• 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!

World Economy

Moderate Right said:
Thanks for the economic lesson.:roll: Why is it you guys are so arrogant that you think you know more than anyone and everyone else?
Click to expand...

I don't know what other "guys" you are referring to but I don't claim that I know more than anyone and everyone else but I might know more than you.
 
Exquisitor said:
Nonsense, people were paying seventy percent taxes after the war, that's why the tax cut became popular.
Click to expand...
I made no claim about tax-cuts or their popularity. What I DID write was that we never paid off the WWII debt, which is a fact.

On you side argument about taxes, the top 70% (which was 91% for decades) only applied to top incomes. Most Americans were not subject to those tax rates. It was never popular to cut that top rate. Taxes were cut because of the rise in the dominance of movement conservatism. As a result, taxes on the rich have fallen, and the holes in the safety net have gotten bigger, even as income inequality has soared. Do you really think the average American is better off because taxes on the rich has fallen over the last 40 years?
 
Rexedgar said:
My economics classes are way back in the rear view mirror. I have asked a few questions here on the board and learned a few things. Can anyone give me the Reader’s Digest answer for a question that just came to my addled brain.

If we can print/spend our way back to prosperity, why do we owe so much to the world?


National debt of the United States - Wikipedia
Click to expand...

Let's ask the right wing why they ever came up with Tax Cut economics.
 
Exquisitor said:
Tbird19482 said:
Everybody is going to take birth in the third world for the way they acted and good people will be born here to pay it back.

That way, you're right, you won't have to worry about paying it, you can just starve in the third world and let them train you to be a suicide bomber for ISIS.

That's why nobody cares about the good old US of A.
Click to expand...
Just where do you come up with this trash
The one percent sales tax I suggested could pay the debt off in a few years and we would not be paying interest to other countries , some like China that hate us , and as I said after it is paid off the sales tax would be suspended and could only be reinstated IF we had to run a deficit / debt in case of a deep recession / depression or a war like WWII where we had to run a debt
and as for the people that buy T-bills they could invest in Tax free Munies and get about the same ROI and States / counties would be able to build roads / buildings they need
Have a nice day
Click to expand...
 
MTAtech said:
I made no claim about tax-cuts or their popularity. What I DID write was that we never paid off the WWII debt, which is a fact.

On you side argument about taxes, the top 70% (which was 91% for decades) only applied to top incomes. Most Americans were not subject to those tax rates. It was never popular to cut that top rate. Taxes were cut because of the rise in the dominance of movement conservatism. As a result, taxes on the rich have fallen, and the holes in the safety net have gotten bigger, even as income inequality has soared. Do you really think the average American is better off because taxes on the rich has fallen over the last 40 years?
Click to expand...

No, you're right, you have to go back to Andrew Jackson to a time when there was no debt.

Of course not, there are two sides to the equation, on one side, you reward money, on the other you're giving corruptible people more money.

On one side, you concentrate wealth, on the other side, you're putting this on the credit card to likely get ripped off.
 
Exquisitor said:
No, you're right, you have to go back to Andrew Jackson to a time when there was no debt.

Of course not, there are two sides to the equation, on one side, you reward money, on the other you're giving corruptible people more money.

On one side, you concentrate wealth, on the other side, you're putting this on the credit card to likely get ripped off.
Click to expand...
We seem to have done pretty well not being debt-free for the last 195 years.
 
MTAtech said:
We seem to have done pretty well not being debt-free for the last 195 years.
Click to expand...

For 175 of those years the debt was tiddly winks.

Look, Bush cuts revenue and hands over a crisis, requiring Obama to borrow against Republican opposition. Then Trump cuts revenue again and coronavirus drops it again. Moreover, we're nearly maxed out for the Convergence (2020-2026) where we don't know what might happen.

Thanks Republicans.

You got to be pretty dippy to vote for them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom