The Tea Party - Page 32 - 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 04-19-2010, 11:51 PM   #621
Refugee
 
U2387's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Boston
Posts: 2,297
Local Time: 11:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AEON View Post
Here is an interesting source:
Congressional Budget Office - Home Page
Yes, and nowhere does it make the claim that we are now at 30% revenue/GDP!

The deficit is going up, tell us something we do not know!

Obama is responsible for only a tiny fraction of this structural deficit, and he has already done a good amount to address the issue.

If you are still going to try and make this claim, against all economic or common sense, then you may as well bring a tin foil hat with you!

Again, if revenues are weak, taxes have fallen and GDP is steady or increasing very little, than we have a smaller numerator with slightly bigger or the same denominator. How does that yield 12 more percentage points?



Quote:
And oecd.org is another source…
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and

Development
Yes, and again, it does not back up your b.s. initial claim.

You do realize that something cataclysmic, seismic, unprecedented would have to have happened for there to be a movement of 12 percentage points in either direction on revenue/GDP, right?
__________________

U2387 is offline  
Old 04-20-2010, 12:15 AM   #622
Refugee
 
U2387's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Boston
Posts: 2,297
Local Time: 11:04 PM
Aeon, it has to be something else with you, because you are resorting to statistics that are made up and completely out of whack as well as trying to deny the increase in the presence of militia violence in our country.

Neither can be done.

If you want to criticize Obama or the Democrats or anyone else, just do it in good faith. If you truly do not like the policies, then you should be able to discuss them without outright falsehoods.

What you are doing amounts to the same argument as "our civilization as we know it will end because of Obama." "Why," others ask. Because we said so.

Don't be absurd.
__________________

U2387 is offline  
Old 04-20-2010, 12:23 AM   #623
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 08:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by U2387 View Post
Yes, and nowhere does it make the claim that we are now at 30% revenue/GDP!
Maybe it is just my interpretation – but your use of exclamation marks, all caps, and cursing come across a someone taking personal offense by someone daring to disagree with your long (and a tad bit recycled) posts. You asked for numbers, and I’m giving you the numbers - as well as the sources behind those numbers. You’re free to question them – I did not do the accounting myself. I tend to trust the OECD and CBO, but I can understand if someone did not.

To clarify - I don't believe I said it happened in one year. If I did say this – it wasn’t my intention. It’s common knowledge this has been a trend that started well before Obama. Again, I think it is the general opinion that the trend will accelerate – a reasonable concern in light of the current crises and follow up spending bills. If it continues to accelerate – let’s say into the high 30’s and 40’s – we might be in serious trouble. Smaller countries might be able to deal with such a high level – the United Sates economy may not cope so well.

The OECD report states that it the US revenue to GDP was 28.3 percent in 2008. I did not see 2009 information in the PDF but I would wager 2009 and 2010 are the same or worse.
AEON is offline  
Old 04-20-2010, 01:40 AM   #624
Refugee
 
U2387's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Boston
Posts: 2,297
Local Time: 11:04 PM
Quote:
Maybe it is just my interpretation – but your use of exclamation marks, all caps, and cursing come across a someone taking personal offense by someone daring to disagree with your long (and a tad bit recycled) posts. You asked for numbers, and I’m giving you the numbers - as well as the sources behind those numbers. You’re free to question them – I did not do the accounting myself. I tend to trust the OECD and CBO, but I can understand if someone did not.
I gave you the official federal revenue and GDP numbers for 2009, divided them and got 13.86% and linked to my source.

I have the facts.

You have numbers that you misunderstand and are trying to use to back up your opinions.

Look, you are not disagreeing with me. We have not even been in an argument on the merits of any issue.

What you are doing is putting out 2 different numbers, calculated differently by different methods and using the lower one that favors you for the period before Obama, and using the higher one for after Obama. That is all. If you consistently use OECD or consistently use CBO, you will find NO INCREASE or a DROP in 2009 for taxes as a percentage of GDP!

I will give you the benefit of the doubt and say you don't understand the issue, because I do not want to accuse you of intentionally changing the calculation mid game on us!

I am giving the correct numbers and actually explaining why they are correct!

That is not long winded or recycled posting, my friend!

Again, you are showing no understanding of the issue. You use CBO statistics which, calculating by their method for 09 shows 13.86% and then compare them to OECD statistics, which are calculated completely differently, to try and claim a big increase.


Neither OECD nor CBO has shown any kind of increase in the tax as % of GDP of the United States of late.

The OECD and CBO aren't making the same claims as you are!

CBO in no way shape or form says we are anywhere near 30%

OECD calculates completely differently than we do. They include state, local and federal taxes and add them in, they include other things that we do not include. Their numbers, not the ones we use to calculate it, have been pretty consistently between 25 and 28 since 1980, so where is the big increase?


Quote:
To clarify - I don't believe I said it happened in one year. If I did say this – it wasn’t my intention. It’s common knowledge this has been a trend that started well before Obama. Again, I think it is the general opinion that the trend will accelerate – a reasonable concern in light of the current crises and follow up spending bills. If it continues to accelerate – let’s say into the high 30’s and 40’s – we might be in serious trouble. Smaller countries might be able to deal with such a high level – the United Sates economy may not cope so well.

The OECD report states that it the US revenue to GDP was 28.3 percent in 2008. I did not see 2009 information in the PDF but I would wager 2009 and 2010 are the same or worse.
This is just not true, I am sorry.

You are still claiming this trend is accelerating, when I have shown you clearly it is dropping. You don't even need numbers, just, once again, common sense. Taxes decreasing, revenue decreasing, GDP staying the same or growing slightly, it does not work out. Again, non partisan Tax Foundation estimates that even if Obama's tax increases go through in their entirety, we are unlikely to move up in this category by any noticeable amount! Bigger tax increases in the past, again, have not even registered on the radar screen. So it is not rising, I don't know where you are getting this!

Are you sure you are not confusing this trend with the rising trend in deficits as a percentage of GDP? Of course, that can't be sustained, and we are addressing it.

I will be repetitive on these points until you acknowledge you are spinning!

The claim you made was that we were always sitting around 18% and we are now at 30%.

You said we were at 18%(which is where we have been for a while now) and NOW we are at 30.

So I made the logical conclusion(of course using the same source calculated with the same method) that it had to have happened in a year, unless there is some change in the numbering of years that I am not aware of.

What is between 2008 and 2009? How many years?

Again, logic. How could the trend of tax% of GDP have started to accelerate upwards long before Obama when Clinton, after a modest tax hike in 1993 kept cutting, cutting cutting, and Bush II did the same?

The tax bite as a percentage of GDP was the lowest in history in 2003. Bush kept cutting.

Obama has cut so far and is proposing modest increases in the future.

Lets acknowledge this little bit of common sense now, AEON! How could tax/revenue percentages be increasing if taxes have been cut and revenues have dropped off a cliff? Again, that numerator decreasing/denominator stable or increasing logic that you have not acknowledged yet, even though I pointed it out 3 times.

So the CBO and all other internal numbers that simply look at federal revenues to GDP and get the percentage will hold us right around 18% for the foreseeable future!

The OECD, with whatever metric they use, will keep us around 25-30%, where we have always been! Whatever numbers you use, the big increase has not happened!

At least acknowledge to me right now that you understand the difference in how the 2 sources calculate the numbers. That is important.

Moral of the story:

You can't work it out like this:

CBO 2000-2008- 17-18%

OECD 2000-2008-25-28%

2009

CBO:13.86%

OECD: probably a little less than 25% given how they calculate and the fact that revenues are down.

Now you move on to make your original claim:
Quote:
"We have always been right around 18%, now we are approaching 30%, and that gets us fiscal conservatives shaking in our boots."(paraphrase)
FYM, what is he doing?

He is selecting the CBO statistic to use for pre-Obama and the OECD statistic to use post-Obama.

He is not being consistent, as neither show an increase.

He is changing the METHOD OF CALCULATION, changing the rules mid game, to make it LOOK LIKE there is some big bad policy change that has caused this of late!

Again, AEON, and this is key, you have to now acknowledge that you did this, and that you realize that there is no way such a large increase could take place absent a MAJOR, MAJOR incident, like doubling of the tax rate all around plus a big gas tax plus finding a pot of gold!

Bottom line, if both CBO and OECD are consistent throughout the last decade or two and we compare periods without changing the method of calculation mid game and hoping no one notices, revenue(taxes) as a percentage of GDP are either stable or falling!!
U2387 is offline  
Old 04-20-2010, 01:50 AM   #625
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 08:04 PM
Another interesting note...the Congressional Budget Office (not Heritage) estimates that the gross debt will rise from 70.2% of GDP in 2008 to 100.6% in 2012...

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/100xx/doc...dentBudget.pdf
AEON is offline  
Old 04-20-2010, 01:54 AM   #626
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 08:04 PM
The phrase "always been" and the word "historical" do not mean the same thing.
AEON is offline  
Old 04-20-2010, 02:04 AM   #627
Refugee
 
U2387's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Boston
Posts: 2,297
Local Time: 11:04 PM
Quote:
The OECD report states that it the US revenue to GDP was 28.3 percent in 2008. I did not see 2009 information in the PDF but I would wager 2009 and 2010 are the same or worse.
I will leave you alone after this, but again, is your calculator broken. For the final time.

2008 to 2009 has led us to a big drop in revenues, and there has been a substantial tax cut.

This cuts our numerator

GDP in this time period has fallen a bit, then risen a bit(mid 2009 the recovery started) so lets say it is stable overall.

This keeps our denominator the same

Smaller numerator, plus the same denominator, or in the case of 2010, a growing denominator, will yield a LOWER PERCENTAGE.

SIMPLE MATH.

Just acknowledge this stuff, and move on to a discussion based on the merits of issues.

Just because you acknowledge that Obama has not raised our collective tax bite 12 percentage points does not mean that you in any way, shape or form can't disagree with his policies!
U2387 is offline  
Old 04-20-2010, 02:05 AM   #628
Refugee
 
U2387's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Boston
Posts: 2,297
Local Time: 11:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AEON View Post
Another interesting note...the Congressional Budget Office (not Heritage) estimates that the gross debt will rise from 70.2% of GDP in 2008 to 100.6% in 2012...

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/100xx/doc...dentBudget.pdf
Marvelous, remember GW Bush and the hole this recession that happened on his watch has blown in it!

Obama's policies have contributed about $300 billion total to this, once you factor in the revenue saved by the stimulus.

The recession loses revenue at the same time it automatically spends federal money on unemployment benefits, etc. This mechanism, plus the already existing Bush tax cuts and Iraq war, prescription drug benefit, health care costs, etc is what is responsible for most of the increase.

Obama is actually doing something about it.

He does not have it easy, it will not be easy, but it would have been the same or worse under the Republicans.
U2387 is offline  
Old 04-20-2010, 02:06 AM   #629
Refugee
 
U2387's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Boston
Posts: 2,297
Local Time: 11:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AEON View Post
The phrase "always been" and the word "historical" do not mean the same thing.
Stop with this.

My point is we have been stable in this area over the last 2 decades or so and are now dropping, that much is clear.

ADMIT YOU CHANGED THE CALCULATION INTENTIONALLY or that you do not know what you are talking about and move on!

I am not going around in circles with you over stupid crap like the difference between 2 words I used in a posting.

I will not discuss 2 words or anything more with you until you acknowledge that you did not understand the difference between 2 methods of calculation, and that your entire claim defies any common sense whatsoever.
U2387 is offline  
Old 04-20-2010, 02:51 AM   #630
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 08:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by U2387 View Post
I will leave you alone after this...
Oh, I don't mind. The bright colors and extra large fonts you use while questioning my integrity and intelligence are slightly amusing. Of course, I’ve become a tad bit used to it in FYM over the years. However, occasionally, rational discourse does take place and a good point is acknowledged. Most people in here understand that each of us has limited time and cannot answer every question in the depth it probably deserves – or we try to answer a few questions from different people with one post in the hopes it covers the general idea of our premise. We also try our best with the resources and time available to add weight to the thoughts we share. Occasionally, I will dust off old college books – otherwise I will go online for sources. The truth is – both sides of just about any argument can find sources to back up their opinion.

You seem like an educated, passionate young person. I am personally not a big fan of passion. Too much passion is too much emotion, and we cannot control our minds (and most especially our words) when we are ruled by emotion. From the great Epictetus, “No one is free who is not master of himself.”

You can ignore what Epictetus is saying here (which is mirrored in the great teachings of Buddhism, Christianity, Gnosticism…etc) or you can step back – and really consider what that means. Even though we are online, and I can’t see your face – the real you is shining through. And I don’t imagine you want to be the type of person that shouts his opinions with a blow horn and quickly judges the integrity of his opponents. Such a person will eventually look around…and find that nobody is listening.
AEON is offline  
Old 04-20-2010, 02:59 AM   #631
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 08:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by U2387 View Post

You have the record that I have seen for the most amount of non sense in the shortest period of time right now.
At least you are giving me some credit
AEON is offline  
Old 04-20-2010, 03:16 AM   #632
Refugee
 
U2387's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Boston
Posts: 2,297
Local Time: 11:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AEON View Post
Oh, I don't mind. The bright colors and extra large fonts you use while questioning my integrity and intelligence are slightly amusing. Of course, I’ve become a tad bit used to it in FYM over the years. However, occasionally, rational discourse does take place and a good point is acknowledged. Most people in here understand that each of us has limited time and cannot answer every question in the depth it probably deserves – or we try to answer a few questions from different people with one post in the hopes it covers the general idea of our premise. We also try our best with the resources and time available to add weight to the thoughts we share. Occasionally, I will dust off old college books – otherwise I will go online for sources. The truth is – both sides of just about any argument can find sources to back up their opinion.

You seem like an educated, passionate young person. I am personally not a big fan of passion. Too much passion is too much emotion, and we cannot control our minds (and most especially our words) when we are ruled by emotion. From the great Epictetus, “No one is free who is not master of himself.”

You can ignore what Epictetus is saying here (which is mirrored in the great teachings of Buddhism, Christianity, Gnosticism…etc) or you can step back – and really consider what that means. Even though we are online, and I can’t see your face – the real you is shining through. And I don’t imagine you want to be the type of person that shouts his opinions with a blow horn and quickly judges the integrity of his opponents. Such a person will eventually look around…and find that nobody is listening.
Oh, Please do stop!

I appreciate the attempt at humor by making an internet diagnosis of me(talk about losing control over your health care, lol).

I have strong views, but I am not an ideologue driven by passion who lets it overcome rationality. This psycho-analysis and quote of a great mind is a great way to change the subject instead of providing a simple answer to a simple question! I am free in thought, rest assured!

If you really knew me, you would know I am no screaming ass liberal, but rather moderate Democrat. I hang out with Cops, business owners, economists, etc. Not left wing whackos in Berkley or Cambridge, MA. My posts indicate my moderate views in many areas. In fact, the last letter I wrote to a politician was on behalf of my brother, who is seeking a change in Massachusetts concealed carry law from "may issue" to "shall issue' for criteria meeting law abiding citizens. No, I am not an NRA person, I support background checks, etc, but I am not the kind of person who is repulsed by the thought of someone owning a gun. Just a short story about me. I am sure you have one!

Thank you for your concern, but I am really not driven by passion so much as reason. Hence my emphasis on simple, empirical numbers.

You are 100% right, almost everyone can come up with some data to back up their opinion, but that does not mean that the very specific number we are talking about backs you up here.

I realize, I should not be asking for detailed explanations. All I really want, and I have repeated it over and over, and that is the reason for the tacky bold and colors, etc, is for you to see that on this one, tiny, little number called tax% of GDP, your claim was wrong.

I am objective here, not trying to say that any number you throw up is going to be false on its face, just saying that it is a FACT, just as sure as the sun will rise in the East, that tax to GDP ratio has not increased in the last few years.

Of course, you can find plenty of legitimate statistics to use plenty of different ways to back your views(conservative, and THERE IS NO PROBLEM WITH THAT) on Obama or the deficit or what have you.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Now, down to what I really want to say.

And the sarcasm is all in the past now, mind you!

I realize that sometimes, I can get carried away! In my attempt to make or explain a point, I get way too sarcastic or way too happy with the bolds and the colors.

I will always have to watch my posting style, and I have tried my best to let my reasonable side show through most of the time.

Please understand that it is not personal, and as much as we can disagree, know that I always appreciate the discussion.

You said I seem like a passionate and informed young man, and truly, thank you for the compliment!

I noticed in your profile that you are in the National Guard, so thank you for serving our country!

U2 fan to U2 fan, neither one of us could be that bad!

I think we are alright now, maybe a little closer to understanding each other.

I will see you around.

Greg Ander
Boston, MA
U2387 is offline  
Old 04-20-2010, 03:19 AM   #633
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 08:04 PM
After some additional research, I see that the CBO and OECD do in fact use different calculations to determine revenue to GDP estimates. Thank you for pointing that out and I apologize for the confusion.

It is the CBO’s version, and not the OECD’s, which is historically at 18.3 percent. According the CBO report, “Over the 2010–2019 period, under the assumptions for CBO’s baseline, total outlays would average 23.4 percent of GDP” (pp. 3) – still a significant increase.
AEON is offline  
Old 04-20-2010, 03:21 AM   #634
Refugee
 
U2387's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Boston
Posts: 2,297
Local Time: 11:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AEON View Post
At least you are giving me some credit
That was over the line a bit, my apologies!
U2387 is offline  
Old 04-20-2010, 03:23 AM   #635
Refugee
 
U2387's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Boston
Posts: 2,297
Local Time: 11:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AEON View Post
After some additional research, I see that the CBO and OECD do in fact use different calculations to determine revenue to GDP estimates. Thank you for pointing that out and I apologize for the confusion.

It is the CBO’s version, and not the OECD’s, which is historically at 18.3 percent. According the CBO report, “Over the 2010–2019 period, under the assumptions for CBO’s baseline, total outlays would average 23.4 percent of GDP” (pp. 3) – still a significant increase.
Yes, outlays. Meaning spending. Not revenue

Which is still a problem of course, as 23.4 for spending compared to 18 for revenues is quite an imbalance.

A challenge.

Democratic ideas wont solve it alone.

Republican ideas wont solve it alone.

And that, AEON, is the common ground.
U2387 is offline  
Old 04-20-2010, 03:28 AM   #636
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 08:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by U2387 View Post
You said I seem like a passionate and informed young man, and truly, thank you for the compliment!
You’re welcome.

Quote:
Originally Posted by U2387 View Post
I noticed in your profile that you are in the National Guard, so thank you for serving our country!
You’re welcome.

Quote:
Originally Posted by U2387 View Post

U2 fan to U2 fan, neither one of us could be that bad!
Agreed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by U2387 View Post
I think we are alright now, maybe a little closer to understanding each other.
Definitely.
AEON is offline  
Old 04-20-2010, 03:33 AM   #637
Refugee
 
U2387's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Boston
Posts: 2,297
Local Time: 11:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AEON View Post
You’re welcome.

You’re welcome.

Agreed.


Definitely.
Hey, truly, thanks a lot!

See you around here, and know that the tone I took will never be back.
U2387 is offline  
Old 04-20-2010, 03:46 AM   #638
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 08:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by U2387 View Post
Yes, outlays. Meaning spending. Not revenue

Which is still a problem of course, as 23.4 for spending compared to 18 for revenues is quite an imbalance.
Again, I was a little quick with the trigger - you are correct - the spending is projected at 23.4 (historically around 20). However, the revenue will be down to 14.9 in 2010 (I think you pointed this out earlier as well), which makes the imbalance a bit more glaring.

But I do agree regarding the common ground...(also - I've been an Independent for a few years now)
AEON is offline  
Old 04-20-2010, 03:53 AM   #639
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 08:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by U2387 View Post

and know that the tone I took will never be back.
No worries - you have a sharp mind and I see you love logic (and maybe a little love for rhetoric) - you're on the right track in my opinion. Pick up a copy of Marcus Aurelius' Meditations and you'll be good to go!
AEON is offline  
Old 04-20-2010, 04:06 AM   #640
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,601
Local Time: 07:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by U2387 View Post
Deep, I realize I have misinterpreted some of your posts in the past and jumped down your throat because I actually thought you were some teenaged troll! For that I apologize, and I've been meaning to say as much for a while!

You seem to spend a lot of time doing the same kind of analysis!

So what do I think?

I have as good an idea as you!!

We are in April, not September for one!
I never take anything in here personal.

I do think the GOP will pick up at least 4-5 seats in the Senate and around 25 in the House.

I may revise my opinions as Nov gets closer.
__________________

deep is offline  
 

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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Obama General Discussion diamond Free Your Mind Archive 1009 06-28-2010 12:03 AM
Sarah Palin resigns as Governor VintagePunk Free Your Mind Archive 1005 04-05-2010 04:30 PM
Elevation Canada 8th Anniversary Party February 19th bradyvox Interference Gatherings 22 02-20-2010 04:30 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:04 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×