Page 46 of 58 FirstFirst ... 36444546474856 ... LastLast
Results 451 to 460 of 573

Thread: SC allows Texas to use New Voter ID Law

  1. #451
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,270

    Re: SC allows Texas to use New Voter ID Law

    Quote Originally Posted by JasperL View Post
    That, and inflation, and population growth, and normal economic growth. Inflation is the big one that's ignored. Second is the assumption that all economic growth is as a result of tax cuts, so if the economy grew by 3%, even though it's grown by 2-3% for decades, and grew by those rates when tax rates topped out at 92%, the "conservative" analysis assumes it's all a result of the tax cuts. It's the kind of economic analysis that wouldn't get a passing grade in Econ 201. I'm sure I'm telling you nothing you don't know, but just wanted to get it on the record.

    Wrong, when taxes were cut what inflation number gave us a 60% increase in INCOME TAX Revenue??

  2. #452
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    21,833

    Re: SC allows Texas to use New Voter ID Law

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    Again, the Treasury date disagrees with you but then again you don't want to use actual dollars only inflation adjusted dollars and that isn't how our country operates. Rather sad that you don't seem to understand exactly what happened during the Reagan term or even the Clinton term. 1994 was a rejection of Clinton economic policies and the tax cut act of 1997 refutes your claims of tax hikes
    If the Treasury data disagrees, cite the data. I'm supposed to take your word for that?

    And of course I'm using inflation adjusted dollars. It's how one compares any financial information from different periods. If you don't adjust for inflation, you can't make apples to apples comparisons. This is the most basic of steps, step ONE in serious analysis. If you're not willing to accept that, you're just saying you prefer meaningless data to something that might actually tell us something.

    Just the most basic of examples - if GDP growth is 3% nominal, but inflation is 100%, the country is going BACKWARDS, fast, collapsing in fact, since real GDP, and therefore living standards have been cut nearly in HALF. You're saying you want to ignore that and treat an economy that grows 3% nominal with 1% inflation as doing equally well? OK, but don't expect to be taken seriously.

    Look, if you want to send more money into the govt. just do it and stop complaining about others wanting to keep more of their or the benefits generated by that revenue
    I'll say one more time - I support tax cuts. I just prefer they be paid for with spending cuts that are VERY difficult politically, instead of the easy and cowardly path of increased deficits. If you want to run deficits to offset tax cuts, fine, just say so, like Cheney did. But don't pretend that you're picking some other option - the "MAGIC!!" option - where tax cuts are self financing and require no tough spending decisions.

    Obama ran deficits of more than a $Trillion per year during the heart of the Great Recession. I'm not delusional, so never suggested the way to reduce those deficits was more tax CUTS.

  3. #453
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    21,833

    Re: SC allows Texas to use New Voter ID Law

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    Wrong, when taxes were cut what inflation number gave us a 60% increase in INCOME TAX Revenue??
    I've been through it. No point doing it again so you'll ignore it again.

  4. #454
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,270

    Re: SC allows Texas to use New Voter ID Law

    JasperL;1063919305]If the Treasury data disagrees, cite the data. I'm supposed to take your word for that?

    And of course I'm using inflation adjusted dollars. It's how one compares any financial information from different periods. If you don't adjust for inflation, you can't make apples to apples comparisons. This is the most basic of steps, step ONE in serious analysis. If you're not willing to accept that, you're just saying you prefer meaningless data to something that might actually tell us something.
    What you are supposed to do is research Government websites including the Treasury which is the bank for the U.S. govt. that is what you fail to do and you never use inflation adjusted dollars to fund current expense items or debt service. What is it about people like you who cannot understand the benefit of keeping more of what you earn? You want the data go to

    Combined Statement of Receipts, Outlays, and Balances

    https://www.bea.gov/iTable/iTable.cf...isuri=1&903=86

    Just the most basic of examples - if GDP growth is 3% nominal, but inflation is 100%, the country is going BACKWARDS, fast, collapsing in fact, since real GDP, and therefore living standards have been cut nearly in HALF. You're saying you want to ignore that and treat an economy that grows 3% nominal with 1% inflation as doing equally well? OK, but don't expect to be taken seriously.
    I know this is hard for you to understand but what you are paying in expenses today are paid for in today's dollars. What that dollar is worth in 10 years is irrelevant. Reagan cut taxes and no amount of inflation and population growth would generate a 60% FIT increase



    I'll say one more time - I support tax cuts. I just prefer they be paid for with spending cuts that are VERY difficult politically, instead of the easy and cowardly path of increased deficits. If you want to run deficits to offset tax cuts, fine, just say so, like Cheney did. But don't pretend that you're picking some other option - the "MAGIC!!" option - where tax cuts are self financing and require no tough spending decisions.
    Please stop with the stupidity, you don't have to pay for tax cuts, it is your money and the govt. isn't getting less by cutting taxes because personal behavior takes over. Show me tax cuts on an income statement??

    Obama ran deficits of more than a $Trillion per year during the heart of the Great Recession. I'm not delusional, so never suggested the way to reduce those deficits was more tax CUTS.
    The recession ended in June 2009, he had trillion dollar deficits for four straight years and it was the sequester that brought those deficits down but still above anything Bush generated

  5. #455
    Pragmatic Idealist
    upsideguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Rocky Mtn. High
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    10,122

    Re: SC allows Texas to use New Voter ID Law

    Quote Originally Posted by Grant View Post
    Yeah, spending versus income is complicated for Democrats, which is why we see so many of them on welfare and food stamps.
    ...what is truly amazing is the fact that Cons can't seem to get their heads around the basics of finance.... cutting revenues has the same bottom line effect as increasing expenses, unless you believe voodoo.

  6. #456
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,270

    Re: SC allows Texas to use New Voter ID Law

    Quote Originally Posted by upsideguy View Post
    ...what is truly amazing is the fact that Cons can't seem to get their heads around the basics of finance.... cutting revenues has the same bottom line effect as increasing expenses, unless you believe voodoo.
    How do you explain the FIT revenue increases after the Reagan and Bush tax cuts? Also please let me know when either Reagan or Bush had trillion dollar deficits?? And please don't point to 2009 unless you can post a Bush approved and signed budget?

  7. #457
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    21,833

    Re: SC allows Texas to use New Voter ID Law

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    Accounting and math ignore human behavior which is what liberals like you always do.
    I've said many times, tax cuts increase economic growth. But that growth isn't fast enough over growth without the tax cuts to "pay" for the tax cuts, except in extraordinary circumstances, such as perhaps the LBJ cuts coming off 92%. That's the Laffer Curve. I beat that to death on another thread - but I'm not ignoring human behavior and that it responds to changes in economic conditions, including tax rates, interest rates, population growth, demand and much, much more.

    Bottom line is people with models that do a good job of predicting behavioral changes to, among other things, tax cuts, estimate that $1 of nominal tax cut costs about 80-99 cents, depending.... Capital gains tax rates might only cost 50 cents per dollar in the short run. To pay for themselves, the cost would have to be NEGATIVE. That doesn't happen, not in reality.

    You want more money to go to the govt. then send it in. Put your money where your mouth is.
    If right wingers want lower tax rates, cut spending. Put your money where your mouth is.

    What serious people understand is that just because you cut taxes there is nothing that says you have to increase spending. Politicians do it to get votes and keep their jobs. The two aren't synonymous
    OK, but Reagan cut taxes and increased spending. W cut taxes and increased spending. They didn't have to but they DID. And both Reagan and Bush INCREASED DEFICITS. You call that "fiscally responsible" apparently.

  8. #458
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    21,833

    Re: SC allows Texas to use New Voter ID Law

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    How do you explain the FIT revenue increases after the Reagan and Bush tax cuts?
    You're a broken record. Not any more convincing now than it was the first half dozen times.

    How do you explain that FIT revenues increase two and a half times faster under Clinton?

  9. #459
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    21,833

    Re: SC allows Texas to use New Voter ID Law

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    What you are supposed to do is research Government websites including the Treasury which is the bank for the U.S. govt. that is what you fail to do and you never use inflation adjusted dollars to fund current expense items or debt service. What is it about people like you who cannot understand the benefit of keeping more of what you earn? You want the data go to

    Combined Statement of Receipts, Outlays, and Balances

    https://www.bea.gov/iTable/iTable.cf...isuri=1&903=86
    Thanks for the link, but I'm not going to do your work for you. What numbers do you want to highlight? Put them here as I did.

    And I'm glad you want to ignore inflation, so 3% growth is just as good when inflation is running 100% as when inflation is 1%. As I said, no one will take you seriously.

    I know this is hard for you to understand but what you are paying in expenses today are paid for in today's dollars. What that dollar is worth in 10 years is irrelevant. Reagan cut taxes and no amount of inflation and population growth would generate a 60% FIT increase
    You're comparing receipts in 1989 to receipts in 1982. It matters what inflation was between those two dates. I'd go into it but if you can't accept that, there is no point in trying.

    Please stop with the stupidity, you don't have to pay for tax cuts, it is your money and the govt. isn't getting less by cutting taxes because personal behavior takes over. Show me tax cuts on an income statement??
    You're right, you don't have to make any hard choices after a tax cut, you can gutlessly do nothing and watch deficits explode, as you can see here (Reagan and Bush eras) http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/historicals Table 1.1.

    1981 -78,968 (Last Carter budget)
    1982 -127,977
    1983 -207,802
    1984 -185,367
    1985 -212,308
    1986 -221,227
    1987 -149,730
    1988 -155,178

    2001 128,236 (Last Clinton Budget)
    2002 -157,758
    2003 -377,585
    2004 -412,727
    2005 -318,346
    2006 -248,181
    2007 -160,701 (Top of the biggest debt bubble in 80 years, and largest housing bubble in U.S. history - still didn't have a balanced budget)
    2008 -458,553 (This is a reflection of the Great Recession)

    Notice something? After the Reagan tax cuts, deficits were never less than TWICE the highest deficits of the Carter era. Cut taxes and don't reduce spending, that's what happens.... Bush came in and did two major tax cuts in 2001 and 2003. Deficits increased by over $500 billion. Math says so. Behavior doesn't change enough to affect basic math.

    Let's see basic results in the Clinton era:

    1992 -290,321
    1993 -255,051
    1994 -203,186
    1995 -163,952
    1996 -107,431
    1997 -21,884
    1998 69,270
    1999 125,610
    2000 236,241
    2001 128,236

    Huh, lookee there. Clinton raise tax rates and deficits went DOWN! Just like math says they should, and the OPPOSITE of what happened following the Reagan and Bush tax cuts. Imagine that....
    Last edited by JasperL; 10-28-14 at 07:06 PM.

  10. #460
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,270

    Re: SC allows Texas to use New Voter ID Law

    Quote Originally Posted by JasperL View Post
    I've said many times, tax cuts increase economic growth. But that growth isn't fast enough over growth without the tax cuts to "pay" for the tax cuts, except in extraordinary circumstances, such as perhaps the LBJ cuts coming off 92%. That's the Laffer Curve. I beat that to death on another thread - but I'm not ignoring human behavior and that it responds to changes in economic conditions, including tax rates, interest rates, population growth, demand and much, much more.

    Bottom line is people with models that do a good job of predicting behavioral changes to, among other things, tax cuts, estimate that $1 of nominal tax cut costs about 80-99 cents, depending.... Capital gains tax rates might only cost 50 cents per dollar in the short run. To pay for themselves, the cost would have to be NEGATIVE. That doesn't happen, not in reality.



    If right wingers want lower tax rates, cut spending. Put your money where your mouth is.



    OK, but Reagan cut taxes and increased spending. W cut taxes and increased spending. They didn't have to but they DID. And both Reagan and Bush INCREASED DEFICITS. You call that "fiscally responsible" apparently.
    This is absurd, you don't pay for tax cuts, never have and never will. And you claim to have accounting experience? Further you don't seem to understand the budget of the United States, it is yearly, unfortunately it is a baseline budget and unfortunately people like you have been convinced that the govt. needs the money more than you do

    As for spending, when you have debt to GDP of less than 70% it is manageable, you don't seem to comprehend that neither Reagan or Bush had debt to GDP exceeding 70%, Obama's is over 100%. Please don't talk to me about fiscal responsibility since obviously you have no understanding of the term

Page 46 of 58 FirstFirst ... 36444546474856 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •