A REALLY bad day for liberals

[Fenton]

So your so-called "proof" that the growth of health care costs under the ACA (2013-2015) is that insurance CEOs want bigger profits in 2016?! Is this a serious claim?!

I'm not a democrat. Democratic politicians are spineless and often duplicitous. It is the downside of the fact that they are the intelligent political party. And many of them are hypocrites, though admittedly they are not as bad as republicans.

Lol !!

Obama and the Democrats MANDATE the purchase of a product that was sold under false pretenses and you blame the Corporations ?

LOLOL !!

The Democrats pull the biggest bait and switch scam in our Nation's history on the American middle class and you demonize the CEOs ?

You DO realize that if a Corporation had done what the Democrats did to MILLIONS of Americans they would be at the center of the LARGEST Federal Trade Commission investigation in our Nation's history, right ?

But since it was the Democrat party, and since your a selfish leftist HACK, its all good.

Its ok for the Democrat Party to burn Millions of Americans with their lies and broken promises, but if a Corporation does it......

Unreal. You probably think Bush " lied and people died " and you probably think he caused the 2008 Financial crisis too.

You people are a dime a dozen.

 

[Absentglare]

Lol !!

Obama and the Democrats MANDATE the purchase of a product that was sold under false pretenses and you blame the Corporations ?

LOLOL !!

The Democrats pull the biggest bait and switch scam in our Nation's history on the American middle class and you demonize the CEOs ?

You DO realize that if a Corporation had done what the Democrats did to MILLIONS of Americans they would be at the center of the LARGEST Federal Trade Commission investigation in our Nation's history, right ?

But since it was the Democrat party, and since your a selfish leftist HACK, its all good.

Its ok for the Democrat Party to burn Millions of Americans with their lies and broken promises, but if a Corporation does it......

Unreal. You probably think Bush " lied and people died " and you probably think he caused the 2008 Financial crisis too.

You people are a dime a dozen.

I don't appreciate the personal attack. Please leave that stuff in your head.

I don't know why you're making these claims.

- the ACA was passed by CONGRESS. The ACA is a free market based solution to ensure that all Americans have access to health care. It has been largely successful and helped many millions of Americans the care they need. Frankly, if that cost you and your friends a few dollars, i think you should just suck it up.
- Bush probably didn't lie. The Bush administration definitely lied. Powell and Cheney gave false testimony to compel our nation to war. It is uncontroversial truth, they should be in prison.
- the Bush tax cuts created a supply side glut. Remember the great depression?



Maybe the reason you are resorting to personal attacks is your frustration over the fact that your argument lies on a foundation of thin air?

 

[Absentglare]

So Greece should keep spending ? Because " spending cuts " ( austerity ) has been so economically destructive ?

Greece absolutely needs to spend money.

Ideally, during periods of economic boom, there should be a budget surplus. During periods of recession or depression, there should be a budget deficit (deficit spending) to kickstart the economy by increasing aggregate demand.

This is basic economic theory. It is obvious that, years ago, Greece never should have adopted austerity measures. That was a horrible mistake, one made by people who are irrationally scared of deficits because they consider them irresponsible and do not have a firm grasp of economic theory. You can't cut spending to get your way out of a depression.

 

[Gimmesometruth]

No.they didn't.

"This is not surprising given that no one in the Reagan administration ever claimed that his 1981 tax cut would pay for itself or that it did.

The story begins in the 1970s, when America’s poor economy exposed the limits of the New Deal/Great Society welfare state. Arthur Laffer, a consultant who had left the government “in disgrace,” Chait says, after making a wildly wrong calculation of the 1971 G.D.P., argued that large tax cuts would so stimulate growth that even more revenue would flow to the Treasury. His theory was embraced by Jude Wanniski, an editorial page writer at The Wall Street Journal, who would later defend Louis Farrakhan and compare Slobodan Milosevic to Abraham Lincoln. Other devotees of Laffer’s ideas, like George Gilder, were decidedly on the fringe as well.

Chait exploits the eccentricities of this gang to cast doubt on their economics, a questionable tactic, but he rightly observes that the Laffer curve, better known now as supply-side economics, was promoted mostly by opinion writers and not by mainstream economists. In any case, Wanniski converted Representative Jack Kemp, and Kemp converted Ronald Reagan.​

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/23/books/review/Lowenstein-t.html?_r=0




Dr. Laffer was a member of President Reagan’s Economic Policy Advisory Board for both of his two terms (1981-1989). He was a member of the Executive Committee of the Reagan/Bush Finance Committee in 1984 and was a founding member of the Reagan Executive Advisory Committee for the presidential race of 1980. He also advised Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher on fiscal policy in the U.K. during the 1980s.

Arthur Laffer is the father of supply side economics.

 

[US Conservative]

I don't appreciate the personal attack. Please leave that stuff in your head.

I don't know why you're making these claims.

- the ACA was passed by CONGRESS. The ACA is a free market based solution to ensure that all Americans have access to health care. It has been largely successful and helped many millions of Americans the care they need. Frankly, if that cost you and your friends a few dollars, i think you should just suck it up.
- Bush probably didn't lie. The Bush administration definitely lied. Powell and Cheney gave false testimony to compel our nation to war. It is uncontroversial truth, they should be in prison.
- the Bush tax cuts created a supply side glut. Remember the great depression?

View attachment 67187115

Maybe the reason you are resorting to personal attacks is your frustration over the fact that your argument lies on a foundation of thin air?

The ACA was passed by one party in Congress.

And lolz for your claim that a LIE, that forces both seller and customer to comply with the MANDATES of the govt middle man is free market.

I don't think you understand what a free market is.

 

[Absentglare]

The ACA was passed by one party in Congress.

And lolz for your claim that a LIE, that forces both seller and customer to comply with the MANDATES of the govt middle man is free market.

I don't think you understand what a free market is.

No, it was based on plans that formed in earlier bipartisan negotiations. It was voted in by more than just democrats. It was the same as Mitt Romney's successful health care plan. Ask any democrat, it doesn't go nearly far enough. A democratic's "ideal" plan would have looked completely different and probably served the American people much better, save for hospital CEOs, medical malpractice lawyers/insurance, and pharmaceutical companies.

You can pay the tax if you don't want to buy the product. You don't have to participate. No one's forcing your hand to buy some companies product. And, actually, you don't have to actually pay a tax, you would just get a potential tax refund garnished.

And what do you think about car insurance, i wonder...?

Are you a robot or something? Is there some reason you don't have to participate in the health care industry? Do you have a card in your wallet that tells paramedics to let you die rather than drive you to a hospital?

 

[US Conservative]

It was voted in by more than just democrats.

Name just one.

And I just happen to be a Paramedic, we don't look for cards before we treat anyone. :2wave:

 

[JohnfrmClevelan]

And I just happen to be a Paramedic, we don't look for cards before we treat anyone. :2wave:

So isn't it a nice surprise when people actually have insurance?

 

[US Conservative]

So isn't it a nice surprise when people actually have insurance?

Not my concern, and illegal to even ask about.

I noticed you haven't named any non-democrats, is this because you concede there were none?

(heres where you change your story)

 

[MTAtech]

I don't know who is feeding you this nonsense, but you need to find some reputable sources because Reagan sold this idea as a win-win when clearly is ballooned the national deficit. He was hoping it would also force the cutting of services. That's because he didn't understand economics and how devastating spending cuts can be for the economy.

Actually, Reagan was less than an ideologue than right-wing politicians today. When Reagan saw that his tax-cuts created large deficits, he raised taxes in following years (e.g. "revenue enhancers.") Of course, the cuts fell on different people than the increases.

 

[MTAtech]

Not my concern, and illegal to even ask about.

I noticed you haven't named any non-democrats, is this because you concede there were none?

(heres where you change your story)

As a paramedic it may not be your direct concern but the hospital can't run or have ambulances if patients don't pay bills.

 

[jaeger19]

Lower taxes aren't the end-all in life. It's what one gets with those taxes. Nixon started revenue sharing. Revenue sharing was sending federal money, collected via taxes, to the states. This helped poor states pay for K-12 education that they couldn't afford on their own. In wealthier states, like NY, we subsidized the state university system to the tune of 75% -- 75% of the cost to in-state students was paid by the state. This really helped poor and lower income students, with good grades, get a college education, which allowed them to get better jobs and raise their economic status -- and pay more taxes.

That was just one example. I would contend that the poor and middle class did better when even their tax-rates were higher.

That's because the poor and middle class had better relative wages. That was at a time where the economy was so good that it was a rare household that had a woman working and it was rare that she HAD to. Now is certainly a different time.

Its interestingly just how foolish both views are. One side believes that if taxes are low.. then magically the economy booms, government coffers get filled.. and there is free lunch.

The other side believes that if taxes are raised.. the economy booms, government coffers get filled and there is free lunch.

And the reality is that both sides are wrong. The economy is a much bigger and complex animal.

Tell me.. in todays economy.. do you really advocate increasing taxes on the poor and middle class that are already struggling?

There is the irony and disconnect of the liberal view.. they talk a great game about the poor and middle class having more spending and are the engines of prosperity, but they then next advocate higher taxes on those very same people..

 

[jaeger19]

The capital gains rate under Kennedy was 25%, which is what it is now but higher than under Bush. Under Reagan, short-term capital gains tax was 40% and long-term was 20%.

So? His point still stands. At both times the higher earned income rate had less meaning to the rich because they made much more of their income by capital gains which was and is taxed at a lower rate.

 

[MTAtech]

That's because the poor and middle class had better relative wages. That was at a time where the economy was so good that it was a rare household that had a woman working and it was rare that she HAD to. Now is certainly a different time.

Its interestingly just how foolish both views are. One side believes that if taxes are low.. then magically the economy booms, government coffers get filled.. and there is free lunch.

The other side believes that if taxes are raised.. the economy booms, government coffers get filled and there is free lunch.

And the reality is that both sides are wrong. The economy is a much bigger and complex animal.

Tell me.. in todays economy.. do you really advocate increasing taxes on the poor and middle class that are already struggling?

There is the irony and disconnect of the liberal view.. they talk a great game about the poor and middle class having more spending and are the engines of prosperity, but they then next advocate higher taxes on those very same people..

Commenting of the bold area above, there is evidence to prove that when taxes are raised to non-confiscatory rates, government revenue increases. There is no evidence that lowering taxes increases government revenues.

As you said in the first paragraph, the poor and middle class had better relative wages at a time when taxes on wealth was greater. Now, I don't attribute all of that to high taxes on wealth. Strong labor unions and a relatively higher minimum wage also contributed. But what this shows is that contrary to conservative thought, liberal policies aren't bad for the economy.

 

[US Conservative]

As a paramedic it may not be your direct concern but the hospital can't run or have ambulances if patients don't pay bills.

Really? Thanks for the news.

 

[Fenton]

Greece absolutely needs to spend money.

Ideally, during periods of economic boom, there should be a budget surplus. During periods of recession or depression, there should be a budget deficit (deficit spending) to kickstart the economy by increasing aggregate demand.

This is basic economic theory. It is obvious that, years ago, Greece never should have adopted austerity measures. That was a horrible mistake, one made by people who are irrationally scared of deficits because they consider them irresponsible and do not have a firm grasp of economic theory. You can't cut spending to get your way out of a depression.

" Basic economic theory " ?? What basic economic theory advocates spending as a way to climb out of a debt crisis ? Can you name it ?

WHERE does Greece get the money NOW to spend its way out of this mess ?

 

[Fenton]

I don't appreciate the personal attack. Please leave that stuff in your head.

I don't know why you're making these claims.

- the ACA was passed by CONGRESS. The ACA is a free market based solution to ensure that all Americans have access to health care. It has been largely successful and helped many millions of Americans the care they need. Frankly, if that cost you and your friends a few dollars, i think you should just suck it up.
- Bush probably didn't lie. The Bush administration definitely lied. Powell and Cheney gave false testimony to compel our nation to war. It is uncontroversial truth, they should be in prison.
- the Bush tax cuts created a supply side glut. Remember the great depression?

View attachment 67187115

Maybe the reason you are resorting to personal attacks is your frustration over the fact that your argument lies on a foundation of thin air?

The ACA was " passed " by a DEMOCRAT Congress after a DEMOCRAT President purposely misrepresented its content and its impact.

I don't like being lied too. I don't know why Democrat supporters dont mind being manipulated.

 

[Absentglare]

Name just one.

And I just happen to be a Paramedic, we don't look for cards before we treat anyone. :2wave:

Sanders (I-VT).

Wow you actually responded to something for once!!

 

[Absentglare]

" Basic economic theory " ?? What basic economic theory advocates spending as a way to climb out of a debt crisis ? Can you name it ?

WHERE does Greece get the money NOW to spend its way out of this mess ?

Yes, i can name many, but a list won't convince you, anyway.

There's fiscal policy and monetary policy. Different economic schools may recommend different economic policies under the various market conditions.

No credible economists will recommend CUTTING spending to solve a debt crisis.

 

[US Conservative]

Sanders (I-VT).

Wow you actually responded to something for once!!

The socialist running in the democrat party primaries. :lol:

You lefties and spin are like peaches and cream.

 

[Absentglare]

The ACA was " passed " by a DEMOCRAT Congress after a DEMOCRAT President purposely misrepresented its content and its impact.

I don't like being lied too. I don't know why Democrat supporters dont mind being manipulated.

You don't like being lied to? Why did we invade Iraq? Republican lies. Why do you believe the ACA does not use republican principles? Republican lies, they can't bear to give the democrats the credit they are obviously due for negotiating a bi-partisan plan. I could go on, but i'm assuming you've already filtered everything anyway on account of my "liberal bias" aka my pesky argumentative form of sticking to the facts that work unfavorably for misrepresenting republicans.

 

[Absentglare]

The socialist running in the democrat party primaries. :lol:

You lefties and spin are like peaches and cream.

Spin? I'm sorry that i just proved you wrong, and you probably don't like that.

The fact is that all moderates have been forced into the democrats camps because the republicans have given the reigns of their party to extremist lunatics.

 

[Fenton]

Yes, i can name many, but a list won't convince you, anyway.

There's fiscal policy and monetary policy. Different economic schools may recommend different economic policies under the various market conditions.

No credible economists will recommend CUTTING spending to solve a debt crisis.

Wait, so you CANNOT name the " basic economic theory " that advocates borrowing and spending your way out of a debt crisis ?

And name ONE " credible economist " who's supports more debt to solve a debt crisis.

 

[US Conservative]

Spin? I'm sorry that i just proved you wrong, and you probably don't like that.

The fact is that all moderates have been forced into the democrats camps because the republicans have given the reigns of their party to extremist lunatics.

So your premise is that hundreds of dems and one independent currently running for the democrat party presidential candidate is evidence of bipartisanship?

And the ACA is still (because you say it is) free market.

My how you love your spin.

:lamo

 

[Absentglare]

Wait, so you CANNOT name the " basic economic theory " that advocates borrowing and spending your way out of a debt crisis ?

And name ONE " credible economist " who's supports more debt to solve a debt crisis.

Sorry, it's so uncontrovertible i thought i might just ignore your claim when you failed to posit a single economic theorist that suggests a way to get out of an economic depressing is by cutting government spending.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Post-Keynesian_economists