Adios Muchacho

[hazlnut]

(P.S. John McCain needs to retire)

.

What about Marco Rubio?

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Lowering taxes doesn't "free up capital". Same with regulations.

A myth proved over and over again by conservative administration, which lowered taxes and softened regulations.

you are wrong....

Nearly every empirical study of taxes and economic growth published in a peer reviewed academic journal finds that tax increases harm economic growth.
...
This review of empirical studies of taxes and economic growth indicates that there are not a lot of dissenting opinions coming from peer-reviewed academic journals. More and more, the consensus among experts is that taxes on corporate and personal income are particularly harmful to economic growth, with consumption and property taxes less so. This is because economic growth ultimately comes from production, innovation, and risk-taking.
...
In sum, the U.S. tax system is a drag on the economy. Pro-growth tax reform that reduces the burden of corporate and personal income taxes would generate a more robust economic recovery and put the U.S. on a higher growth trajectory, with more investment, more employment, higher wages, and a higher standard of living.

What Is the Evidence on Taxes and Growth? | Tax Foundation

Not wrong at all.

History proves me out.

Reagan lowering taxes on rich folks? Led to raising taxes on the poor and middle class. It also led to massive bailouts of the financial industry.

Part 2: Bush lowering taxes on rich folks? Led to raising taxes on the poor and middle class. It also led to massive bailouts of the financial industry.

You need a new act.

both Reagan and Bush cut taxes on EVERBODY and growth followed.....i guess you could say it eventuall LED to money-grubbing, big government, tax-raising Dimwits sucking the economy dry of any profits they could rip off the producers....

BO STILL wants more taxes to increase the size of government....are his tax increases and regs helping our economy?....that's one big fat NO....

when Reagan gave amnesty there were enough jobs (due to his economic growth) to absorb the Mexican illegals.....today the illegals are only helping increase the unemployment rate and hollowing out our health and welfare systems...because there is zero economic growth in BO's plans....

 

[Sallow]

ScreaingEagle -

How do you explain the fact that despite already having the lowest personal tax rates in the developed world, the US regularly has poorer economic growth than countries with much higher tax rates?

Also, as the only country in the developed world without a VAT or GST-type tax, why do you think the US has been so reluctant to move towards tax based on consumption rather than income?

No consumption tax because the libs harp that it would disproportionately affect those with the lowest incomes.

That's because..it does.

 

[Sallow]

you are wrong....

Not wrong at all.

History proves me out.

Reagan lowering taxes on rich folks? Led to raising taxes on the poor and middle class. It also led to massive bailouts of the financial industry.

Part 2: Bush lowering taxes on rich folks? Led to raising taxes on the poor and middle class. It also led to massive bailouts of the financial industry.

You need a new act.

both Reagan and Bush cut taxes on EVERBODY and growth followed.....i guess you could say it eventuall LED to money-grubbing, big government, tax-raising Dimwits sucking the economy dry of any profits they could rip off the producers....

BO STILL wants more taxes to increase the size of government....are his tax increases and regs helping our economy?....that's one big fat NO....

when Reagan gave amnesty there were enough jobs (due to his economic growth) to absorb the Mexican illegals.....today the illegals are only helping increase the unemployment rate and hollowing out our health and welfare systems...because there is zero economic growth in BO's plans....

Jumped right over the bailouts did ya?

That's some good jumping.

 

[The Rabbi]

ScreaingEagle -

How do you explain the fact that despite already having the lowest personal tax rates in the developed world, the US regularly has poorer economic growth than countries with much higher tax rates?

Also, as the only country in the developed world without a VAT or GST-type tax, why do you think the US has been so reluctant to move towards tax based on consumption rather than income?

we have the highest corporate rates in the world...

It's also not true we have the lowest growth rate. This has only been true for the last several years. Part of that is the high regulation we have seen, which is really a tax. Also an unfettered legal system where companies can be sued for anything. This is also a tax.

But all of that is irrelevant to immigration. Someone mentioned borders. Every nation defends and regulates its borders. The US should be no different.

 

[Sallow]

ScreaingEagle -

How do you explain the fact that despite already having the lowest personal tax rates in the developed world, the US regularly has poorer economic growth than countries with much higher tax rates?

Also, as the only country in the developed world without a VAT or GST-type tax, why do you think the US has been so reluctant to move towards tax based on consumption rather than income?

No consumption tax because the libs harp that it would disproportionately affect those with the lowest incomes.

You are confusing a flat tax with a consumption tax. They aren't the same. If we changed to a consumption tax, it would penalize those who spent their lives paying income taxes and delaying consumption until retirement.

Either way.

It places a disproportional burden on the poor.

 

[The Rabbi]

No consumption tax because the libs harp that it would disproportionately affect those with the lowest incomes.

You are confusing a flat tax with a consumption tax. They aren't the same. If we changed to a consumption tax, it would penalize those who spent their lives paying income taxes and delaying consumption until retirement.

Either way.

It places a disproportional burden on the poor.

Actually it doesn't. Poor people generally don't buy food.

 

[Scorpion]

ScreaingEagle -

How do you explain the fact that despite already having the lowest personal tax rates in the developed world, the US regularly has poorer economic growth than countries with much higher tax rates?

Also, as the only country in the developed world without a VAT or GST-type tax, why do you think the US has been so reluctant to move towards tax based on consumption rather than income?

No consumption tax because the libs harp that it would disproportionately affect those with the lowest incomes.

You are confusing a flat tax with a consumption tax. They aren't the same. If we changed to a consumption tax, it would penalize those who spent their lives paying income taxes and delaying consumption until retirement.

Both affect the poor more as their income would be taxed on the 'essentials' than those with higher incomes can easily manage.
The 'poor' would have less 'disposable' income if they had to pay either tax.
As it is, those on food stamps are exempt from paying tax on sodas.

 

[Sallow]

You are confusing a flat tax with a consumption tax. They aren't the same. If we changed to a consumption tax, it would penalize those who spent their lives paying income taxes and delaying consumption until retirement.

Either way.

It places a disproportional burden on the poor.

Actually it doesn't. Poor people generally don't buy food.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Not wrong at all.

History proves me out.

Reagan lowering taxes on rich folks? Led to raising taxes on the poor and middle class. It also led to massive bailouts of the financial industry.

Part 2: Bush lowering taxes on rich folks? Led to raising taxes on the poor and middle class. It also led to massive bailouts of the financial industry.

You need a new act.

both Reagan and Bush cut taxes on EVERBODY and growth followed.....i guess you could say it eventuall LED to money-grubbing, big government, tax-raising Dimwits sucking the economy dry of any profits they could rip off the producers....

BO STILL wants more taxes to increase the size of government....are his tax increases and regs helping our economy?....that's one big fat NO....

when Reagan gave amnesty there were enough jobs (due to his economic growth) to absorb the Mexican illegals.....today the illegals are only helping increase the unemployment rate and hollowing out our health and welfare systems...because there is zero economic growth in BO's plans....

Jumped right over the bailouts did ya?

That's some good jumping.

well i didn't want to add insult to injury...

 

[ScreamingEagle]

No consumption tax because the libs harp that it would disproportionately affect those with the lowest incomes.

You are confusing a flat tax with a consumption tax. They aren't the same. If we changed to a consumption tax, it would penalize those who spent their lives paying income taxes and delaying consumption until retirement.

Both affect the poor more as their income would be taxed on the 'essentials' than those with higher incomes can easily manage.
The 'poor' would have less 'disposable' income if they had to pay either tax.
As it is, those on food stamps are exempt from paying tax on sodas.

both are regressive in nature.....although some flat/fair plans may allow for a minimum tax-exempt income....like say 30k...

 

[Sallow]

both Reagan and Bush cut taxes on EVERBODY and growth followed.....i guess you could say it eventuall LED to money-grubbing, big government, tax-raising Dimwits sucking the economy dry of any profits they could rip off the producers....

BO STILL wants more taxes to increase the size of government....are his tax increases and regs helping our economy?....that's one big fat NO....

when Reagan gave amnesty there were enough jobs (due to his economic growth) to absorb the Mexican illegals.....today the illegals are only helping increase the unemployment rate and hollowing out our health and welfare systems...because there is zero economic growth in BO's plans....

Jumped right over the bailouts did ya?

That's some good jumping.

well i didn't want to add insult to injury...

No worries.

I wouldn't insult ya. And I am pretty sure I didn't injure you either..physically anyways.

 

[Katzndogz]

Democrats really think that we will survive an additional 50 million plus people suddenly on welfare and obamacare. They are trying to sell us 11 million people, when illegals will be pouring in, with relatives, for the next 20 years and lying about when they got here, what names they used, and when. Sort of like the way the last amnesty worked. And then, really stupidly, there are those who blindly imagine that this amnesty ONLY means hispanics. We're going to let the little brown people from south of the border in, that's all, just them. The last amnesty gave us Ramsay Youssef who bombed the world trade center the first time. This one will spread the mexican cartel wars here. Then it's on to Canada for them. Hopefully Canada won't be as utterly stupid as America is.

Having rapper bodies found hacked to death out in the desert the way musicians are treated in mexico isn't exactly unattractive. Hopefully our IDIOTS will next do something really chuckle worthy and legalize drugs giving the cartels a new player on the block. One that will cause them to temporarily join together to fight. A new cartel like the US government.

Every day, in every day, this country proves it is now too stupid to survive.

 

[jillian]

Hispanic political leaders say 71% of Hispanic voters voted for Obama.
i'm sure you've heard , the Socialist agenda is saying the Republican party must IGNORE the fact millions of Hispanics came here illegally, FORGET about demanding these people abide by the law, and INVITE them to have the same status as an American.

and if they don't get what they want, they're going to go vote Democrat.

i don't know about the rest of you, but my answer to that is, BYE!

they're trying to blackmail Conservatives.
i'm supposed to be scared that some Republican politician , who didn't do enough about the immigration problem, won't have a job?

threatening to join the Democrat Party Of Evil is going to hurt me?
in 50 years the Democrats will destroy every freaking reason why you came here!
you can tell your grand kids what a hero you are.

(P.S. John McCain needs to retire)

.

Marco Rubio is NOT a Democrat



Neither is Bobby Jindal

the browning of the GOP

all two of them

 

[asaratis]

So strange. Conservatives will be the first ones bitching about tightening the borders and then they'll be the first ones bitching about finding cheap labor.

If by some fluke of nature, the union goons back off and cease asking for more than they are worth, stop digging into to profits of a successful company just because they can...then maybe, just maybe there won't be a need to seek the cheap labor that comes across the border begging for relief from squalid conditions in their homeland.

Sleaze bag unions are the principle cause of our shipping factories and jobs overseas. The dumbass bastards that join them are slitting their own throats as they buy silk suits, limos and high style living for their "organizers". Today's unions are nothing more than legalized mafia!

And America roars with laughter. Without unions and government, business would have all of us working 12 hours a day for $4 an hour with no benefits. Child labor would be in vogue. The history of labor in this country, when business is unregulated, is one of exploitation.

That WAS true when unions were formed decades ago. You fail to understand that I wrote "Today's unions". I agree that unions brought us out of the child-labor and sweat shop days. They have gone beyond "fair pay for a day's work" and reasonable benefits to ridiculous wages and pay-for-not-working demands and have made the companies they work for either go out of business or move overseas. The ridiculous lifetime pension plans wherein companies pay 90% of salary until the beneficiary dies and then 70% or so to the surviving spouse have broken the backs of some formerly well run, profitable, job-providing companies. Like I said ... unions have members have slit their own throats by letting their goons demand more than is available.

 

[Katzndogz]

Unions are a dying breed in the US. They are already on the way out.

 

[asaratis]

Unions are a dying breed in the US. They are already on the way out.

Rightfully so.

 

[rightwinger]

You are confusing a flat tax with a consumption tax. They aren't the same. If we changed to a consumption tax, it would penalize those who spent their lives paying income taxes and delaying consumption until retirement.

Either way.

It places a disproportional burden on the poor.

Actually it doesn't. Poor people generally don't buy food.

Why should they when there are dumpsters to be had?

 

[Truthmatters]

Hispanic political leaders say 71% of Hispanic voters voted for Obama.
i'm sure you've heard , the Socialist agenda is saying the Republican party must IGNORE the fact millions of Hispanics came here illegally, FORGET about demanding these people abide by the law, and INVITE them to have the same status as an American.

and if they don't get what they want, they're going to go vote Democrat.

i don't know about the rest of you, but my answer to that is, BYE!

they're trying to blackmail Conservatives.
i'm supposed to be scared that some Republican politician , who didn't do enough about the immigration problem, won't have a job?

threatening to join the Democrat Party Of Evil is going to hurt me?
in 50 years the Democrats will destroy every freaking reason why you came here!
you can tell your grand kids what a hero you are.

(P.S. John McCain needs to retire)

.

when have you ever been proven correct on the prediction of the outcome of policy?


Never


your advice is worthless

 

[The Rabbi]

Either way.

It places a disproportional burden on the poor.

Actually it doesn't. Poor people generally don't buy food.

Why should they when there are dumpsters to be had?

Actually there are food stamps and WIC to be had.