WSJ "Obama speech most dishonest in decades"Follow

Are you just grabbing random words from your calendar or what?

Well, they did get a federal tax rebate. More than NPR got in federal funding. I think NPR should be a public service, I'm apathetic about federal funding, mainly because of how relatively small it is.

Ha, try not to pat yourself on the back too hard, don't want to hurt yourself.

Haha. No, the more biased the media source, the more MISINFORMED the viewers are. Doesn't matter the makeup of the viewers, only if what they're being told is factual or not. If there was a news source that had a vastly conservative audience but they were consistently less misinformed than any other news source, THAT would be the most unbiased news organization. You can't have a bias towards facts.

On that case though, Fox loses terribly. Their viewers are far more misinformed on news topics than regular viewers of any other network. October 2003 study from the University of Maryland Program on International Policy Attitudes shows that 80% of regular Fox News viewers had one or more misinformed views, whereas only 23% of regular viewers/listeners of PBS-NPR had one or more misinformed views. Looks to me like Fox News is a plague on reality and PBS/NPR is the most reliable news source to me, even doing a better job of accurately informing the public than the print media, which has been a traditional herald of investigative journalism.

Go ahead gbaji, polish that ****.



Edited, Apr 16th 2011 1:00pm by bsphil

Arguable =/= truth

Edited, Apr 16th 2011 5:42pm by Ailitardif

Ridiculous. NOW is the time to buy things up in America. Real Estate is still low, businesses are in distress and everyone down there is ripe for the picking because the banks are still tighter than gbaji's ***.

You should go tell him after you look it up yourself.

And why would you do that....to make more money personally (or for your company.) It is not investment in America, it is for personal gains. Which was my point. You aren't talking about building a new power station or investing in more economical means of travel etc, you are talking about buying a (currently) ****** store and giving it a new sign, and banking on the economy righting itself and your store turning a profit. Where as taxes that are being used in emerging programs, such as green energy programs are a direct investment into the work force.

Rich people don't invest if there is no money to be made, they don't give a **** about the 1000 jobs they kill when they move a plant from say Michigan to Mexico, they only care about the bottom line, and if that bottom line is more money elsewhere be it cheaper running costs, cheaper labor costs, lax environmental cost (ie. waste removal), lax building codes, etc etc etc then that is what they will vote to do.

There is no reason to build a new plant in Michigan, or the like because it costs more money than it produces. People that invest largely in companies such as Ford for example, want money, and are typically on the board. They make decisions to make money on their investments. Fact of the matter is they make more money by building the vehicles in Mexico and shipping them to the US. They used to make more money doing the same in Canada but that is also changing significantly over the last 10 years. My town has lost 2 production plants for big trucks to mexico, and is about to lose a Ford production plant because the financial returns are not there.

Rich people do not invest to boost the economy, they invest to make money.

(on a completely unrelated topic, I just followed a link to a particularly amusing thread, and understand your 10K title, SOUL BALLS!)

But it doesn't directlt do anything for anyone. Taxing the richest right now in America allows the government in addition to the points I made earlier to increase funding for much needed social programs right now. They can cut taxes on lower income people, they can provide assistance to those who are actively seeking employment etc. It allows the government to give money to people and indirectly infuse it into the economy. The majority of the US is having a hard time right now. The top earners are still sitting pretty. But the top earners aren't the ones who go see a movie when they can, or spend money on non-essentials in a large manner. The best way to get the economy rolling is to increase the spending of the American people. Through this companies are making money so they hire a few more people to keep up with increased customers, they open a new store to allow for more sales, creating more jobs, which creates more spending and so on and so forth.

Investing in weak companies, in a weak economy does not fix the issue. People aren't spending money, because they don't have money.




Ya from what I read it seemed pretty epic. Kudos to you for that one, definitely had me chuckling at 2AM last night.


Edited, Apr 17th 2011 9:27am by rdmcandie

Edited, Apr 17th 2011 9:29am by rdmcandie

Judging by the reaction to the last bill trying to close loopholes, the wealthy view those two options as one in the same.

God forbid we consider raising taxes when trying to fix a massive deficit instead of just slash-and-burn tactics against programs we don't like politically......I mean, if we raised any taxes (directly or indirectly), it would be the worst, most socialist thing to EVER happen in America!!

Joph, up until now I thought you were smart. It is only communist if it comes from a democrat, otherwise it is patriotism.

Every time someone mentions Reagan it reminds me of this Lewis Black joke.

Every time someone mentions reagan, it makes me think of the last three posts in this thread.