Joel Pett by Joel Pett

Joel PettNo Zoom

Comments (25) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. INGSOC

    INGSOC GoComics PRO Member said, about 4 years ago

    Why not…. The Nation is in debt anyway, so what harm could it do anyway to add some more….

  2. C. A. Brobst

    C. A. Brobst GoComics PRO Member said, about 4 years ago

    We are next. Those nuke plants in southern California with no earthquake plans are going to go China syndrome. And the country is going to go to Hell.

  3. motivemagus

    motivemagus said, about 4 years ago

    Why not

    1. Get out of Iraq
    2. Get out of Afghanistan
    3. Cut the Pentagon
    4. Put some money into taking care of our own country? We’ve built schools in Iraq and abandoned them here. Anyone else see the irony in that?

  4. bueller

    bueller said, about 4 years ago

    Well put, motive . Somewhere the ghost of Eisenhower is grumblng, “I tried to warn you…”

  5. Rad-ish

    Rad-ish GoComics PRO Member said, about 4 years ago

    Can’t do it Motive, they haven’t finished destroying the middle class yet.

  6. dtroutma

    dtroutma GoComics PRO Member said, about 4 years ago

    Why not spend something on that infrastructure, a DIVERSE SOURCE energy policy, and real jobs IN AMERICA? No, that would make sense, and take American minds off of “sports”. Isn’t it interesting that “playing” a professional sport pays better than any job that actually builds something, or saves a life. “Entertainment” is FAR more profitable in our society than “production”.

  7. Jade

    Jade GoComics PRO Member said, about 4 years ago

    ^ We’ll have none of that good sense in this thread! So if you don’t mind I’m going to disregard everything you’ve said as merely the rantings of a socialist communist liberal bleeding heart heart-bleeder. *

  8. Michael wme

    Michael wme said, about 4 years ago

    motivemagus:

    The US voters have spoken: an alliance of Iraq and Afghanistan sent their army air force and destroyed the WTC and the Pentagon, and you want to let them off scot free?

    They didn’t? How can you say that? No evidence? We don’t need evidence, our last experienced president said they were 110% responsible and that’s more than enough proof for any red-blooded Patriotic American. Any questions of our last experienced president’s judgement or decisions casts serious doubts as to your patriotism.

    Our current inexperienced president is only following in the steps set for him by his experienced predecessor, but he’s doing a terrible job of it. Obviously, doing the exact same thing is totally and completely wrong. It would only be right if a Republican did it. When a Democrat does it, it’s shows complete lack of experience and skill. Not to mention a lack of Patriotism and a secret Muslim jihadist agenda.

    In this enlightened age, we no longer take the shallow, primitive approach of judging people by their actions, we judge them only by their party affiliation.

  9. jack75287

    jack75287 said, about 4 years ago

    motivemagus

    First the interest on the national Dept, Social Security and Medicare with Medicaid exceeds defense spending. Cutting back on defense will not do. How about cutting back on those entitlements that people just aren’t entitled to.

  10. motivemagus

    motivemagus said, about 4 years ago

    jack, you are repeating a popular myth. Let’s take it apart. Social Security is currently based on money people pay in for it. Defense is based on taxes.
    Entitlements have been cut repeatedly. And actually, let’s add the one thing YOU won’t accept, but there is a long tradition for: raise taxes. For that matter: End corporate welfare: welfare logging, ranching, and drilling, where for-profit companies use public lands for a pittance End tax breaks for hugely profitable companies: Companies juggle their structure so there is an “unprofitable” division in the US - so they get tax breaks - and put the profits overseas. End the Bush tax cuts. If we raised taxes by a trivial amount, a huge amount of that gap would disappear outright. And before you scream “class warfare,” I’m in that group.
    Introduce fair taxes for unearned wealth - wealthy people have more sources of income than working people, and are taxed much less on all those sources of income. You might want to think about how THAT came to be…

  11. churchillwasright

    churchillwasright said, about 4 years ago

    You’re right… Capital Gains isn’t taxed the same as regular income. Now why don’t you think on how THAT came to be?

  12. Gypsy8

    Gypsy8 said, about 4 years ago

    Of course you can afford aid to the Japanese. Just continue to borrow from the Japanese.

  13. W(ar).Crime

    W(ar).Crime said, about 4 years ago

    ^^Bush tax cuts?

  14. churchillwasright

    churchillwasright said, about 4 years ago

    WAROBAMA: Is your reply that the Capitol Gains Tax came to be because of the Bush Tax Cuts? You should do some more research and get back to us.

    I don’t mind if libs, who never saw a tax they didn’t like, reject the premise behind lowered taxation on investments in capitol improvements and entrepreneurial activity designed to stimulate the economy, but they should at least be aware of what it was designed to do. And it goes back way before Bush. In fact it’s used in other countries also.

  15. W(ar).Crime

    W(ar).Crime said, about 4 years ago

    ^If I were you gramps I’d read on about how the Shrub tax cuts lowered the Capitol gains tax from 39% to 15%. Calling people names to cover your ignorance is well…childish.

    We are aware of what the Bush tax cuts did to our economy. It made a bunch of rich guys richer and left the middle class with a $300 deduction in next year’s taxes. It made money cheaper to come by and made it easier for wall street guys to speculate. The thinking behind more revenues from less taxes (considering off shore accounts and overseas manufacturing) is a lie. In short term numbers it proves true (looking at it from one year to another) but in long term numbers (looking at it in four to five year periods) revenue decreases. So in the long run the burden gets shifted to the middle class.

  16. Load the rest of the comments (10).