Join me on Facebook!
Follow me on Twitter!
More 'toons here!
Or subscribe here.
While you all take pot shots at one another and regurgitate what you here someone else say try this thought out. I am not going to put anybody down but rather praise the rich and everybody else that spends a buck. When the rich spends money they create jobs no matter if they spend it to create more wealth for themselves which creates jobs or they spend it on golf which creates jobs at the golf courses and all those other people that support the golf course, people who make clubs, golf carts, golf balls, tees and I could go on for an hour but you get the pic. While all this free enterprise is going on its up to the individual to go out and grab a hold of the brass ring with gusto and make there own future instead of making choices which hold themselves back. Everybody is where they are at because of the choices they have made up to this point in there life. Weather it was to study instead of playing or dating instead of studying, again you see where I am going It’s up to the individual and choices.
ANOTHER REASON TEA BAGGERS ARE DANGEROUS:
NO MONEY FOR ASTEROID WARNING
NASA: An Asteroid Will Barely Avoid Slamming Into Earth Today
David Edwards, The Raw Story
Jun. 27, 2011, 11:47 AM
Astronomers have just discovered an asteroid that is expected come close enough to Earth Monday that it will be visible with amateur telescopes.
The Lincoln Near-Earth Asteroid Research centre (LINEAR) spotted Asteroid 2011 MD on June 22. It has an orbit similar to Earth's.
The asteroid will be visible from parts of South Africa and Antarctica when it makes its closest approach at 1:14 p.m. EDT (1714 GMT), passing just 7,500 miles (12,000 kilometers) from the Earth's surface. The rock will be so close that its trajectory will be sharply altered by the Earth's gravity.
How will we spot and deflect the real deal if money is instead funneled to the rich man?
Well maybe we'd have more money for that if we werent giving it away to single moms who refuse to work.
Evidently you've never been a parent. Raising a child IS work.
I think he was refering to women who get pregnant to avoid having to work. A lot teenagers and other irresponsible women do it. They have litters just to get money off of taxpayers and then the kids grow up with no father figure and are more susceptable to dysfuntion and many problems and more likely to devolop criminal behavior. In fact studies show that the majority of crime come from these people. They have no father figure to raise them.
I know what he was referring to, but the problem is that he (and you) just asserted it without pointing to a shred of evidence for it, and frankly it doesn't make a lot of sense. Raising a child is harder work than the average job, and the assistance you get is so meager that it doesn't even cover the costs of raising one. (That assistance in total is also only a small part of public spending, compared to what gets spent on the military, but that's another rant.)
Considering that we have somewhere around ten percent unemployment in the USA, maybe, just maybe, it's just possible that these women don't get jobs because there aren't enough of them to go around.
As for crimes, I don't know what studies you're talking about, but if you measure by the damage done (amount of money stolen or property destroyed, lives lost, etc.) then by far the worst crimes are committed by well-to-do mostly white men. Invading Iraq, for example, led to the deaths of millions of people and the theft of billions of dollars. The children of impoverished single mothers haven't done anything comparable to that. It is true that poverty breeds crime, and that impoverished children have major problems, but the way to deal with that is to end poverty, not to carry out class warfare against the impoverished that will make things even worse.
Were coming closer and closer to crisis and John Bo(eh)ner and his ilk would rather hold us hostage for more money for the rich and less services for the poor and retired. Worse yet the right wing are already trying to finger it on Obama.
Mr. Dan should let his hair grow out like Andrew Breitbart. It makes me want to go and frolic across a golf course and pick up golf balls for the poor executives being crushed by big government.
The government doesn't stand in the way of the fortune 500 companies, Dogboy. It stands in the way of the small companies by putting in regulatory barriers to entry that prevent them from competing with the fortune 500 companies.
Money borrowed by government is money not borrowed by the private sector to increase GDP.
Wealth doesn't flow from government borrowing. It doesn't flow from government spending. At best government can use force to redistribute wealth in which case we all share in a shrinking pie.
Forget GOP/Democrat. It is a fake choice. It is like saying Post Toasties are good and Kellogg's Corn Flakes are bad. They are the same flakes in different boxes.
Have you ever visited the planet Earth?
"The government doesn't stand in the way of the fortune 500 companies." Really? Garsh, maybe someone ought to mention this to Koch Industries and all the other such companies who've been spending huge amounts of money trying to buy favors from government. Yeah, mom and pop shops could totally compete with multi-billion-dollar conglomerates if not for those mean old laws that don't let them dump unlimited amounts of toxic crud into the oceans. Sheesh.
"Wealth doesn't flow from government." So the Internet isn't wealth? Roads and bridges aren't? Knowledge learned in schools is? Technology discovered by university scientists? Truth is, either the public or private sector can make investments that will create wealth. The private sector, however, won't make them unless there's a major payoff for them in the relatively short term.
I was gonna ask you the same question.
Yes government does stand in the way. small businesses need the most support. were it not for government burdening them they would be able to compete with these companies but we now practice socialism.
And yes government cannot create wealth it can only destroy wealth. we are in the mess we are in now because we borrow and borrow which ruins the value of the dollar making everything more expensive. keynsianism has proven to fail time and time again because since government itself CANNOT create wealth it needs to take money out of the economy before putting it back into it. at the same time they siphon most of it off for bureucratic pay. Its like putting a cup into a bucket of water taking a drink from it and then dumping a few drops back into it. That is how the government is meddling with the economy. It doesnt work. We need to stop taking money from people and giving it away to able bodied drug addicts and bums who refuse to work and we need to stop the government from getting in the way of progress and trampling our freedoms
Americans deserve better. We must go back to the values of our founding fathers and the free market. They work. Socialism never will. the last 30 years has proven this not to mention the last 100 years in which scores of millions have perished under socialism.
I listed a number of ways in which government can and does create wealth. Let's just take one. Government builds roads. Your house is worth a whole lot more money if it's connected to work, shopping, friends' houses, and other destinations by a network of traversable roads. That difference in value no doubt far exceeds your share of the tax money that paid for the roads. So, in view of this, please tell me why I shouldn't believe that government can and does create wealth.
And if we're talking about people perishing, then capitalism doesn't exactly have an unblemished record. It's not just the wars that have been started and brutal dictators who've been enabled for the benefit of corporations. It's also the people who work under criminally unsafe conditions, like sweatshops where they lock the doors because it's cheaper to risk workers dying in a fire than to take a chance on them stealing something. It's the deadly products that we get conned into buying -- tobacco, which kills around half a million per year in the USA alone, being one example. It's the people who die because their basic needs are held hostage for money, like the tens of thousands who die every year in the USA because they can't get needed health care. Of course, capitalists will tell you that all of these things aren't their fault. The unwritten law of capitalism is that if you do something to make money, nothing that happens as a result is your responsibility.
Yup, let's go back to ideals of our founding fahters, the time of slavery and lack of women's rights cuz whatever our founding fathers did was 500% okay.
According to people like you, to be for freedom, fiscal responsibility judeo christian value and free from oppresive government is to be pro slavery and anti woman.
Never mind the slavery that took place in the USSR and the lack of rights women had in this and similar countries.
It's all about GOP political games, not what's best for the people, but what's the best way to have more political power and wealth for the few.
As opposed to democratic political games, taking away freedom and prosperity for the greater good? Holding America's fianancial sector hostage in order to demand more freebies for public service workers and welfare recipients who are able to but refuse to work.
Its funny, this notion social services are a drain on society, or thatliving off of wellfare is some kind of 'free meal ticket for the profusely lazy' and not an incredibly difficult, unpleasant, and embarrassing thing to do in near every state, and a borderline impossible thing to do in a few.
That all unemployed or homeless people find themselves in those circumstances because its just so -easy- to dupe the government out of a check every month or so, and not because they're say, mentally ill and alone in the world, or were gored/injured in an industrial accident at a job with no benefits/insurance, or any of the other countless scenarios in which the least a government that still has its soul could do is help out with a modest check now and then.
So whats the mindset? If a bank or corporation finds itself on hard times, we're all too willing to throw billions at them rather than allow them to die. And perhaps rightly so, for who could know all of the economic turmoil and lost jobs that could result? As for that one individual who's come upon hard times however, the only people who will care if the government doesn't throw -them- a lifeline is their family and friends. Hell, perhaps there's noone to care about them at all, so why bother to even get the lifeline out? Better just to put them out of mind, and save the money for the next sick business.
That's more or less the idea, yes?
Perhaps you'd word it differently.
Dogboy & Mr. Dan are back! I can't believe how long it's been. Global economic mayhem, coming up!
More information about formatting options