• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama Plan Would Boost GDP, Economists Say(edited)

Re: Obama's Plan is the Right Way to Go

AdamT said:
It doesn't particularly matter where the tax cuts come from. As you've pointed out many times, the general fund is in debt to the SS trust fund. So why would it be better to pull revenue from the general fund? In either case we will have to borrow more to pay for the cuts.
Click to expand...

Spoken like a true liberal. Why doesn't it matter that SS/Medicare with trillions in unfunded liability has their funding cut further? How do you propose paying for those IOU's? The General Fund is a debt to the American people, the SS trust fund is a debt to you and has taken your money which was supposed to fund your retirement supplement. You don't see the difference?
 
AdamT said:
What Krugman said from the very beginning was that the stimulus was too small, and not the best form of stimulus. He was right.
Click to expand...

Amazing how a socialist's words are gospel to a liberal. Prove that the stimulus was too small instead of being spent poorly?
 
Conservative said:
Amazing how a socialist's words are gospel to a liberal. Prove that the stimulus was too small instead of being spent poorly?
Click to expand...

Krugman isn't a socialist, though he is widely regarded as one of the brightest economists in the world. You, on the other hand.... :lol:
 
AdamT said:
Krugman isn't a socialist, though he is widely regarded as one of the brightest economists in the world. You, on the other hand.... :lol:
Click to expand...

LOL, yep, the brainwashed believe that. What was Krugman's prediction about stimulus one? Why is this one different?
 
Re: Obama's Plan is the Right Way to Go

Conservative said:
Spoken like a true liberal. Why doesn't it matter that SS/Medicare with trillions in unfunded liability has their funding cut further? How do you propose paying for those IOU's? The General Fund is a debt to the American people, the SS trust fund is a debt to you and has taken your money which was supposed to fund your retirement supplement. You don't see the difference?
Click to expand...

Again, it really doesn't matter. Whether the cuts come from SS or the general fund, they will eventually have to be paid back.
 
Conservative said:
LOL, yep, the brainwashed believe that. What was Krugman's prediction about stimulus one? Why is this one different?
Click to expand...

Maybe you should actually read what he said, instead of drinking the wingnut Koolaid EVERY time?

"January 6, 2009, 9:26 am
Stimulus arithmetic (wonkish but important)

Bit by bit we’re getting information on the Obama stimulus plan, enough to start making back-of-the-envelope estimates of impact. The bottom line is this: we’re probably looking at a plan that will shave less than 2 percentage points off the average unemployment rate for the next two years, and possibly quite a lot less. This raises real concerns about whether the incoming administration is lowballing its plans in an attempt to get bipartisan consensus."

Stimulus arithmetic (wonkish but important) - NYTimes.com
 
Yoohoo! Conservative! Krugman pretty much hit the nail on the head, didn't he? Guess they don't give out those economics Nobels for no reason.
 
Re: Obama's Plan is the Right Way to Go

Conservative said:
So tax cuts now create economic growth but only when presented by a liberal President? Interesting contradiction on the part of liberals. Then there are these tax cuts, cuts in FICA which funds a current underfunded SS fund. That is the plan you want passed in its entirety? More spending and less tax revenue, but only less SS/Medicare revenue? Wow, amazing how Obama can brainwash liberals!
Click to expand...
Temporary cuts in payroll tax are demand side tax cuts, they put money into the pockets of the people most likely to spend it creating economic activity.
 
Re: Obama's Plan is the Right Way to Go

AdamT said:
Again, it really doesn't matter. Whether the cuts come from SS or the general fund, they will eventually have to be paid back.
Click to expand...

Except you cannot seem to understand the purpose of SS and the forced contributions by the taxpayers. Nothing will ever change the mind of the brainwashed. If they are cut from SS they cut your retirement contribution. If they come from the general expenses of the govt. that doesn't affect you at all. Why is that so hard to figure out?
 
Re: Obama's Plan is the Right Way to Go

pbrauer said:
Temporary cuts in payroll tax are demand side tax cuts, they put money into the pockets of the people most likely to spend it creating economic activity.
Click to expand...

Right, taking money of of one pocket and putting it in another is never a problem with a liberal except that taking of money is never paid back but is covered by an IOU that has to be funded. Where is that money going to come from?
 
AdamT said:
Maybe you should actually read what he said, instead of drinking the wingnut Koolaid EVERY time?

"January 6, 2009, 9:26 am
Stimulus arithmetic (wonkish but important)

Bit by bit we’re getting information on the Obama stimulus plan, enough to start making back-of-the-envelope estimates of impact. The bottom line is this: we’re probably looking at a plan that will shave less than 2 percentage points off the average unemployment rate for the next two years, and possibly quite a lot less. This raises real concerns about whether the incoming administration is lowballing its plans in an attempt to get bipartisan consensus."

Stimulus arithmetic (wonkish but important) - NYTimes.com
Click to expand...

So in your world the general fund takes care of your SS? Right, you simply are brainwashed. Krugman is an idiot. Now tax cuts are beneficial but when Bush did it, they were detrimental. Do I have that right?
 
Conservative said:
So in your world the general fund takes care of your SS? Right, you simply are brainwashed. Krugman is an idiot. Now tax cuts are beneficial but when Bush did it, they were detrimental. Do I have that right?
Click to expand...

You are a hopeless wingnut parrot. Krugman is a genius who called the stimulus and the reaction to it almost exactly. Try thinking for yourself; limbaugh and Hannity are not very smart.
 
AdamT said:
You are a hopeless wingnut parrot. Krugman is a genius who called the stimulus and the reaction to it almost exactly. Try thinking for yourself; limbaugh and Hannity are not very smart.
Click to expand...

Anyone that thinks an economist like Krugman is a genius doesn't have a lot of credibility but does define their leanings. Results matter, Adam, and the results of Obamanomics are a disaster.
 
Conservative said:
Anyone that thinks an economist like Krugman is a genius doesn't have a lot of credibility but does define their leanings. Results matter, Adam, and the results of Obamanomics are a disaster.
Click to expand...

Yeah, okay, Rush. :roll:

Obama is doing the best he can given the horrific economy he inherited and unremitting opposition by Republicans in Congress.

All you can do is whine; you have no ideas that wouldn't have made the situation far worse than it already is.
 
AdamT said:
Yeah, okay, Rush. :roll:

Obama is doing the best he can given the horrific economy he inherited and unremitting opposition by Republicans in Congress.

All you can do is whine; you have no ideas that wouldn't have made the situation far worse than it already is.
Click to expand...

Obama is doing exactly what his resume showed he would do, nothing as he had zero leadership skills but he does love the camera and the camera loves him. Symbolism over substance is what you are all about.
 
Conservative said:
Obama is doing exactly what his resume showed he would do, nothing as he had zero leadership skills but he does love the camera and the camera loves him. Symbolism over substance is what you are all about.
Click to expand...

If you can think of something to parrot other than wingnut talking points let me know.
 
Goldman Sachs Group Inc., Moody’s Analytics Inc. and JPMorgan Chase & Co.
Click to expand...

All three of those sources have a conflict of interest in that they have close ties to the current administration and make money from those ties. Cheap money is good for their business but not for the economy as a whole. Moodys much less so than JPMorgan and GSG.
 
AdamT said:
You are a hopeless wingnut parrot. Krugman is a genius who called the stimulus and the reaction to it almost exactly. Try thinking for yourself; limbaugh and Hannity are not very smart.
Click to expand...

He said it wouldn't be enough. That's only correct if you assume the answer was stimulus. It wasn't. There is never enough government for Krugman.
 
1Perry said:
He said it wouldn't be enough. That's only correct if you assume the answer was stimulus. It wasn't. There is never enough government for Krugman.
Click to expand...

842 billion dollars some of which was spent to save union pensions and offering targeted tax cuts will never do the job. It was sold on the basis of stimulating the economy and keeping unemployment from exceeding 8%. Guess Obama had trouble finding the shovels for those shovel ready jobs. Only a true liberal blames the amount instead of the implementation for the failure. Krugman is a big spending, big govt. liberal and as you stated there will never be enough govt for Krugman.
 
Re: Obama's Plan is the Right Way to Go

Conservative said:
Tax cuts always put more money into people's hands which is a good thing, the problem with this one is that it taxes money from the underfunded entitlement programs yet you have no problem with it?
Click to expand...

I can live with it as long as the reduction is temporary AND it spurs job growth. I found this LATimes article from 1992, "Kemp Assails Tax Withholding Change as a 'Gimmick'":

[Jack]Kemp said the Administration had not adopted two of his major strategies--cutting payroll taxes by 15% to stimulate job growth (being one)...
Click to expand...

The other was elimiating the capital gains tax in inner cities (whatever the "inner city" part means). But let's focus on the payroll tax deduction since it is the topic of discussion at the moment.

At the time, it was estimated that the tax cut "could inject $25 billion into the economy." So, I ask if a 15% payroll tax reduction (1.14% of 7.65% payroll tax) could potentially generate $25 billion by "provid[ing] each taxpayer with an average of $1 a day in increased disposable income" why then couldn't a 41% reduction (3.1%) do far better 19 years later?

There is, of course, the question of how to pay for it. Well, if you accept the "multiplier effect" theory then you know that the more people who are employed the more income tax revenue goes into the Treasury. Moreover, if as a conservative you subscribe to the believe that "the more money you earn and allowed to keep, the more disposable income you have" then how can you denounce the President's economic plan when this component of economic stimulus was encourage 19 years ago by a Republican administration?
 
Last edited:
j-mac said:
Does Mark Zandi, a proponent of Obama's first failed stimulus plan now speak for all economists?

j-mac
Click to expand...

He is probably the private sectors most astute economist. :shrug:
 
Re: Obama's Plan is the Right Way to Go

Objective Voice said:
I can live with it as long as the reduction is temporary AND it spurs job growth. I found this LATimes article from 1992, "Kemp Assails Tax Withholding Change as a 'Gimmick'":



The other was elimiating the capital gains tax in inner cities (whatever the "inner city" part means). But let's focus on the payroll tax deduction since it is the topic of discussion at the moment.

At the time, it was estimated that the tax cut "could inject $25 billion into the economy." So, I ask if a 15% payroll tax reduction (1.1%) could potentially generate $25 billion by "provid[ing] each taxpayer with an average of $1 a day in increased disposable income" why then couldn't a 41% reduction (3.1%) do far better 19 years later?

There is, of course, the question of how to pay for it. Well, if you accept the "multiplier effect" theory then you know that the more people who are employed the more income tax revenue goes into the Treasury. Moreover, if as a conservative you subscribe to the believe that "the more money you earn and allowed to keep, the more disposable income you have" then how can you denounce the President's economic plan when this component of economic stimulus was encourage 19 years ago by a Republican administration?
Click to expand...

the problem I have with it is that it is a cut in SS/Medicare that has to be paid back. If you cut FIT you can or should adjust the budget items if less revenue is generated. There are no obligations for much of the budget items but there are obligations with regard to SS. The SS/Medicare tax cuts have been in effect for over a year and with what results? Love how liberals complained about the Bush tax cuts that cut rates and FIT but have no problem cutting FICA which funds SS/Medicare.
 
Re: Obama's Plan is the Right Way to Go

I've long had a problem with the Bush tax cuts...I prefer that they didn't get extended but understand why they were. And while I'm not too keen on the FICA tax being cut still, I can live with it as long as the cut is temporary. At some point taxes will have to be raised, but in today's economy I can live with temporary tax reductions as long as they expire at the end of 2012, as appropriate.
 
Re: Obama's Plan is the Right Way to Go

Objective Voice said:
I've long had a problem with the Bush tax cuts...I prefer that they didn't get extended but understand why they were. And while I'm not too keen on the FICA tax being cut still, I can live with it as long as the cut is temporary. At some point taxes will have to be raised, but in today's economy I can live with temporary tax reductions as long as they expire at the end of 2012, as appropriate.
Click to expand...

My problem is why would anyone reward politicians for their bad behavior by giving them more money and taking it from the people who had nothing to do with creating the problem?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom