Was A Big Deal Ever Possible?

cpwill said:

I stop spending it. In fact, I spend even less, in order to pay down debt.

Click to expand...

Wait?? So you have a car loan and your answer is to stop paying it?? Stop buying food for your children?? Stop paying for your house?? Stop paying your bills??

Damn Will?? I am sorry but.. Do you have a brain at all??? Stop spending it?? Crap dude!! I wish!! I am sure most of american wishes it was that simply.. But our government has obligations.. To the people of this nation, the military, other nations, and so forth..

Tax rates does not equal revenue.. It equals income.. If you take a 50% cut in pay right now this moment.. The amount you have in the bank will not change.. But come your next pay period.. You will have a lot less money than you used to.. If you can't understand that basic concept.. Then I suggest retaking the 3rd grade..

There are no lies in my post.. None what so ever.. Are you actually stupid enough to claim that it isn't our government and that we don't vote and that we don't fund it?? Oh? Wait?? You just did make that claim so I guess you are..

Your a conservative.. You most likely watch Fox News.. I completely expect you to say the stimulus failed.. The fact that unemployment isn't at 15% somehow means nothing.. Did you know there is a reality outside Fox News?? Did you know there is an entire world out there of different facts??? Did you know that you are most likely brain washed into your beliefs because you are to lazy to look at the facts yourself and form your own opinions..

Seriously dude.. Learn to think for yourself.. This isn't the life and universe according to Fox News or whatever rightwing mouth piece you live by..

I personally cannot see the justification on raising taxes on anyone as long as the Federal government funds tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of BS projects across the globe. If the federal government were to cut all ridicules programs then I could see taxes being raised in order to combat the deficit. How is it right to ask persons regardless of wealth to pay more just to have part of it completely wasted on nonsense.

BDBoop said:

No, Boo. They honest to GOD don't. He didn't. I just posted in another thread, this very point. The President didn't try to pander to anybody. He was scaring us, with all the **** he was giving up. And they said No.

So, no. They don't HAVE to do anything except strap on a pair. They couldn't, they didn't, and nobody will forget for a very long time that the summer of 2011 was America being held hostage by a bunch of eunuchs kissing up to big money.

Click to expand...

I think that is a bit different subject. Yes, Obama could and should be more forceful, using his position. And Yes, republicans are not doing their job as they should. But, parties need to be able to blame the other when they do what they know their voters won't like.

DemonMyst said:

Wait?? So you have a car loan and your answer is to stop paying it?? Stop buying food for your children?? Stop paying for your house?? Stop paying your bills??

Click to expand...

The country is taking it more than enough to pay those type of bills. It's been noted by now at least 100 times.

1Perry said:

The country is taking it more than enough to pay those type of bills. It's been noted by now at least 100 times.

Click to expand...

Just asking, what do you see as those types of bills?

DemonMyst said:

Wait?? So you have a car loan and your answer is to stop paying it?? Stop buying food for your children?? Stop paying for your house?? Stop paying your bills??

Click to expand...

my pay has just gone from 50k to 40k - the situation is not near so dire as that. Depending on how much I owe on it, I sell the car. Depending on how much I owe on it, I may have to downgrade my house. If I am deeply in debt (and I probably am, since I was spending 60k a year on 50k a year salary), then I certainly stop going to restaurants and the like. But my bills can still be paid and my children still fed just fine.

Tax rates does not equal revenue.. It equals income..

Click to expand...

no. revenue equals income. but tax rates have relatively little to do with how much we get in real world revenue.

There are no lies in my post.. None what so ever.. Are you actually stupid enough to claim that it isn't our government and that we don't vote and that we don't fund it?? Oh? Wait?? You just did make that claim so I guess you are..

Click to expand...

government and it's powers derive from the people. your argument would make it the other way 'round. but since in this nation we hold the truth of governments' deriving it's power from the government to be self evident, it makes it very much "their" money, to the exact same degree to which we are not slaves.

Your a conservative.. You most likely watch Fox News.

Click to expand...

I live in Japan. Occasionally I google up to see who Chris Wallace interviewed on Sunday.

I completely expect you to say the stimulus failed.. The fact that unemployment isn't at 15% somehow means nothing..

Click to expand...

that is correct. because according to the math utilized to argue for the stimulus, the unemployment rate right now should be closer to 6.5%, and had we never passed the stimulus, would never have reached 15%.



we lost more jobs with the stimulus, than the Obama administration said we would lose without it. By it's own measure, the Stimulus failed.

which, of course, is precisely what was predicted by those who were clued in. because in fact if you look at every major attempt at fiscal stimulus in the 30 nations of the OECD since 1970, those predicated on increasing government expenditures were the ones that failed, whereas those predicated on lowering and flattening tax rates seem (inexplicably) to be followed by solid economic growth.....

of course, our failure is a bit out of the ordinary even then.



which, of course, is also precisely what we would expect given that in high-debt nations the multiplier is actually zero. Mind you, Obama seems to have also shot himself a bit in the foot with Obamacare, but that doesn't quite fully excuse the fact that had we followed the 1982 recovery path we would have been able to provide a job for every single individual currently labeled unemployed

Did you know there is a reality outside Fox News?? Did you know there is an entire world out there of different facts??? Did you know that you are most likely brain washed into your beliefs because you are to lazy to look at the facts yourself and form your own opinions..

Seriously dude.. Learn to think for yourself.. This isn't the life and universe according to Fox News or whatever rightwing mouth piece you live by..

Click to expand...

:lol: yes. the National Bureau of Economic Research and Harvard Faculty...... dominated by the evil brainwashing Fox News

Boo Radley said:

Just asking, what do you see as those types of bills?

Click to expand...

we take in enough to pay for interest on the debt, social security, medicare, pay for active duty, and a bit else. not enough to fully fund Medicaid, as I recall, but close.

Cp, you need to learn the difference between a projection, and a fact. The stimulus was somewhat successful, by it's own measure, because it created jobs, which it was designed to do. The fact that unemployment got worse than projected does not mean the stimulus failed. It simply means the projections where wrong. Unemployment would most likely have been even worse without a stimulus.

You have had your facts wrong at every step this thread, and when called on it, ducked and ran, again. No matter how many times Hauser's "law" get blown up in your face, you keep trotting it out. You claim that revenue is just based on GDP, but when the numbers don't work, then you say that it is another factor, but still ignore all the factors that are inconvenient to you that affect revenue. At this point you are not debating anything, you are simply spreading propaganda that you have to know is bogus.

Baralis said:

I personally cannot see the justification on raising taxes on anyone as long as the Federal government funds tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of BS projects across the globe. If the federal government were to cut all ridicules programs then I could see taxes being raised in order to combat the deficit. How is it right to ask persons regardless of wealth to pay more just to have part of it completely wasted on nonsense.

Click to expand...

While I understand this line of thought, and certainly some foreign aid should be cut, this would actually hurt the US more than help us in the situation we are in. Foreign spending pales in comparison to what we spend on ourselves (most is millions and single digit billions compared to multiple 10s of billions). Cutting this would be like saving half-pennies. Further, US aid is one of the bright spots in the world. We feed people; give them medicine; give them shelter; and on every box is USAID. It is great promotion. And when you need people to buys stuff that you make you really need them to like you since we do have competitors. Defense spending for foreign bases in allied land, stopping the wars, raising benefit ages for SS, trimming Medicare/Medicaid/unemployment all should go first.

Boo Radley said:

Just asking, what do you see as those types of bills?

Click to expand...

I've covered this before. We can pay whatever is necessary to avoid default. These are the things like your car or house payment. I'm not going to be upset if we have to bring the soldiers home.

Redress said:

Cp, you need to learn the difference between a projection, and a fact. The stimulus was somewhat successful, by it's own measure, because it created jobs, which it was designed to do. The fact that unemployment got worse than projected does not mean the stimulus failed. It simply means the projections where wrong. Unemployment would most likely have been even worse without a stimulus.

Click to expand...

That of course being a projection and not fact.

1Perry said:

That of course being a projection and not fact.

Click to expand...

No, that being an analysis of historical data. It's not a slam dunk perfect 100 % case, but more reliable than a projection. One is guessing the future, one is looking at what actually did happen.

cpwill said:

In November 2010, the nation had a massive right-leaning correction to two, very large left-leaning previous elections.

however, the White House and the Senate turn over every 4 and 6 years respectively. The House turns over every two.

Ergo, the President and Senate are reflective of strong Democrat elections, whereas the House is reflective of a strong Republican election.

I posit, therefore, that a Grand Bargain was never a real possibility. To say that the two sides are too far apart isn't really a full explanation; but rather that in the context of a large deal, there never was any serious overlap. The math makes it nigh impossible to talk about large deficit reduction without reforming the entitlements, but Democrats are unwilling to reform the entitlements without tax hikes - and the minimum that they will accept is higher than the maximum that Republicans will accept. Both sides put forth their "best offer" and know that they are compromising as much as they possibly can - while both best offers remain too far apart, and each accuses the other of not compromising.

In short, this is something that will have to be decided by the 2012 election - because at current our government, split between the sections that were a reaction to George Bush and the section that was a reaction to Barack Obama, is simply incapable of finding ground both can stand on.

Click to expand...

Actually, I don't think it's because of the Democrats and the Republicans that we can't get a deal passed, but rather the special interests who control both parties.

samsmart said:

Actually, I don't think it's because of the Democrats and the Republicans that we can't get a deal passed, but rather the special interests who control both parties.

Click to expand...

I just read the following quote, and it cracked my ass right the hell up.

And IG Markets chief market strategist Ben Potter told Dow Jones Newswires: "We're still of the view that the 'too big to fail' attitude will mean the debt ceiling is raised."
However he added that it was "becoming more evident that it's going to take longer than expected and that one side is probably going to have to give up more ground than they had wanted".

Click to expand...

Since we already offered the sun, moon and stars at a 3-1 rate and it was refused, I certainly hope he's not talking cuts.

Latest:

John Boehner Unveils New Debt Ceiling Plan: Bitch, Bail, and Flail

The above demonstrates exactly how Boehner and GOP’s bitch, bail, and flail plan works. First comes the complaint about the size of the national debt. The complaint is followed by bailing on doing anything serious by touting a House plan that was DOA the millisecond it was passed. The process is then concluded by flailing anytime reality is injected into the conversation. (For example, Chris Wallace pointing out that the Senate rejected the House plan).

Click to expand...

Redress said:

Cp, you need to learn the difference between a projection, and a fact. The stimulus was somewhat successful, by it's own measure, because it created jobs, which it was designed to do. The fact that unemployment got worse than projected does not mean the stimulus failed. It simply means the projections where wrong. Unemployment would most likely have been even worse without a stimulus.

Click to expand...

in science they call that an "unfalsifiable thesis". the rest of us just call it circular logic. the stimulus must have succeeded because it succeed because we projected it to succeed? okay :roll:

here's a quick question. If I destroy 4 jobs, but create 2 jobs, how much does unemployment fall?

According to stimulus math, unemployment falls by 2 jobs. hooray!

You have had your facts wrong at every step this thread, and when called on it, ducked and ran, again. No matter how many times Hauser's "law" get blown up in your face, you keep trotting it out.

Click to expand...

as far as I am aware, the basic thrust behind it has never blown up in my face. even the outlier you mention serves to reinforce the point that revenues are not primarily a function of tax rates.

You claim that revenue is just based on GDP

Click to expand...

no. I claim that the most powerful factor in revenue is GDP - that the factor that has proven most accurate at predicting revenue has been GDP.

but when the numbers don't work, then you say that it is another factor, but still ignore all the factors that are inconvenient to you that affect revenue.

Click to expand...

:shrug: no single factor determines revenue. but you can demonstrate different weights. what you are doing here is substituting actually answering a point by claiming that the point has been answered.

Only if the Tea Party nutters are marginalised.

Redress said:

No, that being an analysis of historical data. It's not a slam dunk perfect 100 % case, but more reliable than a projection. One is guessing the future, one is looking at what actually did happen.

Click to expand...

hilarious.

Its not over yet...this poll would have been better posted after aug 2nd if no deal is reached....I still believe the debt ceiling will be raised....even if temporarily.

I agree with CPwills original poll post and his analysis of the elections..I think hes right on. The gop won big in Nov, because of two things...Obamacare and Nancy Pelosi's glaring, gloating, joker like grinning face that utterly turned the stomachs of most americans.
The teaparty started out a grass roots effort against obamacare and pelosi, the teaparty was full of working class senior citizens and working class in general....then the teaparty came out of the closet and its leaders exposed themselves as of the rich and for the rich only.

I think the teaparty will have a run for a cycle, but once it settles in that their only goal was cutting anything from the middleclass and not only preserving but even cutting further burden from the rich and corporations...who are prospering greatly while working america is dieing right now today....it will flip and flip HARD.
Let the SS cuts hit and whatever else they are going to whack from the middleclass then the reality will be there....then theres the teaparty govs that are getting more unpopular all the time.....it will be interesting to see how it unfolds...

cpwill said:

in science they call that an "unfalsifiable thesis". the rest of us just call it circular logic. the stimulus must have succeeded because it succeed because we projected it to succeed? okay :roll:

here's a quick question. If I destroy 4 jobs, but create 2 jobs, how much does unemployment fall?

According to stimulus math, unemployment falls by 2 jobs. hooray!

Click to expand...

And this is just random ramblings of unverifiable claims. Our best analysis suggests it created jobs. it only destroyed jobs in the mind of those who do not understand economics.

as far as I am aware, the basic thrust behind it has never blown up in my face. even the outlier you mention serves to reinforce the point that revenues are not primarily a function of tax rates.

Click to expand...

Hey look, now you are forced to claim Hauser's Law says something it does not.

Let's look at Wiki: Hauser's law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hauser's law is the proposition that, in the United States, federal tax revenues since World War II have always been approximately equal to 19.5% of GDP, regardless of wide fluctuations in the marginal tax rate.[1]

Click to expand...

Of course, that is not true any longer, and as the chart I linked earlier showed, it would have not been true in the other direction in the early 2000's if Bush had not cut taxes. Nice try at spin, except it failed.

no. I claim that the most powerful factor in revenue is GDP - that the factor that has proven most accurate at predicting revenue has been GDP.

Click to expand...

You have mentioned a total of 2 factors in determining revenue, when there are dozens. One of those is, surprise, tax rates...but you don't want them to be mentioned. You always try and bring it down to one factor, and the one factor you want to claim is responsible is the one that if it was the controlling factor would make your premise true. The problem of course is that it is not that simple.

:shrug: no single factor determines revenue. but you can demonstrate different weights. what you are doing here is substituting actually answering a point by claiming that the point has been answered.

Click to expand...

Even the weight difference factors have changes.

Redress said:

Actually this is not true, and I agree with republicans that taxes should not be raised. raising taxes, especially in a struggling economy, is akin to eating seed corn. The reality is the only thing that has to be done is reduce the growth of government to below the rate of growth of the economy. Doing somewhat more is better, but that is all that has to be done, and that can be done without any changes in taxes.

Click to expand...

Pure baloney this is a tax base problem created mostly by unemployment and under employment. Our tax base has been significantly reduced by unemployment and the only people that can change that are those with the money to do so and why would they want to create work here in the USA when they can outsource and open up manufacturing in foreign countries?

It's probably to late but we needed a radical change in our government, capitalism brought us to this point and it will not save us from the pending financial diaster that looms directly ahead, mean time as we plunge head first towards the end of our society as we have known it the rich continue to suck every cent out of the economy that they can.

We need a government that puts America and Americans first. We need a socialistic government that will create and protect our jobs using American tax payer monies

Redress said:

No, that being an analysis of historical data. It's not a slam dunk perfect 100 % case, but more reliable than a projection. One is guessing the future, one is looking at what actually did happen.

Click to expand...

Slam dunk 100% case? It wasn't even close. No, it's nothing more than what you complain about others doing.

1Perry said:

Slam dunk 100% case? It wasn't even close. No, it's nothing more than what you complain about others doing.

Click to expand...

I do not complain about others analyzing historical data.

cpwill said:

in science they call that an "unfalsifiable thesis". the rest of us just call it circular logic. the stimulus must have succeeded because it succeed because we projected it to succeed? okay :roll:

here's a quick question. If I destroy 4 jobs, but create 2 jobs, how much does unemployment fall?

According to stimulus math, unemployment falls by 2 jobs. hooray!

Click to expand...

Actually stimulus math claims it created 2 jobs.

lpast said:

Its not over yet...this poll would have been better posted after aug 2nd if no deal is reached....I still believe the debt ceiling will be raised....even if temporarily.

I agree with CPwills original poll post and his analysis of the elections..I think hes right on. The gop won big in Nov, because of two things...Obamacare and Nancy Pelosi's glaring, gloating, joker like grinning face that utterly turned the stomachs of most americans.
The teaparty started out a grass roots effort against obamacare and pelosi, the teaparty was full of working class senior citizens and working class in general....then the teaparty came out of the closet and its leaders exposed themselves as of the rich and for the rich only.

I think the teaparty will have a run for a cycle, but once it settles in that their only goal was cutting anything from the middleclass and not only preserving but even cutting further burden from the rich and corporations...who are prospering greatly while working america is dieing right now today....it will flip and flip HARD.
Let the SS cuts hit and whatever else they are going to whack from the middleclass then the reality will be there....then theres the teaparty govs that are getting more unpopular all the time.....it will be interesting to see how it unfolds...

Click to expand...

We've done this before with me providing links to past articles that notes the Tea Party got started over the outrage at the give aways to Wall Street but yet, none of it seems to matter to you. You'll continue to make your baseless accusations because the Tea Party realizes that everyone is going to have to pitch in, including you and you don't seem to care for that.

Redress said:

I do not complain about others analyzing historical data.

Click to expand...

The analyzing wasn't so much wrong as the projection. You're asking us to believe a program that has been proven a failure can still tell us what things would have been like without it.