- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Want Proof Tax Cuts Don't Stimulate the Economy? Look at Kansas
Posted on 10/29/14 at 7:04 am to S.E.C. Crazy
Posted on 10/29/14 at 7:04 am to S.E.C. Crazy
quote:
Ike cut taxes and the economy boomed, JFK cut taxes and doubled federal revenue, Reagan cut taxes and tripled revenue. Only a moron, socialist wouldn't understand that if cutting taxes created more revenue then an out of control Democratic House must be responsible for running larger deficits.
Yes, I hate capitalism. I am a commie. I have either owned a small business or been self employed for the last 23 years. I understand that in order for you to be a "conservative" ( if you are like most of your brethren you can't even define the term) you have to cling to all sorts of things that you hold as a gospel truth which are simply factually inaccurate and anyone who points out these inaccuracies has to be a commie. This is typical of people when they are confronted with something that make them uncomfortable.
The facts are that allow the tax cutters you mention coupled their tax cuts with massive spending increases. That increase in spending is where the increase in revenue comes from, not the tax cuts.
Those of you who claim to be conservative because you have supported GOP candidates who were labeled conservative are worse than an avowed communist. Y'all have allowed this shifting of tax burden from those with the means to those without. Y'all claim to do so because you don't think the lay bastards ought to lay about living off your earnings...and I agree with this sentiment. What I have a problem with is the shifting of that burden from the wealthy to the middle class. This is what massive spending at the federal level coupled with tax cuts at the federal level has resulted in....and y'all won't support a candidate who will seriously cut spending because your party won't give you one to support. So you go ahed and support the tax cutting GOP and be happy when you are paying more and more user fees and consumer taxes while the wealthiest among us use you and the poor as a buffer against one another. Y'all are as much a shill as the welfare queens you all despise so much yet the GOP is much more open and gushing in its praise for "middle class" producers while they saddle you with a mountain of debt than the left is of its welfare queens. Given the choice between your side and communism I take the name commie as a badge of honor.....
3
Posted on 10/29/14 at 7:15 am to germandawg
quote:
I take the name commie as a badge of honor.....
I bet your parents are proud of that statement.
Posted on 10/29/14 at 7:18 am to 90proofprofessional
quote:. You would be correct....I have never owned a manufacturing business, a technology firm nor produced energy or cattle. But that does not mean that there are not production costs involved with providing services. I can dig a ditch with. 20 men and a shovel or I can do the same thing with 2 men and a backhoe. Business is business my friend. I successfully owned and operated a union building trade shop in a environment that was openly hostile to the idea of collective bargaining. I competed against people who were paying their people 45% of what I paid mine and I cleaned their plows when it came bid day. I did this by managing production and investing in technology, just like an auto manufacturer would do.
The only business I would believe you owned or ran would be a 100% service-type business, as you seem to be completely unaware of why production costs matter, and why technology & process improvements spur growth and improve our standard of living. Nothing on the demand side can do that.
You also seem to be suggesting that production industries do no rely on consumers. What industry are you talking about that is not completely at the mercy of consumers because brother I want in at any cost. It ain't manufacturing because steel companies are completely dependent on consumers of steel and steel products. It ain't technology because they are just like Joe The Plumber...without customers they ain't selling shite. I don't think you can name an industry that is not driven by consumers....and as such the economy over all is driven by consumers.
Before you do the mike drop and walk off the stage do a brother a solid and name this industry that is not consumer dependent. I want in and I got the cash!!!!
Posted on 10/29/14 at 7:42 am to samson'sseed
quote:
So the police and army protection and the free education for your children...is that WRONG too?
Police protection and (it's not free) education are a few basic government functions for which we have to pay. But, taking as much money from those who produce and fricking wasting it on bullshite as our government does in ample abundance is a crock of shite!!!
Additionally, education is and should be a State responsibility....one which it should do on it's own.....FREE from federal inference.
Posted on 10/29/14 at 8:50 am to germandawg
Conservatism and Republican are not the same thing. And often are not in lockstep especially when it comes to budgets (and immigration).
First, Warren Buffet has acknowledged that even his call for higher tax brackets is symbolic and not a fiscal solvency issue.
Second, yes in earlier times the highest tax bracket was at 90%. I am not schooled in tax code, but every economist that I have eve heard comment on this stated that there were so many deductions, that no one actually paid that percentage. And that those tax brackets were not a good indicator of what was actually paid by individuals. This point is not argued.
The U. S. currently has the 2nd highest if not highest corporate taxes in the world. If people think this does not effect investment and jobs,they are mistaken.
Bill Clinton famously admitted that he raised taxes too much. And yes, he left office with a 200 billion dollar plus budget surplus, but who thinks that removing 200 billion plus dollars from the economy is a good thing?
First, Warren Buffet has acknowledged that even his call for higher tax brackets is symbolic and not a fiscal solvency issue.
Second, yes in earlier times the highest tax bracket was at 90%. I am not schooled in tax code, but every economist that I have eve heard comment on this stated that there were so many deductions, that no one actually paid that percentage. And that those tax brackets were not a good indicator of what was actually paid by individuals. This point is not argued.
The U. S. currently has the 2nd highest if not highest corporate taxes in the world. If people think this does not effect investment and jobs,they are mistaken.
Bill Clinton famously admitted that he raised taxes too much. And yes, he left office with a 200 billion dollar plus budget surplus, but who thinks that removing 200 billion plus dollars from the economy is a good thing?
This post was edited on 10/29/14 at 8:52 am
Posted on 10/29/14 at 9:00 am to germandawg
quote:
Before you do the mike drop and walk off the stage do a brother a solid and name this industry that is not consumer dependent.
That strawman is so feeble, even it is laughing at you for building it.
quote:
You also seem to be suggesting that production industries do not rely on consumers.
No. I have not made such a suggestion. Supply curves don't mean shite when there's no demand curve responding/being responded to.
Pointing out that only the supply side is capable of effecting actual growth that leads in standard of living increases is not the same thing as saying you only need one party to have a transaction.
Posted on 10/29/14 at 1:20 pm to 90proofprofessional
Pointing to when tax rates were at their highest but we still enjoyed incredible economic growth is presenting facts in a vacuum. Yes our economy was booming then, it was roaring along, things could not be better.
It was also the post World War II boom when the rest of the world was still trying to rebuild itself and America was flush with cash. Now, if you propose destroying the economic base for the rest of the civilized world so they have to buy from us and then raising our tax rate by all means lets hear it.
It was also the post World War II boom when the rest of the world was still trying to rebuild itself and America was flush with cash. Now, if you propose destroying the economic base for the rest of the civilized world so they have to buy from us and then raising our tax rate by all means lets hear it.
Posted on 10/29/14 at 1:42 pm to Homesick Tiger
quote:
I bet your parents are proud of that statement.
I am nearly 50 years old so I wouldn't give a frick one way or another but taken in context I am sure they would be. If a person who thinks Reagan raised revenue by cutting taxes calls you a commie you gotta be proud of the moniker because that person is not in possession of the knowledge it would take to make a sound judgement of any nature.....
Posted on 10/29/14 at 1:57 pm to Hooligan's Ghost
quote:
Second, yes in earlier times the highest tax bracket was at 90%. I am not schooled in tax code, but every economist that I have eve heard comment on this stated that there were so many deductions, that no one actually paid that percentage. And that those tax brackets were not a good indicator of what was actually paid by individuals. This point is not argued. The U. S. currently has the 2nd highest if not highest corporate taxes in the world. If people think this does not effect investment and jobs,they are mistaken.
You are correct...no one paid the highest rate....but they did pay at a higher rate than we do today.
As far as corporate taxes are concerned you own argument about personal taxes debunks the one you make about corporate taxes. Yes, the statutory rate is the highest but the effective rate, what companies actually pay, is about the same or lower than most of the industrialized world.
All any of this means is that the tax system needs to be tightened up (as the GOP has been constantly saying for at least two cycles) and rates not necessarily cut any further. The system is difficult to maneuver and comply with but the rates are similar to those in other parts of the world.
Posted on 10/29/14 at 2:02 pm to germandawg
Wrong again friendo, and on many accounts.
The reason spending is never cut is about five fold.
1. Republicans have tried to pass the balance budget amendment upteen times and been thwarted by Democrats. They realize the only way to get both sides to do the hard work is to mandate it, because of the blame game.
2. Democrats instead of being responsible stewards, say Republicans are trying to throw granny off the cliff, trying to starve children ert etc. That's why you can't get spendig cuts.
3. The liberal media make sure the federal government keeps growing by colluding with the liberal Democrats to keep the House of Representatives from using the power of the purse to cut expenditures by HOLLERING the Repuplicans are SHUTTING DOWN THE GOVERNMENT, which is BS hyperbole designed to shut down all opposition to spending cuts.
So if the Republicans try and cut spending they get beaten over the head by the media and irresponsible democrats SO THEY DON'T TRY
For you to claim the Republicans don't want to cut spending shows your lack of knowledge of the facts.
I say any person who wants the government to redistribute wealth is a commie
God doesn't punish the super rich, but demands the same from us all, 10 percent. Anything that punishes wealth is immoral.
If a guy maked 10 million a year he pays a million.
If a guy makes 10 billion a year he pays 1 billion.
If a guy maked 100,000 a year he pays 10,000.
Why anyone can't see this as fair and equitable is beyond me.
Screw the government.
The money is ours not the fricking governments.
The reason spending is never cut is about five fold.
1. Republicans have tried to pass the balance budget amendment upteen times and been thwarted by Democrats. They realize the only way to get both sides to do the hard work is to mandate it, because of the blame game.
2. Democrats instead of being responsible stewards, say Republicans are trying to throw granny off the cliff, trying to starve children ert etc. That's why you can't get spendig cuts.
3. The liberal media make sure the federal government keeps growing by colluding with the liberal Democrats to keep the House of Representatives from using the power of the purse to cut expenditures by HOLLERING the Repuplicans are SHUTTING DOWN THE GOVERNMENT, which is BS hyperbole designed to shut down all opposition to spending cuts.
So if the Republicans try and cut spending they get beaten over the head by the media and irresponsible democrats SO THEY DON'T TRY
For you to claim the Republicans don't want to cut spending shows your lack of knowledge of the facts.
I say any person who wants the government to redistribute wealth is a commie
God doesn't punish the super rich, but demands the same from us all, 10 percent. Anything that punishes wealth is immoral.
If a guy maked 10 million a year he pays a million.
If a guy makes 10 billion a year he pays 1 billion.
If a guy maked 100,000 a year he pays 10,000.
Why anyone can't see this as fair and equitable is beyond me.
Screw the government.
The money is ours not the fricking governments.
This post was edited on 10/29/14 at 2:06 pm
Posted on 10/30/14 at 1:29 am to 90proofprofessional
quote:
Also contard just doesn't sound right. There has to be a better term for you lefties to use.
quote:
I believe one of the more popular current terms is "reptiles".
I prefer "teabillies".
Posted on 10/30/14 at 6:44 am to StadiumDormRat'72
Posted on 10/30/14 at 8:27 am to samson'sseed
The OP doesn't know how this works.
If a state has tax cuts and the economy does well then it is indisputable proof that tax cuts are great.
If a state has tax cuts and the economy does not do well then that proves nothing.
Having said that, tax cuts at the state level makes sense to me.
If a state has tax cuts and the economy does well then it is indisputable proof that tax cuts are great.
If a state has tax cuts and the economy does not do well then that proves nothing.
Having said that, tax cuts at the state level makes sense to me.
Posted on 10/30/14 at 12:15 pm to germandawg
quote:false. Simply buying "shite" doesn't grow an economy. Of so we could pay half of the country to dig up dirt, have the other half buy it from them, and the first half buy it back to put in their hole to dig again, so they could sell more of it.
The same way the wealthy do....they buy shite.
Your concept on silly buying economically non-productive goods and services is a tired variation of the broken window fallacy.
Posted on 10/30/14 at 12:20 pm to germandawg
quote:ALWAYS is a strong position. How much have revenues fallen since the "Bush" tax cuts?
The reason is because even the staunchest of supply siders knows full well that tax cuts have never in the history of the western world paid for themselves....revenues ALWAYS fall....
Secondly, if true, why tax less than 100%? Maximum revenue.
Posted on 10/30/14 at 12:30 pm to germandawg
quote:This claim removes any credibility you held. Those were only top tax bracket marginal rates, and second. NO ONE actually paid those rates.
Top income tax rates in the US were as high as 90% at one time and the economy was BOOMING at the time....it never dropped below 70% during the 50's and 60's and times were pretty good then also.
Effective rates were far lower because of liberal deductions, shelters, and income break points.
What has changed, it that "the rich" are paying a far greater share of the taxes (regardless of the top marginal rate bracket). Wish this chart went back further.
Posted on 10/30/14 at 1:15 pm to Taxing Authority
What Obama tax increases? Look the Tea Party said this was "an incubator" for the miracle of lowering tax rates on the wealthy and balancing the budget. Total failure. You guys have more excuses than a ten year old. 4 years ago they were talking about the Kansas Miracle that is coming - what they've got is teachers doing custodial work after school. Way to go right wing. By the way rich people don't increase employment - the middle class with cash in their pocket does. I am probably one of the few people on this board who owns a business. A successful one that I grew from nothing - never borrowed a dime until we were mature and wanted to expand. Why aren't you capitalists out starting companies instead of whining on this board everyday with over 10 K posts next to your name. Cause your all mouth and theoretical just like those fools in Kansas. By the way, never paid an employee the minimum wage in my life. Everybody makes a living wage and I pay for insurance.
Posted on 10/30/14 at 1:25 pm to crawdaddy52
quote:
What Obama tax increases?
Look at the Affordable Care Act. There are lots of tax increases in the bill. There was also the sun-setting of several Bush era tax deductions such as the estate tax and payroll tax, among others.
For example, my pay-roll taxes are much much higher as a percentage of my take home pay than they used to be.
Posted on 10/30/14 at 1:26 pm to crawdaddy52
Posted on 10/30/14 at 1:28 pm to crawdaddy52
quote:
By the way rich people don't increase employment - the middle class with cash in their pocket does.
Sure they do. The American middle class is pretty tapped out on their ability to increase consumption though. What we need is an expansion of a global middle class. Chinese consumers. Indiana consumers. That's the demand side that will stoke the fire of job growth going forward imho.
Page 6 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News