goemaw.com
General Discussion => The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit => Topic started by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on June 07, 2012, 09:04:05 PM
-
. . . and the vast corporate conspiracy.
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2012/06/07/companies-sitting-on-much-less-cash-than-first-thought/
:flush:
:lol:
-
doesn't the inherent problem still exist though that corporations are still holding onto large amount of cash instead of spending it? And in the case of companies sitting on stimulus cash the are in violation of the spirit of the programs to free up capital to increase lending to jump start the economy.
-
doesn't the inherent problem still exist though that corporations are still holding onto large amount of cash instead of spending it? And in the case of companies sitting on stimulus cash the are in violation of the spirit of the programs to free up capital to increase lending to jump start the economy.
The inherent problem is you and a million libtards have no rough ridin' clue what you're talking about, so you seized on a false talking point to trash the corpoboogiestrawman and refuse to give it up.
-
doesn't the inherent problem still exist though that corporations are still holding onto large amount of cash instead of spending it? And in the case of companies sitting on stimulus cash the are in violation of the spirit of the programs to free up capital to increase lending to jump start the economy.
The inherent problem is you and a million libtards have no rough ridin' clue what you're talking about, so you seized on a false talking point to trash the corpoboogiestrawman and refuse to give it up.
nice tap out.
-
doesn't the inherent problem still exist though that corporations are still holding onto large amount of cash instead of spending it? And in the case of companies sitting on stimulus cash the are in violation of the spirit of the programs to free up capital to increase lending to jump start the economy.
The inherent problem is you and a million libtards have no rough ridin' clue what you're talking about, so you seized on a false talking point to trash the corpoboogiestrawman and refuse to give it up.
nice tap out.
I can only assume you didn't actually click the link.
It has also become conclusive that you don't know the difference between a problem and a symptom.
-
doesn't the inherent problem still exist though that corporations are still holding onto large amount of cash instead of spending it? And in the case of companies sitting on stimulus cash the are in violation of the spirit of the programs to free up capital to increase lending to jump start the economy.
The inherent problem is you and a million libtards have no rough ridin' clue what you're talking about, so you seized on a false talking point to trash the corpoboogiestrawman and refuse to give it up.
nice tap out.
I can only assume you didn't actually click the link.
It has also become conclusive that you don't know the difference between a problem and a symptom.
no I read it and understood it quite well. I just don't think you understand that if you analyze the evidence outside of the talking points you choke down, many of the claims are not backed up by even the simplest of bar graphs.
-
doesn't the inherent problem still exist though that corporations are still holding onto large amount of cash instead of spending it? And in the case of companies sitting on stimulus cash the are in violation of the spirit of the programs to free up capital to increase lending to jump start the economy.
The inherent problem is you and a million libtards have no rough ridin' clue what you're talking about, so you seized on a false talking point to trash the corpoboogiestrawman and refuse to give it up.
nice tap out.
I can only assume you didn't actually click the link.
It has also become conclusive that you don't know the difference between a problem and a symptom.
no I read it and understood it quite well. I just don't think you understand that if you analyze the evidence outside of the talking points you choke down, many of the claims are not backed up by even the simplest of bar graphs.
Wut?
You do understand that businesses need cash to operate, right? In your opinion, how much cash should a business be allowed to hold on its balance sheet?
-
doesn't the inherent problem still exist though that corporations are still holding onto large amount of cash instead of spending it? And in the case of companies sitting on stimulus cash the are in violation of the spirit of the programs to free up capital to increase lending to jump start the economy.
The inherent problem is you and a million libtards have no rough ridin' clue what you're talking about, so you seized on a false talking point to trash the corpoboogiestrawman and refuse to give it up.
nice tap out.
I can only assume you didn't actually click the link.
It has also become conclusive that you don't know the difference between a problem and a symptom.
no I read it and understood it quite well. I just don't think you understand that if you analyze the evidence outside of the talking points you choke down, many of the claims are not backed up by even the simplest of bar graphs.
Wut?
You do understand that businesses need cash to operate, right? In your opinion, how much cash should a business be allowed to hold on its balance sheet?
enough so they don't have to buy cronies in Washington to give our tax dollars to them.
also I'm not sure you have been keeping track of talking points if you haven't heard the bitching from crops that they don't have enough money to do....well anything.
-
I guess the real story here is that the talking point was more Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) than even I originally thought.
Thanks for clearing that up edna