UnderGround Forums
 

PoliticalGround >> GWB: Worst Economic Leadership?

| Share | Email | Subscribe | Check IPs

3/25/08 5:53 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
super chin
18 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 25-Mar-08
Member Since: 12/07/2004
Posts: 918
it doesn't have to be zero sum for what i said to be true.
3/25/08 6:40 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
gregbrady
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 25-Mar-08
Member Since: 01/09/2002
Posts: 1117
Show me a country without a middle-class and ill show you a third world country. The rich of this country fail to realize this for whatever reason. A deteoriating middle-class is good for noone, Paris Hilton included. Trickle down economics is complete bullshit and anyone that believes it is brainwashed.
3/25/08 6:50 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
smac1
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 25-Mar-08
Member Since: 03/06/2006
Posts: 11439
"Is taxing the rich the answer? Not sure, just asking." What the fuck. The "rich" are already losing nearly half of their paychecks and over 50% of the wage earners in this country pay essentially NO taxes. The answer starts with reducing taxes on the "rich" by at least 50%. That money needs to be in the economy. The "rich" were paying less than 20% of the tax burden when Reagan was President. Now they pay well over 40%. Time for others to contribute and programs that can't be funded need to go. war, welfare, social security, paying for illegals, free medical care, etc. these programs are destroying the country. We are rapidly training the 50% of the country who doesn't really pay taxes that they can just vote for people who will take from the people who work hard and give to them. It's the absolute worst thing for the country. We ran this country into the 20s on 1% and now they need nearly half? It costs me over $11 in taxes just to drive me girlfriend home and she lives 4 miles away. The one thing we definately do not need is more taxes.
3/25/08 6:57 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
smac1
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 25-Mar-08
Member Since: 03/06/2006
Posts: 11440
"Trickle down economics is complete bullshit and anyone that believes it is brainwashed." The trickle up economics we practice in this country doesn't seem to work either.
3/25/08 7:04 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
HEMAN
63 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 25-Mar-08
Member Since: 01/01/2001
Posts: 15848
"The equity that people have built in their homes is crumbling under their feet." Until their is another housing boom.
3/25/08 7:11 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
e. kaye
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 26-Mar-08 10:33 AM
Member Since: 01/01/2001
Posts: 16773
"it doesn't have to be zero sum for what i said to be true." Sorry but that is a logical fallacy. The economy is not a zero sum game and your premise is false. "Trickle down economics is complete bullshit and anyone that believes it is brainwashed." Obviously someone that does not own a business. I own a business. I have thousands of employees. If my tax burden was less, I would have more money to invest in growing my business. I could hire more people to make my business grow. Taxes are a drain on growth pure and simple. 1-You cannot cut taxes on people that do not pay them. 2-There is a great number of people that if you give them a few hundred dollars, as the govt is about to do, will blow it in a week. If you gave them a long term tax cut, they would be able to change their lives in some meaningful way. 3-People in the higher tax brackets, when given cuts spend and invest even more. They spend more because they have enough savings and they invest more because they can take the chance on losing the money. Both of these activities stimulate the economy and create jobs. This is the bracket that gives you the most bang for your buck. I live in NYC. Between the Federal Income Tax, State and City income tax, Sales taxes and all the other taxes, FICA etc. I pay nearly 60% of my income in taxes. Thank you the AMT-Alternative Maximum Tax. Is that not enough?
3/25/08 8:52 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
smac1
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 25-Mar-08
Member Since: 03/06/2006
Posts: 11442
^ Post of the year!
3/26/08 12:00 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
gregbrady
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 26-Mar-08
Member Since: 01/09/2002
Posts: 1121
So the middle-class don't invest in things? Well maybe not anymore because their wages are staganant and things cost more than ever but they used to.
3/26/08 12:22 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
HEMAN
63 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 26-Mar-08
Member Since: 01/01/2001
Posts: 15850
Sure middle class invest...buying a house...401k...ROTH IRA...etc...
3/26/08 12:41 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
super chin
18 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 26-Mar-08
Member Since: 12/07/2004
Posts: 919
my premise was never that it was a zero sum game. i'm not arguing we're on the gold standard. calling something a logical fallacy doesn't make it one. my premise was that capital begets more capital generally and that those with more capital control more of the resources in society. the conclusion was this creates inequity that leads to instability in society generally by making it harder for those who do not start with large amounts of capital to compete in acquiring resources. one need only look at the percentages of both upward and lower mobility. an economy's stability can't be measured in a vacuum, there are social costs that have to be addressed. and a shrinking middle class isn't good for the economy. i happen to pay a lot in taxes, but it's not beyond affordable. a lot of my friends work as hard as me and can barely make ends meet.
3/26/08 1:05 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
super chin
18 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 26-Mar-08
Member Since: 12/07/2004
Posts: 920
this is a good quote on the point you were making, which i don't entirely disagree with - "[T]he idea of distributing everything evenly is based on a theory that there's only X amount of stuff in the world, that somehow we took it away from the poorer countries in the first place, and therefore we should give it back to them. But this theory doesn't take into account the real reason for the differences between countries -- that is, the development of new techniques for growing food, the development of machinery to grow food and do other things, and the fact that all this machinery requires the concentration of capital. It isn't the stuff, but the power to make the stuff, that is important. But I realize now that these people were not in science; they didn't understand it. They didn't understand technology; they didn't understand their time." -- Richard Feynman but the problem is that this still requires the concentration of capital, which is distributed unequally.
3/26/08 11:34 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
super chin
18 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 26-Mar-08
Member Since: 12/07/2004
Posts: 921
i mean, why is the disparity in income distribution so much less than the disparity in wealth distribution? admittedly the question is partly moral, but would you really tell some kid who is receiving a shitty education while his more well off peers receive quality education that it isn't a zero sum game, that he can just create value? also the very idea that people always are receiving, in terms of value, more than they give in a free exchange assumes rational actors. and i've never bought into homo economicus. either way, kudos to you for running a successful business and adding value and wealth to the market. certainly taxes are too high, but something like a flat tax would be, in my opinion, bad socially and economically.
3/26/08 10:17 PM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
HEMAN
63 The total sum of your votes up and votes down Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 26-Mar-08 10:24 PM
Member Since: 01/01/2001
Posts: 15855
"admittedly the question is partly moral, but would you really tell some kid who is receiving a shitty education while his more well off peers receive quality education that it isn't a zero sum game, that he can just create value?"
3/27/08 7:12 AM
Ignore | Quote | Vote Down | Vote Up
smac1
Send Private Message Add Comment To Profile

Edited: 27-Mar-08
Member Since: 03/06/2006
Posts: 11460
" but something like a flat tax would be, in my opinion, bad socially and economically." It's also ridiculously unfair to those who make more. Less than the current system but unfair and still biased towards those who make less. A lot of people who don't pay income tax would have to start paying a share though. Meaning no politician with a flat tax agenda stands a chance.

| Share | Email | Subscribe | Check IPs

Reply Post

You must log in to post a reply. Click here to login.