- 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: Who is to blame for this alleged disappearance of the middle class?
Posted on 2/1/14 at 11:31 am to germandawg
Posted on 2/1/14 at 11:31 am to germandawg
quote:
Social spending is out of control in the US. That is not an over statement. The citizens of this nation demand this spending. That is a fact. We also somehow believe that we can continue to do so without raising the money to do so. This is not a Right/Left issue...we all love our pork as long as it is ours...we just do not like paying for it, adn politicians have found that they can stay in power and make themselves wealthy in the process by catering to this personality flaw.
I would not at all opposed to legislation that forced politicians to finance the shite the give away. Want to build a road to nowhere? Fine...tax the people for that road....raise the money...don't borrow it from the Chinese or future generations. This is the problem and we are all to blame, left, right and center.
It's not often that I agree with germandawg, but when I do so, it is usually emphatic agreement.
0
Posted on 2/1/14 at 11:37 am to germandawg
quote:Indeed it is.
you mean what happens to $1000 if it is taken in varying amounts from 100 people, and then evenly redistributed back to them at $10/person?
The $1000 remains $1000. Did you think it would magically turn in to $2000?
No..you are making my point for me, and I thank you. The $1000 is still $1000.
. . . . .
Let's review.
Shall we?
quote:So you are claiming you meant that Obamacaid redistribution does not ADD money to the economy?
SO what is going to happen to all of the money that Obama and company is re-distributing?
The first thing that must be asked is who is getting the money. Is it going to be insurance companies? If so they will have to hire fricking people to count the windfall and truck it to the bank. But of course once it is taken from the person who earned it originally, at the point of a gun no less (and for dramatic effect) it will completely disappear from the economy without a trace or a ripple, just like all tax $ do.
The $1000 is still $1000?
You are claiming now that you did not explicitly imply MORE HOSPITALS would be built, etc.?
The $1000 is still $1000?
If that is what you are claiming, you may want to re-read you previous posts.
They were miswritten
Posted on 2/2/14 at 8:49 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
So you are claiming you meant that Obamacaid redistribution does not ADD money to the economy?
The $1000 is still $1000?
Of course taxes do not add money to the economy...printing money and lowering interest rates do that....my point is that if you taking billions of $ from one party and giving it another the recipient is going to have to do something with that money....
quote:
You are claiming now that you did not explicitly imply MORE HOSPITALS would be built, etc.?
The $1000 is still $1000?
If your premise is that there is going to be billions of $ re-distributed to health care providers and insurance companies because more people are going to have access to insurance and will demand more services then yes, there will have to be more infrastructure like hospitals and clinics built.
It is your premise that the money taking from producers at the point of a gun will not make the same impact on the economy that it will in the hands of the producer who earned it in the first place. You are not alone in this....I hear it from folks all the time....but like Max Bialystock says to Leo Bloom "you keep saying it, but you don't say hooowwww".
SO, lets agree....when I send $1000 to the IRS my wallet is $1000 lighter. The IRS's wallet is $1000 heavier. The IRS almost immediately sends my $1000 to thousands of contractors, vendors, employees, food stamp recipients, etc etc etc....some of it even returns to me in many ways, sometimes even directly if I happen to be one of the contractors, vendors, employees etc etc etc. How does this negatively impact the nation's economy? The only thing that I see is that banks and creditors aren't able to get their slice of the pie in the form of interest on loans they made with my $1000. I understand that both mine and the bankers economy is negatively impacted in this scenario...I am $1000 lighter and the banker isn't getting his vig....BUT both of us enjoy a bump in our personal economies because more individuals have more expendible cash to buy shite from me and finance it from him....
Posted on 2/2/14 at 9:09 am to Ace Midnight
quote:
No it isn't. No one claimed the money is completely removed.
Yes, some of you will claim this until called on it, and then you will start to claim that it isn't "completely removed" as you just did, suggesting that some it has disappeared into thin air. None of it disappears...it is 100% intact and doing the same thing in the economy it would have been doing had it not been taken away at the point of the gun...unless of course it is being spent to defend the nation or improve infrastructure that pays a higher dividend in the long run than someone buying a bigger car or a boat.
quote:
Try to process this - if the government takes the dollar and spends it on food stamps - Wal-Mart makes an additional fraction of a dollar sale. The government worker makes his salary.
Of course turnover happens - but it is not directed at economic improvement - that's for sure - it is a drag on the economy.
A drag on the economy....trust me I want to process this...I desperately want to have solid evidence that this is so....I don't like paying taxes anymore than the rest of you...but, as I have said, you all sound like Max Bialystock in "The Producer's"....you keep saying it ..."you just don't say hooowwww...". How is it a net drag on the economy? It is a drag on my personal economy, for certain....but it is a bump in other people's economies....so for it to be a net drag something has to happen that reduces my payment in value in some way. And none of you know how this is....you just take it as an article of faith. Time and again I have offered a plausible way that it could be a drag....it is psychological....it pisses folks off who pay the taxes and they become distracted and less focused on making money and more focused on paying fewer taxes.....NO ON WILL ACCEPT THIS!!!! It seems like it is much better to beleive in the fairy tail that re-dsirtibution involves some sort of friction that erodes the value of a tax $, when there is no evidence of this, than it is to admit the obvious truth and that is the dammed $ is mine, I earned it, and when you take it away from me at the point of a gun it pisses me off and gets me distracted...I start to look for ways to keep you from getting my money which includes all sorts of loop holes, cronyism. I will buy this...it makes sense....but I have never had anyone admit this was the case....ya'll always fall back on it being a basic economic law which simply isn't true....and like so many things from the right it takes an act of faith in something that is obviously flawed and I just can't do it...I would like to...I just cant
Posted on 2/2/14 at 9:40 am to germandawg
quote:Your "point" assumes the "billions of $" taken would not have otherwise been spent in an economically productive way. Of course there is no factual basis whatsoever for that assumption, quite the opposite. Aside from that one minor detail though, it's an interesting thesis.
Of course taxes do not add money to the economy...printing money and lowering interest rates do that....my point is that if you taking billions of $ from one party and giving it another the recipient is going to have to do something with that money....
quote:If that's your premise, it flies in the face of reality.
If your premise is that there is going to be billions of $ re-distributed to health care providers and insurance companies because more people are going to have access to insurance and will demand more services then yes, there will have to be more infrastructure like hospitals and clinics built.
Cleveland Clinic announces job cuts to prepare for Obamacare
As ObamaCare Kicks In, Hospitals Forced to Reduce Budgets, Cut Jobs
Aurora Healthcare cites Obamacare as cause of job cutbacks
Northside Hospital layoffs foreshadow things to come under Obamacare
Obamacare Prompts Hospital Layoffs, More hospitals cutting jobs, patient services
Boston Marathon victim’s rehab hospital could face hefty fines and other penalties under Obamacare
Hospitals Suffering From Mass Layoffs Thanks to Obamacare
Missouri's Liberty Hospital laying off 129 employees, blames Obamacare
Covenant Health Systems announces lay offs due to Obamacare
Posted on 2/2/14 at 9:54 am to germandawg
quote:
germandawg
So lets view this from an investment standpoint. I take $1000 from one of my successful businesses in order to invest it into my continuously failing startup. I should expect equal productivity from the startup? Despite the fact that one entity earned me $1000 to invest with, and the other requires $1000 to continue to operate, the net gain is the same? 1000 is 1000, despite the efficacy or productivity of the current possessor? I call BS. There are economic black holes in America into which quite a lot of economic waste has and will continue occur. The mere existence of currency is by no means an indicator of a productive economy as your theory indicates.
Posted on 2/3/14 at 4:43 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
Your "point" assumes the "billions of $" taken would not have otherwise been spent in an economically productive way. Of course there is no factual basis whatsoever for that assumption, quite the opposite. Aside from that one minor detail though, it's an interesting thesis.
No my friend, my premise assumes no such thing...my premise is that the tax dollar is exactly the same dollar no matter whose hand it is in....the person who earned will put in the bank or invest it somehow and it flows back to the economy....the person who recieves it from the earner from the IRS does the same thing....that is my point and my premise...there is no difference....except of course the person who earned it and remitted no longer has it and that pisses us off no end....
quote:
If that's your premise, it flies in the face of reality.
Time will tell, my friend, time will tell. I hope your premise and these links are correct because it will mean that health care is more competitive and in the end less expensive (if businesses close in a growth market it has to be either poor management OR the competition is simply too stiff).
Posted on 2/3/14 at 4:46 am to MrCarton
quote:
So lets view this from an investment standpoint. I take $1000 from one of my successful businesses in order to invest it into my continuously failing startup. I should expect equal productivity from the startup? Despite the fact that one entity earned me $1000 to invest with, and the other requires $1000 to continue to operate, the net gain is the same? 1000 is 1000, despite the efficacy or productivity of the current possessor? I call BS. There are economic black holes in America into which quite a lot of economic waste has and will continue occur. The mere existence of currency is by no means an indicator of a productive economy as your theory indicates.
No, my friend, if you burn that $1000 it will do nothing for the economy...but if you hand it over to a crack addict he will immediately invest it in a crack dealers product who will immediately buy another gold chain or a pistol and the person who sold either to him will put the money into the bank and it will be borrowed so the lady down the street can fix her leaky roof and the roofing contractor.....but yes, if you set it on fire it will not do anything.....but either way it enters the economy again and again and again is meaningless....thanks for making my point for me....taxes are not a black hole.....
Page 13 of 13
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News