Obama General Discussion, vol. 4 - Page 29 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 06-12-2012, 11:28 PM   #421
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 02:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1131 View Post
Government spending absolutely needs to shrink, but it needs to do so when the economy is healthy.
Which is coincidently exactly what Greece and Europe have been telling themselves for years. And what the Party of Government in this country still believes. The Laws of Economics are now catching up with them however.
Quote:
You can starve the beast when middle and lower income families are out of the shitter, instead of blowing up their benefits and giving them to rich folks as tax cuts.
What is the source of revenue that funds "their benefits"?
Quote:
Taking the legs out from under the very people who need to be spending to generate growth when the economy is shaky is ridiculous.
Thinking we need more spending rather than more production and capital formation is, well, ridiculous.
Quote:
Supply side economics does not work. The very people who were the architects of it during the (!) Reagan era have admitted it is ineffective.
Reagan running for reelection in his 4th year, "It's morning in America."

Obama running for reelection in his 4th year, "I believe that there are a lot of Americans who are hurting right now, which is what I've been saying for the last year, two years, three years, what I've been saying since I came into office."

Quote:
And growth is not a zero-sum game between government and the private sector as you are simplifying it to fit your political ideology
Government does not grow the economy or create wealth; it borrows or taxes money from existing sources and redistributes it to other sources. The only way to grow the economy is through the private sector or Greece would be an economic powerhouse instead of a economic basketcase.

indeed!!
__________________

__________________
INDY500 is offline  
Old 06-13-2012, 12:20 AM   #422
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 03:34 PM
Same planet, different worlds.

Want to solve the debt? End what started it in the first place: the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy.
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 06-13-2012, 12:56 AM   #423
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Canadiens1131's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,363
Local Time: 04:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500
Which is coincidently exactly what Greece and Europe have been telling themselves for years.
No. Greece has suffered from endemic, systematic problems with collecting tax revenue from its citizens for decades (ironic considering your political viewpoint and how you spin the problems with what's going on in that country.) America is not Greece; the IRS is fairly adept at squeezing the working man.

As far as your US Dollar / Euro comparison, I am not going to bother listing the differences between a vast land of states that has had a shared currency and cultural progression since its inception (gee golly, only one internal war wus a bargain, partner!) and a vast land that has bundled together a variety of states with vastly different systems of governance and fiscal responsibility only recently. Giving up the ability to regulate one's national currency vs. the crazy neighbours' via national-level central bank is a huge issue.

Again, the need for nuance when the conservative mind searches for black and white answers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500
What is the source of revenue that funds "their benefits"?
Obviously it is the state, or the federal government. The issue at hand is whether it is a better idea to curb government spending now, where America is poised for a second recession after Europe gets embroiled in a bank run, or later, when the economy has recovered and is healthy.

Cutting benefits to middle and lower class Americans decreases their spending and in turn reduces their retail spending and savings for future investments (locally and nationally), as well as the amount of tax revenue they contribute to local, state, and federal governments.

If you want my honest opinion, we need stereotypically Democratic fiscal policies during the bust and stereotypically Republican fiscal policies during the boom.

Putting into place Republican (Paul Ryanesque) fiscal policy during the bust is like squeezing the last few PSI out of a suffocating diver's tank before he has the chance to use it to get to the surface.

Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500
Thinking we need more spending rather than more production and capital formation is, well, ridiculous.
We need both, truth be told.

If there is no income available to be spent from the working class, then there is no demand for goods and services. Jesus Christ. Are you going to build a Lamborghini factory and a couple hundred cars and then tell an economy that they need to buy these things? Fuck no, you respond to market demand.

Again, if you truly believe the only way out of a recession is tax cuts for a tax bracket that predominantly squirrels money away in safe investments for long-term growth and maintaining their wealth, there is nothing that I could ever type that would convince you otherwise.

The availability of investment information and the skilled resources to apply that knowledge for the rich and super-rich vs. the guy from the auto plant or the bowling alley is hugely disparate.
__________________
Canadiens1131 is offline  
Old 06-13-2012, 03:37 AM   #424
you are what you is
 
Salome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 22,016
Local Time: 09:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1131 View Post
No. Greece has suffered from endemic, systematic problems with collecting tax revenue from its citizens for decades (ironic considering your political viewpoint and how you spin the problems with what's going on in that country.) America is not Greece; the IRS is fairly adept at squeezing the working man.

As far as your US Dollar / Euro comparison, I am not going to bother listing the differences between a vast land of states that has had a shared currency and cultural progression since its inception (gee golly, only one internal war wus a bargain, partner!) and a vast land that has bundled together a variety of states with vastly different systems of governance and fiscal responsibility only recently. Giving up the ability to regulate one's national currency vs. the crazy neighbours' via national-level central bank is a huge issue.


the aforementioned Europe/Greece comparison was shockingly inane
__________________
“Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe.”
~Frank Zappa
Salome is offline  
Old 06-13-2012, 04:02 AM   #425
45:33
 
cobl04's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: East Point to Shaolin
Posts: 55,042
Local Time: 07:34 AM
More like LaDouche, amirite?!
__________________
cobl04 is offline  
Old 06-13-2012, 08:07 AM   #426
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,297
Local Time: 03:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1131 View Post

As far as your US Dollar / Euro comparison, I am not going to bother listing the differences between a vast land of states that has had a shared currency and cultural progression since its inception (gee golly, only one internal war wus a bargain, partner!) and a vast land that has bundled together a variety of states with vastly different systems of governance and fiscal responsibility only recently.
Seriously.

It's as if each time INDY gets on this track, he conveniently forgets that the US has the ability to print its own money.
__________________
anitram is online now  
Old 06-13-2012, 11:37 AM   #427
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,997
Local Time: 03:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by HBK-79 View Post
I saw a married couple doing the same thing outside my local DMV. I don't know who these LaRouche people are.

Either way, these people eventually got kicked off the premises. It was a pretty funny spectacle.
The guy at the desk at the po said that the police had been by there to "check it out". It's federal property-but since they were right at the edge of the street/driveway they aren't trespassing I suppose. He didn't say that, just my guess. Don't know what the laws say about that. He also said that he couldn't say anything about it because he just works there, whatever that meant. Afraid for his job I guess, or just being sarcastic.
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 06-13-2012, 11:51 AM   #428
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
BonosSaint's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,566
Local Time: 04:34 PM
I'm pretty sure the LaRouche tenets are, shall we say, fluid.
__________________
BonosSaint is offline  
Old 06-13-2012, 02:25 PM   #429
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,997
Local Time: 03:34 PM
I get it, that's his cranky old guy insults everyone comedy. But-not classy or appropriate. I don't get what the President even has to do with AFI or Shirley MacLaine.

abcnews.com

Don Rickles has been on TV insulting people for laughs for decades, but his remark comparing President Barack Obama to a janitor at a recent taping of the American Film Institute’s tribute to Shirley MacLaine has been edited out of a broadcast version set to air on TV Land, according to The Hollywood Reporter.

Rickles was firing verbal jabs at MacLaine and several guests, including Jack Nicholson and Warren Beatty, when he commented about the commander in chief, saying “President Obama is a personal friend of mine. He was over to the house yesterday, but the mop broke.”

When The Hollywood Reporter asked TV Land about Rickles’ joke about the president, a spokesman for the cable channel replied, “It’s not going to make it on the air. That’s all I’ll say about it.”
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 06-13-2012, 05:38 PM   #430
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 09:34 PM
Liberals have short memories, are we forgetting the Laffer curve:



Income taxes should be cut and cut significantly across the board. Ignore the class war b.s., the main beneficiaries of such a tax cut would be working class and middle class people not the 1%. And the public sector needs to be shrunk and have manners put on it. There are prison officers in California who earn $300k a year for Chrissakes (well, that receive salaries of that amount, I wouldn't say they 'earn' them precisely!).

http://calcoastnews.com/2011/07/hund...e-than-240000/


Canadiens accuses conservatives of oversimplifying and lacking nuance - well, Indy500's core point is that the only thing that pays for the public sector is taxes on the private sector and that, I'm afraid, is black and white, no matter which way liberals try to obfuscate and create sidetracks and distractions.
__________________
financeguy is offline  
Old 06-13-2012, 06:00 PM   #431
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 02:34 PM
Here's the actual source a little less spin:

State Salaries Results - The Sacramento Bee, Sacramento, California
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 06-13-2012, 06:01 PM   #432
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 02:34 PM
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 06-13-2012, 06:28 PM   #433
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
U2DMfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: It's Inside A Black Hole
Posts: 6,637
Local Time: 02:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
Indy500's core point is that the only thing that pays for the public sector is taxes on the private sector and that, I'm afraid, is black and white, no matter which way liberals try to obfuscate and create sidetracks and distractions.
That's true but liberals aren't really hiding from that, are they? They want to create more revenue. And nobody is denying it that I can see. They want the Bush Tax Cuts to expire in December. Last I saw, that would create, about 800 billion in revenue over 10 years. Plus whatever loopholes or exemptions they want to remove. So yeah, they definitely are transparent about it.

Where conservatives in America fall short is the ability to see our inevitably growing public sector because of so called "entitlements" that everybody wants, and are professing an economic policy that has PROVEN that it can not pay for the public sector, in 1987, 1991, 2003 or 2007 or 2013.

Supply side economics + public need/desire = deficits.
Proven, across 3 administrations, and over 20 years apart.
We cannot run the federal government with those kinds of revenues. Period.

I am a big fan of what works. I said it weeks or months ago and I'll say it again. Show me how supply side economics works (using factual data) and I'll get on board. I've heard it my whole life and all I've seen is smoke and mirrors. It's impractical. Yes, it works to generate revenues (that is demonstrable)...but they are insufficient revenues. All I can say is - 8 years of George W Bush and tax cuts created almost no jobs.

We have 20 of the last 32 years under Reaganomic control and in that time we've seen one remarkable economic growth period (circa 1984) and the rest of it lackluster or worse. At the height of Reagan revenues (1987) it was the low of growth. In other words, the economy maxed out. And 20 years later the exact same thing happened.

Meanwhile we had remarkable job growth at the height of liberal taxation (1997-2000) and we had a balanced budget as well. Reagan raised taxes, I think 11 times. This is not that hard to figure out.

Supply-side Reaganomics is a sham used by Republicans to convince a lot of people to vote against their best interests. I fully accept that the public dichotomy (the political argument) is a big problem, that those that claim that it is ONLY a revenue problem are just as misguided. Honestly, I am all ears and eyes for opposing facts.
__________________
U2DMfan is offline  
Old 06-13-2012, 08:20 PM   #434
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
BigMacPhisto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,262
Local Time: 03:34 PM
Electoral-Vote.com


Jesus Christ. Anybody see this yet? If you switch Iowa to Obama and give Romney Florida (the latter of which will almost surely happen in November), you get an electoral college tie of 269-269. Can you imagine the rioting that would happen? Even worse, under that scenario, the House chooses the winner based on each state's delegation having one vote apiece. We all know who would win under that scenario.

Of course, that map is pretty unlikely. Not that 49 of those can't happen as they may very well, but there's no way Romney is going to take Michigan, especially after what he said about Detroit. So the polls showing him in the lead there seem like an outlier to me.
__________________
BigMacPhisto is offline  
Old 06-13-2012, 08:39 PM   #435
ONE
love, blood, life
 
digitize's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Dallas and around the Texas Triangle
Posts: 13,966
Local Time: 02:34 PM
The Laffer Curve is great and is generally applicable to reality if income taxes are in the 75% range, at least in terms of short term equilibria (what the Laffer Curve deals with). Of course, tax cuts can be great Keynesian stimulus to help boost revenues in the long run, but that's different, and supply-side Keynesianism alone isn't very helpful.

I think it's worth noting that mainstream Republicans are really just as Keynesian as Democrats; their focus for stimulus is just on the supply side rather than on the demand side, or something more balanced (Democrats have gone after both, really). They're not particularly serious about short-term budget balancing, any more than Democrats are. Ron Paul is a borderline Austrian who probably would balance the budget, but the Paul Ryan types who push for eliminating spending that generally helps the poor to have tax cuts for the wealthy tend to do a very bad job balancing the budget.
__________________

__________________
digitize is online now  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:34 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com