Worst than the father

[subterFUSE]

Re: Worst than the father

housing market is going in the crapper...which is often a sign of a looming recession. your currency has gone down significantly against pretty much all other major currencies worldwide.

the fact that the dow is up and unemployment is low is blind luck. the guy can barely spell 'economy', let alone have some measure of control over it.

It's all directly linked to tax cuts. When you lower taxes, it spurs the economy.

It's so funny to listen to democrats cry about "tax cuts for the rich." When Clinton had the top tax rate at nearly 40%, the wealthy class in this country paid less % of the total tax burden than they do now.... and tax revenues are higher now than at any time in history. So this idea of raising taxes on the rich to bring in more revenues is absurd. If you tax more, you get less... because you restrict business, investment, and spending. Unemployment increases, too.

No.... it's not blind luck. It's fundamental economics at work. If you let people keep their money, they spend and invest more.... which is good for our economy.

[day_for_night]

Re: Worst than the father

It's all directly linked to tax cuts. When you lower taxes, it spurs the economy.

the qualifier to that is....maybe. the economists are never sure what will stimulate the economy. lowering taxes may or may not, depending on how the flow of funds is altered. if the lower taxes create more business profits that are then not reinvested in the local economy, lowering taxes can do zilch for a domestic economy. reverse holds true as well.

[day_for_night]

Re: Worst than the father

No.... it's not blind luck. It's fundamental economics at work. If you let people keep their money, they spend and invest more.... which is good for our economy.

and you obviously don't remember the 80s..."regan-omics" was a disaster for the economy. that whole trickle down thing didnt exactly take hold like they thought it would...

[subterFUSE]

Re: Worst than the father

and you obviously don't remember the 80s..."regan-omics" was a disaster for the economy. that whole trickle down thing didnt exactly take hold like they thought it would...

Reagan came into office facing serious economic problems leftover from the 1970s. Chief among them, historically high inflation. The Federal Reserve was forced to hike interest rates sharply to combat the inflation, and the result was a recession early in Reagan's admin. But his economic policies resulted in the largest peacetime economic boom in American history, and created 35 million jobs. Only a short downturn of about 8 months between 1990-1991 mars these statistics. (And this occurred during Bush 41)

Both Reagan, and Bush 43 have shown that cuts in taxes yield more tax revenue, not less as democrats like to claim.

[88Mariner]

Re: Worst than the father

talk about the lesser of two evils. both of them were absolutely awful for the economy. for a right wing president to run that kind of deficit is pathetic. fiscal responsibility my ass...

running a surplus is worse, imo....

[88Mariner]

Re: Worst than the father

and you obviously don't remember the 80s..."regan-omics" was a disaster for the economy. that whole trickle down thing didnt exactly take hold like they thought it would...

Reagon facilitated an economic environment that allowed massive amounts of money to be poured into research and development. The boom of the 90's was a result of this. This coming from an anti-republican, too.

[Miroslav]

Re: Worst than the father

and you obviously don't remember the 80s..."regan-omics" was a disaster for the economy. that whole trickle down thing didnt exactly take hold like they thought it would...

Look at some basic economic indicators. The economy grew quite strongly in the 1980s and there was no "disaster". What you may be getting at, tho, is that the economic gain of that period was not nearly evenly distributed and did not benefit all constituents. This is true. And it's true of any period, regardless of who is in charge.

Also, sustained low unemployment and overall market growth doesn't just happen by "blind luck". And it doesn't matter what Bush can or can't spell, because he doesn't have that much to do with it. Bush doesn't set monetary policy and interest rates. The Fed does.

[thesightless]

Re: Worst than the father

yes regan-onmics did work and help. it just took a decade for the capital improvements to generate income. the trickle down that he toted didnt take 2 year, it took 8.

and clinton did everything he could to help it, albeit a bit overzealous in reagrds to the tech industry and moreso, his underlings went entirely too far early on when they had all 4 branches of government in reagrds to accountability. they loosened up everything to help the tech sector. and it bit them in the ass. just go ask the few thousand ppl who lost their pensions. it is only one example though.

[rubyraks]

Re: Worst than the father

Trickle down economics is an illusion...

[thesightless]

Re: Worst than the father

not when appllied to capitol improvements ben.

on a smaller, simpler scale, use a business example.

you and natalie own a plastics manufacturing business. you are capped as to produciton, and cannot increase it without exceeding the 40 hour work week. so, i solely in charge of the tax code, offer you the pre tax savings of say 4000, if you buy a 10,000 machine to increase productivuty. the machine generates say, 32,000 a year in comce, and requires an operator who gets paid 15. you now have more income, more capacity and another employee who is being paid on a decent scale. (all numbers scaled down for simplicty)

it does work.

[rubyraks]

Re: Worst than the father

ok, but when I give tax cuts to the rich, there's less trickle down than is commonly argued...they are less likely to spend each additional dollar of tax saved than someone who is poor.

[thesightless]

Re: Worst than the father

again, you marginalize the idea that rich wont just pocket it. they will invest in anything from stocks which help companies grow via a cash influx, employing more people, or.... go with something like gov't bonds which put money into social prodjects.

[subterFUSE]

Re: Worst than the father

ok, but when I give tax cuts to the rich, there's less trickle down than is commonly argued...they are less likely to spend each additional dollar of tax saved than someone who is poor.

Please explain why tax revenues are at all-time highs today, when the top tax bracket has been reduced by 5%. Furthermore.... please explain why the wealthy are paying a higher % share of this record tax revenue than when rates were higher.

[toasty]

Re: Worst than the father

Please explain why tax revenues are at all-time highs today, when the top tax bracket has been reduced by 5%. Furthermore.... please explain why the wealthy are paying a higher % share of this record tax revenue than when rates were higher.

I don't have the figures at hand, but I have a feeling this is one of those feel-good statistics that sounds great but doesn't actually mean shit. It's like bragging that home ownership has increased -- when it increases every year by virtue of population growth.

Perhaps tax revenues are at an all-time high because there are more tax payers than there have been in the past?

I'd be curious to see if this stat -- for which no citation was provided, BTW -- holds up when dollars are adjusted for inflation, spread out per capita, etc.

Look, I'm at my most conservative when we're talking about taxes and matters of a fiscal nature, but it's not as easy as just looking at number X and number Y and saying one is bigger than the other. I'm not ready to start blowing the president because tax revenues happen to be high, nor do I think it means shit -- especially considering his out of control spending habits...

[thesightless]

Re: Worst than the father

I don't have the figures at hand, but I have a feeling this is one of those feel-good statistics that sounds great but doesn't actually mean shit. It's like bragging that home ownership has increased -- when it increases every year by virtue of population growth.

..

ill answer it, and it is a feel good stat so to speak, and it does mean shit. most definetly. the US citizen, right now, is enjoying the highest personal income including the factor of adding in for inflation, vs the growth rate of the CPI index (a monster resource survey by product that tracks prices month by month for the last half century.)

to be honest, it is affecting canada too, so north america as a whole is doing fabulous in regards to the rates at which income grow and the rates at which costs go. country wise, not people wise, the US is in heavy debt but also owed heavy as well. o