Good point. I was thinking at the gym this afternoon about what would have happened if, inside of bailing out GM, we'd just let it go bankrupt and reorganize. Instead we barged in, screwed bond holders and acted like we knew what we were doing. The end result is the government lost about $11.5 billion on GM stock.Something else I wanted you to know. I never believed Bush's idea that some corporations were too big to fail.
IMO, we should have left them to fail. Gov. needs to stay out of this. No bailouts.
Tax cuts are not the reason for high debt. Overspending is. Both sides are guilty of it. Bernie is no better either. He just is lobbying for big education and insurance industry. He wants to overspend just like the rest of them.Yeah and both parties are part of the problem. Neo liberal Dems are just as guilty as conservatives for supporting corporate welfare, Bernie Sanders speaks out against it all the time.
Notice that tax cuts and wars are big reason for this high debt, which goes back to my ''fiscal conservatism is a giant scam'' point and Obama's stimulus package included massive corporate bail outs, which started with Bush saying some companies are ''too big to fail''.
Income inequality is a ridiculous LW whining point. Does a brain surgeon deserve more salary than an bathroom cleaner?Oh please, much turn over do you think there is, how is the income income gap and social mobility in the US compared to other first world countries?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-other-rich-countries/?utm_term=.df8305f06528
https://www.vox.com/2018/7/29/17627134/income-inequality-chart
Far more than lower earning people with NO loopholes - whatever those are? When it comes to income taxes around 45% pay NONE while the top 10% pay nearly 80% - and no they DON'T earn that much of the total income.Yes_Minister said:https://www.economist.com/graphic-d...overestimate-social-mobility-in-their-country
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/rep...s-the-american-dream-lives-on/article4171456/
Also watch as the blessed job creators replace workers with robots through automation.
How much do they really pay after all those loop holes?
Sorry, not going to check out a gazillion links for LW opinion sites.Yes_Minister said:https://www.pbs.org/newshour/economy/column-much-poor-actually-pay-taxes-probably-think
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/feat...y-twice-as-much-in-taxes-as-wealthy-investors
Do you really think the pay master donors will let thier pet politicians take away thier loopholes, get real. Not happening.
Its just not tax breaks, how many direct government subsidies do these companies? That's what I am talking about when I mention corporate welfare.
Good point. I was thinking at the gym this afternoon about what would have happened if, inside of bailing out GM, we'd just let it go bankrupt and reorganize. Instead we barged in, screwed bond holders and acted like we knew what we were doing. The end result is the government lost about $11.5 billion on GM stock.
So, I wonder of Joe Biden jumps into the Dem presidential race will his slogan be "Osama bin Laden is dead, and GM ain't feelin' too good" :lamo
Tax cuts are not the reason for high debt. Overspending is. Both sides are guilty of it. Bernie is no better either. He just is lobbying for big education and insurance industry. He wants to overspend just like the rest of them.
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Yes yes yes the your side is worse than my side argument. Neither side can boast about spending less money than they did in the previous year. Less spending is never the solution it's always more taxes. If you dare force the issue of spending cuts they punish people by cutting essential services like police and fire protection.Except one party claims to be the party of fiscal responsibility, but that's just a big lie, why is massive debt through military spending okay with conservatives, why is not never looked at critically?
Income inequality is a ridiculous LW whining point. Does a brain surgeon deserve more salary than an bathroom cleaner?
Far more than lower earning people with NO loopholes - whatever those are? When it comes to income taxes around 45% pay NONE while the top 10% pay nearly 80% - and no they DON'T earn that much of the total income.
I
Sorry, not going to check out a gazillion links for LW opinion sites.
Have a nice day, I'm not interested in rehashing far left clichés and mantras.Fine, then say goodbye to the middle class if insist on the rich getting richer and poorer getting poorer. Do think the Wall Street guys who wrecked the economy back in 2008 derived their golden parachutes? What about the guy who created this monstrosity:
https://www.cnet.com/news/juicero-is-still-the-greatest-example-of-silicon-valley-stupidity/
That stupid company may have gone out business, but do you think he is broke?
https://gizmodo.com/juiceros-ex-ceo-says-he-is-doing-really-well-also-gets-1823602886
Markets based speculation and VC money will ensure idiots like this will always be wealthy. These idiotic companies will go under, but these fools will still have their personal wealth.
Yeah, rich people have more income to tax than poor people, you want a cookie for that brilliant insight, its pretty logical to make them pay more, it doesn't mean they get away with paying far less then they should, not only through loopholes but through tax havens like the ones outlined in the Panama papers.
https://www.icij.org/investigations/panama-papers/
https://www.salon.com/2018/11/25/th...the-crimes-of-the-panama-papers-affect-us-all
That sounds like an excuse for not being able to refute points you do not like. You are pretty bad at debating when all you can do is parrot the term ''LW'' over and over again.
Yes yes yes the your side is worse than my side argument. Neither side can boast about spending less money than they did in the previous year. Less spending is never the solution it's always more taxes. If you dare force the issue of spending cuts they punish people by cutting essential services like police and fire protection.
Give Bernie what he wants and anytime you demand spending cuts the new threat will be people's educations and healthcare
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Have a nice day, I'm not interested in rehashing far left clichés and mantras.
I pretty much agree on all of that. I suspect our disagreement is what the solutions are more than what the problems are.Except you are ignoring that other countries are less wasteful than the US. The US has the highest prison population in the world, that is both shameful and wasteful, its needless expense that is ruining people's lives. What about cutting corporate welfare schemes? Canada spends less of its GDP on health care then the US and the US spend more on its military then the next 8 countries combined, surely there is a problem in how wasteful both things are. But hey insurance companies, defense contractors and private prisons make a buck of government waste and the system just lets them.
No, it's the hackeyed LW B.S. I can't standLooks like someone can't take the heat.
I pretty much agree on all of that. I suspect our disagreement is what the solutions are more than what the problems are.
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
No, it's the hackeyed LW B.S. I can't stand
You offer nothing to debate. Just tired hackneyed talking points and trite slogans.''I don't like your point, so I am going to say it sucks with actually refuting it''. Great debating skills. Don't be a sore loser.
LW is short for left wing, not a difficult concept. As far as talking dolls - dude, look at yourself - you raise the same old "rich are gaming the system", "tax loopholes" "little guy has no chance" that lefties have been chanting for decades. You live is a miasma of self-pity, jealousy and entitledness.Yes_Minister said:I swear some conservatives are like dolls with a string in the back, they just use the same stock phrases over and over again. Can you make an argument without using the term LW? Because its pretty lightweight to just use that as stock phrase over and over again. Because I have seen a lot of conservative lightweight arguments on this board, so I am sure not I should take that insult seriously unless you have a better set of arguments in your back pocket that you have not used yet.
I am not up on every acronym used on this site by random posters, sue me, just spell out the whole word.You offer nothing to debate. Just tired hackneyed talking points and trite slogans.
LW is short for left wing, not a difficult concept. As far as talking dolls - dude, look at yourself - you raise the same old "rich are gaming the system", "tax loopholes" "little guy has no chance" that lefties have been chanting for decades. You live is a miasma of self-pity, jealousy and entitledness.
LOL, thanks for yet another blatherfest of tired clichés mixed with the usual person attacks and insults you guys seem to think passed for debate. Your think by numbers link references a 16 year old story by the way and your financial times link lands on a generic page - well done. As for the usual "Fox" reference - just more proof you have no logical background for any of your blather. Here's a tip - you don't prove your left wing talking points by citing left wing talking point sites.I am not up on every acronym used on this site by random posters, sue me, just spell out the whole word.
Considering a ton of conservatives just repeat talking point clichés from Fox News on this site, you are in no position to talk about tired old positions. I am wrong about corporations benefiting from government spending and political favors, explain how or admit you have nothing, put up or shut up:
https://thinkbynumbers.org/government-spending/corporate-welfare/corporate-vs-social-welfare/
How does corporations getting subsidies from the government a function of a supposed ''free market'' society. Is 92 billion dollars in corporate subsidies
You complain about left wing talking points, but this proves right wing ideology is a farce; the small government ideology never seems to apply to big business. The GOP will create big government to help big business and that proves that Right wing ideology is just BS. Heck how often do Republicans apply fiscal conservatism when in power?
https://www.ft.com/content/0a8db4f6-0db6-11e8-8eb7-42f857ea9f09
Your whole ideology is based on a giant double standard, that this small government ideology only applies to some people, not everyone, just saying my points are ''left wing'' does refute the fact that right wing talking points are worthless compared to actions of the GOP when they get into power.
You say I am motivated by ''self-pity, jealousy and entitledness'', I say you are motivated by hypocrisy, your small government ideology is so filled with loop holes and contradictions it means nothing, you guys will always support big government if its favor of your pet projects, heck that is why the GOP will always jack up the debt when they get into power, its a feature, not a bug. This small government stuff goes out the window when you guys want to start a war in Iraq and give Hallliburton some no bid contracts. How much did that war cost again? I guess you also want everyone to chip on that border wall as well, how much will that cost?
LOL, thanks for yet another blatherfest of tired clichés mixed with the usual person attacks and insults you guys seem to think passed for debate. Your think by numbers link references a 16 year old story by the way and your financial times link lands on a generic page - well done. As for the usual "Fox" reference - just more proof you have no logical background for any of your blather. Here's a tip - you don't prove your left wing talking points by citing left wing talking point sites.
No, I'm not. I'm applying long experience on forums like this when talking to left wing, aka LW zealots. I KNOW there's no possible argument that can break through the wall of ideology you guys have.Except your whole argument is ''your points are left wing, so they don't matter'', that just another stock phrase, you have no actual counter arguments, you are just sticking your fingers in your ears and saying ''I'm not listening''. The right wing method of ''always attack, never defend'' has reduced your debating skills to nothing.
Do you understand what it takes to reduce that debt? You have to have a year where you take more in as revenue than you spend on every government function. GOP has taken action to increase tax revenue. Corporate welfare is just a silly LW mantra. What the GOP has done for poor people is create an economy where more and more people get jobs and pay less tax to the government. We have a record number of job openings, record low unemployment rates for minorities and women. We have a booming stock market so their retirement accounts will be more secure. Consumer confidence is in record territory - guess they don't give a crap about "corporate welfare" as long as THEIR prospects are bright.Yes_Minister said:I bet you can't come up with a reason why the GOP never does anything to reduce the debt when they get into power or why they care more welfare for poor people, rather than corporate welfare.
And still you blather on. [/quote]I just did answer that. You haven't brought up tons of data, you brought up tons of LW spin and propaganda. Fun you accuse me of "stock phrases" yet you drizzle out "corporate welfare" every few sentences and ask the same questions twice in one post.Yes_Minister said:Why should anyone take this ''small government'' when you guys never put it into practice when in power? When is the last time a GOP government took on corporate subsidies or actually reduced the debt in any meaningful way? I bet you can't answer that, you will just go back to saying ''LW'' like a doll who can only say a set number of stock phrases, heck the fact that I can bring up tons of data and you only have a few dismissive sentences based on nothing, shows you are out of your league, so maybe shouldn't actually debate these points and go back to repeating the same stock phrases to someone who cares.
No, I'm not. I'm applying long experience on forums like this when talking to left wing, aka LW zealots. I KNOW there's no possible argument that can break through the wall of ideology you guys have.
No, I'm not. I'm applying long experience on forums like this when talking to left wing, aka LW zealots. I KNOW there's no possible argument that can
Do you understand what it takes to reduce that debt? You have to have a year where you take more in as revenue than you spend on every government function. GOP has taken action to increase tax revenue. Corporate welfare is just a silly LW mantra. What the GOP has done for poor people is create an economy where more and more people get jobs and pay less tax to the government. We have a record number of job openings, record low unemployment rates for minorities and women. We have a booming stock market so their retirement accounts will be more secure. Consumer confidence is in record territory - guess they don't give a crap about "corporate welfare" as long as THEIR prospects are bright.
And still you blather on. I just did answer that. You haven't brought up tons of data, you brought up tons of LW spin and propaganda. Fun you accuse me of "stock phrases" yet you drizzle out "corporate welfare" every few sentences and ask the same questions twice in one post.
As I said I learned long ago the futility of trying to talk to a LW zealot, so, I'm through with this conversation.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?