• 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!

Stimulus Boosted Jobs in 2nd Quarter, CBO Says

Boo Radley said:
Yes, I know stupid is best for everyone. And you do argue this is a conservative position (though I don't buy it). But, knowing something is really better than ignorance. Trust me on this. And investigate the fallacy.
Click to expand...

I prefer results and date to rhetoric and predictions. Seemed to work quite well for me in my 35 years in the business world. Too bad people like you ignore results and continue to buy rhetoric.
 
Conservative said:
I prefer results and date to rhetoric and predictions. Seemed to work quite well for me in my 35 years in the business world. Too bad people like you ignore results and continue to buy rhetoric.
Click to expand...

Actually, you seem to prefer fallacious conclusions to good reasoning. But to each his own. :neener
 
Boo Radley said:
Actually, you seem to prefer fallacious conclusions to good reasoning. But to each his own. :neener
Click to expand...

Only in the liberal world do actual facts equate to fallacious conclusions. Reasoning to a liberal apparently means listening to the elite economists and ignoring their record.
 
Conservative said:
Only in the liberal world do actual facts equate to fallacious conclusions. Reasoning to a liberal apparently means listening to the elite economists and ignoring their record.
Click to expand...

Facts are data. Conclusions are different. but thanks again for supporting my point. you've been real good about that today and I don't want you to think i don't appreciate the effort on your part. ;)
 
Boo Radley said:
Facts are data. Conclusions are different. but thanks again for supporting my point. you've been real good about that today and I don't want you to think i don't appreciate the effort on your part. ;)
Click to expand...

Obviously you have no understanding of human behavior. Please explain the following.

Millionaires Go Missing - WSJ.com
 
Conservative said:
Obviously you have no understanding of human behavior. Please explain the following.

Millionaires Go Missing - WSJ.com
Click to expand...

What a quality opinion piece:roll:

From the article:
One year later, nobody's grinning. One-third of the millionaires have disappeared from Maryland tax rolls. In 2008 roughly 3,000 million-dollar income tax returns were filed by the end of April. This year there were 2,000, which the state comptroller's office concedes is a "substantial decline." On those missing returns, the government collects 6.25% of nothing. Instead of the state coffers gaining the extra $106 million the politicians predicted, millionaires paid $100 million less in taxes than they did last year -- even at higher rates.
Click to expand...

What i find the most interesting is that the writer of this piece is operating on the assumption that incomes have remained constant in from 2008 until 2009. Using that logic (flawed), it would seem that these people have simply moved away. However, the truth of the matter is that during financial recessions such as these, incomes tend to fall (even for those making over $1 million annually).

So is this a case of people moving out of the state to avoid the income tax? Possibly, but i have little faith in the rate of change described by the author (1000 people earning a million dollars or more left the state). I can accept that people had a decrease in bonuses, and businesses had a decrease in clientele (i wonder how many businesses failed in Maryland during 2009). So how many people earning $1 million or more a year left the state? The author does not tell, and therefore it is impossible to conclude that this tax caused people to leave.

To say that this state income tax was the cause (as opposed to a recession) of lower incomes is invalid.
 
Boo Radley said:
Nope. Different issue and different question. But keep trying. ;)
Click to expand...

LOL, different issue? Wrong, it is the issue, human behavior! Rich people will eventually stop paying for the services of the 47% of the people who don't pay any income taxes. They will move and then where does the revenue come from?
 
Conservative said:
LOL, different issue? Wrong, it is the issue, human behavior! Rich people will eventually stop paying for the services of the 47% of the people who don't pay any income taxes. They will move and then where does the revenue come from?
Click to expand...

As noted above, that opinion piece doesn't address human behavior in the slightest. You and the author are making an unproven assumption, a habit I notice in a lot of your arguments.
 
Goldenboy219 said:
What a quality opinion piece:roll:

From the article:


What i find the most interesting is that the writer of this piece is operating on the assumption that incomes have remained constant in from 2008 until 2009. Using that logic (flawed), it would seem that these people have simply moved away. However, the truth of the matter is that during financial recessions such as these, incomes tend to fall (even for those making over $1 million annually).

So is this a case of people moving out of the state to avoid the income tax? Possibly, but i have little faith in the rate of change described by the author (1000 people earning a million dollars or more left the state). I can accept that people had a decrease in bonuses, and businesses had a decrease in clientele (i wonder how many businesses failed in Maryland during 2009). So how many people earning $1 million or more a year left the state? The author does not tell, and therefore it is impossible to conclude that this tax caused people to leave.

To say that this state income tax was the cause (as opposed to a recession) of lower incomes is invalid.
Click to expand...

That is your opinion which you are entitled to but that opinion ignores human behavior. NY just implemented the same program and tax revenue dropped. Tax revenue dropped in Maryland as well in the upper income brackets. Liberals like you have a problem, you use textbook rhetoric trying to trump human behavior. Never going to work but it does make you look foolish.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124260067214828295.html
 
Last edited:
Boo Radley said:
As noted above, that opinion piece doesn't address human behavior in the slightest. You and the author are making an unproven assumption, a habit I notice in a lot of your arguments.
Click to expand...

People are mobile and in today's technological world can operate everywhere else. There is a reason that TX has created more jobs this past year than the rest of the states combined and it has everything to do with tax policy. The WSJ gets it right

Soak the Rich, Lose the Rich - WSJ.com
 
Conservative said:
People are mobile and in today's technological world can operate everywhere else. There is a reason that TX has created more jobs this past year than the rest of the states combined and it has everything to do with tax policy. The WSJ gets it right

Soak the Rich, Lose the Rich - WSJ.com
Click to expand...

I thought you said Flordia has no taxes. Why are they leading?
 
Conservative said:
Florida doesn't have any state income taxes so who said they were leaving Florida?
Click to expand...

Keep up. Ahead of texas in creating jobs? And are there no other variables in job creation than state taxes? I suspect once again a conclusion has failed to measure all variables and thus have leapt to anither false concl=usion. ;)
 
Boo Radley said:
Keep up. Ahead of texas in creating jobs? And are there no other variables in job creation than state taxes? I suspect once again a conclusion has failed to measure all variables and thus have leapt to anither false concl=usion. ;)
Click to expand...

You really are naive and a waste of time. Facts always get in the way of your opinions which are formed from reading liberal elite economist articles. Facts, logic, and common sense have no place in your world. Human behavior trumps liberal rhetoric all the time
 
Conservative said:
That is your opinion which you are entitled to but that opinion ignores human behavior.
Click to expand...

My opinion ignores your opinion on human behavior; as i do not care about your opinion on human behavior.

NY just implemented the same program and tax revenue dropped. Tax revenue dropped in Maryland as well in the upper income brackets. Liberals like you have a problem, you use textbook rhetoric trying to trump human behavior. Never going to work but it does make you look foolish.

Soak the Rich, Lose the Rich - WSJ.com
Click to expand...

You did not respond to the points in my post, and instead decided to call me a liberal and question me on a personal level. You have done nothing to negate my comments. Instead of worrying about who or what i am, try to refute my statements. This would require you to answer the question:

What happens to tax revenues during a recession when we hold tax rates constant?

Or...

Where is the data that shows these people in question moved out?
 
well, calling some a liberal is a good side step to answering a point. ;)
 
Boo Radley said:
well, calling some a liberal is a good side step to answering a point. ;)
Click to expand...

By calling me a liberal, he is intending to insult me (if he wasn't, he would be able to show where being a liberal is vital to the discussion). None the less, i am not a liberal; some of my analysis is inconvenient for so called conservatives.
 
Goldenboy219 said:
My opinion ignores your opinion on human behavior; as i do not care about your opinion on human behavior.



You did not respond to the points in my post, and instead decided to call me a liberal and question me on a personal level. You have done nothing to negate my comments. Instead of worrying about who or what i am, try to refute my statements. This would require you to answer the question:

What happens to tax revenues during a recession when we hold tax rates constant?

Or...

Where is the data that shows these people in question moved out?
Click to expand...

Where is the proof? That is the normal liberal ploy so when you use it that makes you one. We have an Administration in office right now that has worse results this year vs. last year and still blames the previous Administration.

My point continues to be that liberals like Obama and now apparently you believe that tax revenue will go up with an increase in taxes. He is proposing letting the Bush tax cuts expire for those top 1% income earners. There is no evidence that tax increases on the rich will generate additional tax revenue to the govt. as taxes affect human behavior regardless of the income levels. I posted actual documented proof of what happens when states tried to do with Obama wants to do on a national level. The proof is in the historical state data and with a mobile society there is no guarantee that revenue will go up but there is evidence that it could drop.

Right now govt. revenue is down and we have 16 million unemployed Americans, 4 million more than we had when Obama took office and more each month this year vs. last year. Raising taxes is not going to put these people back to work. Tax revenue during a recession is always less due to fewer taxpayers, happens everytime.
 
Conservative said:
Tax revenue during a recession is always less due to fewer taxpayers, happens everytime.
Click to expand...

So how can you conclude that the state income tax was the culprit, when you have just admitted that recessions cause fewer tax payers?
 
Goldenboy219 said:
By calling me a liberal, he is intending to insult me (if he wasn't, he would be able to show where being a liberal is vital to the discussion). None the less, i am not a liberal; some of my analysis is inconvenient for so called conservatives.
Click to expand...

yes, that is his intent, and you're correc that he likley can't answer you. While I care little about such tags, I wouldn't be insulted to be called either liberal or conservative. Makes the effort at insult kind of silly IMHO.
 
Goldenboy219 said:
So how can you conclude that the state income tax was the culprit, when you have just admitted that recessions cause fewer tax payers?
Click to expand...

TX has no state income taxes so how can state income taxes be the culprit? When Obama raises taxes on the rich they will change their behavior generating less revenue to the govt. thus another false prediction. Unemployment always takes taxpayers out of the market place so what is your point?
 
Conservative said:
TX has no state income taxes so how can state income taxes be the culprit?
Click to expand...

Have revenues (or incomes for that matter) in Texas remained constant since the onslaught of the recession?

When Obama raises taxes on the rich they will change their behavior generating less revenue to the govt. thus another false prediction. Unemployment always takes taxpayers out of the market place so what is your point?
Click to expand...

You are also stating that tax increases will also cause people to want less income. Sorry, but there is not a 1:1 relating tax increases and falling income. The point is, the reason there were less revenues for that state is not primarily caused by tax increases, but because of the recession.
 
Conservative said:
Where is the proof? That is the normal liberal ploy so when you use it that makes you one. We have an Administration in office right now that has worse results this year vs. last year and still blames the previous Administration.

My point continues to be that liberals like Obama and now apparently you believe that tax revenue will go up with an increase in taxes. He is proposing letting the Bush tax cuts expire for those top 1% income earners. There is no evidence that tax increases on the rich will generate additional tax revenue to the govt. as taxes affect human behavior regardless of the income levels. I posted actual documented proof of what happens when states tried to do with Obama wants to do on a national level. The proof is in the historical state data and with a mobile society there is no guarantee that revenue will go up but there is evidence that it could drop.

Right now govt. revenue is down and we have 16 million unemployed Americans, 4 million more than we had when Obama took office and more each month this year vs. last year. Raising taxes is not going to put these people back to work. Tax revenue during a recession is always less due to fewer taxpayers, happens everytime.
Click to expand...

You have it just right but in stead of preaching to the Choir you're talking to the back of the pew.

There is little chance any Liberals no matter how the present themselves or what cloak they put on have been indoctrinated in the wonderful world and tax and spend where the sky is green and the grass is blue an butterflies fill the air along with song birds.

It is amazing they will argue that it's a good idea when history clearly shows when you cut spending, reduce taxes the revenues go up and jobs quickly follow.

Today Obama really has some kind of Svengali mesmerizing hold on these people.

Either that or some of them are truly challenged in ways we can only speculate about.

As I said in a previous post this blip is a false indicator and does not reflect reality, and the only improvement will be when all of the millions out of work are bcak on the job and new people entering the job market have a job.

Until then this is nothing and Obama continues to lie about everything. His whole time in office has been hell on this Country, because he truly is a RANK AMATEUR at everything except lying. At that he's a pro because that what he was trained to do as a lawyer and Organizer.
 
Last edited:
Goldenboy219;1059004144]Have revenues (or incomes for that matter) in Texas remained constant since the onslaught of the recession?
Click to expand...

No, TX revenue like the rest of the nation is suffering because of higher than normal unemployment. TX has created more jobs than the rest of the nation combined but not enough to keep the unemployment normal. Right now the TX unemployment is 8.3% a full 1.3% under the national average but 2 points higher than normal. In addition TX isn't taking stimulus money to the level that most states are and TX has an illegal alien problem that the Feds will not help solve.



You are also stating that tax increases will also cause people to want less income. Sorry, but there is not a 1:1 relating tax increases and falling income. The point is, the reason there were less revenues for that state is not primarily caused by tax increases, but because of the recession.
Click to expand...

I am stating that tax increases will force people to change behavior. If Federal Taxes go up the rich will find states that do not have state income taxes and move their operations there affecting state budgets and revenue, just like they have done in Maryland and NY now. Human behavior always trumps your textbook education.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom