- Joined
- Jan 2, 2006
- Messages
- 28,173
- Reaction score
- 14,269
- Location
- Boca
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
One taxpayer paying $1 or two taxpayers paying .50(FIFTY CENTS) each, sorry, forgot who I was dealing with.
This is a ridiculous argument. Can you show that tax cuts were responsible for a doubling of the workforce? If not, then your example is not bounded in reality.
in 2008 Consumption was over 10.1 trillion dollars out of a 14.3 trillion economy showing the power of the consumer and the benefits of higher take home pay thanks to the Bush tax cuts.
What the **** are you talking about, power of the consumer? Are you magically forgetting that economy slid into the worst recession since WWII following the actions (which you label as an absolute positive) of the Bush administration? Not that i am attributing Bush policies as a cause of the recession, only that this occured in accordance of his policies.
Saving money reduces demand on govt. services but saving money does create interest or dividends which are taxable.
Paying down debt is equivalent to saving money. In a consumer driven economy that is heavily indebted, interest payments will overtake income earned through saving (interest payments from a bank). Any consumer who took the proceeds from any tax cut, and spent them on equities will most likely be regretting that investment now. Investing does not equal saving.
You continue to spout the same rhetoric while ignoring the points made.
My so called "rhetoric" was in response to your so called "points made". Tax cuts only lead to economic growth if the money is spent on domestic goods/services. If the money is saved, it does not flow into the economy in the near term, which leads to deficits if spending is not cut in accordance with tax cuts.
You simply cannot admit that you are wrong and the points I have made are valid.
The validity of your points require heroic assumptions on saving and spending. You have to ignore time, leakage (do you even know what it is?), government spending, deficits, etc..., to come to those conclusions.
Do you honestly believe any valid economic analysis ignores important factors?
Liberals always ignore posts that refute their rhetoric and make them look bad. Facts definitely make you look bad.
For the nth time, stop trying to turn this into a discussion about me. We are discussing topics, not each other.