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

Dem gov of MN gives housing to 150 illegals. 18,000 Mainers waiting for section 8

Dawg

President
Supporting Member
So you admit it has nothing to do with the asylum seekers and you could care less about homeless people unless you can scapegoat asylum seekers over it.

At least you admit it.
Show where I posted what you spewed________________or STFU with your prog lies...……..I simply said if they don't want to be homeless to do as majority of Americans and get a damn JOB, I mentioned nothing of illegals or asylum!
 
Show where I posted what you spewed________________or STFU with your prog lies...……..I simply said if they don't want to be homeless to do as majority of Americans and get a damn JOB, I mentioned nothing of illegals or asylum!
Read the title of this thread. Review.
 

Raoul_Luke

I feel a bit lightheaded. Maybe you should drive.
What are you talking about......we have been cutting taxes for decades not raising them. Americans pay way less in taxes than they did in the 50's and sixties and seventies for example.

So how do the 18,000 on the list get housing?
So we've never raised taxes before in the history of the republic?

And, actually no, they don't:

Screen Shot 2019-08-18 at 7.35.13 PM.png
 

EatTheRich

President
And that's a "double dodge." Can you envision any scenario under which there are no American citizens who could benefit from this type of "emergency" shelter? It's a simple yes or no question.
Good point. We should build as many emergency shelters as necessary.
 

Raoul_Luke

I feel a bit lightheaded. Maybe you should drive.
Lol

Read the title of your chart.

Lol.

Care to try again?
You suggested that we can simply raise taxes and it will magically solve the housing social problem. The chart I posted shows that we don't really get any more tax revenues from raising tax rates. Evidently you don't "do" logic...
 
You suggested that we can simply raise taxes and it will magically solve the housing social problem. The chart I posted shows that we don't really get any more tax revenues from raising tax rates. Evidently you don't "do" logic...
It isnt magic.

It is common sense.

And yes we do get more revenue from higher taxes.

Trickle down economics failed.
 

EatTheRich

President
You suggested that we can simply raise taxes and it will magically solve the housing social problem. The chart I posted shows that we don't really get any more tax revenues from raising tax rates. Evidently you don't "do" logic...
No, your chart does not show that. If raising tax rates raises both GDP and tax revenues, as it often does, the ratio between the two can remain the same although revenues have increased.
 

Raoul_Luke

I feel a bit lightheaded. Maybe you should drive.
No, your chart does not show that. If raising tax rates raises both GDP and tax revenues, as it often does, the ratio between the two can remain the same although revenues have increased.
Post the study that says higher taxes raise GDP (so I can ridicule it).
 

EatTheRich

President
Post the study that says higher taxes raise GDP (so I can ridicule it).
The argument is empirical. Very high top marginal income tax rates (not the same as taxes in general, which is not the topic ... sales taxes and other regressive taxes undoubtedly depress the economy) in the 1950s ... unprecedented prosperity ... Kennedy lowers the top rate which was on the wrong side of the Laffer curve and growth picks up ... then Johnson lowers the top rate again, overcorrecting, and the economy slows down ... it is raised again and growth picks up. Nixon lowers the top rate and we enter the era of stagflation. Reagan lowers the top rate and creates a temporary inflationary boom (while real revenues plummet), followed by decades of sluggish growth interrupted only when Clinton raises the top rate and years of higher growth and higher revenue follow.
 

Raoul_Luke

I feel a bit lightheaded. Maybe you should drive.
The argument is empirical. Very high top marginal income tax rates (not the same as taxes in general, which is not the topic ... sales taxes and other regressive taxes undoubtedly depress the economy) in the 1950s ... unprecedented prosperity ... Kennedy lowers the top rate which was on the wrong side of the Laffer curve and growth picks up ... then Johnson lowers the top rate again, overcorrecting, and the economy slows down ... it is raised again and growth picks up. Nixon lowers the top rate and we enter the era of stagflation. Reagan lowers the top rate and creates a temporary inflationary boom (while real revenues plummet), followed by decades of sluggish growth interrupted only when Clinton raises the top rate and years of higher growth and higher revenue follow.
LOL! That's not economics, and it isn't even a "study."
 
Top