New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

Liberal Economics 101.

DefeatObama

Council Member
I thought I'd point out that Bush did not submit a budget until 2001 and it wouldn't go into effect until September of 2001. His deficits would certainly have been impacted by the 911 attacks, the airline and travel industry bailout and the war in Afghanistan.

He made his deficits much worse by invading Iraq in 2003 and the passage of the Medicare drug bill (and tax cuts)....
which is bad. obama on the other hand with at least double that debt. is good.

the world according to middle (chuckle) view
 

DefeatObama

Council Member
What was the deficit in 2000, the year Bush got elected? What did Bush do in 2001 that changed the 2000 deficit? Bonus question, who was the last Republican President to submit a balanced budget?

Oh, and what year did you start your first business?
why would you want the answers to these questions? I assume you're trying to prove that Bush ran deficits. he did.

you either approve of disapprove.

if it's the former you love obama. if it's the latter you still love obama. but why?
 

DefeatObama

Council Member
So with that statement you're implying that the rich don't mind tax cuts for them to enrich themselves nor federal military credit card spending but when time to pay they blame it on entitlement's and would move their money that has'nt been moved already to another country. I guess that says it all as far as who the real americans are. Or should i say that says it all for who the real communist's are. Looks like we need a change in our rich folk's.
what a disingenuous stooge you are.
conservatives endorse tax cuts - for everyone - because it's OUR money. and 'the rich' benefit more because they pay more. capice?

we also endorse fiscal restraint and justification of each federal dollar spent.

we also live on earth where it's roundly acknowledged that entitlements long term liabilities can't be funded. your party's solution is to demagogue. ours is to deal with the problem.

there is waste in the military budget just like in every other aspect of the federal budget.

the decision to go to war or not can be debated. once engaged there is no option but victory. it costs what it costs.

you and the other children want to relitigate the decision to go which is useless. but that's what children do.

the dem's level of spending in the last 3 years is immoral. there is no good result.

that, entitlements AND obamacare as the straw that breaks America's back is on your heads. the problem is it affects me and my family.

unless you want to detail for me how unlimited spending forever works; you're a hack singing from the gimme gimme gimme playbook

frankly I think you should all be jailed and tried for treason but the constitution protects your right to work full time to destroy America
 

CatsEye

Mayor
Every time the Capital Gains tax was reduced, revenue received from the capital gains tax INCREASED due to more money being available for investment. The Revenues received from that increased investment exceeded the revenues lost by the lower rate.
The revenue increase that results from a capital gains tax reduction is temporary. Over the long haul revenue is lost:

Much of the short-run response to changes in the capital gains tax rate are for tax timing purposes. This is a well-known fact, and it is why CBO projects a huge spike in capital gains collections in 2010 (the last year of the scheduled low 15% rate on long-term gains) and thereby also a large decline in 2011 (when the rate on long-term gains is scheduled to revert to 20%) under current law. There is no doubt some revenue feedback will occur over the long-run from lower capital gains tax rates spurring investment, but most estimates would say that we are currently on the left side of the Laffer Curve with respect to capital gains. http://www.taxfoundation.org/blog/show/23137.html

Even Romney's economic advisor doesn't believe cuts on capital gains will generate more revenue:

In all of the models considered here, the dynamic response of the economy to tax changes is too large to be ignored. In almost all cases, tax cuts are partly self-financing. This is especially true for cuts in capital income taxes. source
 

Bruce

Council Member
what a disingenuous stooge you are.
conservatives endorse tax cuts - for everyone - because it's OUR money. and 'the rich' benefit more because they pay more. capice?

we also endorse fiscal restraint and justification of each federal dollar spent.

we also live on earth where it's roundly acknowledged that entitlements long term liabilities can't be funded. your party's solution is to demagogue. ours is to deal with the problem.

there is waste in the military budget just like in every other aspect of the federal budget.

the decision to go to war or not can be debated. once engaged there is no option but victory. it costs what it costs.

you and the other children want to relitigate the decision to go which is useless. but that's what children do.

the dem's level of spending in the last 3 years is immoral. there is no good result.

that, entitlements AND obamacare as the straw that breaks America's back is on your heads. the problem is it affects me and my family.

unless you want to detail for me how unlimited spending forever works; you're a hack singing from the gimme gimme gimme playbook

frankly I think you should all be jailed and tried for treason but the constitution protects your right to work full time to destroy America
That's your story and you're sticking to it!
I've been hoping that the reaganites of the world could explain that to me with some form of logic. You assume that all democrats think the same and that all liberals have no fiscal responsibility. You have no fact's to support that or you would lambaste the board with truth. You're one of the first that I would confiscate your wealth and drop in the slums of New York with an ankle monitor.
Yup, those victories keep on coming one right after the other. Viet Nam, Iraq,Afghanistan,Pakistan and Iran to name just a few. Reagan era paid more people to be our enemies than we could have possibly generated without spending. I give you Bin Laden. We supposedly beat Russia by outspending them but it seems they still have veto power in the UN. China vote's against our every move while we kiss their asz for trade. As I've said before I approach politics and world with an open mind. I voted for G W Bush both times thinking maybe sanity would prevail in a republican regime but that proved me wrong. I can only look back on the record's of those in leadership as I know not what they have in store for the nation when on the campaign trail.
You have a problem with entitlement's for the poor and consider lucrative government contracts for the rich just defending the country. Now who's the child? What you propose is predatory capitalism in order to protect the rich. I'm interested in the returns of the money and blood covering the lands of all those we supposedly just saved from themselves.
Take the entitlements, the healthcare,social security and medicare. Take the payroll taxes and the income taxes off the rich. Give the rich a free ride from here on out. Make abortion illegal and reduce all worker's salaries and wages while since they don't produce anything they need to pay 95% of their wages in tax'es. I really don't have a problem with this at all as discussing logic with challenged folk's is becoming irrelevant. The mass'es are educated and will overcome any onslaught of the oligarchy carpetbagger's. Engineer's,scientist's and all of those that have real ties and family here and want a progressive society (even some of the responsible rich) will come together and cast out those that want it all. Actually there are very few real conservatives that would'nt like a shot at running up the debt as long as it's for their side (Reagan, HW Bush, GW Bush, while Clinton was supposedly the best damn democrat in the world I never considered him much of anything but a left leaning republican. Check your history book to see who's working full time to destroy america but you may not like what you find.
 

Lukey

Senator
It cleaned out the Oligarchy quite nicely, and if this country becomes a full out Oligarchy with 1% owning 100% of the country, expect to see some action, I fully expect you to be manning the barricades in defense of your beloved masters.
Or morality and rule of law...whatever...
 
I am simply stating the obvious. Wealth spent is wealth squandered. I do not know anyone who is still wealthy that spent every dime they had. What Lukey thinks is immaterial to the true behavior of wealthy people. They will always protect their wealth at all costs if they want to remain wealthy. If they spend it, its gone forever.
 
And the nation that overspent for decades is not yours or mine? Owing money to a mortgage lender is a personal debt we incur. We also collectively own the national debt which means each and every one of us must take responsibility for that debt. That means it is NOT your money until the debt is paid. It is money owed for debts incurred. As a citizen, you owe a portion of that debt. Saying that a surplus should be returned to the citizens before paying down debt is nothing more than ignoring your obligation is it?
 

DefeatObama

Council Member
If you have a mortgage it is not your house. It's joint ownership with the bank and your local tax collector. refuse to pay your tax'es and see who knocks on the door.
effectively but not contractually. the local tax collector has no ownership of your house. they do have the legal authority to tax you ... as you note they don't take ignorance lightly
 

DefeatObama

Council Member
You assume that all democrats think the same
I don't assume that democrats think at all

and that all liberals have no fiscal responsibility.
only until evidence to the contrary is made available

You're one of the first that I would confiscate your wealth
the difference between you and me (and Americans). you would confiscate wealth

Yup, those victories keep on coming one right after the other.
I understand America's military success' being painful for you

We supposedly beat Russia
I suppose you can show me U.S.S.R. on a map?

As I've said before I approach politics and world with an open mind. I voted for G W Bush both times thinking maybe sanity would prevail in a republican regime but that proved me wrong.
I find that hard to believe. but you say so.

what did Bush do that obama hasn't done worse?


You have a problem with entitlement's for the poor
as I've written ad naseum, that you 'open minded' types have trouble comprehending... the problem I have with 'entitlements for the poor' (as far as I know rich people get medicare too, but I digress) is that they're broke.

your 'open minded' answer is evidently to ignore the problem

lucrative government contracts for the rich just defending the country.
I don't even know what this means


What you propose is predatory capitalism in order to protect the rich. I'm interested in the returns of the money and blood covering the lands of all those we supposedly just saved from themselves.
I have no idea what this means. if you have a problem with 'croney capitalism' , so do I. but capitalism built this country into the worlds lone superpower. the answer is not what's failing in europe(and everywhere else its been tried)





if you're going to assign ludicrous accusations to me please produce a quote of mine.
 

Lobato1

Mayor
For starters, Government provided the job you got your paycheck from

& if you hated this SOCIALIST paycheck why did you take that government job in the 1st place?

Best Regards
Lobato1


When Liberal economic policies fail, as they always do, Liberals say that it is simply because government didn't spend enough or tax enough.

Evidently, Liberals think that only government spending creates jobs.

But let's look at economic mathematical fact:

When government increases spending on projects, such as building roads and bridges, it has to take that money from some other sector of the economy by taxation.

In other words government tries to increase productivity in one sector, by choosing where money is spent, while at the same time reducing productivity in the sector where that money was taken from (the Private Sector).

This results in no net job creation, as for every job government creates it destroys another job in another sector of the economy.

Actually it's worse than that.

If we look at Obama's stimulus package and divide the amount spent by even the inflated number of jobs that Obama says it created, we will find that the government spent about $250,000 per job created.

Since the average job created by the private sector costs the private sector about $60,000, we could have created over 4 times by as many jobs by adding 800 billion to the private sector through tax relief instead of giving it to government to decide where it would be spent, unemployment would be around 5.5% instead of 9%, GDP would be about 5% instead of the meager 1.7% it was all of last year.

That also means that the government would have received 4 times as much in tax revenue from those jobs, meaning the tax cuts would have eventually paid for themselves, rather than adding 800 billion to the debt.

That's why taking more from the private sector and giving it to government reduces revenue and tax cuts, which leave more money in the private sector increase revenue.

Tax revenue in Britain has dropped greatly after their recent tax increase. It always does.

The basic math and economic history prove it beyond all doubt or argument.

Every time the Capital Gains tax was reduced, revenue received from the capital gains tax INCREASED due to more money being available for investment. The Revenues received from that increased investment exceeded the revenues lost by the lower rate.

If Obama gets his way and Cap gains rates are tripled, revenue received from cap gains taxes will drastically be reduced as investment will be drastically reduced.

And since our economy is still struggling to recover from the punishment Obama is inflicting on it, we will slide into immediate severe recession or even depression.

The math and historical fact prove it.

Something you Obama Zombies might want to consider.
 
Top