• 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!

Elizabeth Warren admits economy need be "rebuilt"

BrewerBob said:
Intellectually Trump's victory speech sounded like it was given by a third grader but the message behind it was a good one and shows Trump trying to at least appear to mend fences. He said to his opponents, "I am reaching out to you for your guidance and your help."

That is the most humble thing I have ever heard Trump say. The least his opposition can do is to come to the table and see what can be worked out. Many of us never really thought Trump was a real Republican anyway and that some of the more conservative policies he espoused was just theater. There is a chance Trump will be more likely to listen to the Democrats more than your average Republican president. After all, he was one of them not too long ago.
Click to expand...

I know he's not a Conservative, and most on the right know this too.

He was elected because he addressed major issues others cowered about.

There is one thing that you just haven't heard in ages, which Richard Allen (Nixon Admin) found amazing when he heard it from Reagan... though in a different context.

In a discussion about the Cold War with Richard Allen (after he lost to Ford)... Reagan said...

R:You know, people think I'm simple, but there is a difference between that and having simple answers to complex problems.
RA: Yes sir.
R:You want to know my take on the Cold War?
RA: Yes sir.
R: We win and they lose.
RA: Do you mean that sir?
R: I said it didn't I?
Pause...
RA: Sir... if you ever think about running for president again, I would like to be on your team.

He later went on to explain it was the first time he heard an American president speak of winning the Cold War.

Trump... spoke about America winning again.
 
cpwill said:
Broadly speaking, increasing the incentive to do something increases the degree to which it is done.


For example: let us say (this is a hyperbolic example): "If you agree to let me shoot you in the leg, I will give you $5 million". Hm. Well, at that price, you might do it. Some solid pain up front, perhaps lingering soreness, but instantly wealthy. That's not a bad bargain.

Now I say "If you agree to let me shoot you in the leg, I will give you $5 million, and then take $499,000 of it back". So your net benefit is a grand. You're unlikely to take this deal.

We have changed the incentive structure for you to undertake an activity, and the result is that you engage in less of it. You find other things to do.


Spiking tax rates reduces the incentive to invest, and so less of it happens. It reduces the incentive to produce, and so less of that happens. Your own country (Canada) knows this, which is why they have lower corporate and capital gains tax rates than we do (capital gains is particularly elastic - meaning responsive - to tax rate changes, and corporations invest large sums of money in reducing their tax exposure - instead of investing back in the business - when doing so produces positive returns).
Click to expand...

With all due respect, CPWill, that is the most retarded thing I have ever read. Your analogy fails miserably.
 
Middleground said:
With all due respect, CPWill, that is the most retarded thing I have ever read. Your analogy fails miserably.
Click to expand...

1. As I point out, it's a deliberately hyperbolic example to drive home the mechanism - changes in incentive structures change our behavior.

2. You have completely failed to even try to explain how people don't respond to incentives. Instead, you just said what I wrote was retarded, and that it failed. Congrats on learning to channel the spirit of the new President-Elect in your rhetoric.


Changes to tax and regulatory structures that impact the potential rewards for engaging in particular behaviors change the incentive structures and the resulting participation in that activity. This, for example, is why we had cash-for-clunkers: Democrats were hoping that by changing the incentive structure around buying a new car, they could get people to buy more new cars. It's why we offer tax breaks for things like putting Solar Panels on your roof - because when you change the tax incentives of an activity, you can alter levels of participation in it. It's true in buying cars, it's true in putting up solar panels, it's true of investment in stocks, and it's true in expanding your business. I do not understand liberal willingness to accept this basic point when it comes to behavior they approve of, but refusal to do so when it means that their preferred tax policies can have negative unintended consequences. It seems a deliberate decision to ignore reality in order to build an artificially doubt-free information bubble.
 
Last edited:
Fenton said:
Talk about Hot air, Pocahontas Warren would be proud.

Supply Side strategies involve incentivizing new private sector investment and that leads to new jobs. Texas has been doing it for years and now, after 8 years of disastrous economic policies millions of Non-Texans call my State home because of it

For example, Texas offered Toyota a 40 million dollar tax break to move its headquarters from Torrance California to Plano, Tx

Toyota agreed and spent 300 million dollars building its new facilities and hired thousands of Texans. Its called a " investment " and Toyota wasn't the only Company that took advantage of Texas's Supply Side initiatives.

California lost 9,000 business HQs and expansions, mostly to Texas, seven-year study says - Dallas Business Journal

Oh, and Texas is and has been running a mulit-billion dollar budget surplus. So much for Tax cuts dont pay for themselves

Get the Govt and its arbitrary and divisive left wing pandering out of the free market economy and let it do what it does best, create jobs

Just curious, how would Pocahontas Warren or Hillary have closed that gap ? Through a higher minimum wage ?? Higher taxes on the rich, corporations and investors ? Horrible ideas.


If you notice the link I provided, the " Rich " are not and will not EVER stick around and pay confiscatory tax rates just to molify the pandering of some morally bankrupt Liberal like Elizabeth Warren.

They and their money are mobile.
Click to expand...

If you want a perfect example of how trickle down economics are working, try Kansas. How's that working out for Brownback?
 
cpwill said:
1. As I point out, it's a deliberately hyperbolic example to drive home the mechanism - changes in incentive structures change our behavior.

2. You have completely failed to even try to explain how people don't respond to incentives. Instead, you just said what I wrote was retarded, and that it failed. Congrats on learning to channel the spirit of the new President-Elect in your rhetoric.


Changes to tax and regulatory structures that impact the potential rewards for engaging in particular behaviors change the incentive structures and the resulting participation in that activity. This, for example, is why we had cash-for-clunkers: Democrats were hoping that by changing the incentive structure around buying a new car, they could get people to buy more new cars. It's why we offer tax breaks for things like putting Solar Panels on your roof - because when you change the tax incentives of an activity, you can alter levels of participation in it. It's true in buying cars, it's true in putting up solar panels, it's true of investment in stocks, and it's true in expanding your business. I do not understand liberal willingness to accept this basic point when it comes to behavior they approve of, but refusal to do so when it means that their preferred tax policies can have negative unintended consequences. It seems a deliberate decision to ignore reality in order to build an artificially doubt-free information bubble.
Click to expand...

There is NO incentive when the person who gets the incentive takes the incentive into an offshore account because he has more incentive then he knows what to do with it*. It's a known fact that the only thing that trickles down is bullshit.


*Cue the asinine retort "oh but but but you're just so jealous of the rich!1!1!!!!"
 
Middleground said:
If you want a perfect example of how trickle down economics are working, try Kansas. How's that working out for Brownback?
Click to expand...

According to the Kansas Department of Labor, unemployment is 4.4 %

Home Page
 
Middleground said:
There is NO incentive when the person who gets the incentive takes the incentive into an offshore account because he has more incentive then he knows what to do with it*. It's a known fact that the only thing that trickles down is bullshit.
Click to expand...

Mostly because it is a strawman - "Trickle Down Economics" isn't a theory proposed by the right, but a slur by the left.

That being said, higher taxes are why people and businesses go to the expense and effort of storing money offshore. You are correct that there is reduced incentive to investing here in the US - but it is high tax and regulatory cost structures that causes that reduced incentive.

*Cue the asinine retort "oh but but but you're just so jealous of the rich!1!1!!!!"
Click to expand...

:shrug: There's a lot of that ugliness on the left (and not a little on the right, to be fair). But that's no more necessarily the motivation behind the argument for higher taxes than the flip claim that those who argue for lower taxes are trying to advantage the rich against everyone else.
 
Middleground said:
There is NO incentive when the person who gets the incentive takes the incentive into an offshore account because he has more incentive then he knows what to do with it*. It's a known fact that the only thing that trickles down is bullshit.


*Cue the asinine retort "oh but but but you're just so jealous of the rich!1!1!!!!"
Click to expand...

That says it all doesn't it ? Liberals are motivated by envy, to the point where they think it's part of a healthy and effective economic agenda.

They're so angry at the fact that others have more than them that they're incapable of seeing the obvious, that confiscatory tax rates create more disparity as investors simply relocate their capital

Worse, they believe that its Govts role to define and then apply some metric of " fairness ". That the Govt should be the final arbiter of whats fair and whats not.

Conservatives see the value in incentive as a effective tool to increase investment capital in down economy. Effective economic growth just by adhering to prinicples consistent with human nature.
 
Fenton said:
That says it all doesn't it ? Liberals are motivated by envy, to the point where they think it's part of a healthy and effective economic agenda.

They're so angry at the fact that others have more than them that they're incapable of seeing the obvious, that confiscatory tax rates create more disparity as investors simply relocate their capital

Worse, they believe that its Govts role to define and then apply some metric of " fairness ". That the Govt should be the final arbiter of whats fair and whats not.

Conservatives see the value in incentive as a effective tool to increase investment capital in down economy. Effective economic growth just by adhering to prinicples consistent with human nature.
Click to expand...

You don't get it and you never will.
 
cpwill said:
Mostly because it is a strawman - "Trickle Down Economics" isn't a theory proposed by the right, but a slur by the left.
Click to expand...

Of course it is a theory. So what if the left coined it "trickle down."

That being said, higher taxes are why people and businesses go to the expense and effort of storing money offshore. You are correct that there is reduced incentive to investing here in the US - but it is high tax and regulatory cost structures that causes that reduced incentive.
Click to expand...

They do it to avoid paying taxes, period. It's a game to many. It does not matter that living wages and good infrastructure make American go round, including helping their businesses thrive. Why give back when it can be avoided.
 
Re: Elizabeth Warren admits economy need be "rebuilt"

Middleground said:
Of course it is a theory. So what if the left coined it "trickle down."
Click to expand...

No, it isn't. It's a strawman. You can tell because it depends on leftist assumptions, but flips their preferred policy reactions.



They do it to avoid paying taxes, period.
Click to expand...

Many do. So why encourage them to do so, and then be upset that they do? That's like beating your dog for no reason, and then being upset when it shies away from you.

When you create an incentive structure that encourages people to go to significant trouble and expense to minimize tax exposure, then that is what they will do. The more you increase that incentive, the more they will do so. Reduce the reward for something, and you'll get less of it.

It does not matter that living wages and good infrastructure make American go round, including helping their businesses thrive. Why give back when it can be avoided.
Click to expand...

Ah yes. They are evil. Go with that :roll:


Just guessing - you make more than $33k/year?

Sent from my XT1526 using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
Middleground said:
You don't get it and you never will.
Click to expand...

No I get it. Im a Conservative, a PROUD Conservative so Im well versed on the Lefts toxic agenda and their idiotic initiatives.

The ideology you seem to adhere to when apllied causes great damage. It doesn't fix disparity, it causes it, it doesn't create equality, it promotes divisiveness, it doesn't bolster and or grow our economy, it throws a big wet blanket on it.

Your ideology has done enough damage over the last 8 years, now its time to let the grown ups take over
 
Fenton said:
According to the Kansas Department of Labor, unemployment is 4.4 %

Home Page
Click to expand...


Oh wow... jeepers!!!... you certainly told me!1!!!!!

:roll:

Get real Fenton. Kansas is in a deep crisis right now. A crisis created by an idiotic governor who has completely ****ed everything up with his tax cuts to the wealthy.

In 2012, Kansas governor Sam Brownback signed a massive tax cut into law, arguing that it would boost the state's economy. Eventually, he hoped to eliminate individual income taxes entirely. "Our place, Kansas, will show the path, the difficult path, for America to go in these troubled times," he said.

National conservative activists raved. Patrick Gleason of Americans for Tax Reform said Kansas was "the story of the next decade." The Cato Institute praised Brownback's "impressive" tax cuts and gave him an "A" on fiscal policy. And the Weekly Standard's Bill Kristol said that, if reelected, Brownback would be "a formidable presidential possibility."

Yet though Brownback is running for reelection this fall in a deep red state, he's trailed his Democratic challenger in 3 of the 4 most recent polls — and his marquee tax cut appears to be the main reason. Kansas is now hundreds of millions of dollars short in revenue collection, its job growth has lagged the rest of the nation, and Moody's has cut the state's bond rating. "Governor Brownback came in here with an agenda to reduce the size of government, reduce taxes, and create a great economic boom," says University of Kansas professor Burdett Loomis. "Now there's been a dramatic decline in revenues, no great increase in economic activity, and we've got red ink until the cows come home."
Click to expand...

Kansas was supposed to be the GOP?s tax-cut paradise. Now it can barely pay its bills. - Vox
 
Fenton said:
Your ideology has done enough damage over the last 8 years, now its time to let the grown ups take over
Click to expand...

What fairy tale land do you live in??? Dubya drove the economy into the ground and that is the massive mound of **** that Obama inherited. How is it you can re-create facts like that and still sleep at night?
 
Middleground said:
Oh wow... jeepers!!!... you certainly told me!1!!!!!

:roll:

Get real Fenton. Kansas is in a deep crisis right now. A crisis created by an idiotic governor who has completely ****ed everything up with his tax cuts to the wealthy.



Kansas was supposed to be the GOP?s tax-cut paradise. Now it can barely pay its bills. - Vox
Click to expand...
Oh. So Kansas has 4.4% unemployment, but it's a disaster because it has a deficit.

That's an interesting take. I can't imagine how much of a disaster you think President Obama has been. Given that the key metric, apparently, is the deficit....

Sent from my XT1526 using Tapatalk
 
Middleground said:
Of course it is a theory. So what if the left coined it "trickle down."



They do it to avoid paying taxes, period. It's a game to many. It does not matter that living wages and good infrastructure make American go round, including helping their businesses thrive. Why give back when it can be avoided.
Click to expand...

It has also been called Voodoo economics (not coined by the left but Bush 1)
 
cpwill said:
Oh. So Kansas has 4.4% unemployment, but it's a disaster because it has a deficit.

That's an interesting take. I can't imagine how much of a disaster you think President Obama has been. Given that the key metric, apparently, is the deficit....

Sent from my XT1526 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Did you read the article or are you making your argument without seeing the whole picture? Because if you did, you'd see that the deficit did not happen because of overspending. In fact, many many cuts have happened. Education amongst one of them.
 
Re: Elizabeth Warren admits economy need be "rebuilt"

Middleground said:
Did you read the article or are you making your argument without seeing the whole picture? Because if you did, you'd see that the deficit did not happen because of overspending. In fact, many many cuts have happened. Education amongst one of them.
Click to expand...
And government deficits are... bad?

Sent from my XT1526 using Tapatalk
 
Middleground said:
What fairy tale land do you live in??? Dubya drove the economy into the ground and that is the massive mound of **** that Obama inherited. How is it you can re-create facts like that and still sleep at night?
Click to expand...

See, I dont have to rely on stale Democrat talking points to defend my ideology. I simply put forth the time and effort to inform myself. For example, I know the Subprime crisis wasn't the fault of one man, of one party and didn't start and stop in the last 2 years of Bush's Presidency.

I know its roots stretch all the way back to the Clinton administration and that the GSEs basically drug the American economy and the world economy down with them when they were declared insolvent.

I also know better than to buy into Obama's jobs numbers, or the silly narrative that he pulled us back from the brink.

Just FYI, the FED doesn't implement unprecedented monetary stimulus and zero interest rate policies when the economy is in good shape, or even when there's a strong recovery in progess. For the last 8 years they've felt the need to drive target rates down to zero and keeep them there.

I know Obama's jobs numbers are and have been essentially propaganda, put out by a dishonest administration to appease the uniformed. Trump didn't flip the rust belt states because the economy is or has ever been on the mend under Obama.

His policies had the expected result on a economy that really neeeded a competent leader that understood how Free market economies function.

It was one big wet blanket of tax increases, added regulations and mandates through ObamaCare that wound up hurting the MiddleClass the most.

Sure, Trump destroyed the Democratic party partly for who they chose to run against him, but this election was also a absolute rebuke of the last 8 years of Obama's destructive agenda and his legacy.

See the following. ...
countymaprb1024.jpg
 
cpwill said:
Mostly because it is a strawman - "Trickle Down Economics" isn't a theory proposed by the right, but a slur by the left.
Click to expand...

"David Stockman, who as Reagan's budget director championed Reagan's tax cuts at first, but then became critical of them, told journalist William Greider that the "supply-side economics" is the trickle-down idea: "It's kind of hard to sell 'trickle down,' so the supply-side formula was the only way to get a tax policy that was really 'trickle down.' Supply-side is 'trickle-down' theory."[5][6] Political opponents of the Reagan administration soon seized on this language in an effort to brand the administration as caring only about the wealthy.[7]

The economist John Kenneth Galbraith noted that "trickle-down economics" had been tried before in the United States in the 1890s under the name "horse and sparrow theory." He wrote, "Mr. David Stockman has said that supply-side economics was merely a cover for the trickle-down approach to economic policy—what an older and less elegant generation called the horse-and-sparrow theory: 'If you feed the horse enough oats, some will pass through to the road for the sparrows.' " Galbraith claimed that the horse and sparrow theory was partly to blame for the Panic of 1896."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trickle-down_economics

Supply side was a lame smoke screen to justify increasing income inequality, it was also never actually done. Stockman straddles the line, he has on foot in conservatism, and the other is in kook land. IOW, far Right, and he's where trickle down came from.

The rate at which income inequality increases broke the previous record, and it was nearly all the government robbing the people to give to the rich.

It was also part of a plan to divide the country, politically. It worked. Of course, the result was, and is, an appalling failure of governance, but sabotage is 'in'.
 
Fenton said:
See, I dont have to rely on stale Democrat talking points to defend my ideology. I simply put forth the time and effort to inform myself. For example, I know the Subprime crisis wasn't the fault of one man, of one party and didn't start and stop in the last 2 years of Bush's Presidency.

I know its roots stretch all the way back to the Clinton administration and that the GSEs basically drug the American economy and the world economy down with them when they were declared insolvent.

I also know better than to buy into Obama's jobs numbers, or the silly narrative that he pulled us back from the brink.

Just FYI, the FED doesn't implement unprecedented monetary stimulus and zero interest rate policies when the economy is in good shape, or even when there's a strong recovery in progess. For the last 8 years they've felt the need to drive target rates down to zero and keeep them there.

I know Obama's jobs numbers are and have been essentially propaganda, put out by a dishonest administration to appease the uniformed. Trump didn't flip the rust belt states because the economy is or has ever been on the mend under Obama.

His policies had the expected result on a economy that really neeeded a competent leader that understood how Free market economies function.

It was one big wet blanket of tax increases, added regulations and mandates through ObamaCare that wound up hurting the MiddleClass the most.

Sure, Trump destroyed the Democratic party partly for who they chose to run against him, but this election was also a absolute rebuke of the last 8 years of Obama's destructive agenda and his legacy.

See the following. ...
View attachment 67209793
Click to expand...

Were the "uniformed" really just pandered too? What actual, capital plans does the capitalist of the right actually have. All that has been discussed in the public domain, is social plans, not capital plans.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom