US Auto makers may become extinct, caused by Unions

WTF? TBone, are you saying you have never stated that under Clinton there was a surplus???? Further more, are you telling us that you also have never said that Bush JR. spent that surplus? Oh man. Now thats hysterical!!

lol, you give credit to a president that just says there is a surplus when no such thing ever existed? Hmm...just BS, say there is a surplus and you're all happy. Good grief.

So you are now retracting from there being a surplus to comparing who is worse. Well, at least you're moving in the right direction.

Well now, theres where your flaw is. High taxes in a down economy would sink it further, causing lower revenues, not higher as you seem to blindly assume. Economy has a larger effect that the rate itself.

Pretty easy to see it. Note the trends in revenues when taxes were raised vs. lowered during economic downturns. You'll figure it out eventually TBone.

LOL, complete bullshit. The revenues are higher because the economy is recovering and there are more people in the country of working age and working.

Hmm...so now you're backing away from all this unemployment you whined about not long ago? The economy would not have grown with high tax rates. Don't forget, Bush did not cut taxes. He removed the massive tax hikes that Clinton gave us (after he campaigned saying he would lower them).

Nope. I've said many times Clintons budget increases averaged 8% per year.

Nope. lol. You're arguing with yourself!

No, what is hysterical is you level of spin. You claimed that I said the first part many times and have yet to show me where I said either, never mind many times. I admit that I said Clinton formed a budget surplus which he did. I don't recall claiming that Bush spent it but again, I await your proof.

Gee, could it possibly be that the right wing congress spent it when Clinton wouldn't give out the tax cuts that they demanded or have a Democrat do what the financially responsible Republicans couldn't do. Gee, politicians couldn't possibly do something that would harm the country for partisan reasons, would they...

Where are you deriving this BS from but at least you are correct as to who is worse.

LOL, complete bullshit. How do high tax rates on the personal income of the rich reduce revenues. Perhaps a better idea would be to remove the loopholes that allow those scumbags to hide money and then the tax rates for everyone can be validly reduced.

LOL, back to the fuzzy math thing again. I did look and saw a significant drop right after those tax cuts went into effect.

That was over 2 years ago and then it was a problem. Now the problem is low salaries for the same work.

Once again, you make claims that you can never back up.

LOL, more spin.

Just what did those Dems do? Under Clinton spending exceeded revenues every single year in office. How could the reps spend a surplus that never even existed? Is it possible the so called piece of paper that said their was a surplus 'projection' was a result of very poor figuring? Was it possible that surplus projection was the result of massive campaign spin for Gores campaign? To answer one must consider the fact that economists were saying there would be a large economic downturn despite Gore and Clinton saying how great things were.

TBone, you seem to have forgotten how much you argued in months prior about the Clinton surplus. I told you it was only a projection and you whined and cried saying I was wrong. Well, at least you admit I was right in your own spun way. Theres hope for you yet as you're learning.

How many jobs do the poor provide to the masses of people in this country? Ya, lets sock it to those rich bastards and make them move out of the country and take those jobs with them. That'll teach em.

Significant drop? lol.

Care to back up that claim? According to the labor boards own figures the new jobs created are at salaries above the median. Hardly low paying but keep believing what you may based on your biased doom and gloom standard liberal way of thinking.

Spin? Clinton most certainly did campaign saying he would lower taxes. Instead one of his first things in office was to give us one the highest tax hikes in history.

Funny how you forgot to mention who was in control of congress at the time. Actually, it was fully expected.

By purposely going over budget and attaching the cost to bills that cannot be easily vetoed.

Yea, the right wing ones were and while all of the above are possible, so is the possibility that it was purpously wasted by the right to weaken the Gore campaign, just like the Monica crap.

Just because you keep saying it doesn't make it so. I have asked you many times to back this up and you have yet to do so. I think that you are confusing me with someone else in another group but with your extreme right wing view point, I suspect you have these arguments often and with many people.

More COMPLETE BULLSHIT!!!!! The wealthy are going nowhere for no other reason as there is nowhere better to go. This is nothing more than a right wing fear tactic that is proving to be complete crap. You are forgetting the fact that they are rich and rich here and rich because of what this society provides. Sure, greed may make them whine and want more but they know that they will have it better nowhere else and are not willing to give up all this country has to offer due to personal income tax that even at Clintons level, still allowed them to be very wealthy.

And what did you say the median income is, IIRC you said under $25,000. Could you support your family where you live on this? You can hide behind the fuzzy math of the government all you want, I see the real world for what it is and so do you. You just like to hide from it in the hopes of increasing your own wealth at the cost of others.

Pretty much like Bush Sr with the difference being of a significant economic growth during Clintons time in office, unlike Bush.

Face it Miles, you keep whining about Clinton because you have nothing positive to say about the idiot you helped to elect the last two terms and want to keep the failure of our current president in the background but his dismal approval rating speaks for itself. Even during the Monica episode, Clinton didn't do this bad.

Funny how you forgot that Clinton had veto powers. Actually, it was expected of you.

LOL. Anything can be vetoed. If that happens then congress has got to submit a bill without the crud attached.

If thats true then Clinton should have revised his 'surplus' projection somewhere along those 8 years. Did he? Hell no. Kept right on saying there was a surplus right through his 8th year. So if you defend him on that then I guess the spending was all late in the 8th year huh?

Kewl. Then you'll shuddup about the the companies that have moved away cuz according to you they couldn't have.

You best check again. Median income is way above 25K. The newly created jobs are not lower paying as you claim. Please back this up TBone rather than just tout your own biased wishes.

No TBone. You see the world as YOU want to see it, not how it really is. You believe newly created jobs are mostly low paying. I've asked you to back that claim up. All you gotta do is look at the labor boards figures then post the URL here. I'll wait. Course it will be a long time since they won't substantiate your own claim.

Bush Sr. entered office with a negative economy and left with it positive. Clinton entered with it positive and left with it negative. None the less I don't credit nor blame either one for the economy. What drives it is far more than anything a president or even congress can do.

The hell he didn't. He sold us out to countries such as China and N.Korea to name just a few. The so called love that other countries had for us was at a high price we're paying now.

I forgot nothing but once again you try and spin it. Using the veto is not all that easy, especially when the congress is controlled by the other party.

Ya see, I said that I didn't forget but once again, you spun it and again, it was fully expected. If Clinton vetoed every bill with crap in it, nothing he wanted to do would ever make it thru congress.

IIRC. the idiot you helped to get elected projected an even greater surplus and have yet to see him revise that one either, even after putting us into record increases in dept.

Once again, either you think we are all idiots or are just one yourself. While many of these companies have shut down operations in this country, it never had a damn thing to do with personal income tax and in most cases, the wealthy corporate execs and owners are still here.

Hahahahahaha, you truly are an idiot. These numbers have nothing to do with what you are saying. This is the median income of 4 person homes where the income shown is the total income from all persons over 15 in the household. Are you taking lessons on supplying meaningless facts from MAX? Now either show us a report stating that in fact your median income job creation is based on this figure or show us the individual income figure where it is actually based on. I would probably even limited it to 19 year old male income because that is actually what they are basing this claim on.

I go by what I see in the paper, on line, and what the news tells me which is still far more than anything you have come up with.

The economy was still in the toilet when Clinton took office and when he left, was still much higher than when he started but that was 6 years ago. While the economy is better than it was after the Bush disaster, it is still not what it should be, despite your smoke and mirrors attempts to make it look otherwise and while I also don't blame Bush for everything, he is doing nothing to help correct it either.

More right wing bullshit and again, not what I said. What was Clintons lowest approval rating???? What is the rating of the one you helped to elect??? Face it Miles, you helped to elect an idiot and it does not look good for your party during the mid-term elections and I guess that is why you feel the need to keep bringing up Clinton. I hate to break it to you, but he has not been president for 6 years now.

lol, Congress has little to do with a veto except to override it, which is pretty rare.

Then I suppose that holds true for Bush Jr. as well for not vetoing spending bills right? Your BS doesn't hold up if you look at the dems voting record in congress under Clinton or Bush. Neat thing about that. It's public record if you take the time and interest. But then, you never do.

Ahh....defense by deflection. Ok so they both suck with budgets. At least you're in agreement that Clintons surplus wasn't real and the budget was blown by HIM during his own years. Otherwise he would have revised it sometime during his years. Instead Clinton said there was a surplus right till the end when records show spending exceeded revenues every year. Do you care? Hell no. At least instead of praising Clinton like you have you're now reduced to saying Bush is worse. Thats progress at least!

Ah yes, we should include the income of toddlers to be per TBones math comprehension. The fact remains that the US median income is WAY above your 25,000 figure. Care to back that figure up?

So do tell. Lets see some real numbers that agree with your claim that the USA median income is $25,000 or less. I wanna know where the hell you pulled a number like that from?

The economy was falling and economists warned of a collapse during Clintons last year. Instead of doing anything he touted how great the economy was. Why? Campaign year. You wanna whine about Bush not doing anything then do the same for Clinton.

Approval ratings equate to doing a proper job in the WH? How does a decent approval rating make what Clinton did with China and N. Korea any better? Or is it the fact that most in this country pay little attention to such things...making the approval rating meaningless. What you are doing is admitting your vote can be bought. Whats important in politics is not important to you.

LOL, I must say Miles, I think I reply to you just to see how far you can push the envelope of reality. While overrides are pretty rare, that is not what I'm talking about and you know it. First of all, if the President vetoed everything that had crap like this in it, nothing would ever get done. Second, by putting them in important bills, if the President vetoed it, all you would hear is crap about how the president doesn't care about the country for vetoing such an important bill. And third, if the president kept vetoing all of these bills, the other side (especially if it is in control of congress), will never let bills important to the other side get to the President.

You keep making these claims and yet, never back up a word of it yourself. The point is, that Bush is the president and the congress is controlled by the right at the moment. The left has no choice but to follow along because if not, nothing they propose will even have a chance.

Not at all. just an injection of reality. You keep whining about Clinton because you have nothing positive to say about the man you helped put into office. And after 6 years, that's pretty sad.

Again, you would be wrong. At least Clinton was able to balance the budget, even if congress chose to overspend. Bush can't even get that far.

I am in agreement of no such thing because you are completely full of shit. Please demonstrate exactly how Clinton blew the budget and not the right wing congress.

Spin it anyway you like, there is no need to revise for pork barrel spending, especially when there is no way to know how much will be done year to year. The funny thing is that I can praise Clinton and Bush still is worse, far worse, LOL!!!

I am still waiting for you to come up with some valid figures for a change. Median HOUSEHOLD income has little to do with median personal income as it is a total income of the entire family so the link you provided is worthless. The 25,000 figure came form you and Jerry about a year ago and little has changed since then.

Want adds in the paper for one. You are the one NOW claiming that it is so much higher, lets see you back it up with some valid data for a change.

Who cares about Clinton NOW, he is no longer the President and hasn't been so for 6 years and BTW, I'm not the one who keeps bringing it up, you are. Perhaps you should follow your own advice and instead of still whining about Clinton, how about talking about the problems with our current president.

What exactly did Clinton do that is any worse than what Bush is doing now??? How many of our men did Clinton get needlessly killed or wounded? How many billions did Clinton flush down the toilet while doing it? Approval ratings have a lot to do with mid-term elections and I think that is what scares you.

Sorry Miles, but that truly defines you. The man you voted for did a shit job in his first term with nothing to suggest he would do any better later and yet, you voted for him anyway and for nothing more than tax cuts for the rich. Any way you want to try and spin it, as in the union thread, you have demonstrated to the group your level of greed and complete lack of concern for anything but yourself.

Oh geez. So Dems vote for all the spending bills but it's not really their fault huh? Well at least you admit they have no backbone but we knew that already.

Pretty easy to say you have a balanced budget by simply drawing up numbers on paper. Seven years went by with deficit spending under Clinton. Why did he not revise his budget for the 8th year to match the trend? Oh ya, he needed to show you a 'balanced' budget and a 'surplus'.

Your local want ads show the USA median income? lol. I did back it up but you've decided that median income needs to include everyone including those too young to even work and have an income.

The point is TBone that you are a huge hypocrite. You whine about many things that were acceptable from others.

So thats your excuse for Clintons failures? lol