QE is creating a speculative stock bubble.

[Yssup Rider]

Originally Posted by bambino

"Answer you own question"!!!!!!! God you're stupid. Gotcha. Anyway, try to keep up with LustyLad, it's entertaining. And LL is correct, you and your pack of hyenas have ruined this forum because you're not bright enough to carry on an intelligent debate. Try again, I need a good laugh.

It's refreshing to see the pissant rear up on his hindlegs and call someone stupid.

He's posted a number of times in this thread but hasn't yet made an observation about the topic.

He has, on the other hand, WK'd for his "Butt Buddy" "Nefarious Ruffian" and Wolfpack" cohort from pissburgh, corrected someone else's spelling (which is always a treat coming from him) and chided another for being unable to "carry on an intelligent debate."

Oh the irony!

[CJ7]

Originally Posted by bambino

"Answer you own question"!!!!!!! God you're stupid. Gotcha. Anyway, try to keep up with LustyLad, it's entertaining. And LL is correct, you and your pack of hyenas have ruined this forum because you're not bright enough to carry on an intelligent debate. Try again, I need a good laugh.

its his question pal, not mine.... wouldn't you think when someone asks a question they would know the answer? Apparently LL doesn't ...How about you answer his question? are you smart enough to figure out what his question was?

this is LL's version of an intellectual debate, when you learn to spell, you can get an invitation ... since you're defending an idiot, you may take his place ... bring me a cup of coffee and my WSJ.

[bambino]

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

It's refreshing to see the pissant rear up on his hindlegs and call someone stupid.

He's posted a number of times in this thread but hasn't yet made an observation about the topic.

He has, on the other hand, WK'd for his "Butt Buddy" "Nefarious Ruffian" and Wolfpack" cohort from pissburgh, corrected someone else's spelling (which is always a treat coming from him) and chided another for being unable to "carry on an intelligent debate."

Oh the irony!

When do you ever address the thread topic?

[bambino]

Originally Posted by CJ7

its his question pal, not mine.... wouldn't you think when someone asks a question they would know the answer? Apparently LL doesn't ...How about you answer his question? are you smart enough to figure out what his question was?

this is LL's version of an intellectual debate, when you learn to spell, you can get an invitation ... since you're defending an idiot, you may take his place ... bring me a cup of coffee and my WSJ.

You have a better chance of catching butterflies than saying anything intelligent or winning a grade school spelling bee.

[CJ7]

Originally Posted by bambino

You have a better chance of catching butterflies than saying anything intelligent or winning a grade school spelling bee.

LL quips ..

Put dollar amounts next to each of his tax cuts/hikes and we'll net them all out. If you can't do that, then STFU. You're just wasting everyone's time.[/QUOTE]

he can't do that, you cant do that, I can't do that ... it's a sophomoric question from a freshman trying to look somewhat intelligent ... somewhat being the keyword.

now run along and dispense with the childish butterfly banter ... 1 spoon of sugar in my coffee please, assuming you can count to 1.

[CJ7]

Originally Posted by bambino

When do you ever address the thread topic?

post 11 ... study up

[CJ7]

here ya go Bimbo ..

LL quips ..

Put dollar amounts next to each of his tax cuts/hikes and we'll net them all out. If you can't do that, then STFU. You're just wasting everyone's time.[/QUOTE]


I responded with

quote chapter and verse how much revenue increased when asset sales became taxable, tax-advantaged contributions, and benefits under pension plans were limited ...

your turn Einstein, surely YOU know the answer, break it down for LL.

[bambino]

Originally Posted by CJ7

here ya go Bimbo ..

LL quips ..

Put dollar amounts next to each of his tax cuts/hikes and we'll net them all out. If you can't do that, then STFU. You're just wasting everyone's time.

I responded with

quote chapter and verse how much revenue increased when asset sales became taxable, tax-advantaged contributions, and benefits under pension plans were limited ...

your turn Einstein, surely YOU know the answer, break it down for LL.[/QUOTE]

You're proud of your twaddle aren't you.

[CJ7]

Originally Posted by bambino

I responded with

quote chapter and verse how much revenue increased when asset sales became taxable, tax-advantaged contributions, and benefits under pension plans were limited ...

your turn Einstein, surely YOU know the answer, break it down for LL.

You're proud of your twaddle aren't you.[/QUOTE]

twaddle that escapes you and LL to be exact ...

didn't I dismiss you? .. run along and call grown ups childish names.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by lustylad

“lustylad... thinks the economy turns on a dime.”

No, asshole, that's the way YOU think. You're the idiot who said “Carter righted the ship in 1979” simply by appointing Volker. I'm the one who corrected your dimwit claim that the economy turned on a dime in 1979, remember? I said “it took Volker 3 years to wring inflation out the economy because Carter spent 3 years pumping it up.”

You dumb muther fucker you fail to mention that oil prices were on the rise. Do you understand that our country is based on low oil prices. Without them...we do not do so well. Reagan benifited from the Alaska oil influx and Obama has benifited from fracking. Points you fail to mention.


“Reagan gets all thw (sic) credit for hiring Volker even though he didn't.”

Not my argument, dipshit. You're the moron who thinks by appointing Volker to clean up his mess, Carter somehow absolved himself of the blame for creating it in the first place. If Volker was a smart appointment (and I think he was), then Reagan deserves credit for supporting him when his Federal Reserve policies were at their most painful and for reappointing him in 1983.

Reagan does deserve credit for reappointing him. Just as Carter should get credit for appointing him. If you look up the history , Carter made a mistake in his first appointment and he 'fired' him. Reagan then 'fired' Volcker for Greenspan because Volcker was not for looser bank regulations.


“Reagan gets all the credit for low oil prices...”

You keep making this stuff up, turdhead. I said oil prices stayed low “on his watch”. Nothing about who gets credit. At least Reagan never blocked any important pipelines (like Keystone VI) and he wasn't a shameless hypocrite who tried to claim credit for higher domestic oil production after putting nothing but impediments in its way.

http://www.redstate.com/thedividedst...rican-history/
Ronald Reagan spent us into a deficit . Because of the tax cuts he enacted, coupled with the massive increase in defense spending, our national debt rose from roughly $700 billion to $3 trillion during Reagan’s time in office. We shifted from being the largest creditor in the world to the largest debtor. We also dramatically increased our borrowing from foreign nations , which continues today.
4. Ronald Reagan helped facilitate the Savings and Loan crisis . Not entirely dissimilar from the financial crisis in fall 2008 , the savings and loan crisis ended up being costing $125 billion in a taxpayer-funded bailout.

So Fuck you and Ronnie.

[WTF]

http://thefaintofheart.wordpress.com...benjamin-cole/

Long forgotten today, given the near-hysteria and requisite orthodoxy on the American right that only tight money is sound policy and patriotic, is that the Reagan White House tried to skin Fed Chief Paul Volcker alive back in 1984. And not just Volcker—they wanted to eviscerate the Federal Reserve Board, and shift control of the money supply into the Oval Office. Inflation in 1984 had just dropped under 5 percent, and the Reaganauts wanted the Fed to print a lot more money, and keep the economy flourishing.
Secretary Regan mustered more than a few arguments. “The United States is the only country in the world that has a totally independent central bank,” he averred. The Fed was an errant oddball institution, obsessed with fighting inflation instead of promoting growth, the Reaganauts charged. Ergo, Volcker (originally an appointee of President Jimmy Carter) was a loose cannon on the deck of macroeconomic policy making.
Some Reagan hagiographers have tried to pooh-pooh Regan’s commentary as not truly part of the Reagan heritage, and cite Reagan’s gentlemanly public statements about Volcker as proof of the pudding. Indeed, “Reagan, The Inflation Fighter” is a subspecies of GOP monographs, written even by people who know better, such as GOP solon and Stanford University academic John Taylor. But the Reaganauts are engaging in Soviet-style revisionism.
Speaking before the National Association of Realtors in December 1984, President Reagan echoed the Regan assault on the Fed. “Let me assure you we are not pleased with the recent increases in interest rates,” said President Reagan. “And frankly there is no satisfactory reason for them.”

[nevergaveitathought]

We do have a stock bubble, though not like the Internet sock puppet bubble

[CuteOldGuy]

Actually, monetary policy should be in the hands of Congress. At least according to the Constitution. But who cares about the Constitution, anyway?

[lustylad]

Hey CBJagoff, don't you think you should give your stretched-out butthole a day's rest before you drag it back here to be reamed again? You really are the biggest DUMBFUCK/LAZYFUCK double loser on eccie. Your posts are so sloppy you tee yourself up for more ridicule and abuse every time! How long have you been using the “you got nothing” comeback? Did you program your botnet for that one? You need to change it to “you got me again - ouch, my ass hurts!”

Originally Posted by CJ7

its his question pal, not mine.... wouldn't you think when someone asks a question they would know the answer? Apparently LL doesn't ...How about you answer his question? are you smart enough to figure out what his question was?

this is LL's version of an intellectual debate, when you learn to spell, you can get an invitation ... since you're defending an idiot, you may take his place ... bring me a cup of coffee and my WSJ.

Originally Posted by CJ7

LL quips ..

"Put dollar amounts next to each of his tax cuts/hikes and we'll net them all out. If you can't do that, then STFU. You're just wasting everyone's time."

he can't do that, you cant do that, I can't do that ... it's a sophomoric question from a freshman trying to look somewhat intelligent ...

Listen up, CBJizzface, I never asked a question. Do you see a question mark anywhere? You're the one who said Reagan raised taxes 7 times. Did you pull that factoid out of your tender ass in between poundings? I have no fucking idea what 7 tax increases you are referring to. Was it the tax on condoms? Chewing gum? Texas libtards? Tell us, shithead. How should I know? You're so desperate you even asked bambino to bail you out. Really. I've got news for you - only CBJerkyboy can explain the diarrhea that blows out of his ruptured asshole each day.

As for the dollar amounts involved (“I can't do that”), are you deaf, blind, plagued by short-term memory loss, or just being the same old DUMBFUCK/LAZYFUCK? Why do you expose yourself as an idiot twice on the same point? Like being convicted twice for the same crime. Are you some kind of masochist? Give your butthole a break. Concede defeat and move on. Here's a repost from #87. Read it and learn.

Originally Posted by lustylad

Ever hear of the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), moron? Each time someone puts out a tax proposal, the CBO estimates the revenue impact. So yes, it can be done, it's done every day, you stupid twit. In the future, stay on the fucking sidelines when people are speaking economics. It's obvious you flunked Econ 101 and have zero knowledge on the subject.

I have a math test for you: If I cut your taxes by $30k, then raise them 7 times by less than $1k a pop, are you better or worse off? Quick now, don't reach for a calculator.

Do you really think anyone believes you read the WSJ? Seriously, I would sooner believe Sarah Palin reads the New York Times Review of Books. You really need to STFU whenever economics is spoken. Maybe you can wire up your testicles for an electric shock each time you are tempted to open your piehole here. I know that sounds a little drastic, but your butthole will thank you.

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by CJ7

post 11 ... study up

Hey CBJellobrain, I went to #11 but couldn't find any original comments, just a cut-and-paste of 3 paragraphs someone plagiarized from Time magazine.