ones. Outsourcing is terrible.
33916
« on: January 29, 2015, 01:36:07 PM »
Women are experts on dick sucking.
33917
« on: January 29, 2015, 01:34:24 PM »
Climate change has been happening before humans even industrialized. Ever hear of the Medieval Warm Age and Little Ice Age?
Ever heard of carbon dioxide and how it's a heat trapping gas? Ever hear about the fact that the majority of our technology emits carbon dioxide?
Seriously, you have to actually wilfully try to deny anthropogenic climate change. Fuck. Turn your fucking brain on.
I'm not denying climate change exists, I'm questioning that history and science has shown multiple times in the past that change in the environment is natural. A study conducted in 2003 showed that temperatures 1000-1100 AD are comparable to the temperatures from 1900-1990. Rising CO2 levels are a result of global warming, not a cause of it. As temperatures increase, CO2 is released from "carbon sinks" such as the oceans or the Arctic tundra. Measurements of ice core samples show that over the last four climactic cycles (past 240,000 years) periods of global warming preceded global increases in CO2. Human releases of CO2 cannot cause climate change as any increases in CO2 are eventually balanced by nature. CO2 gets absorbed by oceans, forests, and other "carbon sinks" that increase their biological activity to absorb excess CO2 from the atmosphere. 50% of the CO2 released by the burning of fossil fuels and other human activities, has already been absorbed
[Citation needed]
I'll be awaiting your pseudo science source.
Arthur B. Robinson, PhD, et al., "Environmental Effects of Increased Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide" (3 MB) , Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, Fall 2007
Willie Soon, PhD, and Sallie Baliunas, PhD, "Proxy Climatic and Environmental Changes of the Past 1000 Years" (660 KB) , Climate Research, 2003
Anders Moberg, PhD, et al., "Highly Variable Northern Hemisphere Temperatures Reconstructed From Low and High Resolution Proxy Data," Nature, Feb. 2005
Timothy Ball, PhD, "Global Warming: The Cold, Hard Facts?," www.canadafreepress.com, Feb. 5, 2007
Nicholas Caillon, PhD, and Jeffrey P. Severinghaus, PhD, et al., "Timing of Atmospheric CO2 and Antarctic Temperature Changes Across Termination III," Science, Mar. 14, 2003
US Senate Minority Environment and Public Works Committee, "US Senate Report: Over 400 Prominent Scientists Disputed Man-Made Global Warming Claims in 2007," epw.senate.go, Dec. 20, 2007
Willie Soon, PhD, "Implications of the Secondary Role of Carbon Dioxide and Methane Forcing in Climate Change: Past, Present, and Future,” Physical Geography, 2007
Arthur B. Robinson, PhD, et al., "Environmental Effects of Increased Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide" (3 MB) , Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, Fall 2007
Yeah I want actual links to these sources. Anyone can make up a name with a PhD attached to it.
ur a fuckin fgt m8 PhD, et al., "Why is Mordo such a colossal faggot?" Sep7agon.net, Winter 2015
33918
« on: January 29, 2015, 01:30:49 PM »
Like I said, the Chinese made ball caps suck dick. The consumer is getting fucked.
None of what you're saying makes any sense in light of pretty much all the economic trends.
So you're saying poorly made hats in China which are visibly worse looking and more uncomfortable than the American made ones isn't fucking the consumer over? Come on now.
33919
« on: January 29, 2015, 01:29:06 PM »
Climate change has been happening before humans even industrialized. Ever hear of the Medieval Warm Age and Little Ice Age?
Ever heard of carbon dioxide and how it's a heat trapping gas? Ever hear about the fact that the majority of our technology emits carbon dioxide?
Seriously, you have to actually wilfully try to deny anthropogenic climate change. Fuck. Turn your fucking brain on.
I'm not denying climate change exists, I'm questioning that history and science has shown multiple times in the past that change in the environment is natural. A study conducted in 2003 showed that temperatures 1000-1100 AD are comparable to the temperatures from 1900-1990. Rising CO2 levels are a result of global warming, not a cause of it. As temperatures increase, CO2 is released from "carbon sinks" such as the oceans or the Arctic tundra. Measurements of ice core samples show that over the last four climactic cycles (past 240,000 years) periods of global warming preceded global increases in CO2. Human releases of CO2 cannot cause climate change as any increases in CO2 are eventually balanced by nature. CO2 gets absorbed by oceans, forests, and other "carbon sinks" that increase their biological activity to absorb excess CO2 from the atmosphere. 50% of the CO2 released by the burning of fossil fuels and other human activities, has already been absorbed
[Citation needed]
I'll be awaiting your pseudo science source.
Arthur B. Robinson, PhD, et al., "Environmental Effects of Increased Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide" (3 MB) , Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, Fall 2007
Willie Soon, PhD, and Sallie Baliunas, PhD, "Proxy Climatic and Environmental Changes of the Past 1000 Years" (660 KB) , Climate Research, 2003
Anders Moberg, PhD, et al., "Highly Variable Northern Hemisphere Temperatures Reconstructed From Low and High Resolution Proxy Data," Nature, Feb. 2005
Timothy Ball, PhD, "Global Warming: The Cold, Hard Facts?," www.canadafreepress.com, Feb. 5, 2007
Nicholas Caillon, PhD, and Jeffrey P. Severinghaus, PhD, et al., "Timing of Atmospheric CO2 and Antarctic Temperature Changes Across Termination III," Science, Mar. 14, 2003
US Senate Minority Environment and Public Works Committee, "US Senate Report: Over 400 Prominent Scientists Disputed Man-Made Global Warming Claims in 2007," epw.senate.go, Dec. 20, 2007
Willie Soon, PhD, "Implications of the Secondary Role of Carbon Dioxide and Methane Forcing in Climate Change: Past, Present, and Future,” Physical Geography, 2007
Arthur B. Robinson, PhD, et al., "Environmental Effects of Increased Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide" (3 MB) , Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, Fall 2007
It took me like 20 minutes to gather everything that was wrong with the sources in your response. I'm not sure how many of these were published in what could be considered a peer-review journal. Consider this post the short response:
Arthur Brouhard "Art" Robinson (born March 24, 1942[1]) is an American biochemist, politician and member of the Republican Party from the U.S. State of Oregon.
For the papers referencing Soon and/or Baliunas, see here.
Moberg Anders is primarily a businessman, so there's obviously a potential conflict of interest.
Timothy Ball was funded by Friends of Science which he founded, and the Natural Resources Stewardship Project, both of which oppose the idea of climate change.
The paper published by the US Senate Minority Environment and Public Works Committee was written by Jim Inhofe, a notorious climate change denier in the Senate:
Since 2003, when he was first elected Chair of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, Inhofe has been the foremost Republican promoting arguments for climate change denial in the global warming controversy. He famously said in the Senate that global warming is a hoax, has invited contrarians to testify in Committee hearings, and spread his views both via the Committee website run by Marc Morano, and through his access to conservative media such as Fox News.
The only paper that seemed to have any semblance of validity was Caillon and Severinghaus.
33920
« on: January 29, 2015, 01:26:52 PM »
Produces the most value for who?
As if their interests are divergent. But if you want an answer, then the consumers.
Like I said, the Chinese made ball caps suck dick. The consumer is getting fucked.
33921
« on: January 29, 2015, 01:21:50 PM »
Now, I can't think of much that's produced in America.
. . . Good.
at its core outsourcing is the practice of shifting labour to where it produces the most value
Produces the most value for who? The company, not the country, not the consumer, and certainly not the employees.
33922
« on: January 29, 2015, 01:09:35 PM »
need to cash in on their unemployment benefits before finding a new job.
So? About three million jobs are lost each year in the United States. However long a lot of people have to temporarily remain on the dole, it obviously isn't having a significant negative impact, especially not since we can see unemployment reach highs of 10pc and still recover.
Any amount of time on welfare is negative.
33923
« on: January 29, 2015, 01:08:58 PM »
There's no positive to getting rid of jobs.
You can keep saying it but the evidence is against you.
We've seen increased consumer surplus, increased GDP, increased living standards and virtually no change in average unemployment. How does any of this point to a poor economic situation because of outsourcing?
It doesn't, because at its core outsourcing is the practice of shifting labour to where it produces the most value.
Because the job pool isn't fixed. It doesn't mean we're not missing thousands of jobs and all economic growth that comes with producing things nationally. America used to make everything. Now, I can't think of much that's produced in America.
33924
« on: January 29, 2015, 01:06:06 PM »
I drop coins in those little "THINK OF THE CHILDREN" things every once in a while. Other than that no.
33925
« on: January 29, 2015, 01:03:21 PM »
You're not looking at the bigger picture. Like those 400 people recently layed off, there are thousands like them. That isn't good for economy no matter how you spin it.
The point is that this isn't happening. You can have a situation wherein 400 people are laid off and permanently end up on benefits, but it's certainly not the norm and, even if it were, clearly has no substantial negative effect.
I'm not saying 400 will end up on welfare. I'm saying 50-100 would end up on welfare for a substantial amount of time. The other 300-350 will move on to some other minimum wage job. And the hats will then be those inferior quality Chinese made hats that feel like they've been soaked in starch. There's no positive to getting rid of jobs.
33926
« on: January 29, 2015, 12:54:07 PM »
Be realistic.
I am.
I don't care if 300 people end up on welfare if the total economic wealth is increased. It's as close to a fact as you can get in economics that free trade is a massive boon, and controls on imports and exports (including capital) retard economic growth. If you want more jobs in the country, you make it a more competitive place to put your capital.
Now, since the natural rate of unemployment hasn't massively altered since 1950 and our wealth has increased substantially, claiming outsourcing hurts the domestic economy doesn't hold up to scrutiny.
You're not looking at the bigger picture. Like those 400 people recently layed off, there are thousands like them. That isn't good for economy no matter how you spin it.
33927
« on: January 29, 2015, 12:29:09 PM »
I don't want to be rude because I like you, but you don't have a fucking clue what you're talking about. The republicans want to do nothing but run America into the ground and have done so almost every time they've been elected.
I like you too, but you're incredibly partisan, at least when it's against Republicans. Republicans, quite clearly, don't want to run the U.S. into the ground, and whether you think their policies will do that is an interesting discussion.
But let's be honest here, the Democrats who've 'endowed' the country with good economic growth have done so largely by adopting centrist/conservative policies; Kennedy's tax-cuts (ruined by the Great Society and LBJ), Clinton's appointment of Robert Rubin as head of the CEA and the maintenance of PAYGO rules. And when Republicans have fucked the economy, it's been because of profligacy a la Bush, which I have a hard time categorising as conservative.
I didn't even come out for the Republicans in my post, anyway, I just said Rubio was better than Hillary.
Of course I'm partisan when there are only two parties and one of them wants to destroy America for everybody who isn't rich. Sorry, but you're wrong. There has almost never been a time conservatism has caused progress for humanity or created a stable economy. They actively deny climate change, it's the party of racists, they're incredibly classist, they hate immigrants. There's nothing good about them.
You're seriously delusional if you think the goal of a party is to ruin a country. There's no logic behind that reasoning.
The logic is they do what benefits them and nobody else, effectively ruining the economy.
You have an unhealthy and ignorant bias Hey Camnator.
that proves Meta's thread correct when liberals are more close-mined than conservatives. That was the most bullshit study I've ever seen and I wouldn't have believed it if it was saying the opposite either.
The Democrats want to make people that work hard feel like the bad guys by taxing them to hell. So people working minimum wage don't work hard? But of course, give the poor millionaires a break.
If you SERIOUSLY think Republicans have never benefited the economy, are racisists, xenophobes, etc I don't think, I know. They're against immigration reform, they're against same sex marriage, republican politicians have said racist things countless times and have tried bringing back Jim Crow laws.
then you're the definition of ignorance and it's disgusting you're acting in a fascist manner
>mfw you randomly string together words trying to insult me
Great, and so do Democrats. You keep ignoring that both parties only care about lining their pockets
To a far lesser extent than the Republicans. dat fucking damage control. It's pretty evident with your delusional Republican hate that you would jump all over it if it said conservatives were more close-minded No, because I don't need a study to show me something so obvious. It's fact Republicans are anti gay, anti women, anti immigrants, and anti black. People that don't actively search for jobs and just collect benefits don't do jack shit and Democrats reward that behavior. So because some people take advantage of welfare we should get rid of it completely when people who need it don't abuse it? News Flash: The purpose of taxation is NOT to hurt and humiliate a specific class like the Democrats want to do to the upper-class, the point of taxation is to raise revenue in a FAIR manner. It's not fair to tax the wealthy more than the poor and middle class? In fact, a large portion of millionaire only stay such for a short period then others take the position; it's a cycle and heavily taxing the upper-class makes people afraid of working to make money and instead stay middle-class Yes. That must be it. People are afraid of being rich. No, you don't know. If you think Republicans are all what you claim then you're an uneducated ignorant child that has no business discussing politics when you type like a Mother Jones article
Funny how the majority of discrimination and pro life bullshit is in the hick- I mean Republican states. Don't forget you guys use all the welfare too :^)
33928
« on: January 29, 2015, 12:23:51 PM »
And when New Era shuts down a factory in New York resulting in 400 people being layed off and opens up more factories in China, people are losing jobs.
Right, and then they go and find other jobs which create more wealth than their old ones because it was more economical for their old jobs to be done in China.
Ah, so you realize jobs are lost due to outsourcing. Really? Or will they become unemployed for several months with 300 moving on to some other minimum wage job and the other 100 living off welfare possibly? Be realistic.
33929
« on: January 29, 2015, 12:22:15 PM »
Let me ask - what is so bad about Clinton? She has some fairly shit opinions. I don't have the sheet on me at the moment that I made comparing Clinton, Rubio and Gary Johnson but Clinton was by far and away the worst there.
I don't want to be rude because I like you, but you don't have a fucking clue what you're talking about. The republicans want to do nothing but run America into the ground and have done so almost every time they've been elected.
Good to know indoctrination is a real thing
Democrats are running this country into the ground. It's a fucking blessing they lost control of the Senate
The irony.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/reagan-insider-gop-destroyed-us-economy-2010-08-10
For one, the Federal Reserve ruined the economy in the 70s and 80s
http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-carterreagan.htm
Inflation was increasing since 1965, which led to economic situations later on
But here's a study, not some "insider", saying the Democrats ruined the economy
http://www.examiner.com/article/new-study-confirms-economy-was-destroyed-by-democrat-policies
If you want some added fun, only a mere 250K something jobs added since 2009 up til now was a collective 49 states+D.C; The conservative stronghold of Texas added the majority of over 1 million jobs since 2009
>complete lies
>bullshit study misrepresenting the facts and straight up lying
This "insider" you're disregarding is David Stockman, "President Ronald Reagan's director of the Office of Management and Budget". It's incredible how hard you deny the facts and then how vehemently you accuse others of what you do. Republicans nearly collapsed America.
tl;dr: Chally instead of refuting uses his typical "lalalala i can't hear you" attitude when facts are shown that discredit him. God, grow up already. I bet if I told you the grass was green then you would call that a lie because that IS your attitude
LOL Sure thing kiddo.
So because he has some fancy title, he's automatically the most "credibe" source on the planet? By that logic, the Republican in-charge of the environmental committee must be the most credible person on the climate Misrepresentation of the facts again :^)
No, it's that he was director of the Office of Management and Budget and is actively saying Republican economics are destroying America.
You're the one denying facts as the fact is inflation started growing in 1965 and snowballed for the next 15 years. To battle inflation, Carter appointed Paul Volcker as Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board, who defeated it by putting the nation through an intentional recession. Once the threat of inflation abated in late 1982, Volcker cut interest rates and flooded the economy with money, fueling an expansion that lasted seven years. Neither Carter nor Reagan had much to do with the economic events that occurred during their terms. Because if you seriously think the president has total control of the economy then you're totally damn wrong
>Reagan didn't have anything to do with the economy
Good stuff as always Bueno.
Anybody that can read can see my point of your inability to refute
Man I just got so #rekt so hard. Not misrepresenting of anything. You pointed out his title like it was of great importance. And I'll give a little tip: what some person claims, in this case your insider, doesn't mean it's total fact; that's called anecdotal He worked for Reagan and was the director of the Office of Management and Budget. He's not some conspiracy nut on an Internet blog. Instead of refuting, once a again, you instead twist my words when I said the president doesn't have total control. But again, twisting words is your specialty
No, you said Reagan had little to do with economic events. He had a lot to do with it and his whole structure fucked America big time.
33930
« on: January 29, 2015, 12:15:27 PM »
Far more jobs
Outsourcing doesn't result in job losses.
I didn't say that. I said it results in jobs not even existing. And when New Era shuts down a factory in New York resulting in 400 people being layed off and opens up more factories in China, people are losing jobs.
Pages: 1 ... 112911301131 11321133 ... 1397
|
Show Posts