HOME | DD | Gallery | Favourites | RSS
| rwpikul
rwpikul
[1359988]
[]
"Rick Pikul / Chakat Firepaw"
# Statistics
Favourites: 0; Deviations: 0; Watchers: 3
Watching: 198; Pageviews: 5196; Comments Made: 957; Friends: 198
# Comments
Comments: 48
The tax cut got the economy out of the slump we were in during the Obama years. Look at the numbers. You know it's true. It's hilarious that your side literally wants to run on wrecking the economy again to put us in either stagnant Obama growth or out right recession. Guess those unemployment numbers are too low for the left right now. Have to get them higher so they vote for you clowns to give them free gibs stolen from other people's pay checks. "Progressives" feed on suffering like vampires do on blood. If the problems are fixed by they other side, their racket isn't working anymore, so may as well take a wrench to what's working.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I suggest you look at the numbers yourself: The economy has been doing about as well as it did through most of Obama's time in office and most of what Trump tries to take credit for are all lagging indicators. You might also want to look into the economic actions that were not done because of extreme right Republicans throwing what amounted to a temper tantrum.
You might also want to look into the reason for the old saw about US governments: "Republicans bring recession and Democrats bring war."
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
BS. The economy was basically stagnant through out the Obama years. The recovery was very limp. It only took off really after the Trump tax cuts and the slashing of regulations. You can look at any indicator and it will say this. The economy is GOOD right now, very good. Crediting the economy to Obama all these years later is a cheap play and you know it's CHEAP. Yes, please run on knee-capping the economy by overtaxing business to fund your worthless government programs and "free" stuff." I'm sure people in Wisconsin, Michigan and Ohio will love to hear about how how you want to raise taxes on their employers so they all get fired. Manufacturing is finally coming back to the US, and middle class wages are rising again and unemployment is at record lows for every minority group, and you want to throw that away due to your hatred of the president. The left has turned into a bunch hyperbolic demagogues who only care about winning no matter the cost. You want to cheat through either impeachment based on debunked Hillary Clinton opposition research or by throwing the electoral college in the trash can. Instead of wondering why Trump won you want to disenfranchise his voters and then ruin all progress he has made in the economy even if it will ruin the country in the progress. Good luck with running on raising taxes and tying to elect Uncle Joe who said to a crowd of 12 people in the rust belt that China, who took their jobs, is not a threat to them. Good luck with that.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Repeating your falsehoods won't make them any more true. To get growth through the Obama administration significantly lower than the past couple of years you have to include the latter part of Bush the Younger's second recession. And yes, large scale economic trends are lagging indicators no matter how much you want to pretend otherwise, (it simply takes time both to enact changes and for those changes to have an impact).
And again: The main limitation over the first half of the past decade was GOP stonewalling on even things like maintaining public infrastructure.
You might also want to look at the real research regarding taxes and the economy: Cutting taxes has very little positive impact, especially cuts that favour the wealthy, (at the top end a $1 tax cut can mean only $0.30 in GDP growth¹, contract with infrastructure spending with direct impacts on the order of $1.50 GDP/$1 spent). Not that I expect you to, given your public demonstration of woeful ignorance².
Another thing you might want to do is to take that time you think things were great for the US economy³ and look at what taxes were back then. It might shock you to learn that today's arguments are pretty much about about "not quite the lowest in living memory" and "the lowest in living memory."
1: Shockingly, the richer you are the less you tend to spend as a fraction of your income.
2: Seriously, increasing taxes on the rich is the exact opposite of a regressive tax policy.
3: A warning about looking prewar: In the latter 19th/early 20th century the US spent most of the time in recession, (the US was not particularly bad off⁴, it was a general problem). Although that was mostly due to the use of deflationary currencies.
4: In fact, the US did better through some of the worst times. Most nations had a single two decade long depression starting in the 1870s, rather than two just under a decade each.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Cutting business taxes and the corporate rate causes businesses to invest more in the US and raise wages, which is exactly what is happening. If you don't think so, you're nuts, and I wouldn't put that past modern Democrats. Communism doesn't work, so you're going to have to get used to the fact that people work for businesses and trying to run them into the ground with over-taxation and a burdensome regulatory frame work simply causes them to leave for foreign soil where that is not the case. Taxing the wealthy in this case is just code for taxing businesses, because Dems know they have to frame it that way to sell a tax increase. Won't work though. "Infrastructure spending" was already disproven as having a huge economic impact during the Obama years when growth and wages were largely stagnant. Slashing the corporate rate did far more than all that money Obama wasted on solar panels and his crappy high speed rail that even California doesn't want anymore.
GOP stonewalling what, Obama raising taxes? Again, it was the tax cut for businesses and the slashing of regulations that is fueling the current economic turn-around. People didn't vote for a third term for Obama economics for a reason. Obama's economy was sluggish at best. Put your head in the sand all you want and continue crying about the 2010 Republican congress, it's 2019 now and Trump will get credit for his economy. You may as well still be talking about Merick Garland. Get some newer talking points.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Perhaps you should look at what companies said they would do, and did do, with their tax breaks: Paying down debt and stock buybacks¹. While your at it, go and look at the real research, (hint, those numbers weren't pulled out of thin air). For that matter, you probably should look at the size of the renewable energy sector and compare it to things like coal production.
You also continue to demonstrate that you don't know what communism even _is_.
And sorry, so long as you are going to make a period part of your argument, pointing out what was actually happening then is completely relevant. If you don't want to argue the point _you_ raised, you can concede it.
Now, are you going to continue telling lies and/or demonstrating that you are the kind of idiot who doesn't know that supply side economics has been an utter _FAILURE_ every time it has been tried?
1: Seriously, anyone with any understanding of how to run a business would know that you don't expand for the sake of expanding. You expand because there is demand you could be supplying.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Holy fucking shit, I just looked at your profile and it says your from Canada? This isn't for real, right? Did you change that as a joke? I've been hammering well known facts into your head for days here, and you're not even from here? You can't even vote here. XD You can't seriously be this angry at Trump for saving the US economy from FREAKING Cuckanada right? Are you really this pathetic? Is your country really that pathetic that you have to get butt hurt over in the weeds political debates over the US's economy from CANADA?
I know why you're mad though, Trudeau is doing such a shitty job you're in due for conservatives to get back into power up there. You know it's coming, and you're booty blasted about that. Isn't your country's economy so pathetic right now that steak at the grocery store is basically unaffordable? lol Yeah you know what communism is up there, don't you, leaf? XD
No wonder it felt like I was talking to some moron who doesn't live here and has no idea what is going on with the US economy and work sector on the ground, YOU ARE A MORON WHO DOESN'T LIVE HERE! Hahahahaha! Get a life, leaf. Go eat some poutine with Tim Horton's or something, you sad sad little hoser. XDDDDDDDD The fact that Trump has made some foreigner like you so mad makes me so much happier I voted for him. XDDDD Oh god, this is too good. LOL. I'll think of you when I re-elect him too. XDDD
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Since you are unable to make any actual response and instead have descended into barely coherent insults: I accept your concession.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
How fuck would you know how what the conditions are on the ground in the US from the Great White North, chuckle fuck? Have you ever been to the rust belt? Ever been to Michigan? Who the hell do you think you are as a foreigner to tell me what's happening on the ground here? Why are you so butt hurt about Trump and facts about the US economy as a Canadian? Answer those questions, retard. Come on, I'm a girl, you afraid of me? XD The only thing I concede is your mom should have had an abortion, leaf. XDDD Yes, I'm so afraid of your economic theory you got out of a communist pamphlet that raising corporate taxes creates growth. XDDDDDD You'r a hack, and even worse you're such a leftist stereotype you are on social media arguing about another country's economy. XDDD PATHETIC.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Sorry, but you already conceded by resorting to spewing insults rather than arguing.
However, I'll let you try again if you can do something very simple: Give an accurate definition of both "communism" and "regressive tax policy." There is a caveat regarding the former in that it must be a definition, not claiming something as an example¹.
1: To help you understand the difference, I'll do both for "feudalism".
Definition: A hierarchical governmental system based on bidirectional obligations of service, (from the peasantry up through lords to a king), and protection, (from a king down through lords to the peasantry).
Example: Norman England.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I didn't concede shit, you pretentious moron. This isn't a game you get to set arbitrary rules to. I asked you some simple questions (and you dodged my previous arguments btw), you don't want to respond to because again, you're afraid of a girl on the internet. XD Why are you so pathetic that you are obsessed with Trump as a CANADIAN? why are you so pathetic you are complaining about the 2010 Republican congress as a CANADIAN? why do you think I would give a FUCK about your opinion of US public policy as a FOREIGNER? and why would you pretend you know shit about the US economy or job market from freaking CANADA? Answer those FOuR things specifically and maybe I'll respond to you embarrassing looking citations to sentences you typed in the very next paragraph (do you think this looks good and not stupid? XDDD). If not, go fuck a moose or something, you pathetic wimp. I don't have time for you.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You're the one that came to my page and decided that spittle-flecked ranting was a substitute for actual arguments.
If you don't want to admit that you don't actually know what communism and regressive tax policies are, you can simply _do nothing_ and slink off like the ill-informed ranter you have demonstrated yourself to be.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I know what they are, you pompous dumbass. I have more education than you do including in economic theory which was required for one of my degrees. I told you to answer my four questions if you want to continue this, but you are afraid to do so. Afraid of little ol' me. You can change your profile to female now to match mine now. I removed your balls already.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Claiming post-secondary level education in economics just makes your demonstrated ignorance of basic concepts even worse. Your continued ranting just makes you look even more pathetic than your running away from a comment thread to rant on a profile page did in the first place.
Oh, and you can stuff your ad hominem and strawman arguments in the trash where they belong.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Everyone knows what communism and a regressive tax policy are (Trump's isn't one, you're fucking insane btw). Hilariously, your shitty country has high sales taxes, you doofus, what do you think that is? XDDDD But I'm not going to spell out definitions until you do what I want. Answer these:
Why are you so pathetic that you are obsessed with Trump as a CANADIAN? Why are you so pathetic you are complaining about the 2010 Republican congress as a CANADIAN? Why do you think I would give a FUCK about your opinion of US public policy as a FOREIGNER? And why would you pretend you know shit about the US economy or job market from freaking CANADA? Answer those four things specifically and maybe I'll respond to you embarrassing looking citations to sentences you typed in the very next paragraph (do you think this looks good and not stupid? XDDD). If not, go fuck a moose or something, you pathetic wimp. I don't have time for you.
But you won't, because you're AFRAID, AFRAID of me a girl on the internet for calling you out for the embarrassment you are. You're too afraid to do this. Like I said, you have no balls now because I removed them. XD
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Funny how you can't seem to give a definition then, (and keep showing that you don't understand what makes a tax policy regressive).
Repeating your ad hominem doesn't make it any more valid. Once more, remember that I'm not the one who went ranting on somebody's profile page over a simple mention of your demonstrated ignorance. Perhaps you should consider how that is a sign of obsession and how responding in a direct response to a topic someone else brought up is not.
(You know if you keep ignoring the first rule of holes, you're going to need a new metaphorical shovel.)
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I'm in charge here, dickless male. You answer my questions, then I'll answer yours. That's how it works here. You want your balls back, answer my questions, coward boy. Other wise, go eat your gravy fries and fuck off. Also this didn't start on your profile page either. Stop crying, you baby.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Misogynist insults are just digging your hole deeper. As does your strawman.
Every time you refuse to give a couple simple definitions, you just continue to demonstrate that you simply aren't able to do so. That you had to go off into a less public place to do your rants in response to your ignorance being pointed out just shows that you know your ignorance would have been on full display.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Apparently, you don't know what the word misogynist means, dumbass. Of course you don't know what simple terms mean. Of course, you're a pretentious hypocrite. You're on the left after all. You still won't answer my questions though, because you're SCARED. XD Your also won't refute "my strawman," because of your cowardice. It's not a strawman. It's validated by your actions here. You haven't used the word Canadian in the last several exchanges. I must have hit a sore spot you can't defend against, because you're too afraid to address it. How about you stfu about topics you have no knowledge of, moose fucker, and stop thinking you're smart because people more intelligent than you are ignore pathetic debate points like "please define this well known term you already know." You are not smart, and I'll be laughing after the next wave of Canadian elections does not go your way due to your arrogance thinking I should give a shit about what you have to say about the United States, our tax policy and other things that don't concern your stupid Canadian socialist ass.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
So you still are unable to demonstrate that you know what either "communist" or "regressive tax policy" means, which isn't a surprise given your clear ignorance. We can now ad misogyny to the list of things you don't understand.
Do you really like making yourself look so pathetic? Your opening non sequitur contrafactual rant on my profile made you look bad enough. When you responded to dismissals of your false claims with a descent into incoherent insults, ad hominems and strawmen, (and not even being able to keep straight which of your invalid implied arguments are irrelevant and which are dishonest), just makes you look worse and worse.
So, going to prove my original observation wrong or are you going to continue to act like a badly behaved child?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You just demonstrated you don't know what misogynist means, and you are replying like nothing happened like you ignored the fact I pointed out you are a leaf. Really, you're not going to even address that and keep replying like nothing happened, and you expect me to respond to your soy boy hissy fit that I won't define commonly known terms like communism because I used commie as an insult or something? XD Again, you don't even know what misogyny is and don't know the correct word you should have been using. What was the word you should have used instead, stupid? Come on, dumbass, let's see if you can post it. Come on, you chimp, do what I say. xD
Oh yes, I look worse and worse. I'm sure there's mountains of people reading you're completely barren DA account that keep clicking to read more of this exchange. I'm sure that's some huge numbers. XD
I'll give you one more chance. Tell me what word you should of used instead of misogynist. Come on you can do it. If you have a brain in that head of your, you can do it. Really try hard now.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You still can't define a couple simple terms, instead you keep whining about how I treated your ad hominems as the irrelevant digressions they were.
I kind of feel sorry for you: You are so hurt by a simple observation of your demonstrated ignorance that you have to respond, but you know you would have no effective response so you had to flee to a semi-private venue and even they you had to do anything but make an actual refutation. After all, if you did have the understanding you claim to you could have won with a single, fully public, reply to the original comment.
I'll give you a little gift though: Insults based on emasculation are based on the concept of it being shameful to be a woman. It's similar to how saying someone "gypped you" is racist against Roma.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
And, having faced someone who wouldn't give in to her lies and insults she posts a final missive and slinks off to hide behind a block.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Thanks for playing. You have proven yourself to be effectively retarded. Regressive taxes affect people in lower income brackets more like Canada's high sales taxes, the text book example of a regressive tax, which you don't care about because you're a dumbass liberal whore for your government, and communism is when the government controls the means of production, something you'll eventually be moving towards with your increasingly socialist Orwellian hell hole country that pathetically didn't officially become sovereign until the fucking 80's.
Nice bullshit mental gymnastics. The word you're thinking of but don't know due to your limited vocabulary is misandry, and yes, I hate little pathetic pricks like yourself. XD Not having a dick doesn't make you a woman, it makes you an eunuch, another word I'm sure you'll have to look up now. I also didn't need to emasculate you, you did it yourself. You don't have a dick and no woman is going to ever have sex with you because no woman will ever respect someone as pathetic as you are.
Have a nice day. I'll be re-electing Trump in one year and change while you cry about it like a powerless baby like you have been for years already from leaf land, the place where you can't vote to determine whether or not Trump is president of the free world. And although you will never have sex with a woman, maybe you could try raping a beaver or something since you are Canadian.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Thanks for addin' me to your watch, let me know what you like out of my gallery.
Cheers,
AT
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Um... yeah. Most of the permutations of, "thanks for the watch" are taken in the previous postings so... er...
Donkey Shorts!
(speak german to get joke)
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Thanks for the watch, but who are yas? n.n;
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Thanks for the watch, never realized I have something worth watching.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Hey rkpikul! I hope you drop some of your drawings in here. Thanks for watching me! ^_^
👍: 0 ⏩: 0