07-06-2012, 01:34 PM
(07-06-2012, 01:16 PM)IMaDick Wrote: Ummmmm ya I can see where I fucked up.
Quote:"Let the private sector loose" is a general statement. Are you talking deregulation, lesser or no business tax, etc? It's the details not the general concepts that I'm anxious to hear from Romney and Obama in regards to plans for future economic improvement and job creation; including timeline and projections.
once again let me say this slowly for you, government cannot create jobs without taking money from the people, if they take more money from the people to create more jobs then they dismantle those who actually create the jobs.
Government does not have their own money.
Government creates government jobs thus creating a heavier burden on the people to sustain government that doesn't have their own money.
it's all bullshit and mirrors everytime Government says it created jobs.
Let me say this really slowly for you, again. I understand the concepts.
"Letting loose" doesn't mean "doing nothing"; it means that there is some action required to change/lessen the current level of involvement.
When you advocated for "letting loose" while also claiming that the "government should do nothing" it prompted me to seek clarification because I was interesed in what you meant.
If you meant backing out rather than leaving things as they are, I was curious regarding your opinion as to what it would take to get the level of involvement from where it is now to the point that you think is optimal. That's all. You can answer my specific question or not. If you do, I'll look forward to reading it.