- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
October 18, 2012 at 3:59 pm #774102
SmittyParticipant“”The Republican plan of Lower tax rates for people and businesses creates jobs and send more money to the treasury…”
is a myth “
It absolutely can and has happened. W’s second round of tax cuts increased federal tax revenues substantially. Look how receipts climb after the 2003 cuts. The laffer curve is reality, it is just we all disagree where on that curve results in optimal receipts.
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=200
Personally, as a fiscal conservative, I want to lower rate AND lower total tax receipts. Every time we give them more money they figure out a way to spend that and more (both sides)!
October 18, 2012 at 4:39 pm #774103
kootchmanMemberOh they myths that abound eh? I would say that structurally, RR inherited a worse case scenario from Carter. By his third year in office, had added 15 million jobs. Federal stimulus didn’t create jobs.. Apple did, Microsoft did, Intel did, construction did, with private capital. Compare to Obamanomics which has fewer workers today, gainfully employed, then the day he took office. The billions lost and the billions to be lost to pay off his massive expansion of the deficit will lay claim to our national purse for an entire generation. As it would happen, though, give congress $5 bucks and they will spend $20. RR raised employment, raised revenue, and congress overspent. Liberals are like kids. They just can’t resist the impulse to spend the rent money.. and then use the national check cashing service without looking at the “vig”…. think they energy department waste was bad? Taking 500 billion out of the economy to pay debt interest… shameful. And they want more of the same! Drug rehab with a twist… more fiscal crack to cure the addiction!
October 18, 2012 at 4:46 pm #774104
NFiorentiniMemberSmitty-I’m not disputing the Laffer Curve and I have a great deal of respect for Dr. Arthur Laffer. But the Laffer Curve exists only as a generality; the more variables used to model an economy, the more difficult it is to isolate the curve.
Also, it doesn’t say that low taxes results in the best scenario; it says that there is a balance in which tax revenue is maximum and that this point lies between “low taxes” and “high taxes” which result in no goods or services being bought.
(I wish that I could post a pic of my textbook’s graph here. The book was written by Greg Mankiw, Rmoney’s economic adviser back in 2008.)
In other words, the Laffer Curve cannot take into consideration the massive expansion of government that occurred during Bush’s first term, coinciding with the 2003 tax cuts – Airline industry bailouts, the creation of the Department of Homeland Security, the ongoing wars, etc. These things pumped money into the economy, but also grew the national debt.
In other OTHER words, correlation does *not* equal causation.
The take home message: Proper fiscal conservatism shouldn’t be rooted in “all taxes and government expenditures are bad,” but rather, “what is worth paying for?” I would argue that science and research and development are expenditures that are worth paying for; can you imagine a world in which China created the Internet? Or the Soviets got to the moon first?
Other things include education, infrastructure, and defense (which is different than “military”).
October 18, 2012 at 5:23 pm #774105
dobroParticipant“…check out Dobro’s last statement. Not very nice. That is why you should think twice about voting for Obama.”
RW logic. Dobro says something not “nice”=don’t vote for Obama.
I love unicorns and ponies and I know Mitt does, too. I think Mitt Romney’s tax plan will make it so we all can afford to have them. There you go. Now feel free to vote for Obama.
October 18, 2012 at 6:52 pm #774106
WorldCitizenParticipantOctober 18, 2012 at 7:08 pm #774107
365StairsParticipantI viewed the JFK links that HMCRich sent. Very interesting that 50 years later, the same Deficit topics and “plans” to repair it to are so relevant – just with today’s slightly bigger $ figures at stake and, in conjunction, increasing national divide on whats really the right way.
Its also very interesting to me it came from JFK and it appears to be something that M.R. wants too regurgitate.
Lastly…assuming those speaches were legit (not modified by the youtube poster)…I appreciate and understand more about what M.R. concept is…but I just wish he could articulate it for the modern world…
Only a 130K hits on the videos…so clearly not viral in nature…but still interesting JFK info.
* Note – as I have stated several times…I am not a proflic political involvement guy…(like some of you)…but I care and I am learning more…from a lot of your input and on my own.
Thanks for most all of the great information to ponder…
No matter who wins…I believe strongly in supporting the elected officials & holding them accountable…until they prove otherwise…not blindly…
October 19, 2012 at 2:30 pm #774108
JoBParticipant365stairs..
i would like to remind you that JFK is the guy who coined..
Ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country…
he didn’t amend that statement with …
unless of course you are very rich or an investor.. in which case you should not only ask but demand that which your country can do for you…
the conversation about deficits may have been very similar..
but the financial circumstance were very very different.
October 19, 2012 at 5:30 pm #774109
365StairsParticipantJoB – that very statement was one of the main reasons I joined the Marine Corps out of high school…although…as as side…you likely know…JFK was not the originator of that quote…
October 19, 2012 at 5:38 pm #774110
JoBParticipantOctober 19, 2012 at 9:59 pm #774111
dobroParticipantHere’s today’s Gallup poll on the 2nd debate…
A majority of Americans who tuned in to Tuesday’s town hall debate in Hempstead, N.Y. said President Barack Obama outperformed Mitt Romney, a new poll from Gallup released Friday shows.
According to the poll, 51 percent of debate watchers said Obama was the winner of the second debate, while 38 percent judged Romney the winner.
October 20, 2012 at 1:53 am #774112
DBPMember—Or, put another way, 51 percent thought that Romney lost. You know, the debates don’t offer us much in terms of being able to compare policies, but as I said before, that’s not what most people will be voting on anyway. Most people will be voting for (or against) a candidate based on whether they “like” him and can identify with him. Twas ever thus.
To me Obama comes off as being the more thoughtful and courteous of the two men, so I feel more sympathetic toward him. And in fact if I knew nothing more about these guys than what I get from the debates, I’d feel an even greater affinity for Mr. Obama.
Don’t worry, dobro; Obama’s gonna win it. Yeah, the media wants us to think it’s a close race, but that’s just ‘cuz we’ll watch more TV (and buy more laundry soap) if we think it’s a dead heat. But it’s already in the bag, and they know it.
I’ve known it ever since Romney made those remarks about Big Bird in the first debate. I couldn’t even imagine a Romney win after that.
October 20, 2012 at 6:27 am #774113
JoBParticipantDBP..
“Don’t worry, dobro; Obama’s gonna win it. Yeah, the media wants us to think it’s a close race, but that’s just ‘cuz we’ll watch more TV (and buy more laundry soap) if we think it’s a dead heat. But it’s already in the bag, and they know it.”
what? are you trying to throw this election?
If you convince enough people that there is no reason to vote because Obama will win anyway.. who do you think will turn out to vote?
hint.. it won’t be Obama voters.
I so wish this election was in the bag…
but i fear it is really not so.
October 20, 2012 at 12:36 pm #774114
redblackParticipantko00tch:
By his third year in office, had added 15 million jobs.
wrong. unemployment stood at 9.5% in 1983. ronnie went to the ranch in santa barbara because he didn’t want to hear any more bad news.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.