View Poll Results: Was it Ever?

Voters
32. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    6 18.75%
  • No

    18 56.25%
  • Only If......

    8 25.00%
Page 4 of 24 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 233

Thread: Was A Big Deal Ever Possible?

  1. #31
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:16 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,041

    Re: Was A Big Deal Ever Possible?

    Quote Originally Posted by DemonMyst View Post
    So basically what your saying is.. You haven't the faintest clue about elementary school math??
    no, what i am saying is that static scoring is not and never has been an accurate predictive measure for reality.

    Claiming that less people will attempt to evade taxes is retarded.. We should be going after people for evading taxes no matter what..
    go look up tax avoidance and then look up tax evasion and then come back.... i'll wait....

  2. #32
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:06 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,266
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Was A Big Deal Ever Possible?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    no, what i am saying is that static scoring is not and never has been an accurate predictive measure for reality.



    go look up tax avoidance and then look up tax evasion and then come back.... i'll wait....
    While he is doing that, look up what percent of GDP revenue was last year, and what it is projected to be this year. Get back to me with those numbers and an explanation of what it does to your failed little "law".
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  3. #33
    Global Moderator
    I'm a Jedi Master, Yo

    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:20 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    152,604

    Re: Was A Big Deal Ever Possible?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post


    higher rates doesn't increase revenue. Growth in GDP does.
    This has already been debunked several times. It oversimplifies a more complex issue and doesn't take into consideration different types of tax revenues. Increasing taxes, ACROSS THE BOARD increases revenue. Very simple mathematics. Revenue has been consistently higher in years after there have been tax increases.
    "Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run

    ====||:-D

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    This is what I hate about politics the most, it turns people in snobbish egotistical self righteous dicks who allow their political beliefs, partisan attitudes, and 'us vs. them' mentality, to force them to deny reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    You can't paint everone with the same brush.......It does not work tht way.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    See with you around Captain we don't even have to make arguments, as you already know everything .
    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Had you been born elsewhere or at a different time you may very well have chosen a different belief system.
    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    It a person has faith they dont need to convince another of it, and when a non believer is not interested in listening to the word of the lord, " you shake the dust from your sandels and move on"

  4. #34
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:06 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,266
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Was A Big Deal Ever Possible?

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    This has already been debunked several times. It oversimplifies a more complex issue and doesn't take into consideration different types of tax revenues. Increasing taxes, ACROSS THE BOARD increases revenue. Very simple mathematics. Revenue has been consistently higher in years after there have been tax increases.
    Some problems with this:

    1) Increasing taxes increases revenue beyond what it would be, for a period of time. After a certain amount of time, it is much more questionable and almost impossible to model accurately. It is too complex a system.

    2) Revenue has been consistently higher almost every year, no matter what change in tax policy. Tax cuts, tax increases, no change, almost always tax revenue increases. What you want to say is revenue increases beyond what it would have been, which is generally accepted.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  5. #35
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:16 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,041

    Re: Was A Big Deal Ever Possible?

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Those are the numbers, except for recently, when revenue is running under 15 % of GDP. Funny how your little graph does not show those years....
    that's correct. nobody argued that GDP was the sole determinant of revenue. But isn't it odd how now it has dropped? Tax rates haven't changed significantly. Looks like something else has. Gosh... now what has changed recently.... i mean we've been through severe and lengthy recessions, and booming recoveries before, yet always revenue hovered at around the same percent of GDP....

    .... and it didn't drop until we drastically increased the size of government. Government does not tax itself like it does labor, production, and investment, and so as the percent of GDP marked to government goes up, the percent of GDP marked to revenue goes down.

    you will note there is a distinct mirror effect:



    1963: Spending drops slightly, revenue increases slightly
    1967: Spending increases, revenue drops
    1968: Spending drops, revenue increases
    1970: Spending increases, revenue drops
    1973: Spending drops, revenue increase
    1974: Spending increases, revenue drops
    1976: Spending drops, revenue increases
    1979-80: Spending increases, Revenue drops
    1983: Spending begins to decrease, Revenue begins to increase
    2000: Spending begins to increase again, Revenue begins to decrease again
    2004: Spending slightly decreases, revenue increases
    2008: Spending explodes, revenues plummet

    so, as the electrician might say: there's your problem, right there. yup, some inverse proportionality seems to be screwing with your static model. but don't worry ma'am. looking up close me and my boys note that tax code efficiency seems to be able to produce short term straight line shared growth.

    doh.

  6. #36
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:06 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,266
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Was A Big Deal Ever Possible?

    So what we have learned is that GDP determines revenue, except when it doesn't. That Hauser's Law works, except when it doesn't. When it doesn't work, it's because of those rascally democrats and their spending, except for when spending doesn't cause a violation of Hauser's Law. The one thing cp is desperately trying to avoid is actual big picture thinking. He throws little things out there which make his point look good, and as soon as the flaws are pointed out, changes tact completely(it's GDP, except when it isn't, then it is one and only one other factor) until he can throw out his initial premise again as if it had not already been refuted repeatedly.

    Sorry cp, but Hauser's Law is something no one takes seriously. Revenue is dependent on a multitude of issues, and your attempts to claim just one, or just another is the cause is so obviously either wishful thinking or flat out dishonesty to support a partisan position.

    Let me show you a nice chart cp.



    Notice how as 2001 came along, we were fairly quickly headed towards exceeding Hauser's Law by bringing in more revenue than it claimed, until the top rate was cut and all of a sudden it started down and has continued down with only one small bump the other direction. Just something to make you go hrmmm.
    Last edited by Redress; 07-24-11 at 05:19 AM.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  7. #37
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:06 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,266
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Was A Big Deal Ever Possible?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    I will give you a hint that will help you out alot: just because some one says something you wish was true, does not make it true. See your chart right there? Notice what it says: "...spending is causing the deficits". Sounds great doesn't it? Hit's your talking point just like you want it. There is a problem though. It's bull****. It is provably bull****. A deficit is caused when revenue is lower than spending. That is what a deficit is. Notice two factors there. Spending and revenue. A deficit is caused by the difference between the two. If I am spending massive amounts of money, but revenue is even more massive, there is no deficit. Likewise, if revenue is really low, but spending is even lower, no deficit. Notice how there are two variables in those equations. Are you who you are due to nature, or nurture? Two things again, and again, both are factors.

    "Spending is causing the deficit" makes a great soundbite. It's a great talking point, as long as you don't want to actually be accurate. It's the kind of thing you tell the simpleminded so they will believe your propaganda.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  8. #38
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:16 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,041

    Re: Was A Big Deal Ever Possible?

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Those are the numbers, except for recently, when revenue is running under 15 % of GDP. Funny how your little graph does not show those years....
    but the last couple of years are the part most pertinent to our current discussion.

    Look at the relative stability of the last 60 years. then look at revenue's swing far outside of where it has been before.

    Odd, that.

    Now, tax rates weren't significantly lowered between 2007 and 2010; which of course merely reinforces my points that nominal tax rates have very little direct effect on revenue.

    So, what changed? what changed as dramatically as revenue.



    Government Spending did.

    Government does not tax itself like it taxes labor, production, and investment. So, when Government spending increases as a percentage of GDP, Revenue decreases as a percentage of GDP. conversely, when Spending decreases, Revenue increases, both relative to GDP. Government spending started rising in the early 80's, and Revenue started falling (again, as a percent of GDP). Spending went into a long decline in the 90s, and revenue had an inversely proportional rise. then spending increased, and revenue dropped. Then spending lowered slightly and revenue increased. then, starting first in 2008 under George Bush and accelerating under Barack Obama, government spending skyrocketed as a percent of GDP, higher than it has been in the post war era - and so revenue plummeted to lower than it had been in the post-war era.

    If you want greater revenue as a percent of GDP; then lower government spending as a percent of GDP. If you want more raw revenue, then you have to increase GDP without increasing the size of government relative to it. Thats why everyone from Bill Clinton to the President's Bi Partisan Simpson-Bowles Commission to Paul Ryan want to reduce rates and decrease complexity - because they have all seen this exact same math.
    Last edited by cpwill; 07-24-11 at 05:33 AM.

  9. #39
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:16 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,041

    Re: Was A Big Deal Ever Possible?

    huh. that's odd. when i posted earlier it just gave me an error message - i thought i had to rewrite my post.

  10. #40
    Educator DemonMyst's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Seattle WA.
    Last Seen
    02-11-13 @ 12:31 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    727

    Re: Was A Big Deal Ever Possible?

    Will.. The problem that you and other conservatives have is that your entire view point on this issue is flawed and baseless.. Our government took a $3.2 billion dollar pay cut thanks to Bush.. There is no arguement there..

    So consider this.. You typically make $2000 a month.. But you took a pay cut, so now you only make $1500 a month.. Of course the economy grew a little bit.. It usually does every year.. So now, thanks to this little growth, you now make $1600 a month.. Without your other pay cut you would have been making $2100 a month.. So you are still $500 dollars off..

    That is what you people don't understand.. Sure the economy grew.. But thanks to the tax cut, our government was still short.. We the tax payers essentially gave money to the rich and got nothing in return.. You would have been better off giving that money to Nasa or something..

    You can never argue against this point.. As long as the tax cuts are in effect, conservatives are shorting our government money.. Bush had a budget surplus when he took office.. Where is it now?? Bush even admitted he had it so don't go saying it didn't exist.. The surplus was the basis for the entire arguement for Bush's tax cuts..

    The other issue is that you all sit and blame Obama for all this spending?? How much has been spent on emergencies?? Fire, floods, oil spills, ect. ect.. Do conservatives consider this?? You complain and moan and groan about things that help the poor.. When you simply miss reality all together..

    You are more concerned about the people that attempt to evade paying their taxes and not the billions spent on an oil spill that BP is doing all it can to not pay for.. Again with the help of conservatives.. I am not sure what to say here?? But that is far from the smart thing to do..

    You tell me dude?? Who's reality do you want to talk about?? Your's which doesn't exist both on paper and in the real world.. Or the one that just slaps you around because the math is so simple..

    We have a lot of problems in this nations.. We don't need a bunch of dipsquat morons in congress threatening to flush this nation in the crapper because of the useless tax cuts to the rich that should have gone bye bye to begin with.. Oh!!! Wait?? We had to hold up the vote on unemployment benifits to get them extended.. Wow.. So first republicans hold up the unemployed and now the entire nation for some tax cuts that do nobody but the rich any good.. Instead of giving the rich another $3.2 trillion.. Why not just give the bottom 1% a cool 10 million dollars or something.. At least you will get some economic stimulus and some job creation.. I mean crap.. May as well.. I am sure the poor are better at creating jobs than the rich.. The question is, are you smart enough to understand all this?? You will at least not have to worry about them out sourcing any labor to another country..
    Last edited by DemonMyst; 07-24-11 at 06:57 AM.

Page 4 of 24 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... 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
  •