• 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!

Where is the Tea Party??

Let's stick with the Laffer Curve.

If you'd like to cite some "scientific modeling" of the Laffer curve, I'm open to reading it.

Here's an article published by the FRB Atlanta. https://www.frbatlanta.org/-/media/...tions/economic-review/2000/vol85no3_becsi.pdf...

Did you even read the link? It supports the Laffer Curve. All it's saying is that it's not fixed, that it can be moved by "external shocks". This is no different than how the Fed raises or lowers interest rates depending upon the current economy. For the Laffer Curve, that means raising or lower tax rates in response to economic factors.

The entire idea of the Laffer curve is to maximize tax revenue with minimum tax rates.

It's odd to me that you post link supporting the Laffer Curve when you ridiculed it before.
 
Did you even read the link? It supports the Laffer Curve. All it's saying is that it's not fixed, that it can be moved by "external shocks". This is no different than how the Fed raises or lowers interest rates depending upon the current economy. For the Laffer Curve, that means raising or lower tax rates in response to economic factors.

The entire idea of the Laffer curve is to maximize tax revenue with minimum tax rates.

It's odd to me that you post link supporting the Laffer Curve when you ridiculed it before.

I've ridiculed its usefulness in fiscal policy decision making. I have never said it's completely bogus, just that its use is in our political environment is invariably dishonest. Let me repeat this part since you ignored it. I argued this:

"You keep saying the Laffer Curve is a great model, but when it's useless for fiscal policy decision making, and it has been since at least LBJ, it isn't great. In practice, in real life, it's a sales tool for con men and liars, and a crutch for ignoramuses."

You hand waved that away as false, so I asked you this:

"So what part of that do you disagree with? How can you or I use the Laffer Curve to evaluate, say, the TCJA? At a minimum, we need to separate out the corporate tax cuts from individual tax cuts, because the behavior implications are different. Individuals don't move as easily as businesses, for example. I've seen estimates of the corporate peak of about 26%, but does that mean nominal maximum rates, or effective? Pre-TCJA we had nominal rates much higher than that, but effective rates at or below the peak. So should the corporate tax provisions have lowered or raised corporate tax revenues, based on your analysis of the Laffer Curve? If you can't tell us, and explain your position, that curve is in fact worthless for decision making, and I'm pretty sure you cannot explain."

If you'd like to address my ACTUAL comments, that would be great, but you've avoided them.
 
Well, I don't. I have paid for both of them my whole career and I am still paying for Medicare. I will not live long enough to get everything I paid in back. But I'd still rather be me than you. You're welcome.

You are obviously unclear on the concept of insurance.
 
That’s right, and every conservative politician from Howard Jarvis to Donald Trump knows that the true gold of trickle down economics is the ability to tell voters a fairy tale that they can have all the services and a tax cut too.

If you think conservative actually care about deficits or debt, take it up with Dick Cheney. He summed the real conservative attitude toward debt.

That’s right, and every conservative politician from Howard Jarvis to Donald Trump knows that the true gold of trickle down economics is the ability to tell voters a fairy tale that they can have all the services and a tax cut too.

Except, you forgot Calif adding all their little social programs and building more Gov right?

You guys never finish the story
 
Fact is I don't really know or care if I mentioned Trump specifically. Why does it matter? He can't spend money unless Congress appropriates it. I've said several times excess spending is a bipartisan afflection.
If he hadn't signed that bill the government would have shut down - you want that?

Yeah, that's a good thing


How else do you expect politicians to face reality and do reform by just enabling it?

Think about it
 
No, that was you who said such nonsense

Well then they should be protesting like crazy right this minute.

Unless they were a bunch of fakes about the deficit and debt. We certainly know Sean Hannity is. He has completely quit talking about the debt.
 
Well then they should be protesting like crazy right this minute.

Unless they were a bunch of fakes about the deficit and debt. We certainly know Sean Hannity is. He has completely quit talking about the debt.

Psst

The tea party 2010 politicians were always a minority
 
Psst

The tea party 2010 politicians were always a minority

Sure, and so was the base, but it's very passionate. Sarah Palin was too intellectual for most of the Tea Party supporters, but now they've found someone they can identify with: Trump.

And any conservative politician or talking head that does not bow will be exorcised from the cult.
 
Sure, and so was the base, but it's very passionate. Sarah Palin was too intellectual for most of the Tea Party supporters, but now they've found someone they can identify with: Trump.

And any conservative politician or talking head that does not bow will be exorcised from the cult.

but now they've found someone they can identify with: Trump.

Well, I was a tea party guy and I do not Identify with Trump


Trump signs $1.3 trillion spending bill, despite earlier threat to veto | Fox News
 
Well then they should be protesting like crazy right this minute.

Unless they were a bunch of fakes about the deficit and debt. We certainly know Sean Hannity is. He has completely quit talking about the debt.

No, were just sick of all the BS

Well, if protesting the way we did back in the tea party days didn't work, why the heck should we protest now?

Think about it
 
No, were just sick of all the BS

Well, if protesting the way we did back in the tea party days didn't work, why the heck should we protest now?

Think about it

that's all a cop out. The Tea Party was screaming during the Democratic President and have tucked tail during the Republican President.

weaklings and hypocrites.
 
Did you know what the TEA party was about? Taxed Enough Already? If you are worried about the deficit quit demanding free stuff, but if I know the Trump haters on this forum you'll be voting for Bernie to get more free stuff and you'll just worry about the deficit when the next Republican is in office.

Surprise !!!! American's pay for what they get.... its the past history of those like yourself who wanted much, by the abusive use of others, and the misuse of the tax paid by minorities and women, to go to benefit only the types like yourself... Now you are pissed, becasue the Government deals with "Equality" in how it serves the public citizen population. It's no more of the game of direct all tax resources to only the white segment of society.... So... you can let your anguish stay with you until you expire.. and it won't change things back to the old system you lust for.
 
that's all a cop out. The Tea Party was screaming during the Democratic President and have tucked tail during the Republican President.

weaklings and hypocrites.

The Tea Party was nothing more than a mass of white people, who hated the fact that "Tax Money" serves "all people" and not just white people... That's what they hated about the Obama Administration who said... "Let's Rebuild America where it works for EVERYONE, and let's built it from the bottom up, and to reinvest in a "fair" America and get away from the America of the past.

The time of tax moneys going to build up only white well to do and white middle class communities and society, while ignoring minority communities and ignoring communities of dire poor whites.... is over!!! They fought Obama on everything... including health care, because they detest anything that benefits minorities, women and dire poor whites. Because the "white male dominance agenda, wanted to retain power over women and disenfranchisement over minorities and poor whites, to promote their white male dominance of white male controlled white nationalist agenda, of plutocracy by and through autocratic agenda and dictatorial mentality.

It's ALL Exposed !!!! The Society of America will NEVER allow that type of malice to create and do the damages it has done over centuries and decades...

The New Era of American Democracy is here!!!! The Era that honors and respect the Declaration of Independence, Honors and Abides by the Values of The Preamble, and stand to uphold the Constitution for ALL PEOPLE....
 
Surprise !!!! American's pay for what they get.... its the past history of those like yourself who wanted much, by the abusive use of others, and the misuse of the tax paid by minorities and women, to go to benefit only the types like yourself... Now you are pissed, becasue the Government deals with "Equality" in how it serves the public citizen population. It's no more of the game of direct all tax resources to only the white segment of society.... So... you can let your anguish stay with you until you expire.. and it won't change things back to the old system you lust for.

This is so stupid I dont even know where to begin....
 
You are obviously unclear on what I am clear on.

What are you talking about? If you don’t get back everything you contributed and I get back more, that’s the way insurance works. I don’t get it: do you want to get rid of Medicare, Social Security, etc., because some benefit more from their contributions than others? What is your point?
 
Obama "cut taxes" and then made everyone buy overpriced healthcare or pay fines.

:lamo
A new lie to cover up for your original lie, huh? Classic Trumpist behavior.
Let's be clear:
1. You claimed that "if Obama ever cut taxes"...you'd give him credit for it. I pointed out that Obama did in FACT cut taxes, yet you responded with more derision AND another lie.
2. Your second lie is that "Obama made everyone buy overpriced healthcare or pay fines. In FACT, Obamacare insurance options only applied to 5-8% of the public. And 85% of the people who purchased insurance through the Obamacare marketplace received subsidies which meant they were paying BELOW market value for BETTER insurance than previously. In FACT, only 3% of Americans paid higher premiums due to plans purchased in the Obamacare marketplace.

We weren't "plunging towards a depression, in fact that economy bottomed out five months after he took office
Silly comment. The market's bottomed out during Bush's Great Recession in March of 2009, just 2 months into Obama's 1st term, and BEFORE the Stimulus was passed. Unemployment during the Bush Recession bottomed out in Oct 2009. Perhaps you're thinking that the economy bottomed out 5 months after Obama took office because that's when you attended your first Tea Party meeting? Regardless, the FACT is that when Obama took office in January, the economy was headed for a Depression. The economy was losing 700-800 thousand jobs per month, the 3 of the 5 major banks were at, or near, insolvency, and the markets were in an absolute nosedive. Even conservative economists agree that Obama saved the U.S. economy (and the world) from a 2nd Major Depression. And while you recollection of recent history is specious, at best, that that is not arguable.

Obama EVEN TOLD US that high unemployment and slow economic growth was the "new normal"
Another fake news LIE. Obama NEVER told (or even suggested) to ANYONE that high UE and slow growth were the "new normal". You're either repeating the fake news you read/watch/hear...or you're just lying. Hard to say which. In FACT, Obama warned AGAINST allowing the trend of high unemployment in a growing economy, due to businesses hiring fewer employees to do the same work as before the Bush Recession. So that's what...your 3rd LIE in this response, already? It's always easy to see when someone has been "educated" by the FakeNews media.


The UE on the data Obama was sworn in for his second term was 8.0% When he was sworn in in 2009 it was 7.8%
...and when he left office is was 4.9%. How "convenient" of you to forget that most important part, huh? No credible economist still argues against Obama's record in restoring the U.S. economy.

And no, Trump didn't inherit a "robust" economy he inherited on struggling to make 1.6% GDP growth and a stock market that had gained a little over 1000 points in two years.
You and approximately ZERO economists agree with this drivel. The FACT is that Trump did inherit a strong economy from Obama. The ONLY economic indicator that has done anything other than sstay on the same created by Obama...is the stock market, which has benefited tremendously from Trump's tax cuts. Every other major statistic (UE, GDP, median incomes, etc.) has simply maintained the trend that Trump inherited from the Obama economy.
Unemployment

GDP Growth

Non-farm Payroll Growth

Median Household Income

S&P 500

Federal Deficit


So let's be clear about this: Trump has done little except ride the coattails of the economy he inherited from Barack Obama. That's not arguable. He's just a saleman, a con-artist, whose schtick appeals to low-information types. And that, too, is not arguable.

I'd suggest you follow your own advice in that last sentence and check the facts before disgorging empty LW talking points.
No, I had it right the first time. You need to check your facts and stop relying upon fake news for your "facts". As you can see, above, fake news makes fools out of it's followers. The difference between you and I is that when I say you are spewing ignorant RW talking points....I can back it up.
:lamo
 
Last edited:
:lamo
A new lie to cover up for your original lie, huh? Classic Trumpist behavior.
Let's be clear:
1. You claimed that "if Obama ever cut taxes"...you'd give him credit for it. I pointed out that Obama did in FACT cut taxes, yet you responded with more derision AND another lie.
2. Your second lie is that "Obama made everyone buy overpriced healthcare or pay fines. In FACT, Obamacare insurance options only applied to 5-8% of the public. And 85% of the people who purchased insurance through the Obamacare marketplace received subsidies which meant they were paying BELOW market value for BETTER insurance than previously. In FACT, only 3% of Americans paid higher premiums due to plans purchased in the Obamacare marketplace.


Silly comment. The market's bottomed out during Bush's Great Recession in March of 2009, just 2 months into Obama's 1st term, and BEFORE the Stimulus was passed. Unemployment during the Bush Recession bottomed out in Oct 2009. Perhaps you're thinking that the economy bottomed out 5 months after Obama took office because that's when you attended your first Tea Party meeting? Regardless, the FACT is that when Obama took office in January, the economy was headed for a Depression. The economy was losing 700-800 thousand jobs per month, the 3 of the 5 major banks were at, or near, insolvency, and the markets were in an absolute nosedive. Even conservative economists agree that Obama saved the U.S. economy (and the world) from a 2nd Major Depression. And while you recollection of recent history is specious, at best, that that is not arguable.


Another fake news LIE. Obama NEVER told (or even suggested) to ANYONE that high UE and slow growth were the "new normal". You're either repeating the fake news you read/watch/hear...or you're just lying. Hard to say which. In FACT, Obama warned AGAINST allowing the trend of high unemployment in a growing economy, due to businesses hiring fewer employees to do the same work as before the Bush Recession. So that's what...your 3rd LIE in this response, already? It's always easy to see when someone has been "educated" by the FakeNews media.



...and when he left office is was 4.9%. How "convenient" of you to forget that most important part, huh? No credible economist still argues against Obama's record in restoring the U.S. economy.


You and approximately ZERO economists agree with this drivel. The FACT is that Trump did inherit a strong economy from Obama. The ONLY economic indicator that has done anything other than sstay on the same created by Obama...is the stock market, which has benefited tremendously from Trump's tax cuts. Every other major statistic (UE, GDP, median incomes, etc.) has simply maintained the trend that Trump inherited from the Obama economy.
Unemployment

GDP Growth

Non-farm Payroll Growth

Median Household Income

S&P 500

Federal Deficit


So let's be clear about this: Trump has done little except ride the coattails of the economy he inherited from Barack Obama. That's not arguable. He's just a saleman, a con-artist, whose schtick appeals to low-information types. And that, too, is not arguable.


No, I had it right the first time. You need to check your facts and stop relying upon fake news for your "facts". As you can see, above, fake news makes fools out of it's followers. The difference between you and I is that when I say you are spewing ignorant RW talking points....I can back it up.
:lamo
Sorry that you wasted all this time, but when you can me a liar in the first sentence the rest of your bull**** loses any value.
 
Sorry that you wasted all this time, but when you can me a liar in the first sentence the rest of your bull**** loses any value.

Nice whine.

Of course, I didn't call you a liar. I did point out that your previous remarks were lies and popular fake-news/right-wing talking points. The difference is important.

But I get it. You're playing the victim card because you can't rebut. You got caught posting lies, repeatedly, and it's easier to feign indignation than to admit you posted lies, repeatedly, in your previous remarks.

So let's end this the way I started it: Trump has done little except ride the coattails of the economy he inherited from Barack Obama. That's not arguable. He's just a saleman, a con-artist, whose schtick appeals to low-information types. And that, too, is not arguable.

Enjoy the links. Feel free to own up to your previous dishonest fake-news talking points, at your convenience.
 
Nice whine.

Of course, I didn't call you a liar. I did point out that your previous remarks were lies and popular fake-news/right-wing talking points. The difference is important.

But I get it. You're playing the victim card because you can't rebut. You got caught posting lies, repeatedly, and it's easier to feign indignation than to admit you posted lies, repeatedly, in your previous remarks.

So let's end this the way I started it: Trump has done little except ride the coattails of the economy he inherited from Barack Obama. That's not arguable. He's just a saleman, a con-artist, whose schtick appeals to low-information types. And that, too, is not arguable.

Enjoy the links. Feel free to own up to your previous dishonest fake-news talking points, at your convenience.
Not playing any card, just stating facts. Obama's economy was wheezing and gasping in 2016, he'd ridden the post-recession bounce back as far as he could and his policies were dragging the economy down. GDP of 1.6% in Obama's last year is hardly a "coattail" to ride, more like a bad stench to get rid of. Which is why the stock markets surged upward the day after Trump won.
 
Not playing any card, just stating facts. Obama's economy was wheezing and gasping in 2016, he'd ridden the post-recession bounce back as far as he could and his policies were dragging the economy down. GDP of 1.6% in Obama's last year is hardly a "coattail" to ride, more like a bad stench to get rid of. Which is why the stock markets surged upward the day after Trump won.

Oh, look....you're back. What a surprise (not really). In my last remarks, I again noted that your previous remarks were LIES, just as I did in the post you pretended to be offended by. So...I wonder what changed? I guess it's much easier for someone like you to respond to a post that doesn't contain numerous links and FACTS that you can't rebut. This way, you can pretend to just "move on" without making a fool of yourself (or just lying some more) in response to that evisceration I posted earlier, huh? :cool:

That's fine. We both understand what just happened. :lamo

Now, to respond to your latest fake-news drivel...

Let's be clear: "Obama's economy was wheezing and gasping in 2016..."....is a personal opinion. Like a lot of right-wingers, you don't know the difference between FACT and OPINION...an ignorant opinion that you STILL haven't backed up with links or data. You won't do that, because you CAN'T do it. And we both know that, at this point.

As for GDP:
  • -Trump has been president for almost 12 quarters now. The average GDP under Trump for the first 11 (Q1 2020 is TBA) has been: 2.56
  • -Obama's last 12 quarters, the GDP was: 2.56

And GDP is just one common measurable for the economy. More importantly, ECONOMISTS of all stripes, conservative to liberal, ALL agree that Trump's economy has been nothing more than a continuation of the Obama economy.

Forbes: Trump's Economic Growth over his first 3 Years is Slower than Obama's Last 3 Years
Over the 12 quarters Trump has been President only four of them have had GDP growth over 3% and six of the quarter’s growth was 2.3% or lower. And for the past three quarters GDP growth has been 2.0%, 2.1% and 2.1%, respectively. This is a far cry from Trump’s claim that the economy could growth 4%, 5% or maybe even 6% when he was President.

Under Trump business investment has turned negative the past three quarters and is negative or essentially flat when the impact of inventory changes are taken into account.

A better metric to use than the GDP growth rate that is reported each quarter is the change year over year. The main reason is that quarterly results take the quarter-to-quarter change and multiples it by four. This means that any component having a stronger or weaker result in a quarter can create a yearly number that is not a good indicator of the real economy.

When Obama took office he inherited an economy that was in the teeth of the Great Recession. In 2009 personal consumption dropped 2.5% year over year and business investment fell off a cliff, down 21.2%. Both segments recovered and started the current 10-year plus economic expansion. Obama’s last three years had better growth than Trump’s three years

Using the same GDP metric of consumer spending plus business investment adjusted for inventory changes, Obama’s last three years in office had growth rates of at least 2.17% and as high as 3.06%.

For Trump the high point was 2.83% in 2018 when the tax cut seems to have had the largest impact and even fell short of Obama’s 2014 and 2015 growth rates of 3.06% and 3.05%, respectively.

In 2019 the adjusted growth rate was only 1.99%. This is less than Obama’s three last years in office and less than five of his last six years.

I use the timeframe of Obama’s last three years to compare to Trump’s three years since they had similar economic environments and are not distorted by the Great Recession.

MarketWatch: Trump Didn't Transform the Economy. It's Mostly the Same As It Was Under Obama
By most measures, the economy of today is little changed from the economy he inherited in early 2017. Job growth is a little slower, but gross domestic product (GDP) growth is a little faster.

And that’s really good news for Trump. There is no shame in keeping the economy on a gradual, upward glide path. It’s nearly impossible for a president’s policies to radically improve the U.S. economy, but there are many ways for a president to mess it up.

Despite Trump’s desperation to juice the economy with tax cuts, spending increases and interest-rate cuts from the Federal Reserve, there’s been only a modest and temporary uptick in the growth rate.
 
Last edited:
Tea party has always been just standard Republican voters. They got bent out of shape when a half black guy was elected, and re-elected president, so they held "rallies" with racist signs and such. Now that a Republican is president again, they are silent, even though that Republican president clearly doesn't give a **** about debt, spending, and deficits (like other Republicans before him). They'll probably be back when the next Democrat is elected president.
 
Tea party has always been just standard Republican voters. They got bent out of shape when a half black guy was elected, and re-elected president, so they held "rallies" with racist signs and such. Now that a Republican is president again, they are silent, even though that Republican president clearly doesn't give a **** about debt, spending, and deficits (like other Republicans before him). They'll probably be back when the next Democrat is elected president.

Exactly.

And Bullseye, the "Conservatarian Guru" has quietly exited the thread.

:lamo
 
Back
Top Bottom