Started By
Message
locked post

If we talk in pure economic terms

Posted on 3/27/17 at 11:25 am
Posted by fareplay
Member since Nov 2012
4817 posts
Posted on 3/27/17 at 11:25 am
No moral beliefs, religion, etc.


What party is better for the pocket books of the following:


Family of 4 - 30k a year

Family of 4 - 70k a year

Family of 4 - 150k a year

Family of 4 - >300k a year
Posted by HailHailtoMichigan!
Mission Viejo, CA
Member since Mar 2012
69294 posts
Posted on 3/27/17 at 11:28 am to
quote:

Family of 4 - 30k a year


democrat, but depends on occupation. If in energy sector, probably GOP.

quote:

Family of 4 - 70k a year


Probably democratic

quote:

Family of 4 - 150k a year

Family of 4 - >300k a year


If private sector, GOP. If public sector, depends.

But the assumption in this thread is flawed. Voting in terms of raw self interest is a bad road to take. That justified things like slavery and nazi atrocities.
Posted by SoulGlo
Shinin' Through
Member since Dec 2011
17248 posts
Posted on 3/27/17 at 11:29 am to
Are we talking short term or long term?
Posted by BlackAdam
Member since Jan 2016
6450 posts
Posted on 3/27/17 at 11:30 am to
The answer is neither of the majors. Libertarian would probably be the most beneficial for everyone.
Posted by Centinel
Idaho
Member since Sep 2016
43335 posts
Posted on 3/27/17 at 11:36 am to
quote:

Libertarian


muh entitlements! -Democrats

muh moral decay! -Republicans
Posted by airfernando
Member since Oct 2015
15248 posts
Posted on 3/27/17 at 11:37 am to
quote:

No moral beliefs, religion, etc
why not just say no oxygen?
Posted by Wtodd
Tampa, FL
Member since Oct 2013
67482 posts
Posted on 3/27/17 at 11:44 am to
quote:

Family of 4 - 30k a year
Family of 4 - 70k a year
Family of 4 - 150k a year
Family of 4 - >300k a year

Reps and it ain't close
Posted by BamaAtl
South of North
Member since Dec 2009
21894 posts
Posted on 3/27/17 at 11:44 am to
quote:

Voting in terms of raw self interest is a bad road to take. That justified things like slavery and nazi atrocities.


And trickle-down economics.
Posted by BigJim
Baton Rouge
Member since Jan 2010
14491 posts
Posted on 3/27/17 at 12:13 pm to
quote:

Are we talking short term or long term?


This. Long-term they would all be better with stronger economic growth.
Posted by CrazyJoeDivola
Member since Jan 2013
592 posts
Posted on 3/27/17 at 12:26 pm to
If you want to move from the first group to the last, Republicans.

If you want to move from the last group to the first, Democrats (Via Taxation and wealth redistribution)
Posted by tedmarkuson
texas
Member since Feb 2015
2592 posts
Posted on 3/27/17 at 12:30 pm to
there are over 600,000 elective offices in the united states, 55 are held by libertarians.

you guy's really aren't a thing.
Posted by TheXman
Middle America
Member since Feb 2017
2975 posts
Posted on 3/27/17 at 12:30 pm to
quote:

No moral beliefs, religion, etc.


What about Russian beliefs? Seems to be the biggest thing going on these days on the left
Posted by BlackAdam
Member since Jan 2016
6450 posts
Posted on 3/27/17 at 12:55 pm to
quote:


you guy's really aren't a thing.



And look at the sorry state of political discourse and governance in this county. Maybe they should be more of a thing. I can't say we as I'm registered with no party affiliation.
Posted by Taxing Authority
Houston
Member since Feb 2010
57223 posts
Posted on 3/27/17 at 12:55 pm to
quote:

What party is better for the pocket books of the following:
None. Government is hurting all of them.
This post was edited on 3/27/17 at 12:57 pm
Posted by Taxing Authority
Houston
Member since Feb 2010
57223 posts
Posted on 3/27/17 at 12:56 pm to
quote:

And trickle-down economics.
Silly reply. There aren't enough "rich" voters to swing elections.
Posted by BamaAtl
South of North
Member since Dec 2009
21894 posts
Posted on 3/27/17 at 5:56 pm to
quote:

There aren't enough "rich" voters to swing elections.


The justification is always that people want to preserve cheap taxes on the rich because they believe they're one step away from being part of the rich....when they really aren't and never will be.
Posted by Vols&Shaft83
Throbbing Member
Member since Dec 2012
69908 posts
Posted on 3/27/17 at 6:02 pm to
BamaAtl believes the little man can't get ahead, and so he/she votes to kick the little man in balls with excessive taxation and regulation.


Just wanted to let the board know the kind of fricking idiot we're dealing with here.
Posted by Taxing Authority
Houston
Member since Feb 2010
57223 posts
Posted on 3/27/17 at 6:05 pm to
quote:

The justification is always that people want to preserve cheap taxes on the rich because they believe they're one step away from being part of the rich....
Or maybe they don't care to mooch off their neighbors.

My grandfather was poor as poor gets. But he never wanted to take other people stuff just because they had more.
Posted by HailHailtoMichigan!
Mission Viejo, CA
Member since Mar 2012
69294 posts
Posted on 3/27/17 at 6:08 pm to
???

there is strong empirical evidence that households move up and down the economic ladder over even very short periods of time.

Fed reserve has studied this


LINK


Posted by Vols&Shaft83
Throbbing Member
Member since Dec 2012
69908 posts
Posted on 3/27/17 at 6:09 pm to
quote:

My grandfather was poor as poor gets. But he never wanted to take other people stuff just because they had more.


Because your grandfather was an honest man and not a blood sucking leech
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 2Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram