"I Want your Money, Obamanomics" Coming Soon to a Theater near you

[MaggieD]

What you ignore and will always ignore is the benefits that tax rate cuts have on the American consumer, obviously not you but a large majority. More spendable income is going to put people back to work, happens every time. Based upon the components of GDP and their contribution, I can without a doubt claim that higher marginal rates destroy wealth and weaken the economy. The economy is always changing. To understand economic growth you need to understand the components and obviously you don't. Further you continue to ignore we have 16 million unemployed workers today and higher tax rates do nothing to put them back to work.

We're in a complete mess. Remember the stimulus checks everybody got? Wellll, of course, the government said too many people "saved" the money instead of spending it. So, next stimulus, they gave everybody $8 a week. Give me a break. Cut taxes across the board!

 

[Hoplite]

The solution is to cut spending and cut taxes, The growth in govt. revenue will increase jobs thus taxpayers and increase corporate profits due to consumer spending. Both income and corporate tax revenues then go up.

All you're doing is cutting revenue off and hoping you'll get it back.

We cant really cut spending any more than we already have. We've already almost sunk most of our social programs and our education system. If you want to cut, cut from our defense budget.


As to the OP, it's the Loose Change of the teabagger movement. I'm not really expecting anything of substance.

 

[Conservative]

You have to show the benefits and not just state they re there. The numbers show nothing clear, which is what I'm arguing. Tax cuts seem to have no major effect. Again, that is the history.

Boo, I don't know what it is going to take because bea.gov, bls.gov, and the U.S. Treasury websites provide the numbers that support my points and then there is logic and common sense applied to human behavior. You really are out of touch with reality and don't have a clue as to how the majority in this country live. Apparently you don't understand the value of keeping more of your own money and it is obvious to me that you don't know the four components of GDP.

There is no logic from someone who claims that higher taxes create jobs. You simply do not understand incentive.

 

[Conservative]

All you're doing is cutting revenue off and hoping you'll get it back.

We cant really cut spending any more than we already have. We've already almost sunk most of our social programs and our education system. If you want to cut, cut from our defense budget.


As to the OP, it's the Loose Change of the teabagger movement. I'm not really expecting anything of substance.

What did you learn in school as to the role of the Federal Govt. Notice that you live in California and call yourself a centrist. Centrists do not believe that the govt. should be in the role of providing for social programs as all they do is create dependence. Your state is in a mess because of over spending. Cutting tax rates has NEVER cut govt. revenue. It does seem centrists don't understand incentive and human behavior.

 

[Hoplite]

What did you learn in school as to the role of the Federal Govt. Notice that you live in California and call yourself a centrist. Centrists do not believe that the govt. should be in the role of providing for social programs as all they do is create dependence. Your state is in a mess because of over spending.

California is in trouble because we vote for spending but we dont want to do what it takes to fund these programs.

Cutting tax rates has NEVER cut govt. revenue.

Prove it

It does seem centrists don't understand incentive and human behavior.

Maybe we just understand it better than you do

 

[Conservative]

California is in trouble because we vote for spending but we dont want to do what it takes to fund these programs.


Prove it


Maybe we just understand it better than you do

Absolutely amazing, where do you get that funding to pay for those social programs? You and Boo need to get together as it appears I have found two people who spend more money when their taxes go up and thus take home pay goes down. That is shocking.

So let me see if I have this right, you believe that a bureaucrat in the State Capital or in D.C. can get better results out of their spending than you can in your local community?

 

[Hoplite]

Absolutely amazing, where do you get that funding to pay for those social programs? You and Boo need to get together as it appears I have found two people who spend more money when their taxes go up and thus take home pay goes down. That is shocking.

Funding comes wherever you can get it. These programs are designed to be safety nets to keep people out of the poverty track and get them back into a stable economic situation. This means more earning, more spending, and more income through taxes. Social programs are ultimately for the benefit of their society, but only if they are worked and funded properly.

So let me see if I have this right, you believe that a bureaucrat in the State Capital or in D.C. can get better results out of their spending than you can in your local community?

I dont recall ever saying anything like that.

 

[Conservative]

Funding comes wherever you can get it. These programs are designed to be safety nets to keep people out of the poverty track and get them back into a stable economic situation. This means more earning, more spending, and more income through taxes. Social programs are ultimately for the benefit of their society, but only if they are worked and funded properly.


I dont recall ever saying anything like that.

So how is that safety net working? funding comes wherever you can get it? It comes from tax revenue funded by actual taxpayers meaning those people get less take home pay because taxes are withheld to fund those so called safety nets. It is no wonder that California is in the mess it is today as you have fewer taxpayers funding what you think is necessary. I asked Boo to do this so now I ask you to do the same thing, the next time you get a raise don't be a hypocrite and tell your employer to send that money to the state capital or D.C. since you believe politicians can do a better job with your money than you can.

The biggest frauds in this country are being ignored, the 3.8 trillion dollar Federal Govt. and your overbloated State govt. Thanks to those so called safety nets your state is bankrupt, Obama has added 3 trillion dollars to the U.S. Debt in two years, and there are 16 million unemployed Americans with California leading the way. How is that hope and change working out for you?

 

[Hoplite]

So how is that safety net working? funding comes wherever you can get it? It comes from tax revenue funded by actual taxpayers meaning those people get less take home pay because taxes are withheld to fund those so called safety nets. It is no wonder that California is in the mess it is today as you have fewer taxpayers funding what you think is necessary. I asked Boo to do this so now I ask you to do the same thing, the next time you get a raise don't be a hypocrite and tell your employer to send that money to the state capital or D.C. since you believe politicians can do a better job with your money than you can.

The biggest frauds in this country are being ignored, the 3.8 trillion dollar Federal Govt. and your overbloated State govt. Thanks to those so called safety nets your state is bankrupt, Obama has added 3 trillion dollars to the U.S. Debt in two years, and there are 16 million unemployed Americans with California leading the way. How is that hope and change working out for you?

Let me know when you're actually interested in an exchange rather than just ranting at me.

 

[Conservative]

Let me know when you're actually interested in an exchange rather than just ranting at me.

I will be happy to have an exchange with you when you offer something of substance and actually respond to the points made. Anyone that says you get revenue from social programs wherever you can get it ignores the basic concept of taxing people and redistributing their wealth. Higher taxes means lower take home pay and thus less spending. That is what liberals propose and that appeals to people who don't pay any taxes.

 

[Hoplite]

I will be happy to have an exchange with you when you offer something of substance and actually respond to the points made.

Except you arent making any real points beyond repeating something that when I say something counter, you just start ranting about the government

Anyone that says you get revenue from social programs wherever you can get it ignores the basic concept of taxing people and redistributing their wealth. Higher taxes means lower take home pay and thus less spending. That is what liberals propose and that appeals to people who don't pay any taxes.

Higher taxes with revenue going to fund social programs means you can get people who are low/no earning back into the workforce quicker and get them jobs quicker. This means more jobs, more money, more spending, and more tax revenue. As the number of people paying taxes goes up, the amount per individual can go down.

Cutting social programs is extremely detrimental to a society, especially one that relies on people WORKING.

 

[Conservative]

Except you arent making any real points beyond repeating something that when I say something counter, you just start ranting about the government

Higher taxes with revenue going to fund social programs means you can get people who are low/no earning back into the workforce quicker and get them jobs quicker. This means more jobs, more money, more spending, and more tax revenue. As the number of people paying taxes goes up, the amount per individual can go down.

Cutting social programs is extremely detrimental to a society, especially one that relies on people WORKING.

The problem is we have charities and local communities for that, not something the Federal Govt. does well. You sound very naive and want to believe your values are accepted by everyone else. There is much abuse and fraud in the current welfare and social programs. Cutting waste, fraud, and abuse in social programs means true help for those in real need instead of subsidizing deadbeats.

I spent a lot of time in your state and it is a disaster. Well meaning individuals like you think only with your heart instead of your brain. Why is California bankrupt? the answer is those social programs that you so strongly believe in. It isn't a state condusive to business growth and that is why businesses and jobs are leaving the state in record numbers meaning a much smaller tax base to draw from. There doesn't seem to be a lot of personal responsibility in California and certainly no consequences for poor personal choices made.

 

[Hoplite]

The problem is we have charities and local communities for that, not something the Federal Govt. does well.

Charities are not widespread or well funded, they cannot provide the kind of support people need. Local communities often dont have the funding either to give people the kind of help they really need to get them back into society.

There is much abuse and fraud in the current welfare and social programs.

Proof?

I spent a lot of time in your state and it is a disaster.

Not as much as you think. I actually, y'know, LIVE here.

Why is California bankrupt? the answer is those social programs that you so strongly believe in.

California is bankrupt because of our referendum system. Voters are allowed to vote on almost anything and will vote down measures for new taxes or means of paying for new initiatives they vote for like new schools or parks. We have to pay these bond measures but we dont have the income. On top of that, California carries dozens of other states with it's federal taxes. We see maybe fifty cents per every dollar we give the federal government back whereas states like North Dakota get a dollar fifty back for every dollar in federal taxes they turn in.

It isn't a state condusive to business growth and that is why businesses and jobs are leaving the state in record numbers meaning a much smaller tax base to draw from.

Our state, taken as a whole, is the eighth largest economy IN THE WORLD. Thousands of multinational corporations have headquarters or major branches in California. We are plenty business friendly.

 

[Conservative]

QUOTE]Hoplite;1058910625]Charities are not widespread or well funded, they cannot provide the kind of support people need. Local communities often dont have the funding either to give people the kind of help they really need to get them back into society.[/QUOTE]

Why is that? So what you are saying is that a bureaucat in D.C. can administer programs in your state better than local charities, churches, and communities? You really this naive.

Proof?

Google Waste, fraud, and abuse in social spending and see what comes up. GAO is also a good place to go.

More Taxpayer Dollars Wasted: Govt’s Duplicate Welfare Programs, Theft, Fraud… IRS Can’t Verify $3 Billion of Its Own Expenses « Frugal Café Blog Zone

Not as much as you think. I actually, y'know, LIVE here.

California is bankrupt because of our referendum system. Voters are allowed to vote on almost anything and will vote down measures for new taxes or means of paying for new initiatives they vote for like new schools or parks. We have to pay these bond measures but we dont have the income. On top of that, California carries dozens of other states with it's federal taxes. We see maybe fifty cents per every dollar we give the federal government back whereas states like North Dakota get a dollar fifty back for every dollar in federal taxes they turn in.

California is bankrupt because it is an entitlement state. Everything there is provided for "free" and you have a declining tax base due to businesses pulling out due to the high taxes and entitlement mentality. I don't think you have a clue as to what is really going on in your state. You have among the highest unemployment rates in the nation, the highest number of unemployed people in the country, you cater to every special interest group, have sanctuary cities that provide taxpayer funded healthcare to illegal's. You simply are out of touch with reality.

Our state, taken as a whole, is the eighth largest economy IN THE WORLD. Thousands of multinational corporations have headquarters or major branches in California. We are plenty business friendly.

Better tell that to the Orange County paper

http://jan.ocregister.com/2010/07/16/84-companies-added-to-leaving-california-list/41399/

My state has the 11th largest economy in the nation, is creating most of the jobs being created today, an unemployment rate a full 4% below California, a part time legislature, a balanced budget requirement, NO state income taxes, and we welcome every day businesses moving here from California.

 

[Hoplite]

Why is that?

Do I really need to explain why groups that get along with bakesales and donations dont have the same resources to help people that the federal government does?

Google Waste, fraud, and abuse in social spending and see what comes up. GAO is also a good place to go.

Not my job. You need to substantiate your claim with sound, verifiable, and accurate statistics, not blogs.

California is bankrupt because it is an entitlement state. Everything there is provided for "free" and you have a declining tax base due to businesses pulling out due to the high taxes and entitlement mentality. I don't think you have a clue as to what is really going on in your state. You have among the highest unemployment rates in the nation, the highest number of unemployed people in the country, you cater to every special interest group, have sanctuary cities that provide taxpayer funded healthcare to illegal's. You simply are out of touch with reality.

**** this, you arent here for any sort of exchange. You keep repeating the same stuff and have nothing to support it. I'm not wasting anymore time talking to a piece of furniture.

 

[Conservative]

Do I really need to explain why groups that get along with bakesales and donations dont have the same resources to help people that the federal government does?


Not my job. You need to substantiate your claim with sound, verifiable, and accurate statistics, not blogs.

**** this, you arent here for any sort of exchange. You keep repeating the same stuff and have nothing to support it. I'm not wasting anymore time talking to a piece of furniture.

You really need to look in the mirror and stop calling yourself a centrist. There is no dealing with a liberal and that is what you are. You don't know the role of the Federal Govt. as defined by our Founders. You have never read the Constitution. You don't understand personal responsibility and consequences for poor choices, and you certainly don't know how to do research at non partisan sites like BEA.gov, BLS.gov, and the U.S. Treasury dept.

I really am sorry that actual facts refute your personal opinions. I am sure you mean well and love your state but it is bankrupt, it is a disaster. I love visiting California, you have beautiful beaches but the entitlement mentality is driving people and businesses our of the state. Texas has the 2nd largest population in the nation and has a 8.2% unemployment vs. 12.3% in California. The question is why?

True liberals always run when challenged and that is what you are doing. For some reason you have been brainwashed and buy what the left tells you. That is a prescription for disaster and personal failure. Trust but verify and do so at non partisan sites.

Calling me a piece of furniture sure advances your position and credibility,:2wave:

 

[LizardofOz]

Look guys, just smile and nod and act like your listening. Eventually he'll forget what he's talking about and dose off.

 

[Conservative]

Look guys, just smile and nod and act like your listening. Eventually he'll forget what he's talking about and dose off.

That is how liberals win, they bore people to death and the patience of a saint regarding their far leftwing socialist agenda. Facts have no place in the liberal world so they ignore them instead resorting to either name calling or no response at all.

 

[Boo Radley]

Boo, I don't know what it is going to take because bea.gov, bls.gov, and the U.S. Treasury websites provide the numbers that support my points and then there is logic and common sense applied to human behavior. You really are out of touch with reality and don't have a clue as to how the majority in this country live. Apparently you don't understand the value of keeping more of your own money and it is obvious to me that you don't know the four components of GDP.

There is no logic from someone who claims that higher taxes create jobs. You simply do not understand incentive.

No, you're not following. You skip what has been presented to throw in that stock comment. history has shown us that taxes have made no real impact on economic growth. We've done well with and without a high tax base. And we'vedone poorly with and without a high tax base. You have to address that point.

The economy is more complex than just taxes. Heck, i remember a story about New Mexico getting rid of all business taxes in their state and business still left. Turns out taxes wasn't the reason after all. So, while I know this is republican mantra, the fact is we have to pay off our debt. This requires both cutting spending and rasing taxes.

 

[Conservative]

No, you're not following. You skip what has been presented to throw in that stock comment. history has shown us that taxes have made no real impact on economic growth. We've done well with and without a high tax base. And we'vedone poorly with and without a high tax base. You have to address that point.

The economy is more complex than just taxes. Heck, i remember a story about New Mexico getting rid of all business taxes in their state and business still left. Turns out taxes wasn't the reason after all. So, while I know this is republican mantra, the fact is we have to pay off our debt. This requires both cutting spending and rasing taxes.

And you show that you don't understand the components of economic growth. WE have transitioned into a consumer driven economy where consumer spending constitutes almost 2/3 of GDP. It is consumer spending that stimulates economic growth, company profits, and tax revenue. In the past consumer spending didn't constitute that much growth but I digress just like you divert. Learn the components of GDP then get back to me.

I am still waiting for you to explain to us all how you keeping more of what you earn affects the economy. You are talking abstracts and I am talking specifics, You and your money! Like far too many logic, common sense, and human behavior play no role in your world. To you and all liberals projections mean more than reality. Liberals believe that if you keep taxes high or even raise them consumer activity will remain the same thus we get more revenue. What a crock! Just like with you when my take home pay drops I have less money to spend and that slows my economic activity. Unlike you who obviously operates differently than all other American taxpayers I believe I am more like others and react the same way with more spendable income.

The fact is we do have to pay off our debt and when it is at these levels it has to be done through revenue generated from economic growth and that means spending cuts and tax cuts.

 

[Boo Radley]

And you show that you don't understand the components of economic growth. WE have transitioned into a consumer driven economy where consumer spending constitutes almost 2/3 of GDP. It is consumer spending that stimulates economic growth, company profits, and tax revenue. In the past consumer spending didn't constitute that much growth but I digress just like you divert. Learn the components of GDP then get back to me.

I am still waiting for you to explain to us all how you keeping more of what you earn affects the economy. You are talking abstracts and I am talking specifics, You and your money! Like far too many logic, common sense, and human behavior play no role in your world. To you and all liberals projections mean more than reality. Liberals believe that if you keep taxes high or even raise them consumer activity will remain the same thus we get more revenue. What a crock! Just like with you when my take home pay drops I have less money to spend and that slows my economic activity. Unlike you who obviously operates differently than all other American taxpayers I believe I am more like others and react the same way with more spendable income.

The fact is we do have to pay off our debt and when it is at these levels it has to be done through revenue generated from economic growth and that means spending cuts and tax cuts.

Not sure how much I keep effects the economy at all, as long as I keep enough to spend. Not being employed without unemployment benefits mean I have nothing at all to spend, and you seem just fine wth that, remember?

And instead of throwng insults, address the histroy. Economic growth does not depend on taxes. We have grown with a high tax base. We've had little to no growth with a low tax base. There are factors other than taxes that decide growth.

 

[Conservative]

Not sure how much I keep effects the economy at all, as long as I keep enough to spend. Not being employed without unemployment benefits mean I have nothing at all to spend, and you seem just fine wth that, remember?

And instead of throwng insults, address the histroy. Economic growth does not depend on taxes. We have grown with a high tax base. We've had little to no growth with a low tax base. There are factors other than taxes that decide growth.

I am fine with personal responsibility and always have been, there are jobs out there maybe not THE job but paying people not to work for over 2 years doesn't encourage taking any of those jobs and contributes to long term unemployment. Take a resume into any employer and show a 2 year gap in employment and see what they say? think that employer cares whether or not you weren't working for 2 years?

Economic growth is affected by taxes and when taxes are lower economic growth is stronger. BEA.gov shows that. You mentioned 1983-1984 as periods of higher tax rates but the fact remains they were reduced and years of the Reagan tax cuts. People had more spendable income and as a result consumer spending, economic growth, and job creation occurred. Since consumer spending is the LARGEST component of GDP it is totally naive to believe that tax rates have little affect on govt. revenue and economic growth. Guess it is an insult to confuse you with facts.

 

[Boo Radley]

I am fine with personal responsibility and always have been, there are jobs out there maybe not THE job but paying people not to work for over 2 years doesn't encourage taking any of those jobs and contributes to long term unemployment. Take a resume into any employer and show a 2 year gap in employment and see what they say? think that employer cares whether or not you weren't working for 2 years?

Economic growth is affected by taxes and when taxes are lower economic growth is stronger. BEA.gov shows that. You mentioned 1983-1984 as periods of higher tax rates but the fact remains they were reduced and years of the Reagan tax cuts. People had more spendable income and as a result consumer spending, economic growth, and job creation occurred. Since consumer spending is the LARGEST component of GDP it is totally naive to believe that tax rates have little affect on govt. revenue and economic growth. Guess it is an insult to confuse you with facts.

Let me see that historical chart.

And I look at the want ads daily, I doubt there are enough jobs out there. I think you just FEEL that way.

 

[Conservative]

Let me see that historical chart.

And I look at the want ads daily, I doubt there are enough jobs out there. I think you just FEEL that way.

There are jobs out there, maybe not in your area but I believe they are there as well. You have your mind closed and simply refuse to understand human behavior as you ignore even yours.

The chart is at BEA.gov but like all liberals you have no interest in doing any research to verify what you believe.

 

[Boo Radley]

Let me give you some reading:

Data for the whole period from 1948 to 2007, during which Republicans occupied the White House for 34 years and Democrats for 26, show average annual growth of real gross national product of 1.64 percent per capita under Republican presidents versus 2.78 percent under Democrats.

That 1.14-point difference, if maintained for eight years, would yield 9.33 percent more income per person, which is a lot more than almost anyone can expect from a tax cut.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/31/business/31view.html

During the 1960's the highest federal income tax rate, applicable to only the wealthiest of Americans, averaged 89.4% while real GDP per capita grew an average of 3.5% per year. In the '70's, the maximum federal tax rate was lowered to an average of 70.2% yet the real GDP per capita only grew an annual average of 2.3%.

1980 brought us Ronald Reagan and supply side economics. And the solution provided by Washington to correct the slower economic growth of the 1970's was, you guessed it, lower taxes on the wealthiest Americans. However, real GDP per capita dipped slightly to 2.28% on average during the '80's even though the top federal tax rate was slashed to 48.4%. During the 1990's the maximum tax rate was lowered once again, down to an average of 36.7%, and the economic growth that had been promised time and time again? Real GDP per capita only managed to grow a paltry 1.99% annually.

Economic Growth and Income Tax Rates

That said, it's obvious that there is no correlation between higher marginal tax rates and slowing economic activity. During the period 1951-63, when marginal rates were at their peak—91 percent or 92 percent—the American economy boomed, growing at an average annual rate of 3.71 percent.

Debunking the claim that higher income-tax rates reduce GDP. - By Eliot Spitzer - Slate Magazine