• 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!

Jobless Rate in US Falls to 5.9% in September, Payrolls Jump

Gonzo Rodeo said:
And we tried tax cuts for the rich (capital gains and estate tax) under Clinton. What happened? The biggest economic expansion in US history.

Perhaps you need to reexamine your premises.
Click to expand...

I guess you forgot the fact that Clinton raised taxes on the rich when he took office. Don't let the facts hit you in the butt.

But even if true, I guess this shows that tax cuts don't result in predictable economic outcomes (since Bush's tax cuts ended in recession). In short, you're arguing against yourself.

My longhand response would be something more like: economic growth is the result of numerous factors, many of which are not in the control of presidents. That said, progressive taxes, investment in public works, education and health care, is the surest way to avoid large income gaps that do in fact lead to recession. So while progressive economic policies might not prevent a recession, conservative policies almost insure we will have one.
 
FaceofBachmann said:
I guess you forgot the fact that Clinton raised taxes on the rich when he took office. Don't let the facts hit you in the butt.

But even if true, I guess this shows that tax cuts don't result in predictable economic outcomes (since Bush's tax cuts ended in recession). In short, you're arguing against yourself.
Click to expand...

Neither do tax raises.

How am I arguing against myself? I just explained, in a very simple, concise way, how your argument doesn't prove any kind of causation (which is what you are claiming). That requires some other kind of evidence. I mean, otherwise, we have pretty good statistics to indicate that pirates cause global cooling.
 
apdst said:
Who is holding up the Keystone pipeline? Who is shutting down cosl mines? Who shut down drilling? It's wasn't the Republicans.
Click to expand...

Natural gas boom is shutting down the coal mines. Blame the free market.
 
poweRob said:
Natural gas boom is shutting down the coal mines. Blame the free market.
Click to expand...


Coal is one if biggest exports and we get nearly 50 percent of our electricity from Coal fired plants.

Its very much in demamd.
 
Fenton said:
Coal is one if biggest exports and we get nearly 50 percent of our electricity from Coal fired plants.

Its very much in demamd.
Click to expand...

Doesn't even address what I said. The guy was making the audacious claim that it was dems shutting down coal plants. Even though coal is still large it has been in decline. And its because natural gas is now cheaper so ng powerplants are cutting into the coal industry.
 
Gonzo Rodeo said:
Neither do tax raises.

How am I arguing against myself? I just explained, in a very simple, concise way, how your argument doesn't prove any kind of causation (which is what you are claiming). That requires some other kind of evidence. I mean, otherwise, we have pretty good statistics to indicate that pirates cause global cooling.
Click to expand...

Increasing taxes on the top bracket and using those revenues to money into the economy in fact does decrease the income gap in various well understood ways. It's not the entire story, but a good step. And since the income gap is the source of recessions, keeping taxes on the top bracket high is always a good thing.
 
apdst said:
Who is holding up the Keystone pipeline? Who is shutting down cosl mines? Who shut down drilling? It's wasn't the Republicans.
Click to expand...

Which president has overseen the largest expansion of fracking leading to such incredible increases in oil and gas production that we are outstripping the Saudis, at least for the present?

Doesn't fit your talking points, does it?
 
FaceofBachmann said:
Which president has overseen the largest expansion of fracking leading to such incredible increases in oil and gas production that we are outstripping the Saudis, at least for the present?

Doesn't fit your talking points, does it?
Click to expand...


Bush

.........
 
FaceofBachmann said:
Increasing taxes on the top bracket and using those revenues to money into the economy in fact does decrease the income gap in various well understood ways. It's not the entire story, but a good step. And since the income gap is the source of recessions, keeping taxes on the top bracket high is always a good thing.
Click to expand...

Raising taxes on the wealthy and Bussinesses has done wonders in California. ....wait, no it hasn't.

Its driven out their tax base and Bussinesses and made their Budget issues much much worse.

Did it reduce the " income gap " ?

No, their High tax anti-Bussinesses policies have driven over 2 Million to States that have low taxes and sensible regulations
 
FaceofBachmann said:
Increasing taxes on the top bracket and using those revenues to money into the economy in fact does decrease the income gap in various well understood ways. It's not the entire story, but a good step. And since the income gap is the source of recessions, keeping taxes on the top bracket high is always a good thing.
Click to expand...

Ok, a hard claim.

Please tell us, how does the wealth gap cause recessions? And how much of a tax increase (in dollars collected) is needed to close the gap? And how does it get across the gap?
 
Gonzo Rodeo said:
Ok, a hard claim.

Please tell us, how does the wealth gap cause recessions? And how much of a tax increase (in dollars collected) is needed to close the gap? And how does it get across the gap?
Click to expand...

The process is well known and you can google it. The literature is well attested.

Simply put, too much cash in the hands of too few people results in bubbles and a decrease in aggregate demand. When the bubble bursts, the recession commences

That's why every major recession in the last century was preceded by a significant increase in the income gap. The data is indisputable. It is the single best indicator of a coming recession. And by the way, the income gap is increasing as we speak.
 
Fenton said:
Raising taxes on the wealthy and Bussinesses has done wonders in California. ....wait, no it hasn't.

Its driven out their tax base and Bussinesses and made their Budget issues much much worse.

Did it reduce the " income gap " ?

No, their High tax anti-Bussinesses policies have driven over 2 Million to States that have low taxes and sensible regulations
Click to expand...

Uh, you realize that California has the largest economy of any US state - by far?

Sounds like it worked pretty well to me.
 
FaceofBachmann said:
The process is well known and you can google it. The literature is well attested.

Simply put, too much cash in the hands of too few people results in bubbles and a decrease in aggregate demand. When the bubble bursts, the recession commences

That's why every major recession in the last century was preceded by a significant increase in the income gap. The data is indisputable. It is the single best indicator of a coming recession. And by the way, the income gap is increasing as we speak.
Click to expand...

Pretend I don't know anything about economics. Help me get started. How about some links to informative sites that make these claims?
 
Gonzo Rodeo said:
Pretend I don't know anything about economics. Help me get started. How about some links to informative sites that make these claims?
Click to expand...

Here's a start:

income-inequality-2.png


Now notice the peaks of the top 10% in 1928, 2001 and 2007? What events correlated to those peaks?

Also notice that the income of the top 10% is nearly a perfect inverse of the bottom 90%, sort of like a mirror. some people will claim that there is nothing zero sum in economics, but the percentage distribution of anything is indeed zero sum, even if the pool that is being distributed from grows or shrinks.

The reality is that when wealthier folks acquire a larger percentage of our wealth and income, then less wealthy folks will have a smaller percentage. Wealthy people tend to buy about the same amount of stuff all of the time. Someone like Bill Gates doesn't have to wait to get a raise before he can buy a new car. And wealthy people tend to save a very large percent of their income, sometimes close to 100%. Any time that income is shifted from the non-wealthy to the wealthy, demand realized at the cash register will not be as strong as it otherwise would be, and businesses either contract, fail to expand, or at least don't expand as fast as they could. When businesses aren't expanding, new jobs aren't being created.
 
imagep said:
Here's a start:

income-inequality-2.png


Now notice the peaks of the top 10% in 1928, 2001 and 2007? What events correlated to those peaks?

Also notice that the income of the top 10% is nearly a perfect inverse of the bottom 90%, sort of like a mirror. some people will claim that there is nothing zero sum in economics, but the percentage distribution of anything is indeed zero sum, even if the pool that is being distributed from grows or shrinks.

The reality is that when wealthier folks acquire a larger percentage of our wealth and income, then less wealthy folks will have a smaller percentage. Wealthy people tend to buy about the same amount of stuff all of the time. Someone like Bill Gates doesn't have to wait to get a raise before he can buy a new car. And wealthy people tend to save a very large percent of their income, sometimes close to 100%. Any time that income is shifted from the non-wealthy to the wealthy, demand realized at the cash register will not be as strong as it otherwise would be, and businesses either contract, fail to expand, or at least don't expand as fast as they could. When businesses aren't expanding, new jobs aren't being created.
Click to expand...

Best post on this thread!
 
FaceofBachmann said:
Yeah, Schwarzenegger screwed everything up, another totally inept GOP politician/ But now that the GOP will never be elected to state office again, California is growing high income jobs again at the fast rate in the country
Click to expand...

LOL !!

Your'e just wrong. Every stinking post of yours is BS.

Jerry Brown Stands Atop California's Collapsing House Of Cards - Forbes

Sure they're " growing high income jobs "....
Why Are Companies Leaving California?


Texas boasts fastest growing Fortune 500 companies in America - CultureMap Dallas

" According to Fortune magazine, Texas is home to the fastest growing Fortune 500 companies in America. The 2014 annual revenue rankings also noted that Texas is the only state that lays claim to three of the top 10 Fortune 500 companies.

"Our commitment to keeping taxes low, regulations reasonable, courts fair and schools accountable has helped produce an economic climate where businesses of any size can grow and thrive," Texas Gov. Rick Perry said in a statement. "This is more evidence that the Texas way of doing business helps create jobs and opportunity for families."

Toxic State Syndrome: As California Declines, Texas Rises - The Daily Beast
 
Fenton said:
LOL !!

Your'e just wrong. Every stinking post of yours is BS.

Jerry Brown Stands Atop California's Collapsing House Of Cards - Forbes

Sure they're " growing high income jobs "....
Why Are Companies Leaving California?


Texas boasts fastest growing Fortune 500 companies in America - CultureMap Dallas

" According to Fortune magazine, Texas is home to the fastest growing Fortune 500 companies in America. The 2014 annual revenue rankings also noted that Texas is the only state that lays claim to three of the top 10 Fortune 500 companies.

"Our commitment to keeping taxes low, regulations reasonable, courts fair and schools accountable has helped produce an economic climate where businesses of any size can grow and thrive," Texas Gov. Rick Perry said in a statement. "This is more evidence that the Texas way of doing business helps create jobs and opportunity for families."

Toxic State Syndrome: As California Declines, Texas Rises - The Daily Beast
Click to expand...

I love the California is Collapsing talking point. The rightwingers keep insisting on it, just like they do hyperinflation and gold prices rising. And of course predictably they are delusional. California is now rolling in dough. It took a while to get over Schwartenegger's ineptitude, but now that there are no Republicans holding any statewide office, the economy is thriving.

What's wonderfully funny is that you cited a bunch of old articles doing just that -- predicting collapse a year, two years, three years ago. And here is California, with a balanced budget and the biggest economy of any state.

It must hurt to be so wrong so often about so many things.
 
apdst said:
If that's true, then you should know that someone has to make the pipe, coat the pipe, haul the pipe, clear the right-of-way, rent the equipment to clear the right-of-way, operate the equipment, haul the equipment, fix the equipment, dig the ditch, build the mats, lay the pipe, cut the pipe, bend the pipe, weld the pipe, x-ray the weld, pressure test the line. Coat the joints, backfill, dress, mop-up and I probably missed a half dozen other stages in the process. We're talking about more than two thousand jobs.
Click to expand...

Yes, 2000 short term jobs. I said that from the get-go. I produced a cite which supported the number jobs created (2,000 short-term for two years and 25-50 long-term). Yes, there will be a bit of a multiplier on that (secondary jobs), as there is from any economic activity. I produced my cite; feel free to counter with your own third party source.

No matter how you slice, its just not a big job producer. Yes, it will create some short-term and a few long-term jobs... but to talk about it as some type of economic panacea, as many Republicans continue to do, is absolute silliness.
 
FaceofBachmann said:
I love the California is Collapsing talking point. The rightwingers keep insisting on it, just like they do hyperinflation and gold prices rising. And of course predictably they are delusional. California is now rolling in dough. It took a while to get over Schwartenegger's ineptitude, but now that there are no Republicans holding any statewide office, the economy is thriving.

What's wonderfully funny is that you cited a bunch of old articles doing just that -- predicting collapse a year, two years, three years ago. And here is California, with a balanced budget and the biggest economy of any state.

It must hurt to be so wrong so often about so many things.
Click to expand...

LOL !!!

Wall of Debt - Unsustainable California

Fixing California: Report ignores state

California's Debt to Its Teachers Is Growing by $22 Million a Day | National Review Online


Yup, California is " rolling " in the dough.....as long as you don't count the hundreds of Billions of dollars of debt.
 
upsideguy said:
Yes, 2000 short term jobs. I said that from the get-go. I produced a cite which supported the number jobs created (2,000 short-term for two years and 25-50 long-term). Yes, there will be a bit of a multiplier on that (secondary jobs), as there is from any economic activity. I produced my cite; feel free to counter with your own third party source.

No matter how you slice, its just not a big job producer. Yes, it will create some short-term and a few long-term jobs... but to talk about it as some type of economic panacea, as many Republicans continue to do, is absolute silliness.
Click to expand...

There are 15,000 truckloads of pipe involved in this project, and that's a conservative estimate. There's no way there will only be 2,000 jobs.

I guess we should shut down construction projevts, because those are temporary jobs, too. Yes?
 
apdst said:
There are 15,000 truckloads of pipe involved in this project, and that's a conservative estimate. There's no way there will only be 2,000 jobs.

I guess we should shut down construction projevts, because those are temporary jobs, too. Yes?
Click to expand...

I'm all for the pipeline, but as far as jobs go, how many long term jobs will be lost because we are no longer transporting that oil by rail or truck?
 
imagep said:
I'm all for the pipeline, but as far as jobs go, how many long term jobs will be lost because we are no longer transporting that oil by rail or truck?
Click to expand...

Probably zero.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom