- Joined
- Dec 9, 2009
- Messages
- 134,496
- Reaction score
- 14,621
- Location
- Houston, TX
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Goldenboy219;1058731847]It is intellectually dishonest for you to label or accuse me of anything negative in regards to my character or success, given the history of my statements in this thread. When i say you are expressing ignorance, senile tendencies or even question your ability, it is because you commonly mis-organize data, claim opinion as fact, or totally disregard important points pertaining to the subject matter. Providing raw data, and completely taking it out of context to fit some sort of political fantasia is not the work of an honest debater. Because you attack me and my sources while totally disregarding my argument, i have no desire to continue in this discussion.
Since what you post here is mostly your opinion or the opinion of others which are very subjective, I posted mine and stand by it until proven wrong. What have you contributed to society lately?
Your argument is based upon an ideology that is a failure. When you post Krugman as a source and ignore his vision as to the role of govt. you ignore that his opinion is biased towards an ideology. I posted BEA.gov, BLS.gov, and U.S. Treasury which reports actual data. I interpreted that data which at the time was in real dollars for the time and thus not subject to your claims of inflation or based upon the value of the dollar today.
I reported the link to actual data, it cannot be taken out of context because it is right there in black and white. I stand by my statement that after EVERY income tax rate cut in U.S. History govt. revenue grew, GDP grew, jobs were created. Based upon that reality it is impossible for tax rate cuts that grew govt. revenue to cause the deficits you want to blame on those tax rate cuts.
For the record, inflation based growth is not real, and does not improve the standard of living within any country it accompanies. Inflation is a necessary evil we are forced to live with if we as a country aspire any economic growth, but only to a point. Too much or too little can diminish real growth, and therefore we must take into consideration the difference between nominal and real growth. Failure to do so instantaneously reduces your argument to jack ****. Now be a man and admit your error; after all it is the decent thing to do.
Since inflation was higher during the Carter years and the first two years of the Reagan Administration prior to the Reagan tax cuts, your point is moot. there was real economic growth, real job creation, real take home pay increases and that spirred the economy and had nothing to do with the deficits created which are always do to spending. And we all know who authorizes the spending, don't we?
The only economic policy that makes any sense is supply side, not what your economists are reporting. Theirs is biased and pointed towards a failed ideology. Personal behavior is never considered. In their world tax cuts mean deficits because they ignore the affects of tax cuts on creating new taxpayers. If the taxpayer base stays the same and taxes are cut, revenue to the govt. would drop. Obviously that didn't happen during either the Reagan or Bush years.
Now as for the improper posting of the charts, I quite frankly haven't reviewed what I posted because I also posted the links. Since I don't know how to insert an excel chart into a post, I copied the information over from the link. If I made a mistake that mistake would have been reflected in the link, a link which showed exactly what I was saying, tax cuts grew AFTER the Reagan and Bush tax rate cuts.
Emphasis on what I copied and if that was right or wrong is really irrelevant when the link was provided. You want me to apologize, ok, if I copied the information incorrectly I apologize. I stand by the statement however that I made regarding tax cuts and individual behavior.
Now if you want to carry this further then you need to open your mind to real world activities and personal behavior. it isn't a black or white issue and economic analysis on the part of any economist is subjective. What isn't subjective is the actual data posted on BEA.gov, bls.govt, and the U.S. Treasury Department.