Is it even possible to be in a 60's percent tax bracket???

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:Let me see......we are in the middle of the worst recovery in our lifetimes.....hmmmm....Nope, can't say that liberals need to run the country. You are running it into the ground.

Of course the obvious rejoinder is, "whose administration created the situation from which we need to recover?" Republicans dig a hole and then complain that Democrats don't fill it in fast enough. Classic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let me see......we are in the middle of the worst recovery in our lifetimes.....hmmmm....Nope, can't say that liberals need to run the country. You are running it into the ground.

The key word being "recovery". Your last president left us in "decline". You are champs at declines, I'll give you that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let me see......we are in the middle of the worst recovery in our lifetimes.....hmmmm....Nope, can't say that liberals need to run the country. You are running it into the ground.

The key word being "recovery". Your last president left us in "decline". You are champs at declines, I'll give you that.

Been a huge turn-around. Damn that George Bush

[Anonymous]

Let me see, unemployment is out if control, welfare recipients are up, the deficit has skyrocketed, etc all in the last 4 years and we are still blaming Bush? While I can freely admit he was not our greatest President (not the worst but not stellar either), the left is unwilling to acknowledge the failures if our current leader and his policies. It is disingenuous to keep pointing the finger backwards.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:Let me see, unemployment is out if control, welfare recipients are up, the deficit has skyrocketed, etc all in the last 4 years and we are still blaming Bush? While I can freely admit he was not our greatest President (not the worst but not stellar either), the left is unwilling to acknowledge the failures if our current leader and his policies. It is disingenuous to keep pointing the finger backwards.

Sorry, but you are being disingenuous. The posts above were not "blaming Bush", but pointing out that while we may be having a slow recovery, we are having a recovery. In order to have a recovery, you have to have something from which to recover. In this case, we are recovering from a recession that occurred on Bush's watch. Personally, I do blame Bush for that. If you can find someone else to blame, then by all means, go for it. But, if you want to complain about the speed of the recovery, you should be pretty clear about what we are recovering from.

BTW, the Dow Jones Industrial Average is nearing it's all time high. The S & P 500 closed higher than anytime since 2007. The NASDEQ is near its all-time high. Obama sucks as a socialist.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let me see, unemployment is out if control, welfare recipients are up, the deficit has skyrocketed, etc all in the last 4 years and we are still blaming Bush? While I can freely admit he was not our greatest President (not the worst but not stellar either), the left is unwilling to acknowledge the failures if our current leader and his policies. It is disingenuous to keep pointing the finger backwards.

Sorry, but you are being disingenuous. The posts above were not "blaming Bush", but pointing out that while we may be having a slow recovery, we are having a recovery. In order to have a recovery, you have to have something from which to recover. In this case, we are recovering from a recession that occurred on Bush's watch. Personally, I do blame Bush for that. If you can find someone else to blame, then by all means, go for it. But, if you want to complain about the speed of the recovery, you should be pretty clear about what we are recovering from.

BTW, the Dow Jones Industrial Average is nearing it's all time high. The S & P 500 closed higher than anytime since 2007. The NASDEQ is near its all-time high. Obama sucks as a socialist.

Absolutely love this argument, that the market is roaring!! You are the same people that would rather see Wall Street traders arrested and shut down and corporate profits returned to the masses.

Oh wait, millions of Americans also benefit from those same gains, how could we forget.

Hypocrisy at its finest.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let me see, unemployment is out if control, welfare recipients are up, the deficit has skyrocketed, etc all in the last 4 years and we are still blaming Bush? While I can freely admit he was not our greatest President (not the worst but not stellar either), the left is unwilling to acknowledge the failures if our current leader and his policies. It is disingenuous to keep pointing the finger backwards.

Sorry, but you are being disingenuous. The posts above were not "blaming Bush", but pointing out that while we may be having a slow recovery, we are having a recovery. In order to have a recovery, you have to have something from which to recover. In this case, we are recovering from a recession that occurred on Bush's watch. Personally, I do blame Bush for that. If you can find someone else to blame, then by all means, go for it. But, if you want to complain about the speed of the recovery, you should be pretty clear about what we are recovering from.

BTW, the Dow Jones Industrial Average is nearing it's all time high. The S & P 500 closed higher than anytime since 2007. The NASDEQ is near its all-time high. Obama sucks as a socialist.

Absolutely love this argument, that the market is roaring!! You are the same people that would rather see Wall Street traders arrested and shut down and corporate profits returned to the masses.

Oh wait, millions of Americans also benefit from those same gains, how could we forget.

Hypocrisy at its finest.

Not hypocrisy at all.

I didn't make any value judgement about the market. I don't understand why posters like you hate it when I point out simple facts. My statement about the stock market is true. If, for reasons I can't begin to understand, you think my statement was false, then make your argument. I can't wait to hear it. It is also a statement of fact that a socialist would have no interest in seeing the stock market reach historic highs. A president who was a staunch enemy of Wall Street would not implement policies to encourage reaching such highs. Either Obama is a very incompetent socialist, or he is not a socialist at all.

As to whether the stock market being at these levels is good or bad, that is a matter of opinion. I did not state an opinion about that.

Now, what I am going to say employs something known as "nuance". You may not be familiar with the term and may want to employ something called a "dictionary" to help you understand its meaning. But, I can wish that those responsible for crashing the economy had been pursued by our Department of Justice with the same vigor with which it went after Aaron Swartz while simultaneously pointing out the fact that the stock market is reaching historic highs. Believing the first (which is an opinion) no way negates the second (which is fact).

But, while we are on the topic, assuming that you agree that the market is doing very well, are you willing to give Obama some credit in that regard?

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let me see, unemployment is out if control, welfare recipients are up, the deficit has skyrocketed, etc all in the last 4 years and we are still blaming Bush? While I can freely admit he was not our greatest President (not the worst but not stellar either), the left is unwilling to acknowledge the failures if our current leader and his policies. It is disingenuous to keep pointing the finger backwards.

Sorry, but you are being disingenuous. The posts above were not "blaming Bush", but pointing out that while we may be having a slow recovery, we are having a recovery. In order to have a recovery, you have to have something from which to recover. In this case, we are recovering from a recession that occurred on Bush's watch. Personally, I do blame Bush for that. If you can find someone else to blame, then by all means, go for it. But, if you want to complain about the speed of the recovery, you should be pretty clear about what we are recovering from.

BTW, the Dow Jones Industrial Average is nearing it's all time high. The S & P 500 closed higher than anytime since 2007. The NASDEQ is near its all-time high. Obama sucks as a socialist.

Absolutely love this argument, that the market is roaring!! You are the same people that would rather see Wall Street traders arrested and shut down and corporate profits returned to the masses.

Oh wait, millions of Americans also benefit from those same gains, how could we forget.

Hypocrisy at its finest.

Not hypocrisy at all.

I didn't make any value judgement about the market. I don't understand why posters like you hate it when I point out simple facts. My statement about the stock market is true. If, for reasons I can't begin to understand, you think my statement was false, then make your argument. I can't wait to hear it. It is also a statement of fact that a socialist would have no interest in seeing the stock market reach historic highs. A president who was a staunch enemy of Wall Street would not implement policies to encourage reaching such highs. Either Obama is a very incompetent socialist, or he is not a socialist at all.

As to whether the stock market being at these levels is good or bad, that is a matter of opinion. I did not state an opinion about that.

Now, what I am going to say employs something known as "nuance". You may not be familiar with the term and may want to employ something called a "dictionary" to help you understand its meaning. But, I can wish that those responsible for crashing the economy had been pursued by our Department of Justice with the same vigor with which it went after Aaron Swartz while simultaneously pointing out the fact that the stock market is reaching historic highs. Believing the first (which is an opinion) no way negates the second (which is fact).

But, while we are on the topic, assuming that you agree that the market is doing very well, are you willing to give Obama some credit in that regard?

I think you've exceeded the quota for the number of straw men used, but I guess you're also exempt. When did I say anything about Socialism? It's conveinient to offer an unproven statement at this point, but your stating that the DJIA is basically never better, is pretty much an endorsement that the market is booming. But as I know you know, the stock market is but one indicator of an economy. The value of a company or stock can be manipulated by decreasing wages, hours worked, employees, assets on hand. None of which, when done is a sign of a rebounding economy.

Too much nuance? And you thought I didn't know francais. Au revoir mon ami.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:
I think you've exceeded the quota for the number of straw men used, but I guess you're also exempt. When did I say anything about Socialism? It's conveinient to offer an unproven statement at this point, but your stating that the DJIA is basically never better, is pretty much an endorsement that the market is booming. But as I know you know, the stock market is but one indicator of an economy. The value of a company or stock can be manipulated by decreasing wages, hours worked, employees, assets on hand. None of which, when done is a sign of a rebounding economy.

Too much nuance? And you thought I didn't know francais. Au revoir mon ami.

Straw men? You have assembled a veritable army of straw men.

1) Where did I say that you said anything about socialism? I mentioned socialism in my message to which you replied. I said that Obama sucked as a socialist. That was in response to posters in this thread who have called Obama a socialist.

2) Unproven statement? What "unproven statement" did I make? I said that the DJIA is near historic highs. Do you dispute that? The highest it's ever been is 14,164. Yesterday it closed at 13,895. When Obama took office, it was 7,949. This is indisputable fact.

3) You say that I endorsed that the stock market is booming. Yes, the stock market is booming. That is fact. Do you disagree?

4) You discuss the stock market being but one aspect of the economy. I said nothing in contradiction to this. You said that my stating that the stock market is performing well was an act of hypocrisy. It was not. It was a statement of fact.

5) You wrote, "Oh wait, millions of Americans also benefit from those same gains, how could we forget" in reference to stock market performance. Now, you say, "The value of a company or stock can be manipulated by decreasing wages, hours worked, employees, assets on hand. None of which, when done is a sign of a rebounding economy." Perhaps you do understand nuance because it requires a great amount of nuance to simultaneously argue both of these positions.

I'm sure it was entirely inadvertent, but you forgot to answer my question regarding whether you were willing to give Obama credit for the stock market's performance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let me see, unemployment is out if control, welfare recipients are up, the deficit has skyrocketed, etc all in the last 4 years and we are still blaming Bush? While I can freely admit he was not our greatest President (not the worst but not stellar either), the left is unwilling to acknowledge the failures if our current leader and his policies. It is disingenuous to keep pointing the finger backwards.

Sorry, but you are being disingenuous. The posts above were not "blaming Bush", but pointing out that while we may be having a slow recovery, we are having a recovery. In order to have a recovery, you have to have something from which to recover. In this case, we are recovering from a recession that occurred on Bush's watch. Personally, I do blame Bush for that. If you can find someone else to blame, then by all means, go for it. But, if you want to complain about the speed of the recovery, you should be pretty clear about what we are recovering from.

BTW, the Dow Jones Industrial Average is nearing it's all time high. The S & P 500 closed higher than anytime since 2007. The NASDEQ is near its all-time high. Obama sucks as a socialist.

Absolutely love this argument, that the market is roaring!! You are the same people that would rather see Wall Street traders arrested and shut down and corporate profits returned to the masses.

Oh wait, millions of Americans also benefit from those same gains, how could we forget.

Hypocrisy at its finest.

Not hypocrisy at all.

I didn't make any value judgement about the market. I don't understand why posters like you hate it when I point out simple facts. My statement about the stock market is true. If, for reasons I can't begin to understand, you think my statement was false, then make your argument. I can't wait to hear it. It is also a statement of fact that a socialist would have no interest in seeing the stock market reach historic highs. A president who was a staunch enemy of Wall Street would not implement policies to encourage reaching such highs. Either Obama is a very incompetent socialist, or he is not a socialist at all.

As to whether the stock market being at these levels is good or bad, that is a matter of opinion. I did not state an opinion about that.

Now, what I am going to say employs something known as "nuance". You may not be familiar with the term and may want to employ something called a "dictionary" to help you understand its meaning. But, I can wish that those responsible for crashing the economy had been pursued by our Department of Justice with the same vigor with which it went after Aaron Swartz while simultaneously pointing out the fact that the stock market is reaching historic highs. Believing the first (which is an opinion) no way negates the second (which is fact).

But, while we are on the topic, assuming that you agree that the market is doing very well, are you willing to give Obama some credit in that regard?

I think you've exceeded the quota for the number of straw men used, but I guess you're also exempt. When did I say anything about Socialism? It's conveinient to offer an unproven statement at this point, but your stating that the DJIA is basically never better, is pretty much an endorsement that the market is booming. But as I know you know, the stock market is but one indicator of an economy. The value of a company or stock can be manipulated by decreasing wages, hours worked, employees, assets on hand. None of which, when done is a sign of a rebounding economy.

Too much nuance? And you thought I didn't know francais. Au revoir mon ami.

Friend of mine who's huge in the field said that if Obama is elected again, there will be short-term rises with his policies but that the eventual crash is going to be UGLY. Given how much money he's made his clients, I tend to listen to what he says.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I think you've exceeded the quota for the number of straw men used, but I guess you're also exempt. When did I say anything about Socialism? It's conveinient to offer an unproven statement at this point, but your stating that the DJIA is basically never better, is pretty much an endorsement that the market is booming. But as I know you know, the stock market is but one indicator of an economy. The value of a company or stock can be manipulated by decreasing wages, hours worked, employees, assets on hand. None of which, when done is a sign of a rebounding economy.

Too much nuance? And you thought I didn't know francais. Au revoir mon ami.

Straw men? You have assembled a veritable army of straw men.

1) Where did I say that you said anything about socialism? I mentioned socialism in my message to which you replied. I said that Obama sucked as a socialist. That was in response to posters in this thread who have called Obama a socialist.

2) Unproven statement? What "unproven statement" did I make? I said that the DJIA is near historic highs. Do you dispute that? The highest it's ever been is 14,164. Yesterday it closed at 13,895. When Obama took office, it was 7,949. This is indisputable fact.

3) You say that I endorsed that the stock market is booming. Yes, the stock market is booming. That is fact. Do you disagree?

4) You discuss the stock market being but one aspect of the economy. I said nothing in contradiction to this. You said that my stating that the stock market is performing well was an act of hypocrisy. It was not. It was a statement of fact.

5) You wrote, "Oh wait, millions of Americans also benefit from those same gains, how could we forget" in reference to stock market performance. Now, you say, "The value of a company or stock can be manipulated by decreasing wages, hours worked, employees, assets on hand. None of which, when done is a sign of a rebounding economy." Perhaps you do understand nuance because it requires a great amount of nuance to simultaneously argue both of these positions.

I'm sure it was entirely inadvertent, but you forgot to answer my question regarding whether you were willing to give Obama credit for the stock market's performance.

Nope.