Page 14 of 17 FirstFirst ... 41213141516 ... LastLast
Results 131 to 140 of 170

Thread: Financial Reform Talks Near Collapse, Some GOPers Threaten To Defect

  1. #131
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:09 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,254

    Re: Financial Reform Talks Near Collapse, Some GOPers Threaten To Defect

    Quote Originally Posted by 1984 View Post
    Lower taxes means less government involvement in the economy, which his type finds objectionable
    Can you provide proof where i said less government is objectionable? I have and will admit we need government spending to increase during periods of severe economic contraction; although that does not mean i view government involvent as "all that".... Lame attempt though


    ; the government must allocate funds because the average Americans is too stupid to know what's good for them; he's an elitist who never got the memo: Central management sucks.
    Again, show me posting such a statement in which i champion "central management".

    I am however bothered by one thing: deficits during economic expansion will have to be paid for by diminished private savings. Reagan and Bush 43 followed the Keynesian doctrine half ass; which emphasizes deficits as a means of boosting aggregate demand, yet did not turn off the spickit during periods of growth. And now I have to pay the tax for it.
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  2. #132
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,253

    Re: Financial Reform Talks Near Collapse, Some GOPers Threaten To Defect

    Goldenboy219;1058729693]Liberal ignorant? I call that nothing short of partisan hackery. Because you are unable to defend your position with any sort of accuracy, you resort to attacking the authors of published economic works. Great strategy!
    Everything you posted is partisan "hackery" from elite socialists who have a different vision for this country than our Founders. Still waiting for an answer, what is Krugman's view as to the role of this country

    And you still have yet to wrap your mind around the fact that correlation does not equal causation. Just because the tax cuts happened before a recovery does not mean tax cuts caused the recovery. To make such a statement, you will need to take a more sophisticated approach and chain weight the time series, and then differentiate specific categories and their respective growth rates against the averaged bands of previous recessions.
    What I posted are verifiable facts. Is "correlation does not equal causation" come out of the liberal playbook in an attempt to demonize tax rate cuts for Americans thus keeping people dependent? Whether or not there is a correlation is irrelevant to me because tax rate cuts have happened four times in U.S. History and everytime they increased govt. revenue and strong economic growth. My suggestion is to stop with the theory, stop with the elitist attitude, stop with reporting economic theory and actually get the facts.

    Again, you cannot link a causative effect because there is none.
    Where does human behavior place in the liberal world? Simple question would you prefer one person paying 1000 in taxes or 2 people paying 500 each? Which would have a bigger impact on the economy?


    And what you are doing is ignoring American consumption patterns while holding the role of the entrepreneur constant. US spending did in fact grow following tax cuts, as did imports Is there an income effect as the result of a higher propensity to consume foreign goods? Most likely, but to what effect and how much of that carries over to domestic goods? All legitimate questions that have to be answered before you can make such broad and bold exclamations.
    Why did U.S. Spending grow following tax cuts? Hmmm, let me see, what do you do when you get to keep more of what you "earn." There are four components to GDP, Go to BEA.gov, the link I gave you and find out those components and look at the part imports and exports played in our GDP, hint it was a negative since we have a trade deficit. You are making this way too easy.


    Must we repeat this exercise? You have yet to show any bit of cause. Yet something does not match:

    Current receipts
    2003: 3,043.4
    2004: 3,265.7
    2005: 3,659.3
    2006: 3,995.2
    2007: 4,209.2
    2008: 4,057.6
    2009: 3,745.5
    source

    Your "source" gives the years of 2009 and 2010. So i reserve serious doubts about your integrity or accuracy. Personal taxation receipts do not match either.
    It has become obvious to me that you have spent way too much time listening and reading economic theory that you ignore the basics of economic growth. I posted the Bush years showing economic growth then the affects of the recession which started after the Democrats took control of Congress in 2007. Nice spin and dodge, you tell me how GDP grew over 4 trillion dollars and any time in U.S. history when the GDP grew that much? You are the one that said the Bush tax cuts didn't have any affect on the economy. Something did so why don't you tell me what caused the spike in GDP?

    Something else that is interesting. In 2000, tax receipts were about 89% of consumption expenditures and transfer payments; in 2003, tax receipts were 66% of consumption expenditures and transfer payments; in 2007 it was up slightly (at the peak of the bubble) to 74% of CE and TP. Which illustrates that the result of tax cuts never lived up to the promise, and massive deficits occurred (DURING PERIODS OF ECONOMIC GROWTH). When the tax receipts face a drop of 2 standard deviations relative to expenditure during growth year differentials (2000 and 2006), your argument falls apart.
    According to NPER we entered a recession in October 2000 and then were hit with 9/11 which of course you ignore. Tax receipts dropped between 2001-2003 which again you ignored. Tax rate cuts took place in July 2003.

    What we did witness was economic growth having a positive relationship to increases in public and private debt. Such a policy and type of growth pattern is/was unsustainable.
    none of which had anything to do with tax rate cuts that grew govt. revenue.



    And you go and **** up your "correlation equals causation" argument by not reporting the data with any sort of accuracy, and then improperly analyze the data.
    Not accurate? Complain to the Bureau of Economic Analysis, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the U.S. Treasury Dept. That is where the data came from. Maybe Paul Krugman can set them straight.



    Incorrect, although not shocking. Credit markets, for the first time since the end of the GD ground to almost a halt. Financial institutions with assets managed to the tune of nearly $1 trillion dollars were collapsing and on the brink of collapse. The TED spread was at its highest in recorded history. Between August 2008 and March 2009, nearly $20 trillion of US wealth disappeared (130% of GDP). So face the facts, and take your lame partisan hackery elsewhere.
    You are truly a legend in your own mind. Why did that weath disappear? What did tax rate cuts have to do with that? What created the collapse is the belief that it is a right for everyone to own a home, one that they cannot afford. There are never any consequences for failure in the liberal world.

    Still waiting for you to actually explain how GDP grew after the JFK, Reagan, and Bush tax cuts as did Govt. revenue?


    Withholdings did in fact change, not in a massive tune, and not for higher income demographics. Tax revenue tends to take a dive when unemployment peaks. Thanks for further exemplifications of your ignorance
    LOL, thanks for the good laugh.

    Here is a good analysis of the Obama "tax cuts"

    Obama's 95% Illusion - WSJ.com

    Imagine that, unemployment affects tax revenue. Who would have thought it? I guess on the opposite side increased employment woud create more taxpayers? Hmmm, Reagan created almost 20 million with his tax cuts. Bush tax cuts increased employment as well. how did the Obama tax cuts do?


    Mostly from inflation and the steady state (population increases). As Krugman elegantly pointed out, the real rate (factor out population increases and inflation) was 19%! Good lord are you dense.
    Yeah, I am dense, dense enough to have no interest in anything a socialist economist or another elite liberal has to say. What inflation was there during the Bush Administration? What inflation was there during the Reagan years?

    The dense one is anyone who believes what an elite economists has to say yet ignores human behavior and the affects the consumer has on the economy.



    LOL, actual numbers that mean nothing in regards to proving causation, and actual numbers that do not represent the reality. Now try again to post both the real numbers
    You are absolutely right, actual numbers mean nothing to an elitist who makes up the theory as they go along, thanks so much for the education


    And here is what you miss on a consistant basis. I am not stating their numbers are wrong, or that tax revenue did not increase et al. I am stating that you cannot attribute the tax cuts for causation siting the numbers if and of themselves. Remember, correlation does not equal causation, and until you show any, you will continue to come of as a senile old fart obsessed with the past.
    Then tell me what you do and 150 million others in this country do when they get to keep more of their money? Explain to me how GDP Grew, Govt revenue grew, job creation grew AFTER tax rate cuts?


    Nobody from my generation is a major political player, or had a hand in bringing down the financial system. Im 26 years old. It was you and your lot that ****ed everything up. And now you do not even have the decency to admit it, and attack my generation on the basis of reckless bias.
    Great, you are 26 years old and have it all figured out. Your book smart, street stupid mentality will lead you to the disaster that is liberalism. Get out into the real world. I am 63, ran a 200 million dollar business than employed 2000 people. You could do better by listening to the more experienced, people that actually generated economic results vs. those economists that haven't contributed a damn thing except hot air. Adopting their theory will keep you dependent on the govt. for a long time.

    Are you serious??? This is your rebuttal? Well, at least you are consistent.
    LOL, if you are 26 you were 3-4 years old when the fall of the Soviet Union occurred. Now I understand that there are history books but not sure what is in them because Gorbachev was the head of the Soviet Union. You may have missed that point so I suggest you call him or write him and tell him how wrong he was to admit that Reagan destroyed the Soviet Union.

    Where? You made a comment not backed by any sound facts, nor the quote itself. FAIL!
    You are right, I forgot, data from bea.gov, bls.gov, and the U.S Treasury are trumped by elite economists like Krugman. Man, you need to choose your mentors better.



    No, i am careful not to post my opinions in discussion such as these.

    You have no problem posting opinions of others and lead us to believe you support those opinions.


    And must i repeat myself? Show causation or admit your error.
    why don't you and misterman get a room?



    You cannot even admit that tax cuts have a deflationary effect. Maybe you should just piss off and enjoy your old age.
    I am enjoying the many years of hard work and individual wealth creation. I appreciate you now paying for my SS. After contributing for 35 years and paying for someone else's I am extremely grateful for your contributions now.

    Paul Krugman is laughing is arse off at people like you. He is getting rich off people like you but you aren't smart enough to recognize the hogwash he is giving you.

  3. #133
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:09 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,254

    Re: Financial Reform Talks Near Collapse, Some GOPers Threaten To Defect

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    Everything you posted is partisan "hackery" from elite socialists who have a different vision for this country than our Founders. Still waiting for an answer, what is Krugman's view as to the role of this country

    What I posted are verifiable facts. Is "correlation does not equal causation" come out of the liberal playbook in an attempt to demonize tax rate cuts for Americans thus keeping people dependent? Whether or not there is a correlation is irrelevant to me because tax rate cuts have happened four times in U.S. History and everytime they increased govt. revenue and strong economic growth. My suggestion is to stop with the theory, stop with the elitist attitude, stop with reporting economic theory and actually get the facts.

    Where does human behavior place in the liberal world? Simple question would you prefer one person paying 1000 in taxes or 2 people paying 500 each? Which would have a bigger impact on the economy?

    Why did U.S. Spending grow following tax cuts? Hmmm, let me see, what do you do when you get to keep more of what you "earn." There are four components to GDP, Go to BEA.gov, the link I gave you and find out those components and look at the part imports and exports played in our GDP, hint it was a negative since we have a trade deficit. You are making this way too easy.

    It has become obvious to me that you have spent way too much time listening and reading economic theory that you ignore the basics of economic growth. I posted the Bush years showing economic growth then the affects of the recession which started after the Democrats took control of Congress in 2007. Nice spin and dodge, you tell me how GDP grew over 4 trillion dollars and any time in U.S. history when the GDP grew that much? You are the one that said the Bush tax cuts didn't have any affect on the economy. Something did so why don't you tell me what caused the spike in GDP?

    According to NPER we entered a recession in October 2000 and then were hit with 9/11 which of course you ignore. Tax receipts dropped between 2001-2003 which again you ignored. Tax rate cuts took place in July 2003.

    none of which had anything to do with tax rate cuts that grew govt. revenue.

    Not accurate? Complain to the Bureau of Economic Analysis, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the U.S. Treasury Dept. That is where the data came from. Maybe Paul Krugman can set them straight.

    You are truly a legend in your own mind. Why did that weath disappear? What did tax rate cuts have to do with that? What created the collapse is the belief that it is a right for everyone to own a home, one that they cannot afford. There are never any consequences for failure in the liberal world.

    Still waiting for you to actually explain how GDP grew after the JFK, Reagan, and Bush tax cuts as did Govt. revenue?

    LOL, thanks for the good laugh.

    Here is a good analysis of the Obama "tax cuts"

    Obama's 95% Illusion - WSJ.com

    Imagine that, unemployment affects tax revenue. Who would have thought it? I guess on the opposite side increased employment woud create more taxpayers? Hmmm, Reagan created almost 20 million with his tax cuts. Bush tax cuts increased employment as well. how did the Obama tax cuts do?

    Yeah, I am dense, dense enough to have no interest in anything a socialist economist or another elite liberal has to say. What inflation was there during the Bush Administration? What inflation was there during the Reagan years?

    The dense one is anyone who believes what an elite economists has to say yet ignores human behavior and the affects the consumer has on the economy.

    You are absolutely right, actual numbers mean nothing to an elitist who makes up the theory as they go along, thanks so much for the education

    Then tell me what you do and 150 million others in this country do when they get to keep more of their money? Explain to me how GDP Grew, Govt revenue grew, job creation grew AFTER tax rate cuts?

    Great, you are 26 years old and have it all figured out. Your book smart, street stupid mentality will lead you to the disaster that is liberalism. Get out into the real world. I am 63, ran a 200 million dollar business than employed 2000 people. You could do better by listening to the more experienced, people that actually generated economic results vs. those economists that haven't contributed a damn thing except hot air. Adopting their theory will keep you dependent on the govt. for a long time.

    LOL, if you are 26 you were 3-4 years old when the fall of the Soviet Union occurred. Now I understand that there are history books but not sure what is in them because Gorbachev was the head of the Soviet Union. You may have missed that point so I suggest you call him or write him and tell him how wrong he was to admit that Reagan destroyed the Soviet Union.

    You are right, I forgot, data from bea.gov, bls.gov, and the U.S Treasury are trumped by elite economists like Krugman. Man, you need to choose your mentors better.

    You have no problem posting opinions of others and lead us to believe you support those opinions.

    why don't you and misterman get a room?

    I am enjoying the many years of hard work and individual wealth creation. I appreciate you now paying for my SS. After contributing for 35 years and paying for someone else's I am extremely grateful for your contributions now.

    Paul Krugman is laughing is arse off at people like you. He is getting rich off people like you but you aren't smart enough to recognize the hogwash he is giving you.
    You mixed up the numbers for tax receipts, gave the incorrect link for the data provided, ignore causation by making empty statements and misinterpretation of data sets, and ignore how the economy reacts when short term rates approach the zero bound.

    Last time we had this discussion, you stated you ran a $100 million company, now its $200 million?

    The truth is ever so clear; you are a senile old man who is obsessed with a period of time when the extreme right allowed massive deficits to be financed by Japan, China, and western Europe. Time to wake up and smell reality; before its too late.
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  4. #134
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,253

    Re: Financial Reform Talks Near Collapse, Some GOPers Threaten To Defect

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenboy219 View Post
    You mixed up the numbers for tax receipts, gave the incorrect link for the data provided, ignore causation by making empty statements and misinterpretation of data sets, and ignore how the economy reacts when short term rates approach the zero bound.

    Last time we had this discussion, you stated you ran a $100 million company, now its $200 million?

    The truth is ever so clear; you are a senile old man who is obsessed with a period of time when the extreme right allowed massive deficits to be financed by Japan, China, and western Europe. Time to wake up and smell reality; before its too late.
    No, I posted the right link and posted actual income and corporate tax revenue, not total revenue since it was income taxes that were cut.

    It was a 200 million dollar company and I have never stated 100 million nor do I have to prove anything to you.

    Thank you for the compliment, self made and senile. brilliant assessment on the part of another typical liberal kid who has a distorted view of the world, probably still living off the parents.

    Massive deficits were due and continue to be do to the entitlement mentality in this country. It has nothing whatsoever to do with tax rate cuts that you still want to demonize.

    It seems that the entitlement mentality is what you have and it is obvious to me that you need the govt. to help you. That means the taxpayer helps you. Thanks again for the SS contributions.

    Obviously you have no interest in real data so keep posting theory. Hope the next time mommy goes to the grocery store she tries to pay for those groceries with theory or percentages.

    You have a full life ahead of you and if this is the attitude you have and an example of the people you believe then you are in for real disappointment.

    I had a lot of employees like you, many I turned around and others ended up total failures. My bet is you will be in that latter class if you don't change your attitude.

  5. #135
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: Financial Reform Talks Near Collapse, Some GOPers Threaten To Defect

    Quote Originally Posted by 1984 View Post
    I suppose every business in the country is like that? All of them are losing money?
    Course not. It's just that some people tend to ignore that businesses aren't making money because of the recession, therefore cutting their taxes is rather futile.

    sole proprietorships account for the majority of businesses in the US
    Perhaps you missed this:

    "If I cut taxes on someone who has a small business being reported on their schedule C who's losing money to the point they have no taxable income (this happens more often then you'd think), how does that help them?"

    You do know what a schedule C is no?

    So, while it may not help businesses that are operating at a loss, tax cuts for businesses who have tight margins are extremely beneficial to them.
    True, but again, people tend to ignore that businesses with operating losses do not benefit from reductions in their tax rates.

    We should also cut the corporate tax rates, so they can retain more jobs during recessions.
    Not far enough. We should eliminate the corporate tax rate because corporations in essence don't pay taxes.

    But, of course, tax cuts don't work because individual people are just too damn stupid and helpless to spend their money efficiently and properly. No, we need big government to allocate resources and money...
    Your banter is pedestrian at best.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  6. #136
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: Financial Reform Talks Near Collapse, Some GOPers Threaten To Defect

    You people do know it's a waste of time to talk to Conservative no?

    He does not understand economics. He does not understand that raw data that is the result of a myriad of factors does not equate to proving only one factor is the cause.

    He does not understand what linear regression is, nor how it actually proves how one factor was the cause.

    Conservative wants tax cuts to be the cause and he will ignore everything else, including good statistics.

    Conservative's argument is little more then a bomb burned the house down, not lightning, arson, a gas leak, bad wiring or a my raid of other possibilities because he wants it to be a bomb. He will never ever prove his argument, only berate you and ignore your arguments.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  7. #137
    Guru
    Porchev's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    GA
    Last Seen
    01-08-17 @ 12:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    3,092

    Re: Financial Reform Talks Near Collapse, Some GOPers Threaten To Defect

    Concerning this financial reform, I thought this article was interesting by Dana Perino:

    Republicans Aren't Caving On Finanical Reform, They're Leading

    "...Far from coming up short, the GOP got six key concessions from the Democrats:

    - Taxpayers must be protected, not exposed

    - Bailout fund must be removed.

    - Failing firms must be allowed to fail - shareholders must be wiped out.

    -Creditors of failing firms must pay - anything that exceeds bankruptcy must be recouped.

    -Congress must have an upfront say in any guarantee program.

    -Emergency programs can only be used in real emergencies and only by healthy (solvent) firms.

    Now Senate Republicans will focus on taking out misguided provisions that go beyond Wall Street to interfere with small businesses, community banks, and employers throughout the country that had nothing to do with the financial crisis. That's not caving -- that's legislating."

    FOXNews.com - DANA PERINO: Republicans Aren't Caving On Finanical Reform, They're Leading

  8. #138
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: Financial Reform Talks Near Collapse, Some GOPers Threaten To Defect

    Too bad the GOP program is little more then a horse and pony show.

    It does nothing to prevent future bailouts and it does seem to suggest that the cost of capital will increase placing a significant burden upon business expansion.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  9. #139
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:09 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,254

    Re: Financial Reform Talks Near Collapse, Some GOPers Threaten To Defect

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post




    Here are the tax revenue during that period of time as well so your so called facts are lies. Any tax rate cut that grows revenue has nothing to do with deficits. Only those that fear the American people spending their own money and becoming less dependent on the govt. should be concerned and usually are. What is Krugman's vision of America and the role of Govt?

    2003 2163.7
    2004 2002.1
    2005 2047.9
    2006 2213.2
    2007 2546.8
    2008 2807.4

    U.S. Department of Commerce. Bureau of Economic Analysis
    Dude, you cannot even post the numbers with accuracy, as the dates and the numbers do not match. Not only that, take a peek at your time series; it states 2009 & 2010, not 2003-2008.

    Actual numbers you wanted to post:

    2003: 2,047.9
    2004: 2,213.2
    2005: 2,546.8
    2006: 2,807.4
    2007: 2,960.6
    2008: 2,758.0
    2009: 2,428.2

    Also, here is the correct link to the data set: source

    Yet i will use your ridiculus argument against you: Due to the Clinton tax increases, the US experienced great GDP growth and it increased government revenue. The data @ bea.gov cannot be denied, as it reads....

    Tax Reciepts:

    1992: 1,239.7
    1993: 1,317.8
    1994: 1,425.6
    1995: 1,516.7
    1996: 1,641.5
    1997: 1,780.0
    1998: 1,910.8
    1999: 2,035.8
    2000: 2,202.8

    Which is undeniable proof (according to the "Conservative" scientific approach) that Clinton's tax policy raised government revenues. Don't worry, i didn't make a major mistake in posting the numbers. Everything aligns as it should.

    Oh guess what? My source represents the actual data set presented
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  10. #140
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:09 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,254

    Re: Financial Reform Talks Near Collapse, Some GOPers Threaten To Defect

    Source

    Ten Char
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

Page 14 of 17 FirstFirst ... 41213141516 ... 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
  •