[h=3]House Republicans Say They Will Block EPA Rule On Power Plants.[/h]The AP (3/6, Daly) reports House Republicans said they will attempt to block an Environmental Protection Agency rule that would limit carbon pollution from new power plants. The Republican measure would require the EPA to set carbon emissions standards based on existing technology. The National Association of Manufacturers said in a letter supporting the bill, the regulation would “mandate (emission) control technologies for power plants that are not yet commercially available, effectively banning new coal-fired power plants ... and setting a dangerous precedent that could cascade to other fuels.”




If it wasn't for the House Republicans we would have completely lost our country already to the radicals in this regime. Day after day they continue to stand up to the abusive power grab by the marxists; you never hear much about it, but thank God they are there trying to defend us.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-03-12/overtime-pay-said-to-reach-more-workers-under-obama-order.html


The job killing policies continue unabated. The community activist is spiraling completely out of control.

Change we can believe in ...

[h=3]Farmers Concerned About Expansion Of EPA Water Rules.[/h]The New York Times (3/13, Nixon, Subscription Publication) reports that the EPA is preparing to issue regulations that some farmers believe may “require them to get permits for work for which they have long been exempt.” The EPA argues that the new regulations are “needed to clarify which bodies of water it must oversee under the federal Clean Water Act.” Opponents argue that the rules are “a power grab that could stifle economic growth and intrude on property owners’ rights.” The proposed rules, for which no release data has been set, could see the EPA require farmers to &#8220ay fees for environmental assessments and to get permits just to till the soil near gullies, ditches or dry streambeds where water only flows when it rains.”




This regime simply knows no bounds when it comes to intruding into our lives and into our businesses. BIG government will eventually destroy what was once a great nation, bit by bit by bit.

• "AMERICAN PERSONNEL ON THE GROUND in Benghazi the night of the 2012 terror attack are outraged after learning that the CIA's inspector general never conducted an investigation into what happened — despite two CIA workers being killed in the attack and at least two complaints being filed by CIA employees."
  
  
  
  
  Mr. President and Madam Secretary,
  
  May we have your resignations, today.
  
  
  Sincerely,
  
  
  We The People

http://dailycaller.com/2014/03/24/six-time-obama-voters-group-received-obama-administration-grant/

USA Loses Edge as Employment Powerhouse...

Labor Participation Below UK First Time in 36 Years...




he is starting to make Jimmy Carter look like George Washington

QuakerOats;1596091 wrote:USA Loses Edge as Employment Powerhouse...

Labor Participation Below UK First Time in 36 Years...

he is starting to make Jimmy Carter look like George Washington

We may have been 30 years behind Europe, but Bush & Obama will just about have closed that gap. Let's face it - once the RINO's caved the liberals went all-in on socialism and unrestrained spending. Permanently lower growth and higher unemployment are a predictable result.

Trickle down will work. Just give it some time.

"New York Times reporter James Risen called the Obama administration “the greatest enemy of press freedom that we have encountered in at least a generation” on Friday, explaining that the White House seeks to control the flow of information and those who refuse to play along “will be punished.”"

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2014/03/24/nyt-reporter-obama-administration-the-greatest-enemy-of-press-freedom-in-a-generation/#ixzz2wywHyszH



We have elected the enemy.

http://allenbwest.com/2014/03/video-future-us-liberalism/

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/condi-rice-blasts-obama-weakness-leadership_786123.html


When you ride bike with a helmet, well .....................

http://allenbwest.com/2014/03/video-...us-liberalism/

Progressives (also known as patient communists) just hate Allen West.

like_that;1596789 wrote:http://allenbwest.com/2014/03/video-future-us-liberalism/

I would love to hear Boatshoes spin on this.

Capital flows to where it is treated best, be it financial or human.

HitsRus;1597267 wrote:Progressives (also known as patient communists)

Ridiculous comment. Marxists have been purged from the progressive movement for 50 years. Indeed, Marxists sucked all of the life out of New Deal Progressivism and played a pretty important role in setting the stage for the Conservative epoch that followed the collapse of the New Deal coalition. There is literally no one of political consequence that advocates anything that marxists espouse. We're just pragmatic capitalists who want to ameliorate its problems where as you folks are fundamentalists. The fact that Hard Right Conservatives like Allen West and the posters on this board and all over teh internetz fail to grasp this only exemplifies how they are more akin to the marxists in their own ideological spectrum and playing their part in hastening the demise of the Conservative era that has predominated since Ronald Reagan.

jmog;1597313 wrote:I would love to hear Boatshoes spin on this.

As if America is anywhere close to being France, and United States liberals want America to be anything like France. American progressives want a new New Deal with Job Guarantees that promotes industry and participatory capitalism...but we've been trapped in the world of the Monetarist Revolution with the NAIRU that says such policies are untenable since Lyndon Johnson crushed the progressive movement with his income support programs that turned Hubert Humphrey democrats into Ronald Reagan Republicans.

And also, the video is pure durp anyway because of all mainland Europe allowed the Germans to conquer Europe with the Maastricht Treaty. Milton Friedman would certainly propose supply-side reforms in France but France, and Europe as whole's problems, are primarily because of the de-facto Gold Standard monetary policy stemming from the EURO.

Talk to me when the United States wants to hand over its monetary policy to the Germans or Gold Miners (the latter of which was in the GOP's Party Platform).

BoatShoes;1597448 wrote:As if America is anywhere close to being France, and United States liberals want America to be anything like France. American progressives want a new New Deal with Job Guarantees that promotes industry and participatory capitalism...but we've been trapped in the world of the Monetarist Revolution with the NAIRU that says such policies are untenable since Lyndon Johnson crushed the progressive movement with his income support programs that turned Hubert Humphrey democrats into Ronald Reagan Republicans.

And also, the video is pure durp anyway because of all mainland Europe allowed the Germans to conquer Europe with the Maastricht Treaty. Milton Friedman would certainly propose supply-side reforms in France but France, and Europe as whole's problems, are primarily because of the de-facto Gold Standard monetary policy stemming from the EURO.

Talk to me when the United States wants to hand over its monetary policy to the Germans or Gold Miners (the latter of which was in the GOP's Party Platform).

Interesting spin, but in reality progressives absolutely do want to be more like "Europe" and want more taxes on "the rich" and more welfare "safety nets" for the poor.

Your own guaranteed job/wage idea for example being one of them. Don't we already have the guaranteed wage with welfare?

Oh, and the Euro being "bound" and therefore not being an unlimited supply for France is NOT the reason they have gone WAY down the socialistic scale.

jmog;1597535 wrote:Interesting spin, but in reality progressives absolutely do want to be more like "Europe" and want more taxes on "the rich" and more welfare "safety nets" for the poor.

Your own guaranteed job/wage idea for example being one of them. Don't we already have the guaranteed wage with welfare?

Oh, and the Euro being "bound" and therefore not being an unlimited supply for France is NOT the reason they have gone WAY down the socialistic scale.

LOL welfare is not a wage. It does nothing to promote productivity. And, we know that businesses do not like to hire welfare state beneficiaries. Welfare takes people out of the labor force permanently and is not conducive to long run gdp growth. And also, "Welfare" in the form of TANF is not a guaranteed income as it is temporary and only available to welfare queens that have children....a single male unemployed indigent does not qualify.

You can't be personally responsible or self-reliant or maximally free from government dependence if you can't get a job. Capitalist/Monetary production economies where people produce to get currency under the monopoly control of the government always have mass unemployment. The money monopolist can either buy their output at a wage floor and prepare them for a job in the private sector or pay them income support....we do the second option and it is terrible for long run growth. The New Deal was a version of the former and it allowed people who were not wanted by private firms to engage in socially beneficial and productive activity.

Or, of course there's the option of pretending that the unemployed can "just get a job if they aren't lazy" and permit mass unemployment with no social insurance at all and allow a communist/marxist revolution to happen when the hungry poor unemployed people meet each other while they riot in the public square but that is not desirable.

Indeed, Progressivism saved Capitalism from its imperfections and from the Marxists that sought to exploit those imperfections.

Welfare and Food Stamps, Section 8 and Obamaphones...it is much worse for RGDP if you're handing out money to people not to work than buying the output of the unemployed.

And people are living France and much of Europe because the economy is pure shit. Scapegoating the Welfare State for Bad Monetary Policy while they go to Quebec which has a very strong Welfare State but much better Monetary Policy in Canada.

BoatShoes;1597546 wrote:LOL welfare is not a wage. It does nothing to promote productivity. And, we know that businesses do not like to hire welfare state beneficiaries. Welfare takes people out of the labor force permanently and is not conducive to long run gdp growth. And also, "Welfare" in the form of TANF is not a guaranteed income as it is temporary and only available to welfare queens that have children....a single male unemployed indigent does not qualify.

You can't be personally responsible or self-reliant or maximally free from government dependence if you can't get a job. Capitalist/Monetary production economies where people produce to get currency under the monopoly control of the government always have mass unemployment. The money monopolist can either buy their output at a wage floor and prepare them for a job in the private sector or pay them income support....we do the second option and it is terrible for long run growth. The New Deal was a version of the former and it allowed people who were not wanted by private firms to engage in socially beneficial and productive activity.

Welfare and Food Stamps, Section 8 and Obamaphones...it is much worse for RGDP if you're handing out money to people not to work than buying the output of the unemployed.

And people are living France and much of Europe because the economy is pure shit. Scapegoating the Welfare State for Bad Monetary Policy while they go to Quebec which has a very strong Welfare State but much better Monetary Policy in Canada.

Yeah, that "second option" we have been doing for over 200 years has REALLY sucked!


Oh wait, nevermind, the facts don't back you up. Our economy has grown exponentially with that "worse" option.

Now, please go on one of your long spin diatribes with multiple graphs, etc.

You do know Ockham's Razor right? Keep it simple, you don't need to try to throw 800 graphs at people, if you are you are trying to drown them in data so they stop arguing the point.

jmog;1597551 wrote:Yeah, that "second option" we have been doing for over 200 years has REALLY sucked!


Oh wait, nevermind, the facts don't back you up. Our economy has grown exponentially with that "worse" option.

Now, please go on one of your long spin diatribes with multiple graphs, etc.

You do know Ockham's Razor right? Keep it simple, you don't need to try to throw 800 graphs at people, if you are you are trying to drown them in data so they stop arguing the point.

Man you are bad at this. Of course a dynamic capitalist economy like the United States is going to continue growing!!! You could post a graph for France and other countries in Europe with even worse supply-side problems than our own and it would look similar to the one you posted!!!

Are you really going to sit here and argue that handing out obamaphones, EBT Cards and Unemployment Insurance does not harm long term growth more than if we did not have them!?!?!?! And, we haven't had a welfare state for 200 years??And I"M THE LIBERAL HERE???

Do you even know what you are arguing here???? Do you even know what you're talking about???


Dynamic capitalist economies grow. They even grow when there is social insurance....but some types of social insurance is worse for growth than others. As you guys point out in this thread, the French have more generous social insurance and it is worse for growth. I and New Deal Liberals have proposed social insurance that requires payment for socially valuable production, meaning you at least buy output rather than provide a transfer payment in exchange for nothing. By virtue of the components of the GDP equation my proposal is better for growth, let alone its long term supply side effects are better than people who rot away on the welfare state for years.


Somehow you managed to end up arguing for our current patchwork welfare state ITT. Congratulations! LOL.

I think you completely missed the point. Iost certainly believe welfare handouts and wealth transfers hurt economic growth.

And when did you stop being a tax/spend, Obama apologist, progressive? Do you really think the programs you are saying will fix things AREN'T wealth transfers? Where is the money coming from to pay for them?

jmog;1597626 wrote:I think you completely missed the point. Iost certainly believe welfare handouts and wealth transfers hurt economic growth.

And when did you stop being a tax/spend, Obama apologist, progressive? Do you really think the programs you are saying will fix things AREN'T wealth transfers? Where is the money coming from to pay for them?

1. I've always been pro-tax cutting and pro-spending because I support bigger deficits and I've never been an "Obama apologist". I defend Obama against the absurd hyperbole on this forum and don't think he's a complete incompetent no-nothing but that makes me an "Obama nuthugger" in this place where people act call him the worst president in history.

Everybody in Washington is wrong because they're deficit hawks when they should be full employment hawks. The democrats are only less bad than the hard money deficit obsessives encapsulating today's conservative movement and republican party.

I am way "to the left" of either party in today's political spectrum. Democrats have bought into the insane, perpetually false doomsday prophecies of the conservatives and are only slightly less bad. Basically everything the Democrats propose (despite being inadequate) is better than the Republicans because they're completely off the map. That's it and that's all.

2. The United States has the Power of the Purse. Taxes don't fund government spending. The Founding Fathers gave the Federal Government the Power to Coin Money and Regulate the Value Thereof. The Treasury doesn't need your money to hire public employees and buy the output of the unemployed masses. The Federal Government levies taxes to ensure that the U.S. dollar is the unit of account and to regulate the economy and subtract purchasing power as a buffer against inflation. That's part of the problem. We have to get rid of the notion that taxes are redistributed to other people. That's impossible.

U.S. dollars are a claim on the Federal Government just like a U.S. Treasury Security. If you have a claim on a bank that is denominated in U.S. dollars and the Federal Government taxes it away, it destroys that claim forever. There is no such thing as wealth redistribution through taxation.

The government doesn't need your money to pay for shit. It takes some of it to make sure that it's expenditures don't cause inflation. Under current conditions, with high unemployment and low inflation we should be cutting taxes and increasing spending. I say cut employer and employee payroll taxes to zero.

Either way. Studies on the Job Guarantee show it only costs 1-3% of GDP. Current Means-Tested Welfare Programs cost 5% of GDP. Even in a country with a Gold Standard or the State's where the government needs tax money to fund expenditures, a Job Guarantee would still be better.

3. And no, it's not a transfer just like the paying of an E-1 soldier is not a "transfer", it is compensation for services rendered and counted in the GDP equation as Government Consumption whereas handouts like EBT deposits are not.

4. I did not miss the point. You missed the point by posting that graph thinking I was somehow suggesting that the United States hadn't had economic growth in the general sense.

And there it is, Boatshoes insane belief that we can have infinite deficits and it's ok because we have a printer.

That at didn't take long.

jmog;1598015 wrote:And there it is, Boatshoes insane belief that we can have infinite deficits and it's ok because we have a printer.

That at didn't take long.

The United States already does run deficits essentially every year. There has been outstanding U.S. Treasuries every year since 1793. U.S. The Japanese have outstanding government securities amounting to 220%+ of GDP and get interest rates at .0001%. Countries that issue their own sovereign currency can always sell securities denominated in that sovereign currency. Period. End of Story. However of course you aren't paying attention. I have always said that there is a limit on the size of the deficit. The limit on the size of an annual deficit is the real capacity of the economy. Hence, deficits should be conducive to long run RGDP growth.

http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/when-welfare-pays-better-work


Incredible stats. Of course, the marxist regime's answer is to not deal with the real problem, but instead dramatically increase the minimum wage and raise the cost of production to inflict further damage on the economy.

Change we can believe in ...