• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

NeoCon-Artist Economic Delusions

unlawflcombatnt

New member
Joined
Sep 8, 2005
Messages
35
Reaction score
0
Location
Southern California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
The NeoCon-Artists are claiming that Friday's economic report indicates the overwhelming success of their economic policies. As such, they are using today's report to justify extending the tax cuts on the wealthy. Some are begrudgingly acknowledging that our huge national debt is a major problem. I completely agree that our $8 trillion national debt is a huge problem. However, the Republican "solution" is the same illogical economic mythology that they are famous for. As expected, extending the tax cuts on the most affluent is the key to their plans. And it still makes absolutely no economic sense. However, that's never stopped them in the past.

At present, cutting taxes on the affluent has no benefit whatsoever. The justification given is that if we increase the take-home pay of the affluent, they'll have more money to "invest." However, there is simply no need for increased investment capital at present.

The markets are already glutted with capital, because there are few investment opportunities. In other words, the amount of investment capital exceeds investment opportunities. (The Wall Street Journal states that the markets are "glutted with capital at present.") Capital does our economy no good sitting in Corporate cash-on-hand accounts, or being invested in foreign production facilities.

Why don't we role back the tax cuts on the top 2%, and use that money to pay down our debt? The capital created by those tax cuts is in excess of that which can be productively invested, so eliminating those tax cuts would NOT hurt our economy. In fact, reducing excessive investment capital might reduce the amount invested in foreign production facilities, which would reduce outsourcing and increase demand for American workers, increase aggregate American labor income, and in turn, increase wage-financed consumer spending.

Such changes would increase utilization of our current over-sized, under-utilized production capacity. A capacity utilization rate of 79.% indicates underutilization. And that indicates that our industrial capacity exceeds the demand for the production it provides. The goal should be to increase the utilization of capacity. It should NOT be to increase investment in an already over-sized, under-utilized capacity.

Why don't we stop listening to supply-side propaganda that maintains that economic growth is related exclusively to the availability of investment capital, and its corollary that tax cuts for the rich ALWAYS help the economy? This is simply self-serving economic fantasy. Economic expansion is related to the PRODUCTIVE investment of capital, which is related to demand for the production that capital facilitates. There is no capital investment without anticipated returns. And those returns are created by consumer spending, and the production demand it creates.

We need to put more money in the hands of consumers, not Corporate America. Only then will we have true economic "growth."

unlawflcombatnt
EconomicPopulistCommentary
_________________
The economy needs balance between the "means of production" & "means of consumption."
 
Joined
Sep 10, 2005
Messages
845
Reaction score
305
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Much of the minutea has faded, but I do remember my political science professor giving a lecture about economic policy. One thing that sticks out is a comment that pretty much any action the government takes will bolster the economy in the short term, with the trick being to avoid actions that will **** us in the long term. Judging by the picture of Greenspan on the front page of today's paper, headed "Greenspan again warns of deficit," I'm guessing we'll need a whole bunch of KY a couple years down the line.

unlawflcombatnt said:
Why don't we role back the tax cuts on the top 2%, and use that money to pay down our debt?
:lol: I thought it was obvious back in '04 that voting for Bush meant a continuation of his economic policies.
 

stsburns

American Infidel
DP Veteran
Joined
May 8, 2005
Messages
1,297
Reaction score
46
Location
Pergatory
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
If I had a penny for everytime someone on this website used the word "Neo-Con", I'd been running my own website!!!! I wonder if any of our celebries wants to trademark it? :lol:
 

culturalrider

New member
Joined
Oct 18, 2005
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
stsburns said:
If I had a penny for everytime someone on this website used the word "Neo-Con", I'd been running my own website!!!! I wonder if any of our celebries wants to trademark it? :lol:
Well they need a word for new political phenomenons like liberals who call themselves conservatives.
 

stsburns

American Infidel
DP Veteran
Joined
May 8, 2005
Messages
1,297
Reaction score
46
Location
Pergatory
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
culturalrider said:
Well they need a word for new political phenomenons like liberals who call themselves conservatives.
So would it be a liberals against liberals word? :rofl
 

danarhea

Slayer of the DP Newsbot
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Messages
43,603
Reaction score
26,254
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
culturalrider said:
Well they need a word for new political phenomenons like liberals who call themselves conservatives.
You mean like Bush?
 

stsburns

American Infidel
DP Veteran
Joined
May 8, 2005
Messages
1,297
Reaction score
46
Location
Pergatory
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
And what exactly makes Bush a Liberal? I would have sworn his daddy was a Repub, and he's a Rupublican from the south, from Texas. He's pro-death penalty, anti-abortion, anti-evironment, anti-isolationist, etc...If their is a liberal in him I keep missing it? If you can help me out, and throw a dawg a bone here, maybe I could understand what you are talking about when you say "Neo-Con?" :2wave:
 

Willoughby

Active member
Joined
Feb 27, 2006
Messages
411
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
the term neo-conservative i feel is a little pointless. for one it doesn't explain who these people are, secondly idiot is quicker to say
 
Top Bottom