User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 35

  1. #21
    deplorable basketcase Tellenbach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    MBTI
    ISTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Posts
    3,953

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus
    Let's repeal murder laws so businesses can murder their competitors. Let's get rid of police departments so businesses can rob their competitors. Cruel, cruel government getting in the way of business.
    If government intrusion worked, we would not have had a Great Depression. FDR and the Dems (all lefties) controlled both houses of Congress with 2/3rds majorities. FDR faced zero opposition. He had the press on his side as well. We all know how that turned out. FDR was regulating chicken coops and telling chicken butchers what chickens they can and can't sell. Where is the evidence that government intrusion works? Show me the evidence. FDR never got the unemployment rate below 14% before 1941.

    North Dakota is digging decayed dead plant and animal parts out of the ground.
    You may want to look up the impact of fossil fuels on economic growth.

    Once the oil boom is over, North Dakota will be full of ghost towns, just like what happened after gold booms.
    Jimmy Carter said something similar in 1977. "We could use up all of the proven reserves of oil in the entire world by the end of the next decade."

    Booms, like what is happening in North Dakota, is no way to model a national economy.
    What's happening in North Dakota can also happen in New York, California, and Alaska. It's politicians like Senator Warren and Obama who are killing millions of job opportunities for low-skilled and unskilled Americans.

    Bush's tax cuts last decade did not produce real growth. It was imaginary. It was growth that only existed in accounting ledgers.
    Bush cut the capital gains tax from 20% to 15%. The dividend tax was cut from 39.6% to 15%. The top income tax rate was cut from 39.6% to 35%. After these cuts, stocks climbed about 20% in the next two years and business capital spending increased by 7.4% in 2004 and by 9.5% in 2005. Between 2003 and 2007, 8 million jobs were created. Median household income increased $20,000 in real terms since the 2003 tax cuts.

    You can choose to ignore all the facts, but you really haven't provided any evidence that increasing wages by govt fiat or govt intrusion creates the kind of growth that we see by merely cutting taxes.

    Those may have been factors, but the dominant factors have been globalization and automation.
    Globalization creates cheaper products and frees up more dollars for Americans to save and spend. It's great that Walmart stocks a bunch of cheap chinese products because consumers save thousands of dollars each year.

    Even with enough tax loopholes that allow companies can to pay 0% corporate income tax, they still moved to China. Why? Because they can pay Chinese pennies on the dollar for work Americans were doing.
    GE paid zero corporate income taxes, but it had to hire 975 people in their tax department to find all the loopholes and prepare the 57,000 page tax return. If you lower the corporate tax rate, GE wouldn't have to hire 975 tax people and capital would be entering the nation instead of leaving it. From 1981 to 2007, the US was a net importer of capital ($5.2 trillion) as businesses flocked to the US after Reagan's tax cuts.

    If lower is always better, why not 10%? Why not 5%? Why 15%? Show me the math. Or did you pull that number out of your ass?
    Yes, lower is better. I'd refer you to Coolidge's tax cuts in the 20s. He achieved 2% nation-wide unemployment by cutting taxes.
    Senator Rand Paul is alive because of modern medicine and because his attacker punches like a girl.

  2. #22
    Senior Member Lateralus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    3w4
    Posts
    6,276

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tellenbach View Post
    If government intrusion worked, we would not have had a Great Depression. FDR and the Dems (all lefties) controlled both houses of Congress with 2/3rds majorities. FDR faced zero opposition. He had the press on his side as well. We all know how that turned out. FDR was regulating chicken coops and telling chicken butchers what chickens they can and can't sell. Where is the evidence that government intrusion works? Show me the evidence. FDR never got the unemployment rate below 14% before 1941.
    Your response is non sequitur, so I repeat: Let's repeal murder laws so businesses can murder their competitors. Let's get rid of police departments so businesses can rob their competitors. Cruel, cruel government getting in the way of business.

    You may want to look up the impact of fossil fuels on economic growth.
    This is a nonsensical response. Fossil fuels are made from dead plant and animal material. The economic impact of fossil fuels cannot change that fact.

    Jimmy Carter said something similar in 1977. "We could use up all of the proven reserves of oil in the entire world by the end of the next decade."
    More nonsense. That's nothing like what I said.

    What's happening in North Dakota can also happen in New York, California, and Alaska. It's politicians like Senator Warren and Obama who are killing millions of job opportunities for low-skilled and unskilled Americans.
    Really? Senator Warren is keeping California from drilling? Or did California's own state legislature stop that? Are you against State's Rights?

    Bush cut the capital gains tax from 20% to 15%. The dividend tax was cut from 39.6% to 15%. The top income tax rate was cut from 39.6% to 35%. After these cuts, stocks climbed about 20% in the next two years and business capital spending increased by 7.4% in 2004 and by 9.5% in 2005. Between 2003 and 2007, 8 million jobs were created. Median household income increased $20,000 in real terms since the 2003 tax cuts.

    You can choose to ignore all the facts, but you really haven't provided any evidence that increasing wages by govt fiat or govt intrusion creates the kind of growth that we see by merely cutting taxes.
    And all that "growth" was funded by credit. Once the credit bubble burst, all the "growth" disappeared.

    Median household income increased $20,000 because of the 2003 tax cuts? The median household income in 2003 was $42,560. The media household income in 2007 was $49,341. That's a difference of less than $7,000, not $20,000. If that's representative of the information you use to form your conclusions, no wonder you're so wrong.

    Globalization creates cheaper products and frees up more dollars for Americans to save and spend. It's great that Walmart stocks a bunch of cheap chinese products because consumers save thousands of dollars each year.
    Globalization does create cheaper products. It also forces American workers to compete directly with foreign workers. There are positives and negatives. But so far the negatives are outweighing the positives for the people who lost their jobs and those who have taken significant paycuts.

    GE paid zero corporate income taxes, but it had to hire 975 people in their tax department to find all the loopholes and prepare the 57,000 page tax return. If you lower the corporate tax rate, GE wouldn't have to hire 975 tax people and capital would be entering the nation instead of leaving it. From 1981 to 2007, the US was a net importer of capital ($5.2 trillion) as businesses flocked to the US after Reagan's tax cuts.
    Did they really hire 975 people? Or is that another number you pulled out of your ass?

    You say capital "flocked" to the US, yet jobs still left. Clearly there is a massive flaw in your reasoning.

    Yes, lower is better. I'd refer you to Coolidge's tax cuts in the 20s. He achieved 2% nation-wide unemployment by cutting taxes.
    Where's your math for 15%. I want to see it.
    "We grow up thinking that beliefs are something to be proud of, but they're really nothing but opinions one refuses to reconsider. Beliefs are easy. The stronger your beliefs are, the less open you are to growth and wisdom, because "strength of belief" is only the intensity with which you resist questioning yourself. As soon as you are proud of a belief, as soon as you think it adds something to who you are, then you've made it a part of your ego."

  3. #23
    deplorable basketcase Tellenbach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    MBTI
    ISTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Posts
    3,953

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus
    Your response is non sequitur, so I repeat: Let's repeal murder laws so businesses can murder their competitors.
    Let's see. In your view, the only alternatives are either socialism or anarchy? That's just silly. How about we remove some of the regulations that cost businesses trillions of dollars in compliance for a start? Here are some examples of job killing regulations: The medical device tax in Obamacare has cost 33,000 jobs according to a survey by the Advanced Medical Technology Association. I thought the purpose of Obamacare was to lower costs. How does taxing the companies that make MRIs and wheelchairs going to lower cost?

    Cruel, cruel government getting in the way of business.
    Exactly. Get out of the regulating lemonade stand business. Get out of the regulating hair styling business, the taxicab driving business, etc.

    This is a nonsensical response. Fossil fuels are made from dead plant and animal material. The economic impact of fossil fuels cannot change that fact.
    Are you kidding? You don't see a connection between economic health and the price of oil and gasoline? Why does it matter that oil comes from dead plant or animal matter? More fossil fuels equals lower energy prices which equals cheaper production costs which means cheaper prices which means more money in my pocket to buy other stuff. Fracking has kept the cost of natural gas down and that's benefitted the entire country.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus
    Once the oil boom is over, North Dakota will be full of ghost towns, just like what happened after gold booms. Booms, like what is happening in North Dakota, is no way to model a national economy. But you haven't thought that deeply about this.
    That's very similar to what Carter said. He implied we were near Peak Oil which is what you are suggesting as well. Yes, the oil boom will be over, but that could be 20 years down the line or 50 years down the line. You don't know when it'll end. You're suggesting we don't exploit this resource because it's not infinite. Well, it doesn't have to be infinite to help the economy right now, which is what we need.

    Median household income increased $20,000 because of the 2003 tax cuts? The median household income in 2003 was $42,560. The media household income in 2007 was $49,341. That's a difference of less than $7,000, not $20,000.
    Read carefully. I didn't say per year. That's $20,000 increase in cumulative wealth per household from 2003 to 2007 (a period of 4 years).

    But so far the negatives are outweighing the positives for the people who lost their jobs and those who have taken significant paycuts.
    And lots of people in the horse carriage business lost their jobs when we transitioned to automobiles. The trick is to grow the economy through innovation (like the invention of Tivo and the i-phone).

    Did they really hire 975 people? Or is that another number you pulled out of your ass?
    Every number I've posted is a real number. Also, you've provided no basis for any of the concerns you've posted. I've provided abundant evidence on every claim; you haven't provided a single piece of evidence that raising the minimum wage is a net positive or that government intrusion is a net positive. I'll ask again. If government intrusion worked, then the New Deal programs would have worked and we would not have had a Great Depression. FDR and Hoover both tinkered with the free market and both screwed up the economy. Obama is doing the same thing today.

    Where's your math for 15%. I want to see it.
    Why do I need math? We've done this before. This is what's so puzzling to me. You are putting mathematical models of what may happen over what actually happened. I'm relying on past history; you're relying on theoretical models.

    The top income tax rate has been as low as 7% in 1913. It exploded to 77% and was eventually reduced to 24% in 1929. We can go back to 7% as long as we cut government spending and ending Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.
    Last edited by Tellenbach; 04-01-2014 at 07:11 PM. Reason: misspelled anarchy
    Senator Rand Paul is alive because of modern medicine and because his attacker punches like a girl.

  4. #24
    Senior Member Lateralus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    3w4
    Posts
    6,276

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tellenbach View Post
    Let's see. In your view, the only alternatives are either socialism or anarchy? That's just silly. How about we remove some of the regulations that cost businesses trillions of dollars in compliance for a start? Here are some examples of job killing regulations: The medical device tax in Obamacare has cost 33,000 jobs according to a survey by the Advanced Medical Technology Association. I thought the purpose of Obamacare was to lower costs. How does taxing the companies that make MRIs and wheelchairs going to lower cost?
    Some regulations? Are you saying that some regulations are okay? That would be admitting that some government intervention in the economy works. You can't have it both ways.

    Are you kidding? You don't see a connection between economic health and the price of oil and gasoline? Why does it matter that oil comes from dead plant or animal matter? More fossil fuels equals lower energy prices which equals cheaper production costs which means cheaper prices which means more money in my pocket to buy other stuff. Fracking has kept the cost of natural gas down and that's benefitted the entire country.
    This argument you think I'm making is hilarious. All I said is North Dakota's economy is based on digging dead plant and animal parts out of the ground. I made no value judgments, yet you've constructed an entire ideology around that statement. It's hilarious. That was kind of a troll statement by me, and you bit into it hard.

    Read carefully. I didn't say per year. That's $20,000 increase in cumulative wealth per household from 2003 to 2007 (a period of 4 years).
    LOL, this is about as disingenuous as it gets. Instead of just saying "Oops, I made a mistake", you double down. You said:

    Median household income increased $20,000 in real terms since the 2003 tax cuts.
    That's a quote. You said nothing about wealth or cumulative wealth. You said "median household income". Now you're not just backtracking, you're lying. You are a liar.

    And lots of people in the horse carriage business lost their jobs when we transitioned to automobiles. The trick is to grow the economy through innovation (like the invention of Tivo and the i-phone).
    This economic "revolution" is different from the past. Previous economic "revolutions" required a reallocation of labor. This economic "revolution" is eliminating the need for labor, altogether.

    Every number I've posted is a real number. Also, you've provided no basis for any of the concerns you've posted. I've provided abundant evidence on every claim; you haven't provided a single piece of evidence that raising the minimum wage is a net positive or that government intrusion is a net positive. I'll ask again. If government intrusion worked, then the New Deal programs would have worked and we would not have had a Great Depression. FDR and Hoover both tinkered with the free market and both screwed up the economy. Obama is doing the same thing today.
    Another lie. I wonder how many other lies you've told that I simply haven't caught yet.

    You've got my position all wrong. I have not taken a positive position on anything. I've never argued that raising the minimum wage increases wealth. I've simply been refuting your position that raising the minimum wage will increase unemployment and all the other nonsense you've been spouting. One thing I've learned is that you're incapable of making a concise, coherent argument. When a point is refuted, you ignore it and move on to something else.

    Why do I need math? We've done this before. This is what's so puzzling to me. You are putting mathematical models of what may happen over what actually happened. I'm relying on past history; you're relying on theoretical models.

    The top income tax rate has been as low as 7% in 1913. It exploded to 77% and was eventually reduced to 24% in 1929. We can go back to 7% as long as we cut government spending and ending Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.
    I want to see your math because you made a precise claim. You said that you support a 15% flat tax. Why? Why that number? You still haven't answered that simple question. Why won't you answer it? It's an incredibly simple question. Why 15%?
    "We grow up thinking that beliefs are something to be proud of, but they're really nothing but opinions one refuses to reconsider. Beliefs are easy. The stronger your beliefs are, the less open you are to growth and wisdom, because "strength of belief" is only the intensity with which you resist questioning yourself. As soon as you are proud of a belief, as soon as you think it adds something to who you are, then you've made it a part of your ego."

  5. #25
    deplorable basketcase Tellenbach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    MBTI
    ISTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Posts
    3,953

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus
    Some regulations? Are you saying that some regulations are okay? That would be admitting that some government intervention in the economy works. You can't have it both ways.
    Ridiculous and untrue. Look at Coolidge vs FDR. Look at Reagan vs Carter.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus
    All I said is North Dakota's economy is based on digging dead plant and animal parts out of the ground. I made no value judgments, yet you've constructed an entire ideology around that statement. It's hilarious. That was kind of a troll statement by me, and you bit into it hard.
    Non-sequitur. Ok, you admitted it was a trollish statement. That's fine.

    LOL, this is about as disingenuous as it gets. Instead of just saying "Oops, I made a mistake", you double down. You said:

    Median household income increased $20,000 in real terms since the 2003 tax cuts.
    That's a quote. You said nothing about wealth or cumulative wealth. You said "median household income". Now you're not just backtracking, you're lying. You are a liar.
    No lie here. You may have some reading comprehension problems. I'll say it as simply as I can. The average family's total wealth increased $20,000 in that 4 year period.

    Another lie. I wonder how many other lies you've told that I simply haven't caught yet.
    Your inability to comprehend does not equate to my lying. Dude, just go away. This thread is about Senator Warren's position on minimum wage. You've added zilch to the discussion. You haven't defended that position or any position really.

    I have not taken a positive position on anything. I've never argued that raising the minimum wage increases wealth. I've simply been refuting your position that raising the minimum wage will increase unemployment and all the other nonsense you've been spouting.
    No kidding. You really haven't provided evidence for any claim you've made. If you're uncomfortable with the evidence I've posted and I've posted a tremendous amount, then perhaps you should come up with some evidence of your own. Yes, raising the minimum wage does increase unemployment as I've demonstrated with the 2008 study and the Great Depression numbers.

    You said that you support a 15% flat tax. Why? Why that number? You still haven't answered that simple question. Why won't you answer it? It's an incredibly simple question. Why 15%?
    Because we can.
    Senator Rand Paul is alive because of modern medicine and because his attacker punches like a girl.

  6. #26
    Senior Member Lateralus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    3w4
    Posts
    6,276

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tellenbach View Post
    Ridiculous and untrue. Look at Coolidge vs FDR. Look at Reagan vs Carter.
    You can have it both ways? Government intervention can both always fail and sometimes work? What a strange world you live in.

    No lie here. You may have some reading comprehension problems. I'll say it as simply as I can. The average family's total wealth increased $20,000 in that 4 year period.
    That's not what you said. You said the "median household income" increased by $20,000. Income and wealth are not the same thing. I'm sure you know this, which I why I called you a liar. I know you're not stupid, you're just disingenuous.

    Your inability to comprehend does not equate to my lying. Dude, just go away. This thread is about Senator Warren's position on minimum wage. You've added zilch to the discussion. You haven't defended that position or any position really.
    I have no issues with comprehension. You got caught lying. Deal with it.

    No kidding. You really haven't provided evidence for any claim you've made. If you're uncomfortable with the evidence I've posted and I've posted a tremendous amount, then perhaps you should come up with some evidence of your own. Yes, raising the minimum wage does increase unemployment as I've demonstrated with the 2008 study and the Great Depression numbers.
    You haven't presented any evidence that supports your position. Why? Because there is no evidence that supports any position.

    Because we can.
    So you pulled 15% out of your ass. Admit that and move on.
    "We grow up thinking that beliefs are something to be proud of, but they're really nothing but opinions one refuses to reconsider. Beliefs are easy. The stronger your beliefs are, the less open you are to growth and wisdom, because "strength of belief" is only the intensity with which you resist questioning yourself. As soon as you are proud of a belief, as soon as you think it adds something to who you are, then you've made it a part of your ego."

  7. #27
    deplorable basketcase Tellenbach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    MBTI
    ISTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Posts
    3,953

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus
    Government intervention can both always fail and sometimes work? What a strange world you live in.
    The economy thrived under Coolidge without any repeal of the murder law. What bizarre thinking you have. Either we have complete anarchy or we have socialism. That's just stupid dude. There are policies that are destructive, like protectionist garbage (Smoot-Hawley), Obamacare, the Wagner Act, etc. and there are policies that don't interfere with corporate decisions like murder laws or public drunkenness or street maintenance regulations.

    You said the "median household income" increased by $20,000. Income and wealth are not the same thing.
    It is the same thing. I think you are confusing "wage" with income. Nowhere did I use the word "annual" or "per year". Wealth includes income, which just means money. Btw, that $20,000 figure is from Art Laffer's book "The End of Prosperity". You may want to read through the whole book.

    You haven't presented any evidence that supports your position. Why? Because there is no evidence that supports any position.
    Ok, you're one of those. Nevermind....nevermind completely.

    So you pulled 15% out of your ass. Admit that and move on.
    Anything I do pull out of my ass will be better than what Senator Warren and people such as yourself come up with. I assure you.

    "On 1 January 2001, a 13% flat tax on personal income took effect in Russia. Ukraine followed Russia with a 13% flat tax in 2003, which later increased to 15% in 2007. Slovakia introduced a 19% flat tax on most taxes (that is, on corporate and personal income, for VAT, etc., almost without exceptions) in 2004. Romania introduced a 16% flat tax on personal income and corporate profit on 1 January 2005. Macedonia introduced a 12% flat tax on personal income and corporate profit on 1 January 2007 and promised to cut it to 10% in 2008.[21] Albania has implemented a 10% flat tax from 2008.[22] Bulgaria applies flat tax rate of 10% for corporate profits and personal income tax since 2008.[23]"

    Flat Tax
    Senator Rand Paul is alive because of modern medicine and because his attacker punches like a girl.

  8. #28
    Senior Member wildcat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,619

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tellenbach View Post
    We are over-taxed. One of the biggest problems was the 1974 Budget Act which gave Congress unlimited spending powers. Before this legislation, the president had authority to stop expenditures that he deemed unnecessary. After this legislation, Congress ran deficits 32 of the next 35 years and the federal budget exploded from $250 billion to $3 trillion.

    Between 1965 and 1978, taxes increased from 19.4% to 29.5% as a share of the taxpayer's adjustable gross income. (Art Laffer, The End of Prosperity)



    Did Pinochet's economic policies work?

    The middle class constitutes the balance of economy and power. Where the middle class turns, there is the centrum of power.

    It is the middle class that pays the taxes.
    Pinochet understood the fact that for his survival, the tax rate had to be generous for the middle class in Chile.
    The middle class was practically exempted of taxes for many years.
    If the middle class does not pay the taxes, someone outside the country pays for them.

    Was it the same people who had initiated the coup of Pinochet in the first place?
    It was not their own money.
    It was the money that had been stolen from the Japanese during the last phase of WW II.
    A money the Japanese originally had stolen from the Asians in between 1937 - 1945.
    After the war, the money had not been returned to the rightful owners. Later, many of the countries that had suffered of the Japanese occupation turned to URSS and/or China for economic help.

  9. #29
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    2,152

    Default

    If you put a floor on a market, the market is naturally going to center around it. Idiots.

    Minimum wage is like saying "how little can I get away with paying people?". It doesn't matter what the minimum wage is when someone that same day made a $1 million.

    Similarly, if you put a cap on wages, you'll find more and more people earning the cap wage. But, humans don't want that...they're a bit selfish. They don't want enough...they want more, more, more!

    Silly humans..

    They should put a cap on wages. If they did...where do you think all that extra money would go to? There's your trickle.

  10. #30
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by xisnotx View Post
    If you put a floor on a market, the market is naturally going to center around it. Idiots.

    Minimum wage is like saying "how little can I get away with paying people?". It doesn't matter what the minimum wage is when someone that same day made a $1 million.

    Similarly, if you put a cap on wages, you'll find more and more people earning the cap wage. But, humans don't want that...they're a bit selfish. They don't want enough...they want more, more, more!

    Silly humans..

    They should put a cap on wages. If they did...where do you think all that extra money would go to? There's your trickle.
    Wow, what a great post: not even I could understand a sentence of it!
    "Do not argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience." -- Mark Twain

    “No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”---Samuel Johnson

    My blog: www.randommeanderings123.blogspot.com/

Similar Threads

  1. [NT] So.. if life's a bitch, then am I wrong for trying to enjoy the ride?
    By mysavior in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 07-03-2011, 06:59 PM
  2. Is it reasonable to compare Socionics with MBTI?
    By Athenian200 in forum Socionics
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 08-15-2007, 09:41 AM
  3. Reasons to Believe organization
    By Totenkindly in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 07-12-2007, 10:11 PM
  4. Reasons to move to Rome...
    By sdalek in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 06-25-2007, 04:41 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO