Palin preferred being a celebrity politician

Excellent depiction!

Poor Tina Fey - it was fun while it lasted! lol

From the latest Quinnipiac University national poll (conducted 9/27-10/3), released today:

"Regardless of how you intend to vote, who do you think would do a better job on the economy Barack Obama or - Mitt Romney?"

Obama-39%

Romney-49%

President Obama's job approval also hit a new low at Quinnipiac:

41% approve, 55% disapprove.

Some sad news to start our Thursday. The saddest, of course, being the loss of the 21^st century’s Thomas A Edison or Franklin.

Then, Palin says she’s not running (who knew? Well, besides Larry O’Donnell, of course)

Then, Marco says HE’S out of the game for veep.

Also: I tried to read the Bachmann posts yesterday afternoon, but there was too much peripheral noise about Jobs and who could be the most inappropriate with their posts. A shame, really.

But back to Bachmann and the campus hide-and-seek that took place yesterday: What the hell would a dim wit like her do if she were president, and there was a world leader conference, and a ‘bad guy’ showed up- sneak off to the basement store room, and continue the meeting there?

Sheesh.

Steve Jobs was the ultimate supply sider. He invented things we never knew we needed. And once those things were invented and sold, countless millions of folks couldn't understand how they ever lived without them. Demand? There was no demand for the products Jobs created until he created them. With Jobs, innovative supply came first. Demand caught up later. Rest in peace Steve Jobs. Your vision changed our world and made it a better place.

FR: "In proposing a 5 percent surtax on incomes of more than $1 million a year to pay for job-creation measures sought by President Obama, Senate Democratic leaders on Wednesday escalated efforts to strike a more populist tone and to draw Republicans into a confrontation over how much affluent Americans should pay to help others cope with a struggling economy,"

You'd think you demand-siders will finally wake up, but that doesn't appear to be the case.. Now maybe you'll see that attempting to improve the economy by the government spending more and more money just doesn't work. The demand side doesn't create new products that people can use to improve their lives. It's the supply side with people like Steve Jobs that create the products that people couldn't even dream about having years ago. Jobs, and other entrepreneurs, are the ones that envision how to make the world better, develop the technology around it, create the product and deliver it to the consumers. Steven Jobs though was one of these rich corporate CEO's, head of a company that has the #2 spot as the richest company in the world, second to Exxon Mobile. Steve Jobs to the liberals was part of the problem. An Evil Rich White Guy ripping off the masses.

This is how the Liberals get it all wrong. They can't stand the successful people of the world. They expect those successful people some how owe them something other than the products they have purchased from these successful people. "They aren't taxed enough" the Liberals say. "It's our money, they stole it" say the Liberals. "Their wealth is as much our wealth" say the Liberals. Wrong on all accounts. Liberals want to strangle the very people that make their lives better each and ever day, and they want the federal government to do it for them.

We saw this week that Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) totally lost his mind when legislation he voted for and that went into law caused Bank of America to raise their fees on consumers. Senator Durbin was indignant that capitalism worked as expected when his actions increased the costs to the banks, and those costs were passed on to the consumer. Mr. Durbin demand the offending bank be boycotted. Image that, a Senator calling for a boycott of a private American company. The man is clueless, and he's not alone, his supporters are too.

So what's Senator Durbins answer to the failing economy? Lets take the producers, the innovators, the people that build the products that make out lives better, and lets tax them even more. Mr. Durbin says the government needs that money, to create jobs, because Mr. Durbin says the government can spend that money better than Steven Jobs could. Does anyone really believe Mr. Durbin knows what he's talking about?

Good morning Independent Redneck Va.

You have started the day off with the first and foremost information needed for the low information.

I thank you.

OH NO!!! SAY IT AIN'T SO.

Sarah not running? Can this be true. Let's hope so. Half the fun will be taken out of this election. Oh well we still have Bachmann to listen to and enjoy. I love it.

Obama in 2012.

Stands and applauds IR.

If only common sense were common, I could just smile and nod in your direction. Unfortunately it isn't so you deserve full accolades for today's work.

IR: you hit the nail on the head. The responsibility of paying to support this government belongs to ALL of us. The top 1%-2% have special obligation, they are not exempt from paying for the benefits that they receive. Trickle down has NEVER worked, and it is a fraud perpetuated by those who have to take from those who don't. Let's see, what would the Republicans call that...class warfare. Ah, yes.

I am really sorry to learn of Steve Jobs' passing. Who else contributed so much to the world of technology? A real American hero.

An Idle Revolting Congress

How can the Republicans and Dixiecrat object to eradicating the pain and suffering of the American people; especially, when poll after poll shows people want the President Jobs Bill passed and to raise taxes on the rich?

Republicans disagree. They want less government regulation, lower taxes and reduced government spending

http://money.cnn.com/2011/10/06/news/economy/congress_stimulus/index.htm

Two icons in our history have returned to forever. Steve Jobs revolutionized computing and was one of greatest visionaries.

Rev. Fred Shuttlesworth helped lead the civil rights movement. When the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against segregated busing in Montgomery, Alabama, Shuttlesworth rallied the membership of a group he established in May 1956 — the Alabama Christian Movement for Human Rights — to challenge the practice of segregated busing in Birmingham.

His home was bombed on Christmas Day in 1956, but he and his family were not injured.

He was, however, hurt in 1957 when he was beaten with chains and whips as he sought to integrate an all-white public school.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/05/us/obit-rev-fred-shuttlesworth/

They both changed the world.

Rest in peace, Mr. Jobs and Rev. Fred Shuttlesworth

Take a bow Floyd - you earned it! ;o)

Dear Mark and Domenico: Any word on why FR is crashing?

Also, why haven't any of you here put your obnoxious loud mouths into action and gone to NYC to participate or start a similar movement in your own town?

Thanks for asking. I heard about this on the radio yesterday;

We are the 99%! Occupy Des Moines is a local resistance protesting the 1% that own 50% of everything.
We will not be intimidated and silent anymore with our civil resistance and street protests. We will no longer tolerate the greed and corruption of the 1%. We represent people of many colors, genders and political persuasions. We have lost our jobs, houses, future, everything...while the fat cats on Wall Street get richer and drink their champagne. WE ARE MADDER THAN HELL AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO TAKE IT ANYMORE!

http://www.occupydesmoines.com/

Thanks Sarah for Showing US there is Something in your Noggin

As stupid and dumb as Sarah is, not running was the smartest thing she could have done. It’s too bad they’ll use her poisonous voice to raise money for whomever the nominee will be

She is a tool.

http://www.rumproast.com/images/uploads/Palin_Media_Whore_3.jpg

haven't any of you here put your obnoxious loud mouths into action and gone to NYC to participate or start a similar movement in your own town?

We have an Occupy Wall Street camp in Portland, Me. Truthfully, they make me feel old. They are camping out all night in tents, in the rain and the cold. You're right, most of these folks are young, which should scare the pants off Republican strategists. Yup, you folks have lost another generation of Americans, just like growing up during Nixon's terms made a life time Democrat out of me.

Dear First Read:

You are welcome to spend Christmas in Des Moines with Republican presidential wannabes.

But you'll be no place at all if you don't spend Christmas Night at Lambeau Field with the Green Bay Packers and the Chicago Bears.

Because one of those teams, at least, is a legitimate contender for something.

Outstanding post IR . . . it is ironic how even though it is clear as a bell that supply side economics hasn't worked . . . the media in this country continues to present it as if it is a valid economic theory . . . who needs "facts" when you can make more money lying? The phrase "morally bankrupt" comes to mind.

You have started the day off with the first and foremost information needed for the low information.

Interesting, because Jeffery Sachs new book, "The Price of Civilization", traces the stagnation of the middle class to globalization.

" Sachs argues that we have profoundly underestimated globalization’s long-term effects on our country, which create deep and largely unmet challenges with regard to jobs, incomes, poverty, and the environment. America’s single biggest economic failure, Sachs argues, is its inability to come to grips with the new global economic realities."

Now I'm not say that taxation is not part of the solution but as usual IR and Bev prefer simple scapegoating to explain complex issues. In other word real low information voters who can only comprehend talking points and bumper stickers. like "Buffet Rule" and "Pass the Jobs Bill"

looks like Obama kicked Palin's butt, just like he did Christie, Pawlenty and Trump. President Obama is taking down his Republican opponents, one by one....

Joanne Smith1, PLEASE, can you wait until the funeral for Mr. Jobs is over before you start using him in your political diatribe against Democrats.

Bill in Fairfax, Your salute to the genuis of Mr Jobs is shared by many. Thank you

Yeah Amy. That "youth" thing worked out real well for the Dems, didn't it? Nixon won by the biggest LANDLSIDE in history in 1972 (AFTER Libs got the voting age lowered to 18)...until 1980, when Reagan acheived an EVEN BIGGER landslide. Then Bush Sr won after two terms of Reagan. Then came the Clinton years where Bill only won because Perot took away votes from the Republicans. Then...George W Bush came and won TWO terms.

What happened Amy? Did all those young people that the Republicans turned off stay home in 72', 80', 84', 92', 96, 00' and 04' ???? LOL

Young people pull a very dirty trick on the Dems time and again: They get old. They get older and wiser and smarter. This is why they vote Republican. It's perfectly natural for a 20 year old working at Old Navy for $8/hr to be jealous of successful people. But when he's 30 and making money and supporting a family and has bills to pay...it's another story.

And don't foolishly state that the "OccupySpaceInsteadOf Working" crowd represents the young people of America. Watch the videos. The average kid in America does not look like these clowns.

Damage, I include you also in my post #1.22

In respect for his famiiy, co workers etc. Can you wait until after his funeral before using his name in your partisan posts here at FR.

Thank you

It's hurts, doesn't it NorthStar? It hurts to have the fallacy of a centralized all controlling government having any chance at success to improve the economy when it is thrown back in your face. You don't like my reference to Mr. Jobs, so just pick another successful CEO, maybe Fred Smith of FedEx or Jim Skinner of McDonalds.

And please, save your pious comments about me referencing Mr. Jobs. For a political party like the Democrats that turn funerals into political rallies, you really don't have a leg to stand on.

Globalization is secondary Alan. Straighten out Supply Side. Then level the playing field with tariffs to offset the subsidy's that other government give to thier industry. Then stop the tax breaks that are given to some of our industry's for off-shoring. I think that if you do some of these things you'll be right suprised at how well the American Worker can compete in the Global Economy.

Sorry Northstar, I didn't see your post until I'd answered JoannaSmith1 below. You're right, of course, we shouldn't use Steve Jobs' death for political ammunition.

Damage123, Maybe I should have said, the Republicans have lost another generation of informed, bright, young people. We all know there will always be un-informed voters who fall for the Republicans line.

And for your information, the older I get, the more liberal I become. I used to vote for the occasional Republican - NEVER again.

Excellent post and observations, IR.

So true, if the only thing people have known is trickle-down, supply side economics then they accept that economic belief as truth. Many of today's republicans know only Reaganomics, trickle down, tax cuts solve every problem, government is bad, regulation is bad. We older folks going back to JFK, LBJ, Nixon, Ford know what works for the economy and it isn't feed the rich and starve the middle. When the highest tax bracket on the rich was 90% (not that they actually paid 90%), the economy was strong, wealth was earned, greed was not rampant. Lowering the tax bracket to 50% made sense and did have an impact during recessions. The GOP claims that when Reagan lowered the high end bracket, it helped the economy during the recession. Of course it did because the high end tax bracket was 50% (not that they paid 50%), they were high enough that it made a difference in the short term. But 30 years of already low taxes means cutting them further has nearly zero impact on the economy and horrific impact on the national debt. We forget that the cost of living for people, rich, middle and poor rose during those 30 years and equally important is that the cost of living rose for our Government. Reagan raised taxes nearly every year he was President because he realized that TOO LOW a tax rate is unsustainable. Bush 43 was Reagan on steroids because he just kept lowering them and paid for nothing; the tax cuts mostly benefiting the wealthy who did not need the cuts did not help the economy. In fact, it helped collapse it. Where were the Tea Party folks during Bush's years? Where were the TP folks rallying to protest the mounting Bush debt? They were home happy as could be--a republican was in the WH and "deficits don't matter."

Northstar-- Remeber how the Dems turned the funerals od Paul Wellstone and Coretta Scott King into disgusting political rallies where they bashed Repubs who were in attendance? Apparently not. Get off your high horse.

For Mitt's biggest fan...

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-october-4-2011/indecision-2012---the-great-right-hope---the-manchurian-candi-dad

I don't care where my rosewood and ebony fretboards come from either...

" There was no demand for the products Jobs created until he created them. With Jobs, innovative supply came first. Demand caught up later"

Yea and verrily, Bill - you are correct (did I just say that??).

BUT- there is much more to our economic model than just the addition of new innovations that we all demand along the way. Agree?

"For a political party like the Democrats that turn funerals into political rallies, you really don't have a leg to stand on."

The Westborough Baptists are Demorcrats? Who knew??

DBO - BUT- there is much more to our economic model than just the addition of new innovations that we all demand along the way. Agree?

Certainly, but taking new ideas from the grease board to the consumers is the engine that drives the economy.

Dbo: The Westborough Baptists are Demorcrats? Who knew

Nice one Buzz. Keep'm coming. You part of their team?

Mixed Bag

From the latest Quinnipiac University national poll (conducted 9/27-10/3), released today:

Obama-39%

Romney-49%

President Obama's job approval also hit a new low at Quinnipiac:

41% approve, 55% disapprove

Mixed Bag take a gawk

Poll: The Affluent Support Higher Taxes — On the Rich

http://blogs.wsj.com/wealth/2011/10/05/the-affluent-support-higher-taxes-on-the-rich/

Poll: Most want taxes on millionaires increased
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20114988-503544.html

Since Mitt favors the rich, I seriously doubt those numbers will continue. Have you seen the Campaign to stop Romney?

Check it out...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/vp/44795444#44795444

The Republican/Tea Baggers hate Mitt Romney more than President Obama it appears

You'd think that after 3 years of Obama putting people out of work and giving them no hope for change, after getting everything he's asked for, that people, even libs would wake up to the fact that all the talk by Obama about transforming this country into the Soviet Union means that we all will be as poor as they were. How long are libs going to continue to apologize for their fearless leader? How long are they going to continue to blame Bush? How long are they going to continue to blame repubs, even though they've gone along with most everything Obama has wanted, or at least haven't been able to stop him? How long are libs going to blame repubs for not passing Obama's half-trillion dollar pork bill (think stimulus 1), when no dem has even proposed the bill in Congress and the repubs are the ones who have proposed it and are pushing for a vote on it? How long will it take for the libs to wake up to the fact that this bill that Obama has been pushing to get passed immediately, was never intended to be passed or even put before the Congress, but rather be used as a talking point to lie once again about repubs? Most importantly, how long will it take for libs to stop being so negative about repubs and start singing praise about all Obama has accomplished?

The Palestinians and Israelis have nothing on this bunch when it comes to dredging up every past transgression no matter how distant on the part of their opponents to justify whatever transgression or behavior they are trying to minimize of justify today...

So the "grass roots" protestors hate wall Street and Corporate America.

But they love Jobs. So what gives?

So tell me libbies - I love apple products more than most and was a fairly early adopter, but as neat and shiny as they are apple products are no where near as necessary in the activities of all of your daily living as OIL. Why is that?

Yet you all, and all those fantastic protestors just despise OIL.

Is it really Apple - the richest corp in the world is great, but Exxon Mobil is not?

If so why? Both have huge corporate profits, both exploit natural resources, and Apple exploits labor. In fact none of Apple's products are american made.

Yet no anti Apple sentiment?

Huh.

Windmills and tilting seem to be a mighty satisfying past time for you all.

Oh and Amy - another precious post. Yep Obama is kicking butt, a whooping and a stomping on Palin, Pawlenty, rump and Christie.

In fact two of those people were actually running against him.

Great job Amy!

@JoanneSmith!

@Damage

I am not being pious or on any high horse. I ,as a Minnesotan, was also appalled what happened at Senator Wellstone's family memorial.

To set the record straight. I work with the sick and the dying in my profession every day. Words of condolences are always appreciated. Anything else is tasteless.

Reminder that supply side doesn't always work so well.

JoAnnaSmith1 said:

Certainly, but taking new ideas from the grease board to the consumers is the engine that drives the economy.

Supply side didn't work so well when it came to MORTGAGE DERIVATIVES. Thus today's economy. Yeah they sure gave it to the consumers right JAS1.

Independent Redneck Va.

Globalization is secondary Alan. Straighten out Supply Side. Then level the playing field with tariffs to offset the subsidy's that other government give to thier industry. Then stop the tax breaks that are given to some of our industry's for off-shoring. I think that if you do some of these things you'll be right suprised at how well the American Worker can compete in the Global Economy.

So what is your evidence against Supply-Side? The current crisis I would say has been caused by a Real Estate bubble. I am no fan of the Bush tax rates but over the last decade it would seem to me that unemployment was fairly low.

Now if you are saying that these rates, and spending on two wars, an unfunded entitlement and other government spending has caused the deficit to balloon out of control I am in agreement. But to simply say that supply-side economics has failed because of the last two years is not supported by the current evidence and other factors affecting the economy.

To use the current Administration's argument, how do you know that unemployment would not be worse but for the current tax rates? Where is your evidence? And please don't quote the rates from the fifties, sixties and seventies. There was no global competition in those decades to speak of

Dcia: Supply side didn't work so well when it came to MORTGAGE DERIVATIVES. Thus today's economy. Yeah they sure gave it to the consumers right JAS1.

Well lets do it your way Dcia. ObamaNomics has been slogging along for nearly 3 years, and even Obama admits people's lives have not gotten better, and in fact have gotten worse in that time period. So now Obama and his friends in the Senate want another dose of the same thing, Stimulus II, used for the same things "Infrastructure and teachers unions" (he needs to re-shore up his base voters I guess). Obama promises 2 million jobs if passed into law, of course, Obama promises many things, but not too many of them work out.

Condolences to the family and friends of Steve Jobs, Rev Fred Shuttlesworth, and Mr. Nielsen of Nielsen ratings fame.

"All I want for Christmas...." is to spend it at the Iowa Caucus---not.

Bill, Fairfax, your thoughts about Steve Jobs were well said and much appreciated.

Once again, I see JS1 has shown her true colors--nothing like a heart filled with hate for liberals that takes the sad death of a great man who had a vision and turns it into a rant. You, JoAnnaSmith1, have reached the lowest rung on the scale of humankind.

Alan, NJ:

Tax cuts do not create jobs and that is one of the holy tenets of supply side economics.

Tax cuts do not increase tax revenue by magic.

So yeah, there are always other factors at play, but the truth is that if your economic theory can only work in a non-reality based bubble, then in fact the net effect is the same, it doesn't work.

Alan, NJ

You have started the day off with the first and foremost information needed for the low information.

Now I'm not say that taxation is not part of the solution but as usual IR and Bev prefer simple scapegoating to explain complex issues. In other word real low information voters who can only comprehend talking points and bumper stickers. like "Buffet Rule" and "Pass the Jobs Bill"

Alan, NJ

My statement was meant for people like you who are totally unaware of what's going on in the American political landscape.

In addition to the polls I cited in #1.35, here is another that contradicts your right wing lies and talking points...

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/Sections/NEWS/A_Politics/___Politics_Today_Stories_Teases/2-24-28-11.pdf

In the future please pay attention to your environment. Hopefully, it'll clear your head.

JoAnna1 -- The infrastructure part of the bill has bi-partisan support. The Chamber of Commerce, a strong lobbying firm for business agrees as well. You do know they represent business right? And you think our infrastructure is in great shape right JAS1....

You say: Well lets do it your way Dcia

Well I'm flattered that you think I have the power to create bills. If only that were true.

It's quite simple really Alan. If you bother to read the entire article that I gave you the link to you'll see that in 30 years Supply Side has never generated the expected Revenues as a % of GDP. It has also not resulted in increased Income. Middle class income has been stagnant for thirty years and in the last couple of years has actually decreased. So I can make my case very well. BTW that's why I try to repeat the salient points in my posts. Because Most folks don't bother the read the whole story before they put up thier reaction. Check it out and then get back to me.

Jody, Iowa: Once again, I see JS1 has shown her true colors-

Jody, still waiting on your claim for green energy companies you made the other day. You know, where you lied, ehh, claimed:

Jody, Iowa: It seems that some folks choose to ignore the many successful "green" energy companies nationwide,

Which ones would those be Jody? Which ones are producing a product at competitive prices without any additional government subsides? Which ones are paying off their government loans? Which ones don't have political connections to Obama and the Democratic party?

Those qualifications would produce a very short list, or no list at all.

You ran away last time and never answered this question. You tend to do that for your lies, ehh, claims.

Jody Iowa: You, JoAnnaSmith1, have reached the lowest rung on the scale of humankind.

From the likes of you and you ilk, that's a compliment.

In addition to the polls I cited in #1.35, here is another that contradicts your right wing lies and talking points...

I know I'm going to regret asking but what exactly does this poll contradict? I quote an admitted liberal author that his thesis is that the US has not dealt with the long-term effects of globalization and you respond with a poll? So I'll ask again what am I contradicting? That if you ask someone if they want someone who makes more money than they do to pay for the government that they'll answer yes? I could have told you that using common sense. Similarly If you ask someone if they are for a jobs bill during 9%+ unemployment, who is going to say no. I'll believe these polls when they start asking questions like, "Are YOU willing to pay higher taxes for the current government" and "Are YOU willing to pay higher taxes to pay for the President's job proposals".

@Nash -- Funny thing. The President just said in his press conference that tax cuts will create jobs.

The walking back on this one ought to be interesting LOL. but but I meant LOL.......

"Hiya kids, hiya, hiya." Froggy

THE AMERICAN ARISTOCRACY

IR, an excellent post and as usual, you are right on the money. I wwould like to add my opinions to you erudition.

Over the last 100 years we have created an American Aristocracy. Not based on royalty, or royal blood or their relations to kings and queens. Our Aristocracy is based on money and above all GREED.

Money, in America, is power. If you have the money you are truly above the law. As an investigator I have considerable personal experience with this. It doesn't matter how good my case is, how ironclad the evidence, how damning the crime, if you have enough money you can walk away from it. I've seen it happen time and time again. Just like the old European aristocrats. Laws are for the poor, the serfs, the indentured servants, to keep them in line. Aristocrats were above the law and so are ours.

Oh we don't call them Lords or Dukes or anything so European, they are CEO's and Corporate Presidents and so on. But it amounts to the same thing. They are America's Aristocracy with all the privileges and percs that title implies. At the turn of the 19th/20th Centuries we had the Rockefellers and the Vanderbilts and the Carnegies. People richer than any king or any god.

But they pale by comparison to those American Aristocrats created by Ronald Reagan and his voodoo economics. Those robber barons of the past can't hold a candle to a Rupert Murdoch or the Brothers' Koch. People so wealthy you could reduce their holdings by a hundred billion dollars and their standard of living would not suffer. They'd just lay off another 10,000 serfs and keep right on living the good life.

They can buy politicians, judges, hire the best lawyers and have legions of loyal wannabes to take the fall when they get caught doing something they shouldn't have.

That was NOT the principle this country was founded on and if it was then we've all been living a lie. We didn't throw off one King and all his Dukes and Earls and so on, just to create a new aristocracy. But somewhere we lost our way. I'm not sure when it happened. American Exceptionalism= Everyone except the rich.

But now the country finds itself in desperate financial trouble and who do our Aristocrats and their lap dog politicians want to carry the load? The ever-growing population of poor and the dwindling middle class.

It's got to stop. The French and the Russians put a stop to it. Their solution was violent, bloody and destructive. It did not end well most of the "haves" lost everything, including their lives.

The "Occupy Wall Street" movement may be the beginnings of the real American Revolution. I hope not. But frankly, I do not see this ending any other way. The rich and powerful, those who have most benefitted from this country and who stand to lose the most will not voluntarily give up a single thing. Their "bought-and-paid-for" politicians will do everything to protect them so they can continue to serve them in Washington. So, in the end, it will come down to the people and it will be decided in the streets.

When only 1% of the population holds more than half of a nation's wealth that's wrong. Just plain wrong. I don't have the solution, but that wealth needs to be redistributed so that more Americans and their children can have a decent life.

No one needs a forty room house, much less three of four of them. Nobody need a $200K car, much less several. Not when children go hungry and people cannot afford basic housing or health care. Not with millions out of work.

We need to start somewhere. The American Jobs Act is a good start. The millionaire tax is a good start. Supporting and improving the Affordable Health Care Act is abolutely necessary. Why are we so worried about the wealthy? They can take care of themselves. THEY ARE RICH!

Wake up America, we've got to take our country back. We've got to put the American dream within the reach of as many AMERICANS as possible. Help us do that.

Investigate and prosecute the Koch's and the Murdochs. Support reasonable redistribution of the wealth. The wealthy and especially the super-wealthy need to pay MORE than their fair share because they HAVE MORE.

It's not Class Warfare because we're not fighting... yet. We're stating our position and asking, hat in hand and with respect, "Please sir, I want more." But we will fight, if we have to.

"Plunk your magic twanger Froggy."

America held hostage and the American dream denied, day 11,229

Obama/Biden 2012

...and FR Conservatives continue to twist meanings in order to make mirages into arguments. "Supply Side" has NOTHING to do with supplying ideas...never has. IDEAS exist in every place, at every time.

"Supply Side" is EXCLUSIVELY about the idea that if we give enough money to the very wealthy it'll make the economy grow faster than it would under other approaches. It's a proven failure. Time to send it the way of the Dodo bird.

Beverly-- "Blockhead" is a slur used against Swedes. Did you not know that? Do you think I'm of Swedish heritage? Look it up. I'll allow you to paste what you find. Run along now. I'll be busy searching through your past posts to paste some unkind things you said about dead people.

Amy-- So only liberal kids are the smart ones, huh? Yeah. It must take a lot of brains to dye your hair green, pierce your face, bang on a drum and stand there with a dumbass look on your face when a reporter asks you what you would like to replace capitalism with.

in 30 years Supply Side has never generated the expected Revenues as a % of GDP. It has also not resulted in increased Income. Middle class income has been stagnant for thirty years and in the last couple of years has actually decreased.

Again the facts do not back up your statement, although I will admit there are outliers. First, where and who produced the targets that would support your statement "Expected Revenues". Are they in some budget somewhere? Second, if GDP is growing, then if the % stays the same, or even falls slightly, the actual amount of revenues collected will be the same or higher (you know the bigger pie argument). Third, the % of GDP from 2000 - 2007 averaged around 18%, with a high of 19.5 and a low of 16.1. The previous decade (Clinton) averaged around 18.5, with a high of 20.6 and a low of 17.5. Only in the last couple of years has the % of GDP fallen off the cliff and I can argue that as the tax rates have stayed the same for the last 11 years that the % revenues have been affected by other factors, banking crisis and real estate bubble that are unrelated to the tax rates.

Don't Carry - loved your "wisdom" on supply side and derivatives, although I suspect you know about as much about derivatives as you do about taxes.

So the Mighty Obama is again pontificating. This time imploring congress to pass his bill. Even has called old Harry to the woodshed - private meeting at the white house.

Why not take all those senate dems to the woodshed?

See gan g even Obama knows that those senate dems value the jobs more than supporting his sinking ship. If you don't believe me look at the aggregate of all the polls. Not just favorability, but trust in the economy, change in the economy, right track/wrong track.

As I suspected - we hit the tipping point about mid August. The "Preference Cascade" has started, and everybody can see Obama ain't got no clothes on.

Well everybody but Feisty, Amy, and Jody, god bless them.

The fun part is Anna Molly had know for a few months, and the light bulb just went off for my pal Drive By - just look at the nature and tone of their posts - flippant, yet defensive.

Soon it'll just be resignation.

Well it sure has been a fun run, eh gang?

Tax cuts do not create jobs and that is one of the holy tenets of supply side economics.

Tax cuts do not increase tax revenue by magic.

I disagree with your first statement and agree with your second.

Hey Skippy -- Want to educate us some more why the Senate can't vote on what you have claimed to be a "revenue bill" first? I'd be happy to hear how you will make excuses and walk those educational tidbits on the Constitution you have been touting. LOL. OOPS, looks like the Senate is going to vote first!

"Supply Side" is EXCLUSIVELY about the idea that if we give enough money to the very wealthy it'll make the economy grow faster than it would under other approaches. It's a proven failure. Time to send it the way of the Dodo bird.

But you are willing to bet Supply Side economics will work for a high speed train system? Where is the demand? However, you are willing to spend billions of taxpayers money to create a product that has no current demand.

Ray-4054460

@Nash -- Funny thing. The President just said in his press conference that tax cuts will create jobs.

The walking back on this one ought to be interesting LOL. but but I meant LOL.......

Ray

Listening sounds easy, but in your case it's very difficult. Maybe, you have a mental or hearing impairmennt??? The President stated independent anylasis poinnt to 1.9 million jobs being created under his plan.

If you do have a hearing impairment, try reading something other than Heritage and Cato blogs so you can compare and contrast.

Reading is fundamental.

Sheesh -- Being concise is not exactly Obama's strong suit. Each question results in a five minute lecture.

@Beverly -- Actually I did hear and hear correctly. Obama said that the tax breaks/cuts for small business will create more jobs for example veterans. Hire a vet get a tax break. That's a tax cut anyway you slice it.

Damn it must be hard to be a libbie.

So by now you all heard your guy - the mighty and all powerful Obama say "Tax cuts create jobs."

And of course this is exactly what he said last Dec.

So I don't suppose any of you libbies care top comment?

Was he 1. wrong, 2. being threatened by the Kochs, 3. high?

Super funny, or just abjectly dis-heartening for you all?

Ray:

There is a difference between a targeted tax cut to support a desired outcome that benefits the country and corporate welfare. . . but you already knew that, right?

I am happy to know that you are watching the President's press conference . . . maybe you will learn something? :o)

P.S. Powerful post skip.

@Nash -- Your quote says nothing about targeted anything. You made a blanket statement and the only reason you are walking it back is because you are wrong. In fact his speech/conference/campaign pitch has proven two of you wrong on here just showing that you post lies and non facts and faulty opinions. Thanks Mr. President LOL!

Tax cuts do not create jobs and that is one of the holy tenets of supply side economics.

What's up, First Read radicals? Busy making sure the country doesn't fix anything today?

Just making sure.

There is a difference between a targeted tax cut to support a desired outcome that benefits the country and corporate welfare. . . but you already knew that, right?

And the tax breaks for electric vehicles would be? ...and the tax breaks for ethanol? ...and the tax breaks for oil exploration?

So basically one man's tax break is another man's corporate welfare. Be pro-market not pro-business, end all the tax breaks and let the market pick the winners.

No,m no Nash - back that statement up, if you can.

Why are targeted tax credits better than "corporate welfare?"

Both were put in place by congress, both are totally legal and all were designed for a stated purpose - which appears in the IRC itself.

Nash making a naked assertion is easy. N ow back it up with some actual thought.

Again, if you can.

Spanky -- Enough to know both can be destructive. ; ) I suspect you know that as well.

What a great loss to have lost Steve Jobs.

A visionary. An inventor, of products and of dreams. The best of American entrepreneurship.

He was willing to imagine where others could not and did not. He was willing to invest and fail where others dared not. He invested his time, money and genius, not to make himself wealthy but to make the rest of us better.

We can learn a lot by remembering who Steve Jobs was, what he did and how he did it. And how he changed us in the process.

Spanky:

Reality backs me up . . . check it out. I am not your personal tutor . . . educate yourself.

Ray:

I am sorry you are not sophisticated enough to comprehend nuance or process more than one concept at a time. If you are happy with your simplistic thinking process, I am too.

@Spanky -- You & I just got hit with the ADAA "dodge, dip, dive, duck and dodge." LOL! Typical left response when they can't back up innuendos -- do your own research and I am a much more complex thinker than you.

Golly fielden - yu sure about that?

He ran a HUGE corporation - and all corps are evil, right? Or did Apple pay it's fair share? Did it manufacture in the US? Did it not exploit precious resources?

How did what Jobs did make us better than say EXXON, or Gibson guitars?

Which is more important in you every day life fielden - Apple or Exxon? Computers and Ipods, or gasoline and heating oil?

Apple partakes in corporate greed - it could open an assembly plant or two here, and make less money, but it did not. Why not fielden - if Jobs was not about making himself wealthy?

I think Jobs was great, but other than shiny, his products were not as important as so many of the "Corporate Masters" you all deride here everyday.

Now why is that? As the CEO of the world's biggest Corp. he is by definition "the man."

Spanky:

So the "grass roots" protestors hate wall Street and Corporate America.

But they love Jobs. So what gives?

Much as I admire Steve Jobs, I think we should step back a little and examine the supply-side revisionism that we are hearing from conservatives this morning.

This little chart shows you a brief timeline of the history of computers.

http://inventors.about.com/library/blcoindex.htm

Obviously, almost any innovative product -- like the automobile -- appears to begin on the supply side. If it wasn't there before, how can there be demand for it?

But often, innovation follows demand.

Personal computers were the innovation that followed the demand for personal applications of rapidly developing computer technology.

In fact, if you review the chart, you will see that the demand for "consumer" computers predates the Apple.

Apple wasn't even the most popular early consumer computer. Most of us probably cut our personal computing teeth on the Tandy TRS-80 or the IBM PC.

So, Apple didn't create the demand. Apple merely built the better mousetrap, and has continued to build on that success.

But for a long time, Apple occupied a small, high-end, niche market. In fact, Apple nearly failed, and at one point had to be bailed out through a collaboration with Microsoft.

Many of you probably don't remember that, but I do.

http://news.cnet.com/2100-1001-202143.html

Gates, who appeared via satellite link, and Apple director Steve Jobs made the announcement here today at the Macworld Expo trade show.

In fact, I still remember how Apple shareholders booed at the meeting when Gates appeared on the big screen.

Take nothing away from Jobs. But Apple's success with PCs is demand-side based.

Apple didn't invent the cell phone, either. It just made a better one.

Apple didn't invent "pad" computing. Apple just made a better one.

Apple built better products because there was demand to support better products.

Spanky: Why are targeted tax credits better than "corporate welfare?"

Nash:Reality backs me up . . . check it out. I am not your personal tutor . . . educate yourself

Solyndra: Tax credits, or corporate welfare?

And is a political payoff part of corporate welfare?

And the better mousetrap was put together in sweatshops in China where 60,000 workers lived and worked in the factories 60 hours per week at $100 per month and giving half back to the factory for room and board. Now that didn't take away American jobs for lower costs now did it.

What does that mean Nash -"reality backs me up."

Uh, no it does not. And neither does you cop out.

Come on Nash - just admit it. You have no idea how or why tax creditsdiffer from regular old deductions. It's like you comments on economic models below - clueless. Also a little sad, and very misinformed.

See Nash - you don't have a real clue, and that's why you think the way you do. Knowledge is power.

But I can see you prefer ignorance. You call Nash, but you don't get to hide behind cute saying. You got busted. Now get out there and do some research. You'll feel better, trust me. :)

Anna Molly [and fielden]:

All well and good, but 1. I love the products - frigging just blew $3k two weeks ago getting my heir a new MacBook Pro, the "spare" and Ipad 2, and some other shiny stuff;

2. In 2003 I bought Aple stock at $29, a little later it split, and now it sits at just shy of $400.

Apple makes everything using cheap/child labor. It's pure corporate greed and is fantastic to guys like me.

Innovation/improvement means little, all about the shiny.

Damage123: Palin hasn't been a "politician" for a few years now. Maybe you need to move on. I wonder if her decision not to run was based partly on the incident a few weeks ago where a hysterical, hate-filled liberal in a bar screamed at her that her "mother is a f***ing whore" and "your mother is the anti-Christ",,,? With that kind of hatred being thrown your way by unhinged liberals it will make you think twice about running.

So it’s okay when Republicans demonize this group of people for 10 years and trample on their civil rights as a campaign tool to get re-elected. Then you’re surprised they hate you? Moron.

You radicals just get your fists out and start actually punching each other already. Stop with the online sissy fighting and stop being cowards. It is high time you get this thing resolved between yourselves physically, since that is what you all seem to insist you are heading for already.

AM: Apple didn't invent "pad" computing. Apple just made a better one

And Henry Ford didn't invent the horse. Ford just made a bigger horse.

AM: Apple built better products because there was demand to support better products

Not really. People used to have their little tape players that they carried with them, then it was a CD player. Movies where on tape, and that was a big jump because before that time, you had to go to the theaters to watch one. The world would have gone on just fine without anything new. The technology needed to bring this to where we are today is truly innovative. The technologies developed by private industry to support these innovations are works of genius. Each of one of these ideas we could have done without, but it's from people at Apple, Cisco, Dell, FedEx, Motorola, and others that drive the improvement of their products and services that we the people benefit from.

And notice the government doesn't subsidize these companies.

But it looks like Oprah will need a "stimulus" package. Her buddy Obama will see she is subsidized on OWN.

Saying supply side economics has never worked is a typical leftist lie. It has ALWAYS worked from Kennedy to Reagan to Bush 2. It is demand side economics that has failed miserably every time it's been tried.

We have not been practicing supply side since democrats took over congress in Jan 2007, we have been practicing demand side. That's what stimulus is, demand side. How has that worked the last four plus years????

Speaking the truth about Steve Jobs does him honor, it's the leftist idiots that extol his virtues then deride supply side, free market capitalism that are spitting on his grave. They are against everything he stood for, everything he achieved. You do all know that Apple products are buit in China don't you?

All you libbies whine about how the system isn't working and how systemic the issue is. You have very short memories, just four plus years ago, democrats inherited 4.6% unemployment and a robust economy when they took over congress Jan 2007. It took them less than two years to destroy that and leave us where we are now.

The reason republicans have the house is because democrats had total control of government for two years and made things worse. Controlling on house only allows republicans to block further damage, they cannot fix the economy because the other two thirds will not give up their failed policies. Only 2012, when the rest of the socialists are flushed, will jobs come back.

JoAnna:

And Henry Ford didn't invent the horse. Ford just made a bigger horse.

Mercy me. Now THERE's a false analogy, if ever there was.

But what else would I expect?

All you have proven with your reply is that demand drives innovation.

Dear Spanky:

I am not seeking your approval darling. I think I have demonstrated that I have the ability to back up what I say . . . the thing is, you and Ray are just not worth it. Ya'll are not truthseekers . . . you are #$@ stirrers. I just don't have the time. Sorry.

Believe what you want Spanky . . . I have never seen you do anything other than that anywho. :o)

"Apple makes everything using cheap/child labor. It's pure corporate greed and is fantastic to guys like me.

Innovation/improvement means little, all about the shiny."

"...the shiny..."!

OMG!

lol

I poke the stick into the First Read anthole, Spank.

You do the same.

But you stir it around like I never could.

I admire that...sort of.

Kinda...

Nevermind.

Barack Obama is going after Steve Jobs' widow for more money because she is "rich" EVEN THOUGH Steve Jobs created real jobs and real wealth for everybody using capitalism SUCCESS is so offensive to President Foodstamps and the other Leftists

Alan That piece that I put up this morning was by David Kay Johnston. A Pulitzer Prize Economist. I used it to back up my opinion. If you'd bothered to use the link that I so generously supplied you you would see plenty of charts and things to back up my opinion. So far from you the only thing I've got for backup is an article on Globalization. Now we can discuss that if you'd like. The rest of what you have put up there is just your opinion and without backup it's worth just about what I'd be willing to pay for it. You know what the say opinions are worth don't you there Sport.

Globalization really is a big factor regardless of your political leanings. Cheaper labor, unfair trade practices, and us being tied into the world's economies took a big toll on us.

Trickle down people have to acknowledge that this is not a closed system anymore and any effect of wealth creating jobs can create them anywhere and that anywhere seems to mostly be offshore. Depending on wealth to create jobs isn't going to create many if any jobs here, although it may create jobs in other countries.

Keynsian leaning people are also stuck in the same unclosed model so that anything you do to affect your own economy has little or no effect on other economies so effects are muted. Investments and stimulus efforts have to much bigger that what we've tried so far to have any real and lasting effects. Something on the scale of the extended works programs implemented after the Great Depression may be more on track to get us back on track.

In any case, things don't look good long term and unless we can re-balance the effects of globalization on our offshore manufacturing, trade imbalances, and currency valuation issues, this economic and employment situation isn't going to improve much regardless of who is in the White House or Congress.

Anybody who tells you they can turn this around quickly based on their past record, experience, or whatever plans they have is blowing smoke or in denial. At least Obama has leveled with the American people about this being a long haul to get back on track. It not what people want to hear, but promising quick or simple fixes to long running complex problems may play well for sound bites but isn't going to work and is just kicking the can down the road for future generations. Our leaders (and all of us, too) need to put aside partisanship and work together on fixing this thing regardless of who might get credit or political points. That's unlikely to happen in an election year and now an election year seems to have 24 months instead of 12.

Hey, how much does the GOP pay you guys to post on these blogs? No seriously, I want to know. Is it by the hour, by the post or by the word?

There is simply no way just regular people posting on their lunch hours or coffee breaks could show up in such large swarms all spouting the same talking points all at once. You guys gotta be paid trolls.

So, where is your boiler room located? Or is this a telecommute gig?

Do they give you some kind of handout or email or fax with the days talking points?

Just curious, I might like to look into it. My theory is all you guys with numbers after your fake name are trolls and those numbers are your employment ID's or something that helps you get paid. Am I right?

I'm going to need some supplemental income when I retire in a couple of years and if I can get paid by the word and work from home this would be a pretty good gig for me and my wife. Help us out in our golden years. It would sure beat being a Wal-Mart greeter.

Obama/Biden 2012

Tax cuts create jobs when they are given after the job is created, not before.

skip-

How much is the DNC paying YOU?

If you can ask your question...

I can ask mine, no?

How much?

I hope (for your sake) they aren't paying you what you're worth.

Romney/Rubio 2012.

So far from you the only thing I've got for backup is an article on Globalization. Now we can discuss that if you'd like. The rest of what you have put up there is just your opinion and without backup it's worth just about what I'd be willing to pay for it. You know what the say opinions are worth don't you there Sport.

Not opinion just the facts mam!

Bureau of Labor Statistics showing Unemployment Rates by month over the last decade.

""

Historical Source of Revenue as Share of GDP

"www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=205"

Now the funny thing about the article you quote is that by documenting all the payroll taxes that the poor pay, exposes the fact that SS, Medicare etc are not walled off from the general tax revenues. Also, exposed when the President stated that SS checks may not be paid unless we raised the debt limit. So basically SS is 6% - 12% tax on everybody. And SS and Medicare are programs that are paid for out of general revenues and mot by targeted taxes. as far as I can see you should be arguing for a single tax system that is transparent so that we can see what everybody pays.

Thanks Alan. Gives me a better idea of where your coming from. See how that works?

Thanks Alan. Gives me a better idea of where your coming from. See how that works?

I included the links but newsvine keeps taking them out...copyright problems or something.

JAS1:

We saw this week that Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) totally lost his mind when legislation he voted for and that went into law caused Bank of America to raise their fees on consumers. Senator Durbin was indignant that capitalism worked as expected when his actions increased the costs to the banks, and those costs were passed on to the consumer. Mr. Durbin demand the offending bank be boycotted. Image that, a Senator calling for a boycott of a private American company. The man is clueless, and he's not alone, his supporters are too.

I guess all the other banks and credit unions haven't been exposed to Dodd/Frank. After all, it hasn't "caused" them to raise their Debit card fees.

I resent the fact too that you seem to speak for Liberals all the time. Speak for yourself because you don't know sh** about Liberals.

Also, with all the promises you've made for the Republicans and how well they'll govern, I hope they live up to all your expectations if they come to even more power. After all, they've done so well improving things since taking the House in 2010.

Alan Contact Newsvine because they propably have you listed as a new user or your account has inadvertently reverted to new user status. Seriously It does make a difference in the quality of the discussion.

Spanky I was trying to make a respectful statement. And you turn it into fodder. Why should that surprise me?

You can denigrate me, and Anna Molly and Northstar and Steve Jobs. You are merely showing your hatred and insensitivity. Again, I should have expected that from you.

Conservatives are so focused on the money that they cannot see beyond that. You insist on politicizing everything while taunting others. And you claim liberals don't understand.

Sad.

Iowa caucus on Christmas Day? First of all, it'll have to be on or around late Dec. Maybe around, Dec. 24th or the day after Christmas Dec. 26th or so. Either way, the sooner they get the caucus out of the way, the sooner they can start the primaries. Then you'll see the field narrow very quickly and that would be good. Because the party would wind up with a frontrunner, imagine that.

This is how the Liberals get it all wrong. They can't stand the successful people of the world. They expect those successful people some how owe them something other than the products they have purchased from these successful people. "They aren't taxed enough" the Liberals say. "It's our money, they stole it" say the Liberals. "Their wealth is as much our wealth" say the Liberals. Wrong on all accounts. Liberals want to strangle the very people that make their lives better each and ever day, and they want the federal government to do it for them.

Ah yes, the Republican Utopia. Where the top 1% gain an ever increasing share of the GDP while the other 99% slide into abject poverty...the American way! How do the rich make our lives better each and every day? By not taking on a reasonable tax burden, by off-shoring jobs, by investing in foreign manufacturing instead of our own...is that really the American way?

You truly are a troll...how much does FreedomWorks pay you for this sludge?

Great post remembering a great man John B . . . thanks.

Thank you John B. The Rev. Shuttlesworth reminds us of a time when some folks stood for what's right rather than political expediancy. No matter what the cost is. I'm glad that head was so hard because without it and more like it we wouldn't have had Justice.

Well said, John B. Your quote of his hard head comment made me smile. What a hero he was leading thousands of other heroes in the fight for civil rights.

....and RIP rich, white, male, capitalist Steve Jobs. Although liberals and socialists would like to see your kind brought down and put in your place, you changed the world.

Damage:

Your racial obsession has really handicapped you. . . praying for ya.

Speaking of banks Nash - have you seen this?

At a rally in St. Louis on August 12, 2011, several people with savings and checking accounts at Bank of America tried to walk into the building to close their accounts. The suits and the police they had there to back them up wouldn't allow it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KtI85Zc6Oik&feature=player_detailpage

How is this LEGAL?

Good post, Nash. Occupy Des Moines will be Sunday at our state capital building.

There are a lot of us 99%ers out here, and we're sick of the radical upward redistribution of wealth which never quite manages to trickle back down.

Good post -- There needs to be more awareness in this area. New reports now out that a major corporation's profits are up 125% over last years while reducing jobs in this country and employing more overseas. Enough is enough. It has to stop!!!

Well, If its an obvious attempt to disrupt business for another purpose I could see them telling him to go to another branch where the media and "protesters" are not so obvious! Im NOT with BOA on this increase, but you can directly tie this back to Mr Durbins attempt to punish banks. As with any other business when the gov. imposes new "fee's" they always get passed on to the customer. You think if Apple were assessed a "fee" you dont think they would pass it on in the cost of their products. They are in business to make money, not give money away!

All this energy going into useless "Occupy ........." demonstrations. If these people are so concerned and smart wouldn't you think they could use their apparently abundant spare time in doing something useful? For the most part demonstrations and protests are relevant only to those carrying the signs (mostly say hooray for our side). Who actually changes their mind based upon a demonstration or protest - especially the ones to whom the protest is directed?

Mark in SoCal:

Your post is beyond ironic bordering on sad . . . have you ever heard about the Civil Rights Movement? Arab Spring? New Coke? :o)

Buy a clue Mark. Please.

Born out of the Tea Party were Politicians whose values were the same as the Tea Parties.

Many of these politicians now occupy offices in the halls of Congress.

Not a chance the same thing happens with the "Occupiers".

Nashville you have to take all of these events as the event they represent. If you start lumping them together where do you end? Open revolution.

Actually jolly, what you end up with is "change we can believe in" . . . :o)

Nashville_fan,

You forgot the Orange Movement in Ukraine (that one was awesome), etc.....

I said "for the most part." Certainly there have been effective demonstrations/ protests/ revolutions. But even those - the people taking to the streets get the publicity but the real change and progress comes from those working hard behind the scenes.

In the present instance (the Occupy movement) I see absolutely no benefit to what the Occupiers are doing. We all know times are hard, certain business practices are unfair, etc. I personally am working very hard to ride this out, keep my people on the payroll, and have no tolerance for people who can somehow spare weeks at a time to camp out in the park. I do not see our system of governance to be so broken that necessary change can not be effected through due process.

Call me naive. Just not ironic.

Nashville, considering present economic conditions I am hard-pressed to buy a clue. I, however, resolve not take to the street with a "Wall Street Cheated Me Out Of A Clue" sign - if I am to afford said clue I shall come across it the old-fashioned way, I'll earn it.

Good to see Nashville and Des Moines joining Occupy Wall Street. This movement will continue to grow.

Mark:

What product or service does Wall Street provide to "earn" the money they make? Creating bogus economic products to sell and then playing dumb when folks lose all their money is not "earning", that's grand theft.

But nice try though.

So the very fact that there is something like the "Occupy" protest goes to show there was no Hope and Change.

More bad news for Obama - more evidence he is just same old, same old.

Nash - it appears you do not understand the difference between a Product, and a Service. Investment bankers, like lawyers, doctors, accountants real estate professionals... do not provide product. They provide services.

Just because you are ignorant of those services does not mean they do not provide them.

You are funny. Ignorant, but precious.

Spanky:

You are pretty precious yourself . . . and you didn't answer the question . . . what is the service that is being provided?

And what about these "services" warrants such a huge payday? What special skills are being employed, other than insider knowledge of scams in progress?

Nashers: What product or service does Wall Street provide to "earn" the money they make?

They provide a place to buy/sell capital to the publicly owned companies and corporations. It's purpose is to bring together entrepreneurs and venture capitalists to analyze, buy and sell, and capitalize the businesses they believe will be successful. Doing these duties are highly technical with the many investors using a variety of economic models used to determine the potential profitablity of companies, and the risks involved in investing in them.

Nash - a whole host of investment services were provided. Do you have an investment broker? Those bastards are always peddling their wares. Me, I usually tell them to shove them, they suck.

The payday comes from the market Nash. Lots of morons with no skills get huge paydays in all sorts of area all the time. You know this.

Life ain't fair, Nash, and the last thing a government can do it make it fair.

But tellus Nash - do you have any interaction with wall street beyond your 401k? If not, then this is not an issue you know anything about.

JoAnna:

Why do all these high fallutin' "economic models" always fail to catch the Bernie Madoff's, Richard Scrushy's, and Enron's? We got all these smart folks who can't see a scam in progress over and over again, so what are we paying them for again? Or maybe they do see it, but they are getting rich off of it?

And when the #@#$ hits the fan, what do they say? The evil poor people MADE US loan them the money!

Personal responsibility indeed.

Spanky:

It became my business when they used my tax dollars to bail themselves out and pay themselves bonuses, thanks. I don't share your view that the folks on Wall Street are some type of divinely endowed group that cannot be questioned. They are the source of a whole lot of #$@ ups, so it is time for some answers.

Nash? Really - economic models are supposed to predict criminal behavior?

huh.

Now I think you are smarter than that, but I'm really starting to wonder.

Oh and Madoff and Enron was private money, poorly invested by greedy smucks. I don't know who or what Scrushy did, but yur cited examples do not remotely support the position you are attempting to argue.

Off day Nash?

So angry Nashers. It is your nature.

Bernie Madoff was crook. He told people they were beating the market, when in fact they were not. A crook is a crook. If your invested with a broker like Bernie, and your beating the market year over year over year, you should be suspicious of how that can be. Personal responsibility indeed.

Crooks lurk everywhere Nashers. It's you responsibility to invest your money wisely with people you trust, and then keep a close eye on them.

You invest much Nash? Anything? Do you know anything about how this works? Or do you just love to rant?

Nashy: And when the #@#$ hits the fan, what do they say? The evil poor people MADE US loan them the money

I wouldn't qualify the poor as evil, but you want to, be my quest.

Laws were in place that allowed banks to not assume the risk of people that did not qualify for loans. Those laws were changed to require that those banks give those people a second look and those loans where allocated to them. We see the results.

Which is why government needs to stay out of private business Nash.

Thanks for making my point. The dumbest of all are the idiots in the SEC - the ones who watch so much porn they have to bring in new computers cause their old ones fill up too quick.

I don't like or trust stock brokers, but they provide a SERVICE. You can use it or not, it's YOUR chioce.

Nashville,

Just got back to the string here (actually have time to participate in a discussion here today!!).

I think JoAnna answered your question to a great extent.

Nashville, I would say scams and "special skills" are the exception rather than the norm. Few traders or companies really want that kind of exposure on the market. Dishonest players get the lion's share of the publicity.

Let me use the following analogy for your question regarding huge payoffs -

Let's take Kobe Bryant for an example. Now I am not sure what shoe brand he is peddling now, but the makers of brand X shoe pay him what appears to be an obscene amount of money for the endorsement. When Kobe appears in a television commercial performing some stunning razzle-dazzle move wearing brand X shoes the sales generated by that commercial are far in excess of the what the brand X shoe people are paying Kobe. Kobe makes a ridiculous amount of money providing a service that brings in an even more ridiculous amount of money for brand X shoes.

Mark:

Is Kobe Bryant too big to fail? Is he getting bailed out with my money? The problem is not folks making money, the problem is folks gaming the system so that they always win, and us "little people" always lose. . . but they are "too big to fail" . . . so then I am forced to give them MY MONEY for them to do it all again.

I call bullsh!t.

Spanky:

Sorry if my examples to fit into your preformed narratives. . . reality rarely does.

Nashville,

Fair enough. And I think the "too big to fail" is absurd.

Kobe was my analogy for big service payoffs, not bailouts. I am not a big fan of bailouts. I am a fan of Kobe.

I don't see anyone "always winning" on Wall Street. The crooks appear to for a time, I'll grant you.

And seriously, us little-uns don't always loose. Sucks when you do, though.

Nashville fan:

You don't get it. If we stopped regulatin' 'em, they'd stop cheatin', stealin', thievin', lyin' and comin' up with more record profits, dontcha know?

Excuse me, someone's tricklin' on my leg and tellin' me it's rainin'.

You don't get it. If we stopped regulatin' 'em, they'd stop cheatin', stealin', thievin', lyin' and comin' up with more record profits, dontcha know?

Excuse me, someone's tricklin' on my leg and tellin' me it's rainin'.

Couldn't have said it better myself. The line "regulators didn't catch the cheating so we shouldn't have regulations" is so devoid of both common sense and logic it should immediately be laughed out of any discussion. The world is in constant flux. That's an argument for continuing evaluation of and adjustment to regulation, not an argument for radically changing the USA into an Ayn Rand fantasy world as Conservatives dream.

These things were all developed because of the 1%-ers,

Not true. Steve Jobs created his company in his parents' garage. Innovation comes up from the very same type of kids you are deriding. The current system is stifling the upward mobility embodied by Steve Jobs' career. That's what they are protesting. The banks are making money off checking account fees, not off funding start-ups. Money is bottled up by the establishment and it's killing our country and thwarting these young people's ambitions.

Amy, what are you talking about? All start up companies have humble beginnings. It's hard work that makes them successful.

Amy B: Innovation comes up from the very same type of kids you are deriding.

Really? Like the Occupy Where Ever kiddies? What are the innovating?

The only entity that is stopping upward mobility is the government itself. Explain how unemployment checks encourage upward mobility. Explain how higher taxes on who ever the Democrats and Obama decide are rich today encourages upward mobility. How does more people going on food stamps encourage upward mobility? How does protests against profits encourage upward mobility?

Money is bottled up by the establishment and it's killing our country and thwarting these young people's ambitions.

Have you seen the cost of credit today Amy? Please explain, is it higher or lower than when Mr. Jobs started Apple? Something is bottled up alright, from all the taxes and regulations placed on companies.

Oh, the poor young people. Amy, do you really think Steve Jobs would have ever considered whining about bank fees instead of hunkering down in his parent's garage and creating something?

Certainly not everyone is a Steve Jobs. But I believe the people who take responsibility for themselves, adapt, accept conditions for what they are now are the ones who are going to succeed and eventually make things better.

Parks and demonstration and....hysterical hypocrisy?

http://www.thedailyshow.com/#tool_tip_0

another take...

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/business/july-dec11/wallstreet_10-05.html

Your protesters are rabble whereas my protesters are PATRIOTS!...

JoAnna your contempt for the average American is showing again, that is some lame meaningless blather even for you, so what are people supposed to do? I realize that people of your ilk would like to “stay the course” and allow corporate America to continue to rape the American Citizen to their hearts content, bribe Congress into keeping laws and regulations skewed exclusively to the top 2%’s liking, but 98% of America thinks maybe some adjustments are required, and if government continues to side with the rich/corporate robber barons the People will effect that change by what ever means necessary, it would be best for everyone concerned if the People were not put in that position, but make no mistake JoAnna you and the fat cats you swoon over are going to have to become part of the solution not the problem.

w bush: JoAnna your contempt for the average American is showing again, that is some lame meaningless blather even for you, so what are people supposed to do?

I guess sitting on a street corner banging a drum and holding up signs is the answer.

wbush: bribe Congress into keeping laws and regulations skewed exclusively to the top 2%’s liking,

I'm for a flat tax, similar to what the Presidents Debt Commission recommended nearly a year ago. It takes out all the favoritism and manipulation by Congress to pay off their supporters. It's makes Congresses job easy because they won't have to meet with lobbyists ever day. You for that flat tax w bush? Or does it matter to you that who gets favoritism continues. And does that count as to what change the 98% you speak of want?

JoAnnaSmith1 and

Mark in SoCal

I don't know your ages, but when I was graduating from high school in 1976, college was well within the reach of middle class kids like me. Opportunites were there for us that aren't there for kids today. In my twenties, I worked in restaurants my young friends founded, restaurants that started Portland, Maine on it's road to being a mecca for foodies. ( Well, we didn't invent computers, but we did create a local industry.) It's fascinating to me, to look back, and see how Portland evolved through the passions of it's young people.

My Dad told me once: no one makes it by themselves. When you look at the careers of people like Bill Gates or Barack Obama, or Mitt Romney, or Hank Williams JR, you see they developed in an environment that supported their talents, and made their achievments possible. This is what is scary about today's environment: the rich got richer and pulled the ladder up with them. I think it's dangerous and inaccurate to think geniuses will always "make it" no matter the obstacles put in front of them. The truth is, talent needs money.

Amy: I don't know your ages, but when I was graduating from high school in 1976, college was well within the reach of middle class kids like me.

At local community college, enrollment 12,000, it's not small, you can get a full time student through a year at about $200 a credit hour. 30 credit hours a year, that's $6000. Is that too expensive?

I know w bush - you all could go out get a good education, get a job, work hard, invest, and pay taxes.

You know like the rest of us.

So other than the unions people how many of the "99%-ers" have done that?

I have seen many college grads complaining about not being able to get a job. Their majors - liberal arts, one was Flute, and other great majors that do nothing to assist in employment.

More bad choices w bush. You all seem to be mighty good at that.

How about you w bush - what did you major in?

Amy,

I graduated high school in 1979.

Portland is one of the few places I have not been; when I do get there I'll be looking forward to some good food!

Though college may not be as available (and that may not be such a bad thing, but that is another discussion), opportunity exists. This is a very different world from 30 years ago. I believe present economic conditions are as much a result of changing consumer behavior and habits as tax rates and regulation (also another discussion altogether).

Mrs. Mark is a professional chef, and she lost her job a year and a half ago. The food world is viciously competitive but she created a niche and though it has been very hard she has seen success in her venture.

Certainly times are hard, but maybe we need to view "opportunity" through different lenses than we have in the past. The world is changing rapidly and I don't think we are keeping up and we are struggling to figure out why and how.

Talent most definitely needs money. Money is always looking for talent and innovation. Successful people seek out environments that foster and encourage their progress.

Amy, Obama is in charge of all student loans.

If loans are an issue blame him.

Now we all know the costs of college has skyrocketed and is ridiculous, but that's the libbies friends - no one in gov would ever seek to bring costs down, which needs to be done, cause that'd take money out of the libbie professor's pockets.

Or should one year f college really cost $50,000?

Mark in So -Cal -- The push for "crowd funding" is gaining traction and hopefully will help with the funding issues most start-ups and innovators are up against.

As for making college more accessible/affordable via student loans....the private loans banks made charged a much higher interest rate than the current option available through the government. Many argue that government doesn't belong in the loan business but isn't that what they were doing when they backed up private bank student loans with government guarantees? Under the new option government collects the interest from these loans and uses it for various means. Right or wrong it has helped lower the cost of taking out a loan. The problem, as a Republican member of Congress has made a case for, is the predators in the "for profit" outfits who aggressively pursue young high school graduates to fill up their businesses, uh, I mean institutes of higher learning....sarcasm intended. How do they fill all those seats? High pressure tactics based on false promises and a well oiled machine that helps those students get loans but not necessarily an education to go along with it.

JS1 - redo your math - a 4 year degree from your community college would cost $24,000. That's more than my annual take home pay.

Tea party doesn't compromise, not even with other republicans <see John Boehner's antics in the House>.

that's what makes them the Tea Party.

also what makes them so fascinating to watch. Even the hardcore Progressives on this board do little more than comment on the Tea Party. Even though it's all derogatory, they do drive the conversation.

I'm still looking for positive things to say about the Tea Party...

Not to bash your comment but I think the world DID say these things about him when he was alive. They devoured his accompishments in unheard of volume. How many product releases can you recall that had people lining up around the block to be the first to have them?

Steve Jobs was a visionary, for sure. He was also a Capitalist of the highest order! He took an idea, turned it into a product and never looked back! No telling how many jobs he created over the years, but it was a lot, to be sure! He and his teams of EMPLOYEES constantly pushed the envelope of technology.

The simple fact is: It takes MONEY to make MONEY... He could NEVER have done this on his own! He probably spent BILLIONS employing the brightest minds to make his visions a reality. He SPENT money that went into the economy, most of it on things that failed time and again until all the pieces fell into place and the dream became a reality that people wanted and needed.

I have never been a FAN of Apple but that is just me. However, I do give credit where credit is due! We will have to see if the new leadership of Apple can continue to forge ahead without him. My hope is that they can because the legacy of Steve Jobs is almost unprecedented. He, Bill Gates and a few others belong with the ranks of Henry Ford, Edison, Tesla and many other world changing people.

Well not so sure about being irrelevant but who wants Florida, with it's track record being the first?

I'm assuming you do not live in Iowa or New Hampshire. I can tell you that in 2008, the Iowa Caucus was held right after New Year's because of these jump in the line shenanigans and the turn out was huge; largest turn out ever; it would have been the same if it were held the day after Christmas. Now, I cannot say how enthusiastic the GOP will be here this year because only they are looking for a nominee.

Obamanatic----my view on the whole collapsing thing is that it is better to let the extreme views and inappropriate comments be seen by everyone----they speak volumes about the person writing them.

Exactly Steeler Fan. The collapsing of posts is stupid and should be left to the moderators and authors if at all. Totally agree with letting the post speak for itself.

Monetfan----what a great analogy to the election of 1948--you are right---the parallels to today seem stronger than 1980. Whatever one's opinion of Ronald Reagan, there is no doubt he was warm and charismatic----two adjectives that I've never seen ascribed to Mitt Romney.

Montefan

I remember John Anderson! I liked that guy.

Great analogy to 1948. I feel cautiously optimistic as well. I think the President is absolutely on the right track taking his Jobs Bill to the people.

Monetfan, thanks for your post. Running against a do nothing congress is very apparent.

but the boat loads of money being spent both locally and nationally on redistricting and primaries before the general election and candidates are declared is frightening.

Need to read up on the 1948 election.

How is a re-elected Obama good for America?

Ray, because we will NOT put the foxes in charge of the henhouse again, that's why

lmao...no he will ruin it all on his own!

If these bills passed, or in the case of Stimulus II, failed, can't Harry Reid and the POTUS see they would be better off letting them make it since they would be bi-partisan and Obama would (at least) look like he could work with congress and try to get something accomplished.

He, Obama, would have a much better chance at being re-elected but "the will of the people" goes against his ideological view of how America should be, instead of how it was meant to be! BY THE PEOPLE, FOR THE PEOPLE AND OF THE PEOPLE!

If they are passed/failed and it turns out they don't work the DEMOCRATS would have re-election "in-the-bag".

Thank you. I'll keep on trying if you'll keep on listenin' and considerin'

Blech!

All these polls only reflect how one POTENTIAL candidate might fare against the Anointed One if a vote were taken TODAY! Once a candidate IS elected these polls go out the proverbial window. It will be a whole new ball game!

The electorate is looking for CHANGE and it isn't the change Obama let you hide in the sofa cushions!