What are the real issues in the U.S.?

[jet57]

I just explained the facts, and you then change the time span to "our history"? No sorry. You can't take a short term problem of job creation, and cite a long term decline in taxation.

Because if you want to look at the long term, growth in this country was faster during the periods of lower taxes, than during the periods of higher taxes.

Further, "everybosy's" is not out of work. You seem to just make up random crap. Lastly, did you read my response? I covered why corps are not making jobs.

Ya'know, I don't what facts you're blathering about that you have entered: I haven't seen any.

I don't know anyone who provides nothing to the American public, according to the example you gave. Could you tell me specifically who you are referring to?

You just asked me a question in your previous post and I answered it.

You lost the last argument, so . . . And consider this: when we have the most growth is when oil prices are down.

 

[Sparkles]

Ya'know, I don't what facts you're blathering about that you have entered: I haven't seen any.

If you can't follow a conversation, then you are not mature enough to be on this forum. I'll repeat this one time.

We haven't even had a tax cut since 2002. And even then is was about 3% cut. Wow! $3 in every $100? My goodness, they could buy a Wendy's burger!

This blathering, is a fact. Now, can you dispute the fact, or not? If not, shut up.

You just asked me a question in your previous post and I answered it.

You lost the last argument, so . . . And consider this: when we have the most growth is when oil prices are down.

Again, nothing you said contradict, addressed, or made a counter point to my position.

Put up, or shut up. Those are you options.

 

[Dittohead not!]

I just explained the facts, and you then change the time span to "our history"? No sorry. You can't take a short term problem of job creation, and cite a long term decline in taxation.

Because if you want to look at the long term, growth in this country was faster during the periods of lower taxes, than during the periods of higher taxes.

Further, "everybosy's" is not out of work. You seem to just make up random crap. Lastly, did you read my response? I covered why corps are not making jobs.

Growth was faster in the '50s and early '60s, when the top marginal tax rate was about 90%.

 

[Sparkles]

Growth was faster in the '50s and early '60s, when the top marginal tax rate was about 90%.

Funny. I have not read that. And in fact the opposite. Could you cite a source I could read up on?

 

[ttwtt78640]

Disclaimer: Didn't read either of your links

The economy. We can not print our way out of this mess.

Stop the spending. Cut every gov't program by the same amount. None are out of bounds and every program needs to tighen its belt.

The taxpayers are sure tighening up their "shot group", time for the feds to do the same. JMO

That "cut every program by the same amount" attitutde is insane. Are the NASA art program, the cowboy poetry festival and the social security system equally important, thus should be handled equally? That is the nonsense logic that got us into this financial mess to begin with. Once a gov't program is started it grows at basically the same rate, and expands to spend "equally" (proportionaltely?) in all states, e.g. we have "interstate" highways on Oahu, that obviously connect to no other state, just to be "fair" to Hawaii. How many times have we heard from federal politicians that they will cut waste, fraud and abuse?

 

[Dittohead not!]

Funny. I have not read that. And in fact the opposite. Could you cite a source I could read up on?

No kidding? I thought everyone knew that.

Well, anyway, here's some interesting reading about that era:

Conclusion

The end of World War II led to the end of the Great Depression and the start of a long period of economic expansion through the 1950s. It is quite ironical that the most destructive war in history would contribute to the emergence of the strongest and biggest economy in the world. The confidence on the economy was obviously brought about by the country's victory in the War. Tempered by strong collaboration between the government, businesses and the consumers, the U.S. emerged from the War a lot stronger and economically strengthened. Industrial expansion during wartime brought economic impetus that would be carried on even after WWII. The fact that most of the major economies were slow to recover from the after effects of the conflict placed the United States at absolute and relative advantage over both its allies and its enemies.

 

[jet57]

If you can't follow a conversation, then you are not mature enough to be on this forum. I'll repeat this one time.



This blathering, is a fact. Now, can you dispute the fact, or not? If not, shut up.



Again, nothing you said contradict, addressed, or made a counter point to my position.

Put up, or shut up. Those are you options.

(chuckle)

Number one, I don't follow discussions you have with anybody else, so as I said, you've not blathered any facts that I'm aware of: you asked me a qustion and I answered it. Secondly, the rich have had their taxes cut quite a bit since Reagan and Bush Historical Top Tax Rate so, you assertions are quite wrong.

 

[presluc]

Funny. I have not read that. And in fact the opposite. Could you cite a source I could read up on?

I could ask a question.

If you compare the national debt from the 1950's and early 60's to the national debt of 2000 till now which is larger and by how much?eace

 

[VTA]

With all due respect, the real issues with the United States are the people of the United States. First is the proclivity for just about everyone to point the finger to assign blame, but that finger never turns inward. It's always the Republicans, it's always the Democrats, it's always corporations, it's always the banks. As far as I can tell, it is never the people. The people who voted for the Republicans, the Democrats, who stand on line to shell out money to the corporations for things they really don't need and keep returning to the banks for loans to buy those things they don't need.

It's always the system, despite it being the same system that allowed us to gain real prosperity.

It's always the mainstream media, the mainstream media can just as easily be ignored if people weren't married to their electronic devices and the illusion of being immediately informed of things that either aren't true or aren't relevant. The people behind the misuse of the msm to fabricate, obfuscate and misinterpret know full well that a generation has been weened on putting it's faith in it and are pretty much addicted to it.

The lack of education as to what our Representative Democracy was really supposed to accomplish is entirely undermined by foolish partisan loyalties, with a generation that just seems to be clamoring for a political monopoly on power as it buys lock stock and barrel any ham handed story about the opposing political party's transgressions while endlessly winking at the sins of it's chosen political party.

The problem starts with us, the people.

 

[jet57]

With all due respect, the real issues with the United States are the people of the United States. First is the proclivity for just about everyone to point the finger to assign blame, but that finger never turns inward. It's always the Republicans, it's always the Democrats, it's always corporations, it's always the banks. As far as I can tell, it is never the people. The people who voted for the Republicans, the Democrats, who stand on line to shell out money to the corporations for things they really don't need and keep returning to the banks for loans to buy those things they don't need.

It's always the system, despite it being the same system that allowed us to gain real prosperity.

It's always the mainstream media, the mainstream media can just as easily be ignored if people weren't married to their electronic devices and the illusion of being immediately informed of things that either aren't true or aren't relevant. The people behind the misuse of the msm to fabricate, obfuscate and misinterpret know full well that a generation has been weened on putting it's faith in it and are pretty much addicted to it.

The lack of education as to what our Representative Democracy was really supposed to accomplish is entirely undermined by foolish partisan loyalties, with a generation that just seems to be clamoring for a political monopoly on power as it buys lock stock and barrel any ham handed story about the opposing political party's transgressions while endlessly winking at the sins of it's chosen political party.

The problem starts with us, the people.

Yes; that's what George Carlin said and that's why I think that democracy has failed in this country. The one part of the equation "of the people" is that it takes a great deal of money to run for office these days and so we do not get to hear from a broader field.

 

[VTA]

Yes; that's what George Carlin said and that's why I think that democracy has failed in this country. The one part of the equation "of the people" is that it takes a great deal of money to run for office these days and so we do not get to hear from a broader field.

I'm not sure it's Democracy that's failed. Systems are dumb and mute and are only as effective as the men who martial them. The only thing a system dictates is whether or not it has inherently built in (agreed upon) an absolute freedom that it itself affords the ability for men to destroy it with it's own precepts.

We've allowed it and like you'd stated, money has become the driving force instead of the will of the people. It's not even hidden that they're prostituting themselves out to the highest bidders and frankly the common mann can't match that.

 

[Sparkles]

I could ask a question.

If you compare the national debt from the 1950's and early 60's to the national debt of 2000 till now which is larger and by how much?eace

Who cares? What relevance does it have to the topic at hand?

 

[jet57]

I'm not sure it's Democracy that's failed. Systems are dumb and mute and are only as effective as the men who martial them. The only thing a system dictates is whether or not it has inherently built in (agreed upon) an absolute freedom that it itself affords the ability for men to destroy it with it's own precepts.

We've allowed it and like you'd stated, money has become the driving force instead of the will of the people. It's not even hidden that they're prostituting themselves out to the highest bidders and frankly the common mann can't match that.

I say that democracy has failed in the US and I say that advisedly. Democracy is only a function of the people who create and maintain it. The people of this country have not maintained democracy in this country: we get to go the poles, but that is only a shell of what we once were when we were great.

Deocracy still exists here, but no one's really fighting for it.

 

[Sparkles]

I'm not sure it's Democracy that's failed. Systems are dumb and mute and are only as effective as the men who martial them. The only thing a system dictates is whether or not it has inherently built in (agreed upon) an absolute freedom that it itself affords the ability for men to destroy it with it's own precepts.

We've allowed it and like you'd stated, money has become the driving force instead of the will of the people. It's not even hidden that they're prostituting themselves out to the highest bidders and frankly the common mann can't match that.

First, I reject the idea that things would be any better if government did not offer government perks for campaign donations. Stalin by all accounts was completely free of corruption. No one could buy him off for anything... and last I checked he slaughtered more people any anyone in history.

Second, it's fairly nutty to ever assume that a politician would not offer government perks for money. Why would you ever conceive that there are some benevolent Angels in the world that you can elect, that will never be corrupted by the power they wield.

You give them tons of authority, and then give them tons of potential lobbying issues, and then think they shouldn't act on the situation that YOU put them in?

Kind of like giving your 5 year-old child 500 boxes of chocolate candies, and then telling him to keep them in his bed room, and then saying... "oh but don't eat them".

Human nature hasn't changed in at least 6,000 years. But you think if you can just find the perfect person in congress, they'll be divinely perfect in their conduct.

Get over it.

The only thing you can do, is remove from congress the power to abuse. By removing the ability to tax with insane taxes, no corporation will find it worth money to lobby for exemptions. Ta-da! No demand for exemptions, no lobbying for special exemptions, no donations for tax breaks. System fixed.

But instead you think we just need more taxes, more regulations, which just gives the politicians more power to take donations for exemptions, while you complain about them "prostituting themselves out to the highest bidders". Hello.... look in the mirror. That's the guy who is causing this.

 

[jet57]

First, I reject the idea that things would be any better if government did not offer government perks for campaign donations. Stalin by all accounts was completely free of corruption. No one could buy him off for anything... and last I checked he slaughtered more people any anyone in history.

Second, it's fairly nutty to ever assume that a politician would not offer government perks for money. Why would you ever conceive that there are some benevolent Angels in the world that you can elect, that will never be corrupted by the power they wield.

You give them tons of authority, and then give them tons of potential lobbying issues, and then think they shouldn't act on the situation that YOU put them in?

Kind of like giving your 5 year-old child 500 boxes of chocolate candies, and then telling him to keep them in his bed room, and then saying... "oh but don't eat them".

Human nature hasn't changed in at least 6,000 years. But you think if you can just find the perfect person in congress, they'll be divinely perfect in their conduct.

Get over it.

The only thing you can do, is remove from congress the power to abuse. By removing the ability to tax with insane taxes, no corporation will find it worth money to lobby for exemptions. Ta-da! No demand for exemptions, no lobbying for special exemptions, no donations for tax breaks. System fixed.

But instead you think we just need more taxes, more regulations, which just gives the politicians more power to take donations for exemptions, while you complain about them "prostituting themselves out to the highest bidders". Hello.... look in the mirror. That's the guy who is causing this.

Uh, I'm sorry but this is one of the most disjointed, poorly written and irrelvant post I think I've read in a long time: eight lines of absolutely nothing . . .

 

[Sparkles]

Uh, I'm sorry but this is one of the most disjointed, poorly written and irrelvant post I think I've read in a long time: eight lines of absolutely nothing . . .

Uh, I'm sorry but this is one of the most pathetic, non-responses and irrelvant post I think I've read in a about 3 hours: but typical of a leftist.

 

[jet57]

Uh, I'm sorry but this is one of the most pathetic, non-responses and irrelvant post I think I've read in a about 3 hours: but typical of a leftist.

Look, you got whipped on the rich people tax issue, and now you're submitting giberish in a very condescending fassion as though you have some sort of bully ability.

 

[Sparkles]

Look, you got whipped on the rich people tax issue, and now you're submitting giberish in a very condescending fassion as though you have some sort of bully ability.

Look, you got thrashed on the rich people tax issue, and now you're blathering about in a very condescending fassion as though you have some sort of alternate reality ability, and yet have not bothered to make a decent point.

 

[VTA]

First, I reject the idea that things would be any better if government did not offer government perks for campaign donations. Stalin by all accounts was completely free of corruption. No one could buy him off for anything... and last I checked he slaughtered more people any anyone in history.

Gratuitous Dictator reference - Check.

Second, it's fairly nutty to ever assume that a politician would not offer government perks for money. Why would you ever conceive that there are some benevolent Angels in the world that you can elect, that will never be corrupted by the power they wield.

Hyperbolic interpretation of your words - Check.

You give them tons of authority, and then give them tons of potential lobbying issues, and then think they shouldn't act on the situation that YOU put them in?

Vague non sequitur - Check.

Kind of like giving your 5 year-old child 500 boxes of chocolate candies, and then telling him to keep them in his bed room, and then saying... "oh but don't eat them".

Poor analogy - Check.

Human nature hasn't changed in at least 6,000 years. But you think if you can just find the perfect person in congress, they'll be divinely perfect in their conduct.

Get over it.

Vague non sequitur - Check.

The only thing you can do, is remove from congress the power to abuse. By removing the ability to tax with insane taxes, no corporation will find it worth money to lobby for exemptions. Ta-da! No demand for exemptions, no lobbying for special exemptions, no donations for tax breaks. System fixed.

Blatant proof of being duped by partisan talking points - Check.

But instead you think we just need more taxes, more regulations, which just gives the politicians more power to take donations for exemptions, while you complain about them "prostituting themselves out to the highest bidders". Hello.... look in the mirror. That's the guy who is causing this.

Misguided interpretation of your words inserted to make this outlandish response seem fitting - Check.

Feel free to re-read my first contribution to this thread.
Not that I think it will help, but never the less it's all there.

 

[VTA]

I say that democracy has failed in the US and I say that advisedly. Democracy is only a function of the people who create and maintain it. The people of this country have not maintained democracy in this country: we get to go the poles, but that is only a shell of what we once were when we were great.

Deocracy still exists here, but no one's really fighting for it.

We sort of agree here: we're both blaming the people not the system itself.

 

[jet57]

Look, you got thrashed on the rich people tax issue, and now you're blathering about in a very condescending fassion as though you have some sort of alternate reality ability, and yet have not bothered to make a decent point.

I provided proof that the rich in this country have seen their taxes drop markedly since Ronald Reagan. That was my point. So, you can't refute fact.

 

[Sparkles]

Gratuitous Dictator reference - Check.

Ignoring the point made. Check.

Hyperbolic interpretation of your words - Check.

Failure to grasp basic concepts. Check.

Vague non sequitur - Check.

Denying responsibility for actions taken. Check.

Poor analogy - Check.

Inept at gasping an analogy. Check.

Vague non sequitur - Check.

Denial of universal truths. Check.

Blatant proof of being duped by partisan talking points - Check.

Incapable of formulating a response, and default to attempt to discredit the point made. Check.

Misguided interpretation of your words inserted to make this outlandish response seem fitting - Check.

More attempts to deny responsibility. Check.

Feel free to re-read my first contribution to this thread.
Not that I think it will help, but never the less it's all there.

Feel free to actually attempt to respond to anything I've said, or I can just continue to mock you. Either way is fine.

 

[Sparkles]

I provided proof that the rich in this country have seen their taxes drop markedly since Ronald Reagan. That was my point. So, you can't refute fact.

Yes, but your point was that jobs have not been created since the rich got a tax cut.

I never denied that taxes have dropped since Reagan. I denied that taxes have dropped since the recession.

That's when jobs stopped being created.

If you want to go back to Reagan, fine. Millions on millions of jobs have been created since Reagan lowered taxes. Ooops! Your point just flushed down the drain.

 

[VTA]

How original.

Feel free to actually attempt to respond to anything I've said,

Why? You didn't.

 

[jet57]

Yes, but your point was that jobs have not been created since the rich got a tax cut.

I never denied that taxes have dropped since Reagan. I denied that taxes have dropped since the recession.

That's when jobs stopped being created.

If you want to go back to Reagan, fine. Millions on millions of jobs have been created since Reagan lowered taxes. Ooops! Your point just flushed down the drain.

"Yes but" means that you agree and then deny my whole point. My point was, since the taxes of the rich are so low, and since "they create all the jobs" and since Wall Street is obviously back in the black, then - where are all the jobs? As I've said before, the tax rate for the rich may be 35%, but you and everybody else knows they don't pay 35%.

So, where are all the jobs? The rich don't create jobs that's why: demand for product and services creaes jobs. Just like the demand for phony mortgages created a boom in housing and all those construction jobs and collateral businesses. So, your assertions are nowhere near correct. This nonsense that the rich haven't had their taxes cut is just nonsense too, and I've proved that as well.

All you have is opinion that adds up to nothing.