Jeff Stahler by Jeff Stahler

Jeff Stahler

Comments (17) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. pirate227

    pirate227 said, about 1 year ago


  2. Stipple

    Stipple said, about 1 year ago

    At least we are not like those countries that take a realistic look at their labor numbers.
    Too many people and not enough jobs so they give away the basics for free and have anybody that wants to work a job.
    So many people would rather work regulations were enacted to limit the the time to 150 days per year at 6 hours per day.
    If that is all the jobs there are, then either most folks can’t work or everyone can work a little.
    Food and shelter for everyone, turns out there is enough pride that more than enough folks fight for employment just to have a job.
    Too many in America have put an evil name to that structure and consider it the work of the devil, so now a growing majority are told they are useless shirkers.
    The fruits of these planted attitudes are growing as well.
    The reaping is getting worse and the answer going out is “More of the same only harder”

  3. dtroutma

    dtroutma GoComics PRO Member said, about 1 year ago

    Reagan pulled out, went into a “war on drugs” (fail) and a war against the middle class (success), and of course that stupendous “victory” in Grenada, also costing us troops, in another fraud paving the way for Panama, Afghanistan, and Iraq in the American mind of “we can’t lose”.

  4. Travis Samuels

    Travis Samuels said, about 1 year ago

    We already have.

  5. Enoki

    Enoki said, about 1 year ago

    LBJ started that particular “war” just over 50 years ago and we are further from winning it today than we were then. Record numbers on unemployment… Record numbers getting food stamps… More without health insurance today than even just five years ago…
    Seems to me this is a “war” we lost not because of the Right but because of the Progressive Left.

  6. Michael wme

    Michael wme said, about 1 year ago


    Wow! Everything you write sounds like it might be true, but many here will say it’s all lies. Links? References?

  7. Michael wme

    Michael wme said, about 1 year ago


    You can’t see that the massive Grenada invasion force was an existential threat to the US, a more serious threat than Japan combined with Germany combined with the UK combined with the Red Indians? And, with the US on the brink of extinction, with everyone thinking Grenada would vanquish the US, St Reagan saved the US bacon. (After which, Islamic Fundamentalists destroyed the World Trade Center, because they don’t like American bacon.)

  8. Michael wme

    Michael wme said, about 1 year ago

    There is an economic model called the IS/LM which says that, if one taxes the rich and uses the money to feed the poor, the nominal GDP must increase.

    Freshwater economists have irrefutably proved that the IS/LM model is wrong, by saying it’s wrong, so no proof is needed.

    So cutting off SNAP and unemployment will eventually help the economy.

    How long will it take for the recipients of the slashed SNAP and unemployment to starve and drop off the rolls and thereby help the economy by reducing the figures for poverty and unemployment?

  9. neatslob

    neatslob said, about 1 year ago


    Of course it’s the left’s fault. If we hadn’t given help to the poor to stay alive, they’d all have starved by now and there’d be no poverty, right? Economic policy that kills people I just can’t get behind.

  10. Enoki

    Enoki said, about 1 year ago


    Not at all. By Progressive Leftist policies both here and abroad (as in Europe) that gave or give generous free government benefits to “the poor” all Progressives did is prolong poverty and encourage remaining impoverished.
    Additionally, the often onerous taxes placed on the rest of society to support and pay for those policies just restrained and made it more difficult for those with funds to do anything themselves.
    Heavy handed and expensive goverment social support systems just increase the stratification of society and make it more difficult for those at the bottom in particular to break out of a permanent cycle of poverty.
    Government policy has killed more people by far than leaving them on their own devices to succeed or fail.

  11. Enoki

    Enoki said, about 1 year ago

    Oh, by the way, the single largest increase in poverty in the US in the last 50+ years has been with the massive increase in single motherhood.
    Also, the choice is not between someone getting government benefits and starving. Just because government benefits end doesn’t mean that someone will just sit and starve instead. As the end of perpetual welfare during the Clinton administration showed what happens instead is that those who got cut off benefits they get employed, maybe at a less than desirable job, and find a way to make a living rather than starve.
    LBJ’s “Model City Program” of massive handouts failed. Public housing like the Watts project failed (such projects have been failures in Europe too…) as two examples.
    Having the government just hand someone a living does not work as a way of social advancement. History shows it.

  12. Kaffekup

    Kaffekup said, about 1 year ago

    republicanism: The poor have too much money and the rich have too little.

  13. Stipple

    Stipple said, about 1 year ago

    @Michael wme

    “might be true…links? References?”
    No links or hard numbers, I was involved with private aircraft sales around Norway and the Netherlands.
    No poor people but also no rich people.
    Aircraft we sold to individuals in America got sold to groups of ten or more in Scandinavian areas.
    All these customers worked three and four day weeks
    This was the norm for indeed they do take all the rich folks money and subsidize heat and homes for all.
    It works with the mindset of the people, America has an attitude that will not accept this sharing concept.

  14. churchillwasright

    churchillwasright said, about 1 year ago


    The Netherlands, you say…

    Dutch King Willem-Alexander declares the end of the welfare state

    Seems that didn’t work out too well for them…

  15. DLee4144

    DLee4144 GoComics PRO Member said, about 1 year ago

    My 30 year old nephew who inherited a building company recently told me that he was angry with the welfare state. He explained that he couldn’t keep people on the job. They would work long enough to qualify to go back on unemployment , stay there until it ran out then come back to work. This kid was standing in his 3/4 million dollar house telling me that he paid his employees so little that they were better off on welfare, and he thought that THEY should be ashamed of themselves. And, he was serious!!!!

  16. Load the rest of the comments (2).