Page 2 of 2 12
Results 11 to 18 of 18
  1. Havakasha is offline
    Legend
    Havakasha's Avatar
    Joined: Sep 2009 Posts: 5,358
    09-21-2011, 05:47 PM #11
    Excuse me but i fell asleep listening to the sound of your brain on pause.

  2. SiriuslyLong is offline
    Guru
    SiriuslyLong's Avatar
    Joined: Jan 2009 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 3,560
    09-23-2011, 09:15 AM #12
    Quote Originally Posted by SiriuslyLong View Post
    Hmmm, seems to be off topic. You didn't like those ideas to stimulate the economy? I would like to hear what is wrong with them in your (narrow) mind. Did you even see that I noted that I would support taxing the rich for such endeavors?

    No comment? Really? None at all?

    I agree to an idea from the left and keynesians and NOTHING. Hmmmmm? It really makes one wonder about your character.
    As suspected - rigid ideology won't let you confirm the above point. Case closed. You are the ideologue, I am not. Thank you for helping me prove that.

  3. Havakasha is offline
    Legend
    Havakasha's Avatar
    Joined: Sep 2009 Posts: 5,358
    09-23-2011, 09:33 AM #13
    You arent even able to be honest enough to admit that Peter Schiff has gotten MANY of his economic predicitons wrong. Thats the worst kind of dishonety possible. You lie about having NO opinion or knowledge on the subject of Climate science YET YOU SOMEHOW KNOW that it is not an important issue
    even worth discussing. This from a science major who wont even acknowldege that 98%
    of climate scientists come down on the side of climate change being a real and serious issue.
    You post only negative articles on alternative energy. You repeat Republican talking
    points item for item. And you call me an ideologue? What a joke.


    If that aint a defintion of a rigid ideology then i dont know what is
    Last edited by Havakasha; 09-23-2011 at 09:35 AM.

  4. SiriuslyLong is offline
    Guru
    SiriuslyLong's Avatar
    Joined: Jan 2009 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 3,560
    09-23-2011, 09:41 AM #14
    Quote Originally Posted by Havakasha View Post
    You arent even able to be honest enough to admit that Peter Schiff has gotten MANY of his economic predicitons wrong. Thats the worst kind of dishonety possible. You lie about having NO opinion or knowledge on the subject of Climate science YET YOU SOMEHOW KNOW that it is not an important issue
    even worth discussing. This from a science major who wont even acknowldege that 98%
    of climate scientists come down on the side of climate change being a real and serious issue.
    You post only negative articles on alternative energy. You repeat Republican talking
    points item for item. And you call me an ideologue? What a joke.


    If that aint a defintion of a rigid ideology then i dont know what is
    That's called diversion. The topic is stimulus, and I've clearly demonstrated that I believe it can be effective. Secondly, depending on what the stimulus is, I support paying for it by taxing the rich.

    Case closed again.

    Just to be clear, you are a RIGID ideologue.

  5. Havakasha is offline
    Legend
    Havakasha's Avatar
    Joined: Sep 2009 Posts: 5,358
    09-23-2011, 09:58 AM #15
    SHOW ME ONE POSITIVE ARTICLE POSTED ON STIM....


    I quess you've never changed the topic in any threads. Lmfao. Your a hypocrite to boot.

    ANSWER TO THE CHARGES POSTED ABOVE. YOU CANT AND WONT BECAUSE YOU'VE BECOME TRAPPED
    IN YOUR OWN LIES AND DISTORTIONS. IN FACT YOUR FAVORITE REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE, RON PAUL, ANDYOUR FAVORITE ECONOMIST PETER SCHIFF (actually i am not sure of his credentials) BOTH SUPPORTED THE U.S. DEFAULTING ON THE DEBT. That IS an example of an EXTREME ideology at work. I ASKED YOU REPEATEDLY ABOUT THAT FACT AND AS USUAL YOU HAVE REFUSED TO ANSWER. Im so surprised.

    You have repeatedly castigated me and liberals for proposing bringing the tax rate on the wealthy
    back to Clinton rates. You have repeatedly posted negative articles about
    Democrats postions on the issue of stimuslus and taxes. You have repeatedly said that taxing the
    wealthy would bring insiginificant revenue. etc. etc. So its news to me that your TRULY support
    the taxing the rich. If you do you have a funny way of demonstrating it. Go back and look at all
    your posts. Mr. Schizophrenic. lol

    Verdict: YOU are a RIGID IDEOLOGUE AND A DISHONEST ONE TO BOOT.

    Judgement rendered, sign, sealed and delivered.
    Last edited by Havakasha; 09-27-2011 at 10:14 PM.

  6. SiriuslyLong is offline
    Guru
    SiriuslyLong's Avatar
    Joined: Jan 2009 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 3,560
    09-27-2011, 07:29 PM #16
    Quote Originally Posted by Havakasha View Post
    I quess you've never changed the topic in any threads. Lmfao. Your a hypocrite to boot.

    ANSWER TO THE CHARGES POSTED ABOVE. YOU CANT AND WONT BECAUSE YOU'VE BECOME TRAPPED
    IN YOUR OWN LIES AND DISTORTIONS. IN FACT YOUR FAVORITE REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE, RON PAUL, ANDYOUR FAVORITE ECONOMIST PETER SCHIFF (actually i am not sure of his credentials) BOTH SUPPORTED THE U.S. DEFAULTING ON THE DEBT. That IS an example of an EXTREME ideology at work. I ASKED YOU REPEATEDLY ABOUT THAT FACT AND AS USUAL YOU HAVE REFUSED TO ANSWER. Im so surprised.

    You have repeatedly castigated me and liberals for proposing bringing the tax rate on the wealthy
    back to Clinton rates. You have repeatedly posted negative articles about
    Democrats postions on the issue of stimuslus and taxes. You have repeatedly said that taxing the
    wealthy would bring insiginificant revenue. etc. etc. So its news to me that your TRULY support
    the taxing the rich. If you do you have a funny way of demonstrating it. Go back and look at all
    your posts. Mr. Schizophrenic. lol

    Verdict: YOU are a RIGID IDEOLOGUE AND A DISHONEST ONE TO BOOT.

    Judgement rendered, sign, sealed and delivered.
    There you go again stealing my style. Loser. Think of something original yourself.

    Look, the numbers speak for themselves. For every anti whatever I post, you post 5x more pro's. You win the posting battle hands down. I couldn't keep up with you if this were my full time job. Be proud of that, very proud.

    The bottom line here is that I laid out a conditional scenario whereby I would support further stimulus AND taxing the rich. Accept it; it's in writing. It seems to bother you?

    I think I know what it is. You know how the tea party is labeled "uncompromising"? Well, I think you are very similar. It's as if it's all or nothing with you.

  7. Havakasha is offline
    Legend
    Havakasha's Avatar
    Joined: Sep 2009 Posts: 5,358
    09-27-2011, 09:08 PM #17
    Sorry S&L but evasion doesnt work to your benefit. When you answer my basic questions i wont be forced to follow you to different threads to confront you. The silly insults only make you look juvenile.

    "You arent even able to be honest enough to admit that Peter Schiff has gotten MANY of his economic predicitons wrong. Thats the worst kind of dishonety possible. You lie about having NO opinion or knowledge on the subject of Climate science YET YOU SOMEHOW KNOW that it is not an important issue even worth discussing. This from a science major who wont even acknowldege that 98% of climate scientists come down on the side of climate change being a real and serious issue.
    You post ONLY negative articles on the alternative energy field. You repeat Republican talking
    points item for item. And you call me an ideologue? What a joke."

    "ANSWER TO THE CHARGES POSTED ABOVE. YOU CANT AND WONT BECAUSE YOU'VE BECOME TRAPPED IN YOUR OWN LIES AND DISTORTIONS. IN FACT YOUR FAVORITE REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE, RON PAUL, AND YOUR FAVORITE "ECONOMIST" PETER SCHIFF (actually i am not sure of his credentials) BOTH SUPPORTED THE U.S. DEFAULTING ON THE DEBT. That IS an example of an EXTREME ideology at work. I ASKED YOU REPEATEDLY ABOUT THAT FACT AND AS USUAL YOU HAVE REFUSED TO ANSWER. Im so surprised.

    You have repeatedly castigated me and liberals for proposing bringing the tax rate on the wealthy
    back to Clinton rates. You have repeatedly posted negative articles about
    Democrats postions on the issue of stimuslus and taxes. You have repeatedly said that taxing the
    wealthy would bring insiginificant revenue. etc. etc. So its news to me that you support
    the taxing the rich. If you do you have a funny way of demonstrating it. Go back and look at all
    your posts. Mr. Siriusly Schizophrenic."
    Last edited by Havakasha; 09-28-2011 at 12:30 AM.

  8. SiriuslyLong is offline
    Guru
    SiriuslyLong's Avatar
    Joined: Jan 2009 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 3,560
    09-29-2011, 10:29 AM #18
    Quote Originally Posted by Havakasha View Post
    Sorry S&L but evasion doesnt work to your benefit. When you answer my basic questions i wont be forced to follow you to different threads to confront you. The silly insults only make you look juvenile.

    "You arent even able to be honest enough to admit that Peter Schiff has gotten MANY of his economic predicitons wrong. Thats the worst kind of dishonety possible. You lie about having NO opinion or knowledge on the subject of Climate science YET YOU SOMEHOW KNOW that it is not an important issue even worth discussing. This from a science major who wont even acknowldege that 98% of climate scientists come down on the side of climate change being a real and serious issue.
    You post ONLY negative articles on the alternative energy field. You repeat Republican talking
    points item for item. And you call me an ideologue? What a joke."

    "ANSWER TO THE CHARGES POSTED ABOVE. YOU CANT AND WONT BECAUSE YOU'VE BECOME TRAPPED IN YOUR OWN LIES AND DISTORTIONS. IN FACT YOUR FAVORITE REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE, RON PAUL, AND YOUR FAVORITE "ECONOMIST" PETER SCHIFF (actually i am not sure of his credentials) BOTH SUPPORTED THE U.S. DEFAULTING ON THE DEBT. That IS an example of an EXTREME ideology at work. I ASKED YOU REPEATEDLY ABOUT THAT FACT AND AS USUAL YOU HAVE REFUSED TO ANSWER. Im so surprised.

    You have repeatedly castigated me and liberals for proposing bringing the tax rate on the wealthy
    back to Clinton rates. You have repeatedly posted negative articles about
    Democrats postions on the issue of stimuslus and taxes. You have repeatedly said that taxing the
    wealthy would bring insiginificant revenue. etc. etc. So its news to me that you support
    the taxing the rich. If you do you have a funny way of demonstrating it. Go back and look at all
    your posts. Mr. Siriusly Schizophrenic."
    Editkasha strikes again lol.

    Peter Schiff has gotten many predictions wrong. OK? Feel better? You are playing this black and white; perhaps because "your" too stupid to do otherwise.

    While you see "the worst kind of dishonesty of all" (probably because Schiff is a republican lol), I see an individual expressing an opinion about a subject. I see an individual talking about possibilities which many seem to agree. So you can go ahead and live in your black and white, democrat and republican, world and lash out on those that do not agree with your agenda.

    Let me quote this again because it's kind of funny.

    You have repeatedly castigated me and liberals for proposing bringing the tax rate on the wealthy
    back to Clinton rates. You have repeatedly posted negative articles about
    Democrats postions on the issue of stimuslus and taxes.


    Wow! Does it remind YOU of anyone?

    If you read my posts, I don't care about taxing the rich. What I have said in the past, which I find objectionable and even immoral, is when OTHERS "promote" taxing the rich. Remember, one of my core values is to mind your own business. What right do you have to judge what others should pay or not pay? I find it appauling. It's really that simple.

    So let me redirect you to the topic at hand. I support conditional stimulus as noted above. If the stimulus were used to build productive assets, I would even support changing the tax policy to collect more tax revenue (from the rich).

    I guess you want unconditional stimulus like we did last time??

Page 2 of 2 12