|
Post by jmwalters on Sept 25, 2016 0:35:29 GMT
The great state of Kansas agrees with your assessment........tax cuts and austerity for everyone!!! They can't create demand, but the alternative (assuming the idea is growth instead of getting out of a recession) is just more government. CA and MN have raised taxes, enforced regulations, and "stimulated" social programs....and they are thriving. "Trickle down" has never been proven to work in a sustained economic environment in the real world...never. Even St. Ronnie raised taxes more than once. KS and WI are textbook cases of unfettered trickle down and they are cratering economically to the point that they can't even maintain their own highways and roads. Pathetic.
|
|
|
Post by UtahGetMeTwo on Sept 25, 2016 0:59:41 GMT
Actually the Kochs test case was a disaster. Too much of the state government giving out state welfare to Kansas corporations and cutting educational funding. Now the budget deficit is too deep created by the Governor getting too involved. That state is now fucked and Grover Norquist is still a loser.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2016 0:59:48 GMT
They can't create demand, but the alternative (assuming the idea is growth instead of getting out of a recession) is just more government. CA and MN have raised taxes, enforced regulations, and "stimulated" social programs....and they are thriving. "Trickle down" has never been proven to work in a sustained economic environment in the real world...never. Even St. Ronnie raised taxes more than once. KS and WI are textbook cases of unfettered trickle down and they are cratering economically to the point that they can't even maintain their own highways and roads. Pathetic. TThe idea behind "trickle down" is there needs to be growth, or else there's nothing to "trickle down." Both Reagan and JFK cut taxes dramatically which raised GDP and created jobs. The budget policies during Clinton were dictated by the Gingrich Congress. He raised taxes, but that had little to do with growth, Greenspan kept artificially low interest rates and unemployment was very low. Bush cut taxes during a recession which will never create demand, so that failed. There's a double standard in the way we discuss economics in the US along party lines. When LBJ's welfare state fails to lower poverty rates nobody says boo. When Obama's trillion dollar stimulus package leads to tepid growth at best (along with gas prices and the return to the mean for other indices) he prevented a depression. Total bullshit. As for California, they ran historic deficits and found their way out in 2015. But you can never tax and spend your way I to prosperity. Their socialist policies have them headed back into the hole. As soon as their is a surplus, you can be sure there will be an entitlement on the table for illegals or druggies or whomever. You can't compare a vibrant and wealthy state with Kansas. The whole phrase and idea of "trickle down" is misleading and reductionist. There are so many facets to economic policy, that to suggest any political filters their strategy through paying themselves or their rich buddies is absurd. Personally, I like tax cuts. I think I know best how to spend my money and take care of myself. I dislike the government and like free markets. For some, life is just so hard. A never ending cycle of grievances that can only solved by a tablespoon of other peoples' money and Uncle Sam.
|
|
|
Post by jmwalters on Sept 25, 2016 1:06:30 GMT
CA and MN have raised taxes, enforced regulations, and "stimulated" social programs....and they are thriving. "Trickle down" has never been proven to work in a sustained economic environment in the real world...never. Even St. Ronnie raised taxes more than once. KS and WI are textbook cases of unfettered trickle down and they are cratering economically to the point that they can't even maintain their own highways and roads. Pathetic. TThe idea behind "trickle down" is there needs to be growth, or else there's nothing to "trickle down." Both Reagan and JFK cut taxes dramatically which raised GDP and created jobs. The budget policies during Clinton were dictated by the Gingrich Congress. He raised taxes, but that had little to do with growth, Greenspan kept artificially low interest rates and unemployment was very low. Bush cut taxes during a recession which will never create demand, so that failed. There's a double standard in the way we discuss economics in the US along party lines. When LBJ's welfare state fails to lower poverty rates nobody says boo. When Obama's trillion dollar stimulus package leads to tepid growth at best (along with gas prices and the return to the mean for other indices) he prevented a depression. Total bullshit. As for California, they ran historic deficits and found their way out in 2015. But you can never tax and spend your way I to prosperity. Their socialist policies have them headed back into the hole. As soon as their is a surplus, you can be sure there will be an entitlement on the table for illegals or druggies or whomever. You can't compare a vibrant and wealthy state with Kansas. More accurately, supply side economics postulates that that growth will most effectively created through less taxes, regulations, and other perceived government interference in the economy so capital can be maximized. In practice, this has never proven to work in the real world in any sustained capacity. Even Reagan raised taxes multiple times, increased gov spending, and had to deal with a few recessions...all due to his initial attempt to follow supply-side theory. You mean MN can't be compared to WI or KS either? Have they really become that powerful? OH and two-thirds of Obamas stimulus was, in fact, tax cuts of various degrees. How socialist of him
|
|
|
Post by UtahGetMeTwo on Sept 25, 2016 1:09:38 GMT
California is not heading back into a budget hole. And California has deported more illegals under Brown than any other state since in office. Since medical Marijuana dispensaries were approved drug arrests have gone down and a new tax revenue was added.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2016 1:15:31 GMT
California is not heading back into a budget hole. And California has deported more illegals under Brown than any other state since in office. Since medical Marijuana dispensaries were approved drug arrests have gone down and a new tax revenue was added. Wow, what a place. Grab Junior and Flaco and a wet mango wrap. See you at welfare office, vato!
|
|
|
Post by UtahGetMeTwo on Sept 25, 2016 1:22:35 GMT
When in doubt deflect the fact that the US governmemt uses 60% of it's spending on the military, even when the Pentagon doesn't ask for the money, then blame it on welfare recipients. Even though food stamps and illegals don't account for a fraction of what corporate welfare costs American taxpayers.
Scew it, throw an elitist comment in as well.
|
|
|
Post by badhabitude on Sept 25, 2016 1:29:03 GMT
When in doubt deflect the fact that the US governmemt uses 60% of it's spending on the military, even when the Pentagon doesn't ask for the money, then blame it on welfare recipients. Even though food stamps and illegals don't account for a fraction of what corporate welfare costs American taxpayers. Scew it, throw an elitist comment in as well. Hey. Henry has inspired me to do volunteer work and donate money to the Hillary campaign. After which I'll donate money to the Democratic party. I'm also going to buy subscriptions from truthful, honest media sites like the NYT and the Washington post. Thank Henry for my new found dedication. The USA and the world - change is coming and the change is going in the right direction with the Democrats, people like Henry can deny it and call it wrong but they can't stop it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2016 2:05:41 GMT
When in doubt deflect the fact that the US governmemt uses 60% of it's spending on the military, even when the Pentagon doesn't ask for the money, then blame it on welfare recipients. Even though food stamps and illegals don't account for a fraction of what corporate welfare costs American taxpayers. Scew it, throw an elitist comment in as well. Yeah, who needs a standing army? You don't mind corporate welfare when it pays the Hag 650k for ten minutes of hacking up phlegm.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2016 2:08:53 GMT
When in doubt deflect the fact that the US governmemt uses 60% of it's spending on the military, even when the Pentagon doesn't ask for the money, then blame it on welfare recipients. Even though food stamps and illegals don't account for a fraction of what corporate welfare costs American taxpayers. Scew it, throw an elitist comment in as well. Hey. Henry has inspired me to do volunteer work and donate money to the Hillary campaign. After which I'll donate money to the Democratic party. I'm also going to buy subscriptions from truthful, honest media sites like the NYT and the Washington post. Thank Henry for my new found dedication. The USA and the world - change is coming and the change is going in the right direction with the Democrats, people like Henry can deny it and call it wrong but they can't stop it. Maybe you can pay Elizabeth Warren five hundred bucks to sit on your face!
|
|
|
Post by sportsnut on Sept 25, 2016 3:37:07 GMT
TThe idea behind "trickle down" is there needs to be growth, or else there's nothing to "trickle down." Both Reagan and JFK cut taxes dramatically which raised GDP and created jobs. The budget policies during Clinton were dictated by the Gingrich Congress. He raised taxes, but that had little to do with growth, Greenspan kept artificially low interest rates and unemployment was very low. Bush cut taxes during a recession which will never create demand, so that failed. There's a double standard in the way we discuss economics in the US along party lines. When LBJ's welfare state fails to lower poverty rates nobody says boo. When Obama's trillion dollar stimulus package leads to tepid growth at best (along with gas prices and the return to the mean for other indices) he prevented a depression. Total bullshit. As for California, they ran historic deficits and found their way out in 2015. But you can never tax and spend your way I to prosperity. Their socialist policies have them headed back into the hole. As soon as their is a surplus, you can be sure there will be an entitlement on the table for illegals or druggies or whomever. You can't compare a vibrant and wealthy state with Kansas. More accurately, supply side economics postulates that that growth will most effectively created through less taxes, regulations, and other perceived government interference in the economy so capital can be maximized. In practice, this has never proven to work in the real world in any sustained capacity. Even Reagan raised taxes multiple times, increased gov spending, and had to deal with a few recessions...all due to his initial attempt to follow supply-side theory. You mean MN can't be compared to WI or KS either? Have they really become that powerful? OH and two-thirds of Obamas stimulus was, in fact, tax cuts of various degrees. How socialist of him Reagan's economic policy (supply side) begot 12 years of the longest economic expansion in American history with an average GDP growth of 3.2 percent. As compared to what? The only administration to not see a single year of 3% growth in American history... facts are funny things.
|
|
|
Post by UtahGetMeTwo on Sept 25, 2016 11:11:15 GMT
When in doubt deflect the fact that the US governmemt uses 60% of it's spending on the military, even when the Pentagon doesn't ask for the money, then blame it on welfare recipients. Even though food stamps and illegals don't account for a fraction of what corporate welfare costs American taxpayers. Scew it, throw an elitist comment in as well. Yeah, who needs a standing army? You don't mind corporate welfare when it pays the Hag 650k for ten minutes of hacking up phlegm. That standing Army sure boded well under Dubyah's watch. The military budget doen't need to be 60% of spending. Especially when the Pentagon isn't even asking for that much to be spent. Good thing Graham and McCain are always making sure Zona's and South Carolinans have assembly line jobs. Well duh, a penicillin shot sure does cost as much as GE and McDonnell Douglas not paying any taxes.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2016 12:58:28 GMT
More accurately, supply side economics postulates that that growth will most effectively created through less taxes, regulations, and other perceived government interference in the economy so capital can be maximized. In practice, this has never proven to work in the real world in any sustained capacity. Even Reagan raised taxes multiple times, increased gov spending, and had to deal with a few recessions...all due to his initial attempt to follow supply-side theory. You mean MN can't be compared to WI or KS either? Have they really become that powerful? OH and two-thirds of Obamas stimulus was, in fact, tax cuts of various degrees. How socialist of him Reagan's economic policy (supply side) begot 12 years of the longest economic expansion in American history with an average GDP growth of 3.2 percent. As compared to what? The only administration to not see a single year of 3% growth in American history... facts are funny things. No fucking shit. All I ever hear are criticisms of "trickle down" and there's never an alternative theory proposed besides "infrastructure spending."
|
|
|
Post by walktheline on Sept 25, 2016 13:30:44 GMT
California is not heading back into a budget hole. And California has deported more illegals under Brown than any other state since in office. Since medical Marijuana dispensaries were approved drug arrests have gone down and a new tax revenue was added. I don't think that's correct. Texas has deported more than CA by a redneck country mile. And if you look at the number of illegals deported on a per capita basis CA slips behind Georgia. Georgia? Even if I was an illegal that place would be near the bottom of my list of states to go to. Unless Tybee Island is a sanctuary city.
And why is TX and CA deporting so many illegals? Because they have the most.
|
|
|
Post by UtahGetMeTwo on Sept 25, 2016 13:40:12 GMT
California is not heading back into a budget hole. And California has deported more illegals under Brown than any other state since in office. Since medical Marijuana dispensaries were approved drug arrests have gone down and a new tax revenue was added. I don't think that's correct. Texas has deported more than CA by a redneck country mile. And if you look at the number of illegals deported on a per capita basis CA slips behind Georgia. Georgia? Even if I was an illegal that place would be near the bottom of my list of states to go to. Unless Tybee Island is a sanctuary city.
And why is TX and CA deporting so many illegals? Because they have the most.
Because the state sizes they deport a lot. That has to do with illegals coming to California in droves. Neither state is strapped, with any effect, on either state budgets, as suggested, because of some sort of expense for illegals. Show me were illegals are hurting either Ca or Tx state budgets ?
|
|
|
Post by walktheline on Sept 25, 2016 13:45:43 GMT
I don't think that's correct. Texas has deported more than CA by a redneck country mile. And if you look at the number of illegals deported on a per capita basis CA slips behind Georgia. Georgia? Even if I was an illegal that place would be near the bottom of my list of states to go to. Unless Tybee Island is a sanctuary city.
And why is TX and CA deporting so many illegals? Because they have the most.
Because the state sizes they deport a lot. That has to do with illegals coming to California in droves. Neither state is strapped, with any effect, on either state budgets, as suggested, because of some sort of expense for illegals. Show me were illegals are hurting either Ca or Tx state budgets ? The illegals/deportation stuff having an real impact on the state's economy wasn't my point. Just that you had your numbers wrong. If you had gone to a better school, like say, BU, you might be better at math and numbers and junk like dat
P.s. Why the hatred of BU, again?
|
|
|
Post by UtahGetMeTwo on Sept 25, 2016 14:28:25 GMT
"As for California, they ran historic deficits and found their way out in 2015. But you can never tax and spend your way I to prosperity. Their socialist policies have them headed back into the hole. As soon as their is a surplus, you can be sure there will be an entitlement on the table for illegals or druggies or whomever. You can't compare a vibrant and wealthy state with Kansas."
Since you came in late and didn't pay attention WTL, like a typical BU student, I fill you into what brought "illegals" into the conversation. The usual conservative drivel that illegals somehow are driving up costs and effecting a certain state, like California, budgets is completly bogus. Corporate welfare drives up state budgets by a country mile.
PS. No issues with BU just their hockey team thinking they might rule Hockey East again.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2016 15:29:01 GMT
"As for California, they ran historic deficits and found their way out in 2015. But you can never tax and spend your way I to prosperity. Their socialist policies have them headed back into the hole. As soon as their is a surplus, you can be sure there will be an entitlement on the table for illegals or druggies or whomever. You can't compare a vibrant and wealthy state with Kansas." Since you came in late and didn't pay attention WTL, like a typical BU student, I fill you into what brought "illegals" into the conversation. The usual conservative drivel that illegals somehow are driving up costs and effecting a certain state, like California, budgets is completly bogus. Corporate welfare drives up state budgets by a country mile. PS. No issues with BU just their hockey team thinking they might rule Hockey East again. What I said is correct. There was a bill before your governor in June to give illegal access to the exchanges, and ostensibly subsidized care. The California Dems lead by Ricardo Lara are pushing Obama on this as we speak. www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-06-03/california-moves-toward-extending-obamacare-to-illegal-immigrants
|
|
|
Post by badhabitude on Sept 25, 2016 16:12:59 GMT
Hey. Henry has inspired me to do volunteer work and donate money to the Hillary campaign. After which I'll donate money to the Democratic party. I'm also going to buy subscriptions from truthful, honest media sites like the NYT and the Washington post. Thank Henry for my new found dedication. The USA and the world - change is coming and the change is going in the right direction with the Democrats, people like Henry can deny it and call it wrong but they can't stop it. Maybe you can pay Elizabeth Warren five hundred bucks to sit on your face! I'm watching the senate committee question Stumpf on cspan. It is so fucking transparent that this asshole absolutely knew what was going on, the game that Stumpf is playing is so fucking obvious its ridiculous. Basically he's saying we have 100k employees and how can anyone possibly know what's going on and that they have an incredible bureaucracy that is out of his control... a few quotes from Stumpf - when questioned about signatures being forged and if he realized it was illegal; 'I'm not a criminal attorney so I wouldn't know'. He said he had town hall meetings quarterly where *ALL* he talked about was ethics - I find that very hard to believe. One southern *republican* senator kissed his ass, forgot who it was. And to be fair, the rest of the republican senators took it to him. People talk about Trump's "straight talk." Well Elizabeth Warren went off on this cocksucker and that was straight talk. The only senator to ream the guy a new asshole and he deserved it. Again - no fucking media manipulation here, I'm watching the hearing itself. If you watch this hearing - in its entirety - it is dog nuts obvious this guy is lying and covering up, and since the media is based on sound bytes alone and never goes into depth about anything they should report the short story and summarize the utter lies and bullshit Stumpf is spewing.
|
|
|
Post by badhabitude on Sept 25, 2016 16:22:59 GMT
Senator Heller (R) Nevada just approached what I feel appropriate, he just said Trumpf is giving the "Sargent Schultz excuse"; "I know nothing, nothing." Kudos to him, and Sen. Menendez (D) from NJ taking it to him. Too bad I forgot the Republican Southern senator just about sucking Stumpf's dick, enormous red flag that something is fishy with that guy. Where's the media on this?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2016 17:21:05 GMT
Senator Heller (R) Nevada just approached what I feel appropriate, he just said Trumpf is giving the "Sargent Schultz excuse"; "I know nothing, nothing." Kudos to him, and Sen. Menendez (D) from NJ taking it to him. Too bad I forgot the Republican Southern senator just about sucking Stumpf's dick, enormous red flag that something is fishy with that guy. Where's the media on this? Nobody cares for the charade. Fine the guy and his company and move along. The outrage against big banks is five, if not seven years past its prime.
|
|
|
Post by badhabitude on Sept 25, 2016 17:28:19 GMT
Senator Heller (R) Nevada just approached what I feel appropriate, he just said Trumpf is giving the "Sargent Schultz excuse"; "I know nothing, nothing." Kudos to him, and Sen. Menendez (D) from NJ taking it to him. Too bad I forgot the Republican Southern senator just about sucking Stumpf's dick, enormous red flag that something is fishy with that guy. Where's the media on this? Nobody cares for the charade. Fine the guy and his company and move along. The outrage against big banks is five, if not seven years past its prime. Well, at least we agree on something. But a fine isn't enough, he clearly clearly encouraged and profited from this scam. How is this any different than a mafia boss not participating in crimes yet demanding money from them every week. A fine will not deter this kind of crime, he's gotten 250 million as compensation. An enormous fine of 200 million wouldn't bother him as I am 100% positive you can live more than good enough on 50 million bucks. Jail time, that is a deterrent, fines are not.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2016 17:40:04 GMT
Nobody cares for the charade. Fine the guy and his company and move along. The outrage against big banks is five, if not seven years past its prime. Well, at least we agree on something. But a fine isn't enough, he clearly clearly encouraged and profited from this scam. How is this any different than a mafia boss not participating in crimes yet demanding money from them every week. A fine will not deter this kind of crime, he's gotten 250 million as compensation. An enormous fine of 200 million wouldn't bother him as I am 100% positive you can live more than good enough on 50 million bucks. Jail time, that is a deterrent, fines are not. Yeah, there should be a suitable punishment on the books. As a sales guy, it's kind of great and ironic to see one of the head honchos taken to task for something that probably started as unrealistic sales goals. TruGreen was like that when I worked there years ago. The weekly quota was like 5x your salary (bonus money was 6) or three strikes and you're out. No wonder we were telling homeowners their tech got Lyme disease to sell tick spray...or tree and shrub treatments got rid of squirrels in the attic...or the all-time sleaze of "old ladies are my meal ticket because their son hasn't called them in years."
|
|
|
Post by UtahGetMeTwo on Sept 25, 2016 23:22:10 GMT
"As for California, they ran historic deficits and found their way out in 2015. But you can never tax and spend your way I to prosperity. Their socialist policies have them headed back into the hole. As soon as their is a surplus, you can be sure there will be an entitlement on the table for illegals or druggies or whomever. You can't compare a vibrant and wealthy state with Kansas." Since you came in late and didn't pay attention WTL, like a typical BU student, I fill you into what brought "illegals" into the conversation. The usual conservative drivel that illegals somehow are driving up costs and effecting a certain state, like California, budgets is completly bogus. Corporate welfare drives up state budgets by a country mile. PS. No issues with BU just their hockey team thinking they might rule Hockey East again. What I said is correct. There was a bill before your governor in June to give illegal access to the exchanges, and ostensibly subsidized care. The California Dems lead by Ricardo Lara are pushing Obama on this as we speak. www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-06-03/california-moves-toward-extending-obamacare-to-illegal-immigrantsWhat you said was wrong. If you were right you would have made a statement about "Medi-Cal" costing CA taxpayers money and that hasn't even been put in in place yet for illegals. The Health and Human services would still have to approve any ACA type bill signed by Brown, but still, at no cost to CA taxpayers. You made it sound like CA taxpayers were already footing a bill for illegals, not in the future. "Though the California bill does not come with federal subsidies that make health insurance more affordable to low- and middle-income people, critics fear it's heading that way." Illegals would still have to go and buy the insurance at the CA exchange. No subsidies, none. Once Moonbeam is out of office another Reagan or Terminator clone will run up another deficit then turn around and call himself a "great fiscal conservative".
|
|
|
Post by jmwalters on Sept 26, 2016 0:29:52 GMT
More accurately, supply side economics postulates that that growth will most effectively created through less taxes, regulations, and other perceived government interference in the economy so capital can be maximized. In practice, this has never proven to work in the real world in any sustained capacity. Even Reagan raised taxes multiple times, increased gov spending, and had to deal with a few recessions...all due to his initial attempt to follow supply-side theory. You mean MN can't be compared to WI or KS either? Have they really become that powerful? OH and two-thirds of Obamas stimulus was, in fact, tax cuts of various degrees. How socialist of him Reagan's economic policy (supply side) begot 12 years of the longest economic expansion in American history with an average GDP growth of 3.2 percent. As compared to what? The only administration to not see a single year of 3% growth in American history... facts are funny things. Yes, facts can be downright hilarious: www.usnews.com/news/blogs/data-mine/2015/10/28/which-presidents-have-been-best-for-the-economy
|
|