About
NYU StudentNYU-Steinhardt/MCC
Formerly @ GMU
Writer
TV Fanatic
Geeky & Nerdy with a twist of Indian.
Does the neocon in your life need some schooling? Here’s a mega-resource of assorted reasons Ron Paul is NOT Libertarian Jesus.(This is a rebloggable version of what’s on this page)
Awesome, I was looking for something like this a little while ago. Read on.
(Source: stfuconservatives)
“Since her election, the Harvard-educated economist, who spent 12 years in exile after criticizing her predecessors, has used her impressive negotiating skills and credibility to persuade the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund to forgive $4.6 billion in debt. At home, she has cajoled former enemies to work together to rebuild the economy.”
In September, we selected Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, President of Liberia, as one of our 2011 Trailblazers. Now she’s a Nobel Peace Prize winner! This shot was taken on April 30, in a helicopter, on her way to launch her re-election campaign. Read her interview.
Photograph by Brigitte Lacombe
(via npr)
Which country’s income equality levels are closest to Turkey (39.7) - France or the United States?
The NewsHour has a quiz for that. (Spoiler: It’s ….)
Do you have “inequality intuition”? Test it in this quiz
(via theatlantic)
(via stfuconservatives)
Paul Begala at The Daily Beast responds to the moment in last night’s GOP debate when audience members booed an openly gay U.S. soldier serving in Iraq. Watch the video here. (via theweekmagazine)
That was absolutely disgusting. Booing a gay soldier? Right after he asks about DADT? There is no reason for you to be terrible to him. Yet, the audience at that debate fulfilled every negative stereotype of conservatives.
To make things even more revolting, Santorum answered the question by saying that DADT would be one of the things that he would overturn almost immediately after going into office.
There is absolutely no reason (religious persons, argue as much as you want but your religion is not the nation’s religion; if you look at law, there is no reason for your aversion to marriage equality/DADT) to overturn to DADT.
(via newsweek)
The Fox News solution: more discrimination, less pay, less benefits.
Is this a joke?
I can’t even believe Fox News is something that’s real
Wow. It’s like Fox doesn’t even give a shit how brazen they are about pushing corporate agendas.
I don’t suppose they really have to any more though, it seems their viewership believes anything they put out like it’s gospel.
All hail the holy church of Fox news.
One of those things that makes me so angry that all I can do is laugh hysterically
What the hell?
(via stfuconservatives)
![stfuconservatives:
whynotshesaid:
downlo:
(Judging from his blog posts, Krugman is nearly there.)
Via this article about why the federal stimulus doesn’t seem to be having any affect on the economy:
Paul Krugman […] has a chart on the stimulus. It’s the most important chart I’ve seen on this topic, which has spawned oh-so-many charts. I’ll show it, and then explain it:
Okay, here is what this chart is telling us. The federal government has been pumping economic stimulus, in the form of higher spending and lower taxes, into the economy since 2009. But state and local governments have been pumping stimulus back outof the economy.
Why? Because state and local governments can’t run deficits. They have to balance their budgets. When the economy slows down, those governments collect less taxes, and often they have to spend more (on, say, programs for the poor, because more people qualify in a terrible economy.) So states that had balanced budgets at a given level of taxes and spending before the crisis suddenly have to raise taxes and/or cut spending in order to balance their budget during the crisis. The private sector is throwing people out of work, and the public sector is throwing even more people — cops, teachers, and so on — out of work.
The […] chart here measures the effect of the federal government’s stimulus against state and local governments’ anti-stimulus. Guess what? Anti-stimulus has been winning since the middle of 2010.
So the conservative arguments that Keynesianism has failed us aren’t quite accurate. State governments have been essentially mitigating the federal stimulus dollars so that the public isn’t really seeing any positive changes. Viewed in another way, the federal stimulus seems to have prevented things from getting even worse.
Our balanced budget amendment down in Florida is one of the things that has screwed us royally.
I know that conservatives like to be all, “Government should operate the same way I run my household! I don’t spend money I don’t have!” I suppose that would be accurate, if they had never taken out student loans, used a credit card or obtained a mortgage or a car loan.
We should probably listen to someone with a Nobel Prize in ECONOMICS!
-Joe
How accurate is this?](http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lrw8h4Nq0c1qccrklo1_1280.jpg)
(Judging from his blog posts, Krugman is nearly there.)
Via this article about why the federal stimulus doesn’t seem to be having any affect on the economy:
Paul Krugman […] has a chart on the stimulus. It’s the most important chart I’ve seen on this topic, which has spawned oh-so-many charts. I’ll show it, and then explain it:
Okay, here is what this chart is telling us. The federal government has been pumping economic stimulus, in the form of higher spending and lower taxes, into the economy since 2009. But state and local governments have been pumping stimulus back outof the economy.
Why? Because state and local governments can’t run deficits. They have to balance their budgets. When the economy slows down, those governments collect less taxes, and often they have to spend more (on, say, programs for the poor, because more people qualify in a terrible economy.) So states that had balanced budgets at a given level of taxes and spending before the crisis suddenly have to raise taxes and/or cut spending in order to balance their budget during the crisis. The private sector is throwing people out of work, and the public sector is throwing even more people — cops, teachers, and so on — out of work.
The […] chart here measures the effect of the federal government’s stimulus against state and local governments’ anti-stimulus. Guess what? Anti-stimulus has been winning since the middle of 2010.
So the conservative arguments that Keynesianism has failed us aren’t quite accurate. State governments have been essentially mitigating the federal stimulus dollars so that the public isn’t really seeing any positive changes. Viewed in another way, the federal stimulus seems to have prevented things from getting even worse.
Our balanced budget amendment down in Florida is one of the things that has screwed us royally.
I know that conservatives like to be all, “Government should operate the same way I run my household! I don’t spend money I don’t have!” I suppose that would be accurate, if they had never taken out student loans, used a credit card or obtained a mortgage or a car loan.
We should probably listen to someone with a Nobel Prize in ECONOMICS!
-Joe
How accurate is this?
(via stfuconservatives)
Every single poll shows that the American public overwhelmingly supports higher taxes on the wealthy as part of a package to cut the deficit. The margins are staggering: the NYT poll shows a majority of 74 - 21; even Rasmussen shows a majority of 56 - 34. What the president proposed this morning is simply where the American people are at. If he keeps at it, if he turns his administration into a permanent campaign for structural fiscal reform, I don’t see how he loses the argument.
The original question for this poll, Can/Should the Budget Deficit Be Reduced with Spending Cuts Alone or Should There Be Some Increase in Taxes? Click the image for a link to the polls.
The US has low taxes compared to other countries of this caliber. So, taxes should, justifiably, be raised. However, raising taxes is no excuse for keeping spending the same. I would appreciate trimming the junk spending rather than taking money out of welfare because of nonsensical excuses.
(via stfuconservatives)
WASHINGTON — Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) said on Sunday that House Republicans would oppose President Barack Obama’s payroll tax cuts for both employers and employees, arguing that the policy had already failed to provide a sufficient boost to the economy. “It hasn’t worked,” Ryan said, suggesting the current temporary tax cut should be allowed to expire, which will amount to a 50 percent tax hike on workers making less than $106,000 per year.
He also said he opposes the president’s proposal to require millionaires to pay the same tax rate as the middle class, known as the Buffett plan. “Class warfare might make for good politics, but it makes for rotten economics,” Ryan said. (Read More.)
Because tax hikes are only okay when they are on the middle class. Right. NOW I understand.
A 50% tax hike on ME!? Are you fucking kidding me? I actually put money into this goddamn economy, you take 50% more of my money and that’s games, electronics, and food I can’t buy! I’m not hiding my money in offshore accounts, I’m putting it into my local retailer! That’s a reduction in everything I waste my money on that keeps this economic system limping along.
They call the rich these illustrious job creators, but you know how most of them got rich? From shmucks like me buying their products and services. You raise my taxes by 50% and they will get 50% less of my business, and not from lack of enthusiasm for their products and services. When their businesses receive 50% less of my money then they cut back production, which in turn cuts jobs. You want to get this economy back on track? Give people like me more money to piss away, that’s how stimulus works! Shit, that’s how economics works!
And he has the fucking gall to say it’s class warfare?
FUCK YOU! FUCK YOU! FUCK YOU!
-Joe
I would prefer the Buffett act going through first…sigh.
Honestly, though, is there any country in which the politics aren’t absolute rubbish?
(via stfuconservatives)
You might be a conservative if…
1: You’re irate over the president taking so many vacation days on the taxpayer’s dime (61 thus far), but you thought George W. Bush earned every minute of his leisure time (196 days at the same point in his presidency).
2: You’re happy with your 40 hour work week, paid vacations and company-provided healthcare, but you’re strongly anti-union, because those commies haven’t done anything for you lately.
3: You strongly support the First Amendment and it’s guarantee of religious freedom to all, but you don’t think Muslims have a right to build an Islamic Community Center in Manhattan.
4: You believe Ronald Reagan was a devout Christian, even though he hated going to church, but any president who spends twenty years going to the same Trinity United Church in Chicago must be a Muslim.
5: You believe when a Republican governor creates a healthcare package with an individual mandate for everyone in his state, that’s a good idea. But when a Democratic president does it, suddenly it’s unconstitutional.
6: You’re so enthused about demonstrating your Second Amendment rights, you can think of no finer place to brandish your pistol in public than at a presidential rally.
7: You believe Bill Clinton was responsible for Osama bin Laden’s escape ten years ago, but thankfully George W. Bush caught up with him and killed him in Pakistan.
8: You believe in putting American jobs first, except when president Obama rescued 1.5 million GM and Chrysler autoworkers, because that was socialism.
9: It angers you that you can’t communicate with the Mexican busboy at your local Olive Garden, but when you took a vacation to San Francisco’s Chinatown, you thought it’s quaint that so many Chinese-Americans are holding fast to their traditional language. Because that’s America!
10: You deny that the lunatic who tried to murder Gaby Giffords was a conservative, even though he targeted a Jewish, pro-choice, pro gay rights, Democratic Congresswoman.
11: You thought it was perfectly normal that every president in history had an untethered right to raise the debt ceiling when warranted, but when Obama asked the GOP held congress to do it, you thought it only natural that it be tied to cutting Social Security and Medicare.
Oh my god, ALL OF THIS
(via stfuconservatives)
