Results 1 to 16 of 16
  1.    #1  
    This is a response to a post in the Kerry thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by PSB22 View Post
    Try telling that to the more than 40 million folks without health insurance in this country. Yes, we are the ONLY major western civilization without a national healthcare system.
    You're right. We should have healthcare for all.

    Try telling that to the school teachers who have to send their kids home with requests for money from parents, to buy basic things like BOOKS! We are the only major western civilization without a federalized education system.
    The states run the schools. Having the federal government take them over is not the answer to under-funded schools.

    Try telling that to the millions who are working on the minimum wage, which the Bush administration has repeatedly refused to increase.
    Raising the minimum wage is counterproductive because it will increase unemployment. Many businesses will hire fewer people, and many will just fail. Small businesses are the greatest source of new jobs, and their failure rate is extremely high as it is.

    Try telling that to the millions (myself included) who will never see a penny of social security in 30 years' time because the government has essentially been borrowing from the SS fund ever since it was created.
    Social security is simply not sustainable by itself in the long-run. It was built on the premise that working people will pay benefits to retired people. That was fine 50 years ago when the ratio of workers to retirees was 8 to 1. Because the population is growing older, the ratio is now 3 to 1. In a few decades, it'll be 2 to 1.

    Try telling that to the Chinese - who are laughing themselves silly because they freakin' OWN this country - they hold a massive portion of the national debt, and pretty soon they're gonna call it in, and then we're screwed!
    They can't "call it in." They can sell the Treasury securities they own, and they can reduce or stop their purchase of US debt in the future. Either would increase the future cost of borrowing for the US, and could have an effect on the economy, but would not affect the existing debt outstanding.

    Try telling that to the poor suckers being affected by global warming, as a direct result of this administration's in-bed approach to the oil industry. We are still the MAJOR party that has not signed Kyoto.
    Please introduce me to these poor suckers.

    So, yes, in your eyes the economy may be doing better, but at what cost? The country (and the planet) are being raped before our very eyes, by a bunch of right wing religious bigot marauders, with no goal other than to line their own poskets. I'm not saying it was any better under Clinton's admin, but PLEASE, don't BS me that the economy is doing well.
    There will always be segments of the population with problems. The reason we have and use macroeconomic data is to measure the state of the whole economy and to compare it with other periods of time and with other countries. Figures like GDP per capita growth, unemployment rate, and the stock market indexes all show that on the whole, our economy is working pretty well relative to our own history and to other countries.
  2. #2  
    To my dear friend Ben who said, "Go take another economics course without the democrats pushing its unsupported facts behind it."

    OK I will. I'd love to take one that tells me how 2.2 trillion in debt is a good thing for this country.
  3. #3  
    When you look at the over all picture, the 2.2 trillion debt is much, much lower than it was during the days of Clinton. 3% when he was playing with her and now it is 1.9% or in that area now. That is a big difference. The amount of debt is not the important feature; the per centage of the debt is what we need to concern ourselves with. You cannot tax your way out of debt. Historically when we have had tax increases, the economy has gone down. Historically when we have had tax cuts the economy has gone up.

    Going in hand with that, take a look at the unemployment numbers just released. If the economy were as bad as the "democrats" said it was, our unemployment rate would be much higher than it is.

    A question, have you been affected by the tax cuts? Do you have more money to spend? Have you been hurt by the economy?

    Let me answer the questions above. Have I been affected by the tax cuts? yes - i have more money to spend. Have I been hurt by the economy? No, not at all. I have two cars, four computers, four Treos, two cats, three entertainment systems, a wife that keeps me in line, three kids, and the list continues.

    Why should I pay to have someone who is on drugs stay on welfare? Why should I pay to keep someone on just welfare when that person just might be able to work...

    The democrats paint a picture of doom when they are out of power and when they get to power, they paint a picture of themselves as "saviors" of all, and they do that by taxing, taxing, taxing, more, more, more. This administration has spent lots of money, more in many areas than the democrats have ever spent. This administration like the Regan administration cut taxes and the results were very clear - and they are clear now. Your economy is in good shape. The average person is in good shape. Home ownership is the highest it has ever been and that is an indication of the economy. You are also aware, I am sure, that more minorities own homes than every before. I am also sure that you are aware that this administration has a higher minority participation than the previous one.

    The list continues.

    Again, do some reading. It really is there.
  4. #4  
    Quote Originally Posted by hdtv4me View Post
    To my dear friend Ben who said, "Go take another economics course without the democrats pushing its unsupported facts behind it."

    OK I will. I'd love to take one that tells me how 2.2 trillion in debt is a good thing for this country.

    $2.2 trillion is just about what we've spent on LBJ's Great Society Programs, and now you want to provide "free healthcare".
  5. #5  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1911sforever View Post
    $2.2 trillion is just about what we've spent on LBJ's Great Society Programs, and now you want to provide "free healthcare".
    I've never advocated free heathcare. Not sure where you got that from. I am a libertarian when it comes to fiscal responsibility. And back in LBJ's day I was a Goldwater Republican. Sadly the real Republican party died when Barry died.
  6. #6  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    When you look at the over all picture, the 2.2 trillion debt is much, much lower than it was during the days of Clinton. 3% when he was playing with her and now it is 1.9% or in that area now. That is a big difference. The amount of debt is not the important feature; the per centage of the debt is what we need to concern ourselves with. You cannot tax your way out of debt. Historically when we have had tax increases, the economy has gone down. Historically when we have had tax cuts the economy has gone up.

    Going in hand with that, take a look at the unemployment numbers just released. If the economy were as bad as the "democrats" said it was, our unemployment rate would be much higher than it is.

    A question, have you been affected by the tax cuts? Do you have more money to spend? Have you been hurt by the economy?

    Let me answer the questions above. Have I been affected by the tax cuts? yes - i have more money to spend. Have I been hurt by the economy? No, not at all. I have two cars, four computers, four Treos, two cats, three entertainment systems, a wife that keeps me in line, three kids, and the list continues.

    Why should I pay to have someone who is on drugs stay on welfare? Why should I pay to keep someone on just welfare when that person just might be able to work...

    The democrats paint a picture of doom when they are out of power and when they get to power, they paint a picture of themselves as "saviors" of all, and they do that by taxing, taxing, taxing, more, more, more. This administration has spent lots of money, more in many areas than the democrats have ever spent. This administration like the Regan administration cut taxes and the results were very clear - and they are clear now. Your economy is in good shape. The average person is in good shape. Home ownership is the highest it has ever been and that is an indication of the economy. You are also aware, I am sure, that more minorities own homes than every before. I am also sure that you are aware that this administration has a higher minority participation than the previous one.

    The list continues.

    Again, do some reading. It really is there.
    This is why we cannot talk Ben. You say outrageous things and I call you on them. Then I ask you a simple question and you reply with rhetoric and never answered my question. Better yet you and your pals do the happy dance after you post your drivel and claim some sort of victory.

    The correct answer is: there is no economics class that would teach you that $2.2 trillion in debt is a good thing.
  7. #7  
    I know I can tell you that my fiscal situation has improved not one bit because of these 'tax cuts', because they're not supposed to.

    Check this link out from the Tax Policy Institute.
    45.8% of the benefits from a reduction in capital gains and dividends went to people with incomes over $1 million. There were 284,000 taxpayers in this income group. This is .19% of all taxpayers.

    An additional 10.8% of the benefits went to people with incomes between $500,000 and $1 million. There were 593,000 taxpayers in this income group. This is .40% of all taxpayers.


    17.4% of the benefits went to people with incomes between $200,000 and $500,000. There were 3,588,000 taxpayers in this income group. This is 2.46% of all taxpayers.


    14.3% of the benefits went to people with incomes of $100,000 to $200,000. There were 14,039,000 taxpayers in this income group. This is 9.66% of all taxpayers.
    Essentially, 88.3% of the tax cut 'benefits' only affect people whose incomes are $100,000 and up. And guess what, that's only 12.71% of all tax payers. (heavily borrowed from this dkos diary)

    Perhaps you fall in that upper bracket but I sure as heck don't, and neither does ~90% of our country.
  8. #8  
    Uh, what percentage of taxes do people with incomes of $100k & up pay?
  9.    #9  
    Quote Originally Posted by g-funkster View Post
    I know I can tell you that my fiscal situation has improved not one bit because of these 'tax cuts', because they're not supposed to.
    If you pay federal income taxes, you should have seen a tax benefit.

    Essentially, 88.3% of the tax cut 'benefits' only affect people whose incomes are $100,000 and up. And guess what, that's only 12.71% of all tax payers.
    That's meaningless without looking at what percent of total tax revenue those people contribute. If it's about 88.3%, then the tax cut is fair.
  10.    #10  
    Quote Originally Posted by hdtv4me View Post
    This is why we cannot talk Ben. You say outrageous things and I call you on them. Then I ask you a simple question and you reply with rhetoric and never answered my question. Better yet you and your pals do the happy dance after you post your drivel and claim some sort of victory.

    The correct answer is: there is no economics class that would teach you that $2.2 trillion in debt is a good thing.
    You didn't actually ask a question. And you ignored Ben's point that it makes no sense to look at debt in isolation.

    It's like saying that a $100K mortgage is a bad thing. It depends on your income level and what you invest the money in. Debt is a good thing, if managed properly, because it allows you to invest and grow. You can learn that if you study economics.

    And the national debt is actually more than $8 trillion.
  11. #11  
    "And the national debt is actually more than $8 trillion."

    Yup, you caught me...saw that after I posted it. The foreign debt is about $2.2 trillion and China has a stake in roughly 11% of that.

    Yes, looking at debt in isolation cannot be a barometer for how the economy is performing or how it will evolve or whether it is a bad thing. And I will concede that there are economist who will dismiss concerns with all of our debt. But I'd bet if we could straw poll 100 top economist that a majority would raise red flags over the alarming increase in our debt and the return to deficits vs. surpluses.

    Good post though...seriously. Thanks for catching that.
  12. #12  
    Quote Originally Posted by samkim View Post
    That's meaningless without looking at what percent of total tax revenue those people contribute. If it's about 88.3%, then the tax cut is fair.
    I was referring specifically to ben's post about how life is sooo much better because of tax cuts.. republicans campaign to average joes about taxes as if it will really make a difference in their lives.
  13.    #13  
    Quote Originally Posted by hdtv4me View Post
    "And the national debt is actually more than $8 trillion."

    Yup, you caught me...saw that after I posted it. The foreign debt is about $2.2 trillion and China has a stake in roughly 11% of that.

    Yes, looking at debt in isolation cannot be a barometer for how the economy is performing or how it will evolve or whether it is a bad thing. And I will concede that there are economist who will dismiss concerns with all of our debt. But I'd bet if we could straw poll 100 top economist that a majority would raise red flags over the alarming increase in our debt and the return to deficits vs. surpluses.

    Good post though...seriously. Thanks for catching that.
    Agreed, that many economists worry about rising debt. Some people think the answer is to raise taxes and cut spending. I think we should cut taxes and cut spending. When we cut tax rates, the economy grows and so total tax revenue grows. Federal tax revenues are up significantly in the past two years despite the tax cuts. Or rather, because of the tax cuts.

    And thanks for staying civil.
  14.    #14  
    Quote Originally Posted by g-funkster View Post
    I was referring specifically to ben's post about how life is sooo much better because of tax cuts.. republicans campaign to average joes about taxes as if it will really make a difference in their lives.
    According to the Tax Policy Center, the median benefit from the tax cuts in 2003 was $470, meaning half of all tax payers gained at least $470.

    It's true that the tax cuts were slightly regressive, meaning that the top 1% gained the most. But the worst off isn't the bottom. It's actually the 60%-95% group in income that gained the least, percentagewise. (That's probably most Treo owners.) The bottom 40% did pretty well. Only if you love looking at numbers, check out this document from the Congressional Budget Office (pdf file):
    http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdoc.cfm?index=5746&type=1
    Look at Table 4, Change in Share of Total Federal Tax Liabilities.
    Last edited by samkim; 11/04/2006 at 08:33 PM.
  15. PSB22's Avatar
    Posts
    192 Posts
    Global Posts
    203 Global Posts
    #15  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    Let me answer the questions above. Have I been affected by the tax cuts? yes - i have more money to spend. Have I been hurt by the economy? No, not at all. I have two cars, four computers, four Treos, two cats, three entertainment systems, a wife that keeps me in line, three kids, and the list continues.

    Why should I pay to have someone who is on drugs stay on welfare? Why should I pay to keep someone on just welfare when that person just might be able to work...
    This is why this country will continue to go down the tubes, because of a**holes like yourself who can't see that without SOCIETY there will be no entertainment centers and cats and cars and treos!

    Seriously, if you think that the sole reason the founding fathers made this country was so that YOU could get rich and not give a damn about anyone else, then you need to go back to school not only to learn economics, but history too!

    And there's a very good reason why YOU should pay for the person on welfare - because if you don't then that person is gonna go postal and come round your house and kill your wife kids and steal your car. We all have a responsibility in SOCIETY (I'll say the word again in-case you forgot it... SOCIETY!), to look after the less fortunate and to embrace all of the people who are not as lucky as ourselves. Yes, I concur with you that there are freeloaders and the system is open to abuse by those who do not want to contribute - but please realize that yourself not wanting to contribute to society from the "top end" is no more or less reprehensible than a bum on the street not wanting to get a job and contribute at the opposite end of the spectrum. Just calling someone a "bum" and ignoring the problem will not make it go away - consider the possibility that the person you look down on may have been put there indirectly by your actions - maybe they lost their job because you bought something from China instead of a US made product? Everything is connected, and to simply write-off your involvement in society because you don't feel the negative effects of government fiscal policy is naive, stupid, and Selfish Selfish Selfish. That pretty much sums up your attitude. One day it will come and bite you on the ***.
  16. #16  
    Number one, we may disagree, but I am not an ******* and I do not think you are.

    As for paragraph number two below - no, not the sole reason for creating society.

    I do have a responsibility in society; so do those on welfare. I do not mind helping people who are in genuine need; but those that use welfare to maintain or justify non-beneficial actions should take care of themselves. A person wants to use drugs - then fine, let them, but I have no desire to support them.

    As for your last part of loss of jobs, try again on that argument, it holds no validity. If it did, our unemployment rate would be much higher and now it is the lowest.......Jobs come and go all the time. We outsource to India, India outsources to us. We loose, they gain; we gain, they loose. As much as i dislike it, we are in a global society. I would prefer we go back to the days of "protectionalism," where the United States put itself first. However, when one looks at that, it is easy to see why people from Mexico die trying to get here.

    Ben

    Quote Originally Posted by PSB22 View Post
    This is why this country will continue to go down the tubes, because of a**holes like yourself who can't see that without SOCIETY there will be no entertainment centers and cats and cars and treos!

    Seriously, if you think that the sole reason the founding fathers made this country was so that YOU could get rich and not give a damn about anyone else, then you need to go back to school not only to learn economics, but history too!

    And there's a very good reason why YOU should pay for the person on welfare - because if you don't then that person is gonna go postal and come round your house and kill your wife kids and steal your car. We all have a responsibility in SOCIETY (I'll say the word again in-case you forgot it... SOCIETY!), to look after the less fortunate and to embrace all of the people who are not as lucky as ourselves. Yes, I concur with you that there are freeloaders and the system is open to abuse by those who do not want to contribute - but please realize that yourself not wanting to contribute to society from the "top end" is no more or less reprehensible than a bum on the street not wanting to get a job and contribute at the opposite end of the spectrum. Just calling someone a "bum" and ignoring the problem will not make it go away - consider the possibility that the person you look down on may have been put there indirectly by your actions - maybe they lost their job because you bought something from China instead of a US made product? Everything is connected, and to simply write-off your involvement in society because you don't feel the negative effects of government fiscal policy is naive, stupid, and Selfish Selfish Selfish. That pretty much sums up your attitude. One day it will come and bite you on the ***.

Posting Permissions