• 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!

Census shows 1 in 2 people are poor or low-income

1Perry said:
Your arguement.

Florida has the fifth lowest corporate income tax rate in the country at 5.5 percent, trailing only South Dakota, Alaska, Wyoming and Nevada — states hardly in Florida's league. Yet Florida's unemployment rate remains far higher than the 9.1 percent national average. Recently, both a Tax Foundation study and University of Central Florida economist Sean Snaith have argued that reducing taxes has no discernible impact on job growth.


It's not hard to find evidence to support such a view. Other states with much higher corporate tax rates — Connecticut, New York, Illinois, Massachusetts, New York and New Jersey — all enjoy significantly lower jobless numbers, as well as hosting the corporate headquarters of many more Fortune 500 companies per capita.


Do the numbers actually support this position?
Click to expand...

Incorrect.

1) Not my argument, but one example from one link. Nothing more.

2) What do you have that it doesn't?


Again, I don't see the state issue as causal either way, but my point, and it is in that article, is that there is no evidence tax cuts create jobs. I did not give you JUST that article and say it was my entire argument.
 
Last edited:
Harry Guerrilla said:
I don't think the numbers on classes are going to be accurate for a while.
With a large part of our population moving into retirement, there are going to be income fluctuations, based on the fact that they may be liquidating their assets, which can skew the numbers in a couple of directions.
Click to expand...

Interesting, but many, including republicans see a trend. Once during Bush's first term I found and lnked then a report my his people that the gap was widing and that it was a concern. But, I suspect we'll see.
 
Boo Radley said:
Interesting, but many, including republicans see a trend. Once during Bush's first term I found and lnked then a report my his people that the gap was widing and that it was a concern. But, I suspect we'll see.
Click to expand...

As I saw in a WSJ article, a large portion of the upper class, are only in the upper class taxable range for a limited time.
Which to me means, that there are many, many reasons behind the numbers and not necessarily wage gap growth.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
As I saw in a WSJ article, a large portion of the upper class, are only in the upper class taxable range for a limited time.
Which to me means, that there are many, many reasons behind the numbers and not necessarily wage gap growth.
Click to expand...

I don't think that means that. Regardless of movement in and out, there are looks at trends that take that into account.
 
When it comes to poor people having TVs and Xbox 360s, it seems that people forget about credit cards. Anyone can get a credit card these days and put things from sound systems to their rent on a credit card. And when it comes to having good credit, all I have to do is make the minimum payments on time. So yes, poor people can have things such as Wiis and flatscreen tvs.

I'd also like to say that I think it's legitimately disgusting that some people think that one need to be starving in the streets, homeless, and/or have nothing besides the basic necessities to be considered poor.
 
Mr. Invisible said:
When it comes to poor people having TVs and Xbox 360s, it seems that people forget about credit cards. Anyone can get a credit card these days and put things from sound systems to their rent on a credit card. And when it comes to having good credit, all I have to do is make the minimum payments on time. So yes, poor people can have things such as Wiis and flatscreen tvs.

I'd also like to say that I think it's legitimately disgusting that some people think that one need to be starving in the streets, homeless, and/or have nothing besides the basic necessities to be considered poor.
Click to expand...

If you exceed your credit utilization, in the range of of 50%+ for a significant amount of time, that can screw up your credit.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
If you exceed your credit utilization, in the range of of 50%+ for a significant amount of time, that can screw up your credit.
Click to expand...


Yeah, kinda like those idiots in Washington DC presently borrowing 40 cents out of every dollar they spend.


(Wait a minute!!! That's almost 50%...!!!! :2party:)
 
1Perry said:
Whose ever it is the numbers dont back up the theory.
Click to expand...

Well, you have not shown that, but the person he quotes for a study wasn't using that. The person writing the article was, so it is really irrelevent to the theory that was really being presented by the economists in all the articles. Perhaps that is people focus on something other than the actual theories or issue being presented? :coffeepap
 
Boo Radley said:
Well, you have not shown that, but the person he quotes for a study wasn't using that. The person writing the article was, so it is really irrelevent to the theory that was really being presented by the economists in all the articles. Perhaps that is people focus on something other than the actual theories or issue being presented? :coffeepap
Click to expand...

I did. You refuse to see it.
 
Thunder said:
no, the GOP is the party that gains votes by pandering to the whiny wealthy, those who inherited their great wealth without having to actually work for it, those who happily send tens of thousands of American jobs overseas (treason), and the greedy by pissing & moaning about the poor.
Click to expand...

envy is a really sucky thing to suffer from.

Unions and government are the main reason why jobs move overseas
 
TurtleDude said:
envy is a really sucky thing to suffer from.

Unions and government are the main reason why jobs move overseas
Click to expand...

What is even worse to suffer from is the use of the phony charge of ENVY at every weak opportunity.

Greed is the main reason why jobs are outsourced. The government is partly to blame - for not growing a pair and using the power the Founders placed in the Constitution.
 
haymarket said:
What is even worse to suffer from is the use of the phony charge of ENVY at every weak opportunity.

Greed is the main reason why jobs are outsourced. The government is partly to blame - for not growing a pair and using the power the Founders placed in the Constitution.
Click to expand...

well we have seen that pity is used as a facade by some to serve as a pretext for envy and hate of the rich.
 
1Perry said:
I did. You refuse to see it.
Click to expand...

You're still ignoring half of what I write. Why?

And no, you said something was true and refered to a chart, and showed me no chart.

I repeat:

Well, you have not shown that, but the person he quotes for a study wasn't using that. The person writing the article was, so it is really irrelevent to the theory that was really being presented by the economists in all the articles. Perhaps that is people focus on something other than the actual theories or issue being presented?


Maybe the highlighting will help. :shrug:
 
TurtleDude said:
envy is a really sucky thing to suffer from.

Unions and government are the main reason why jobs move overseas
Click to expand...

How many people here at DP do you think are able to afford the requirements to communicate via the internet are actually envious of you or any one else, I think secretly you want to be like those who have to struggle to survive and that you envy those who have to depend on social programs to survive

Get realistic American manufacturing has moved overseas because they can increase thier profit margins and our government has not enforced trade agreements, it's hard enough for American workers to compete with wages that do not even qualify to be termed as slave labor but then add to that when the tariffs on chinese goods brough into America is in the 2 to 3 % range and the tariffs on American made goods sent to China is in the 30 to 40% percent range. Want more? when bills " S.3816 - Creating American Jobs and Ending Offshoring Act" have been introduced that would help American workers keep jobs here in America the republicans vote them down.

You may feel safe but I see no reason why your job can not be out sourced to India or China, it's just a matter of time
 
EarlzP said:
How many people here at DP do you think are able to afford the requirements to communicate via the internet are actually envious of you or any one else, I think secretly you want to be like those who have to struggle to survive and that you envy those who have to depend on social programs to survive

Get realistic American manufacturing has moved overseas because they can increase thier profit margins and our government has not enforced trade agreements, it's hard enough for American workers to compete with wages that do not even qualify to be termed as slave labor but then add to that when the tariffs on chinese goods brough into America is in the 2 to 3 % range and the tariffs on American made goods sent to China is in the 30 to 40% percent range. Want more? when bills " S.3816 - Creating American Jobs and Ending Offshoring Act" have been introduced that would help American workers keep jobs here in America the republicans vote them down.

You may feel safe but I see no reason why your job can not be out sourced to India or China, it's just a matter of time
Click to expand...

Multiple choice question

what is the purpose of a corporation

1) to create a profit for the owners

2) to provide you a job

3) to fund the government with taxes
 
Boo Radley said:
You're still ignoring half of what I write. Why?
Click to expand...

I answered that. I read one of the articles. It was wrong. I have no desire to go further.

And no, you said something was true and refered to a chart, and showed me no chart.

I repeat:

Well, you have not shown that, but the person he quotes for a study wasn't using that. The person writing the article was, so it is really irrelevent to the theory that was really being presented by the economists in all the articles. Perhaps that is people focus on something other than the actual theories or issue being presented?


Maybe the highlighting will help. :shrug:
Click to expand...

You can yell all day but the states with lowest taxes have lower unemployed than those with the highest taxes with the exception of Florida. I ask if this is not true. You say it's irrelevant. :shrug:
 
1Perry said:
I answered that. I read one of the articles. It was wrong. I have no desire to go further.
Click to expand...

Not good enough as you picked on the writers opinion and not the actual argument.



You can yell all day but the states with lowest taxes have lower unemployed than those with the highest taxes with the exception of Florida. I ask if this is not true. You say it's irrelevant. :shrug:
Click to expand...

It is irrelevent. You have to prove low taxes are the reason. There are more than one factor involved. Which again is why I linked several articles. I had hoped you would have read the more expert opinion as I can't see not doing so.
 
Boo Radley said:
It is irrelevent. You have to prove low taxes are the reason. There are more than one factor involved. Which again is why I linked several articles. I had hoped you would have read the more expert opinion as I can't see not doing so.
Click to expand...

Absolutely WRONG. It's your theory. As you note, there are many reasons and it's foolish to try and claim it's any one thing. 4 out of 5 of the lowest tax rate states have far lower unemployment than the 5 highest.

But go ahead, tell my why that is irrelevant again. Also tell me again why Illinois had to bribe Sears to stay.
 
1Perry said:
Absolutely WRONG. It's your theory. As you note, there are many reasons and it's foolish to try and claim it's any one thing. 4 out of 5 of the lowest tax rate states have far lower unemployment than the 5 highest.

But go ahead, tell my why that is irrelevant again. Also tell me again why Illinois had to bribe Sears to stay.
Click to expand...

No it isn't. I claim tax cuts do not create jobs. That means you have to show that once a tax cut was received, a job was created. Unemployment comes with and without tax cuts, and tax cuts seem to have no effect on them. The link you responded to and only read the writer's opinion had an expert say tax cuts don't create jobs. The writer than went off on his own. I had hoped you'd have statred with the expert.

So, yes, what you are focusing on is irrelevent. It has nothing to do with my claim.

Say reason Michigan did, and eventually lost after them gave business all they asked for. Business knows you guys buy into, and that elected officials have to appease you or take the heat. But staying isn't creating new jobs. It is only holding on to what is currently there. And there are examples of appeasing business only to watch them leave, moving a set number of jobs from one place to another, but not creating new jobs.
 
TurtleDude said:
Multiple choice question

what is the purpose of a corporation

1) to create a profit for the owners

2) to provide you a job

3) to fund the government with taxes
Click to expand...

Let me predict the future for you. China and the USA are in an undeclared economic war, eventually China will know that they have drained enough out of the American economy and will take the route that other countries have taken they will nationalize all of the American based companies in China and call in the loans they have made to America. When that happens the golden goose that those who own the companies "the stock holders" will find thier selves holding worthless pieces of paper.

American workers built and worked the companies that have moved over seas, When the Chinese nationalize American manufacturing you may know what the price of greed looks and feels like.
 
Boo Radley said:
No it isn't. I claim tax cuts do not create jobs. That means you have to show that once a tax cut was received, a job was created.
Click to expand...

It isn't my theory. I don't have to prove anything.
 
TurtleDude said:
envy is a really sucky thing to suffer from.

Unions and government are the main reason why jobs move overseas
Click to expand...

Nice thought, except the tech industry has been particularly hard hit with overseas outsourcing. That industry is neither regulated nor unionized. Sorry, you can't blame outsourcing on unions and government..... you can blame it on greed.
 
upsideguy said:
OK you answered what, but not how. Nor is it the root cause of the trend that began 30 years ago... so this is nothing but a side bar at best.
Click to expand...

Yes, if we want to take the time I imagine we could agree on many things that have happened over the last 30 years that have got us where we are today. I would agree with that.

QE1 and 2 were very good for Wall Street. It gave investment banks money for nothing to inflate the markets. Things like oil, wheat, etc. These things then costs everyone more for the daily things they need which really affected the lower classes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom