Elizabeth Warren Fights Back Against the "Magical Accounting" of Trickle-Down Economics

[Sarah G]

They left.

 

[kiwiman127]

Considering many in the GOP are sane enough to know that our highway infrastructure is in dire need of upgrades and open to taxes to pay for it, I'd would certainly agree with their approach.
It's been estimated the cost of getting our highway system up practical standards that the cost would be well over a trillion dollars. Obviously this is a long term project. The cost is huge but that's what we get for years of neglect.
Our highways are already incapable of handling the projected population growth.

 

[rightwinger]

Considering many in the GOP are sane enough to know that our highway infrastructure is in dire need of upgrades and open to taxes to pay for it, I'd would certainly agree with their approach.
It's been estimated the cost of getting our highway system up practical standards that the cost would be well over a trillion dollars. Obviously this is a long term project. The cost is huge but that's what we get for years of neglect.
Our highways are already incapable of handling the projected population growth.

We need to raise the Federal and State gas tax while the price is low

Our overall infrastructure is a mess

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Considering many in the GOP are sane enough to know that our highway infrastructure is in dire need of upgrades and open to taxes to pay for it, I'd would certainly agree with their approach.
It's been estimated the cost of getting our highway system up practical standards that the cost would be well over a trillion dollars. Obviously this is a long term project. The cost is huge but that's what we get for years of neglect.
Our highways are already incapable of handling the projected population growth.

Why do we pay a gasoline tax?????????????????

Tolls???????????????

 

[CrusaderFrank]

They left.

...or we're working

 

[CrusaderFrank]

It affects the rules of the game

Up till now, the rules have been written to incentivize the capitalists over the workers

Money made from invested is treated differently than money made from labor. Changing the rules levels the playing field. Just because it is not as easy for the wealthy to claim all the income doesn't mean we are taking money away from them

Huh?

"Changing the rules" means imposing punitive taxes on high incomes. The wealthy don't "claim" more income. They earn it. Their income is not a gift from the government. It's the result of entirely voluntary transactions. It was given to them in exchange for some product or service.

They are no more punative than they were under Eisenhower and yet his economy flourished.

That's pretty damn putative. If you want to bring back the same economic conditions that existed during the Eisenhower era you'll have to bomb the rest of the industrialized world into the stone age.

Workers earn their money also. Most say moreso than the wealthy. Warren is just advocating that they should keep more of what they earn

They haven't "earned" anything that isn't the result of a voluntary transaction. Warren intends to impose force into the transaction between employer and employee. That's more akin to the kind of transaction that occurs during an armed robbery.

No moron, force and fear are the elements of an armed robbery, as well as the use of a weapon.

Benjamin Franklin, Founding Father, American diplomat, statesman, and scientist; letter to Robert Morris, December 25, 1783:

"All the property that is necessary to a Man, for the Conservation of the Individual and the Propagation of the Species, is his natural Right, which none can justly deprive him of: But all Property superfluous to such purposes is the Property of the Publick, who, by their Laws, have created it, and who may therefore by other laws dispose of it, whenever the Welfare of the Publick shall demand such Disposition. He that does not like civil Society on these Terms, let him retire and live among Savages. He can have no right to the benefits of Society, who will not pay his Club towards the Support of it."

What's your point, that Franklin was a Communist?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

JFK cut the upper tax rate from 90% to 65%

Are you supporting JFKs 65% tax rate?

So you believe in JFK's philosophy?

If you do then you should not be a Democrat because Democrats hates these ideas.

“Our tax system still siphons out of the private economy too large a share of personal and business purchasing power and reduces the incentive for risk, investment and effort – thereby aborting our recoveries and stifling our national growth rate.”

– John F. Kennedy, Jan. 24, 1963, message to Congress on tax reduction and reform, House Doc. 43, 88th Congress, 1st Session.

“A tax cut means higher family income and higher business profits and a balanced federal budget. Every taxpayer and his family will have more money left over after taxes for a new car, a new home, new conveniences, education and investment. Every businessman can keep a higher percentage of his profits in his cash register or put it to work expanding or improving his business, and as the national income grows, the federal government will ultimately end up with more revenues.”

– John F. Kennedy, Sept. 18, 1963, radio and television address to the nation on tax-reduction bill


Read more at John F. Kennedy on taxes

I don't know if I would support his 65% tax rate

Maybe 50%

NO LOOPHOLES though. Top rate of 70% for $100+ million incomes

That worked for the French, right?

Oh, wait

 

[Skull Pilot]

I can believe someone as stupid as you appear to be can even turn on a computer.

Now that's funny, especially since I imagine it wasn't intentional.

But you thought trickle down was good? That was highway robbery of the American worker.

When Reagan cut all tax brackets, that robbed the American worker? How?

Be specific.

Reagan's tax cuts eliminated middle and working class deductions, such as tool purchases and union dues.

Why should union dues be a deduction?

And last time I checked you can still write off equipment costs

They had always been a deduction, why do you think Reagan signed off on the 'reform' of the tax code? I can't go through the entire tax code but unless someone can prove to me it is not as large as it is for any reason but to aid the special interests.
Face the truth, the tax system isn't fair and never will be. It is so because the nation needs the revenue and The Congress is owned by white collar criminals and populated by white collar criminals who write the laws.

When was the last time the Congress voted themselves a cut in salary or beneftis? They ask others to accept less and do more; The 113th Congress didn't earn a dime they accepted as pay.

So what if they always had been?

They shouldn't be

People used to be able to deduct the interest on the car loans too and that was done away with.

Yep, and most middle class and lower earners can't afford to pay cash for a new car or even a good used car. Those of us who can simply buy the car without needing a loan. So that elimination is regressive too.

Anyone can buy a car in cash.

All you have to do is pretend you have a car payment even when you don't.
I had one car loan my entire life and that was for my very first car. I paid the loan off in 2 years and kept the car for 6 years. For 4 years I simply pretended I had a car payment and saved the money. That little trick has allowed me to pay cash for every car since

 

[bripat9643]

It affects the rules of the game

Up till now, the rules have been written to incentivize the capitalists over the workers

Money made from invested is treated differently than money made from labor. Changing the rules levels the playing field. Just because it is not as easy for the wealthy to claim all the income doesn't mean we are taking money away from them

Huh?

"Changing the rules" means imposing punitive taxes on high incomes. The wealthy don't "claim" more income. They earn it. Their income is not a gift from the government. It's the result of entirely voluntary transactions. It was given to them in exchange for some product or service.

They are no more punative than they were under Eisenhower and yet his economy flourished.

That's pretty damn putative. If you want to bring back the same economic conditions that existed during the Eisenhower era you'll have to bomb the rest of the industrialized world into the stone age.

Workers earn their money also. Most say moreso than the wealthy. Warren is just advocating that they should keep more of what they earn

They haven't "earned" anything that isn't the result of a voluntary transaction. Warren intends to impose force into the transaction between employer and employee. That's more akin to the kind of transaction that occurs during an armed robbery.

No moron, force and fear are the elements of an armed robbery, as well as the use of a weapon.

Benjamin Franklin, Founding Father, American diplomat, statesman, and scientist; letter to Robert Morris, December 25, 1783:

"All the property that is necessary to a Man, for the Conservation of the Individual and the Propagation of the Species, is his natural Right, which none can justly deprive him of: But all Property superfluous to such purposes is the Property of the Publick, who, by their Laws, have created it, and who may therefore by other laws dispose of it, whenever the Welfare of the Publick shall demand such Disposition. He that does not like civil Society on these Terms, let him retire and live among Savages. He can have no right to the benefits of Society, who will not pay his Club towards the Support of it."

SPAM

 

[Dot Com]

Upward economic mobility has all but stalled for the working/middle class, it would be in conservatives best interests to address this instead of ignoring it and calling people commies.

yabut the SOCONs have nowhere else to go so they vote Repub even though it isn't in their economic interest.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Considering many in the GOP are sane enough to know that our highway infrastructure is in dire need of upgrades and open to taxes to pay for it, I'd would certainly agree with their approach.
It's been estimated the cost of getting our highway system up practical standards that the cost would be well over a trillion dollars. Obviously this is a long term project. The cost is huge but that's what we get for years of neglect.
Our highways are already incapable of handling the projected population growth.

We need to raise the Federal and State gas tax while the price is low

Our overall infrastructure is a mess

We collect plenty of money for infrastructure already it just doesn't get spent where it should.

 

[Dot Com]

Dems have completely controlled all of Congress for 4 of the last eight years, and they controlled the Presidency for the last six years.

But it's the GOP's fault.


You can't make this shit up.

which party has the record of saying "I object" in the senate asswipe?
Gridlock in Congress Blame the GOP - CNN.com

But the number of filibusters by Republicans has escalated, and they have been far more willing to use the tactic than their opponents. Since 2007, the Senate Historical Office has shown, Democrats have had to end Republican filibusters more than 360 times, a historic record.

would it kill you rw hacks to use a source every once in a while?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

 

[Dad2three]

Considering many in the GOP are sane enough to know that our highway infrastructure is in dire need of upgrades and open to taxes to pay for it, I'd would certainly agree with their approach.
It's been estimated the cost of getting our highway system up practical standards that the cost would be well over a trillion dollars. Obviously this is a long term project. The cost is huge but that's what we get for years of neglect.
Our highways are already incapable of handling the projected population growth.

Why do we pay a gasoline tax?????????????????

Tolls???????????????

Highway advocates often claim that roads “pay for themselves,” with gasoline taxes and other chargesto motorists covering—or nearly covering—the full cost of highway constructionand maintenance.

They are wrong.


Highways do not—and, except for briefperiods in our nation’s history—never havepaid for themselves through the taxes that highway advocates label “user fees"

http://cdn.publicinterestnetwork.or...d7884854/Do-Roads-Pay-for-Themselves_-wUS.pdf


Tolls

INEFFICIENCY

Waste of Taxpayer Money
Decades of data shows that toll infrastructure is inherently inefficient and takes many years to generate any net income.

According to the Transportation Research Board of the National Academy of Sciences, the administrative, collection and enforcement costs of a typical toll facility are 33.5% of the revenue generated. Compare this to the Board’s finding that the administrative cost of the fuel tax is about 1% of revenue.

Tolls Alliance for Toll-Free Interstates ATFI

For example, the federal motor fuels tax, 18.4 cents per gallon, generates one-third fewer dollars in real purchasing terms than when it was last increased in 1993, according to an estimate by the (ANTI) Tax Foundation, a nonpartisan research organization.


“At the state and local levels, gas taxes cover less than half of state and local transportation spending,” said Tax Foundation economist Joseph Henchman. He said proposals to cut mass transit funding or relax federal salary standards for laborers on public works projects won’t solve the underlying problem, which is that “every year we’re spending a little more and taking in a little less.”

The Problem with Cheap Gas

 

[Dad2three]

JFK cut the upper tax rate from 90% to 65%

Are you supporting JFKs 65% tax rate?

So you believe in JFK's philosophy?

If you do then you should not be a Democrat because Democrats hates these ideas.

“Our tax system still siphons out of the private economy too large a share of personal and business purchasing power and reduces the incentive for risk, investment and effort – thereby aborting our recoveries and stifling our national growth rate.”

– John F. Kennedy, Jan. 24, 1963, message to Congress on tax reduction and reform, House Doc. 43, 88th Congress, 1st Session.

“A tax cut means higher family income and higher business profits and a balanced federal budget. Every taxpayer and his family will have more money left over after taxes for a new car, a new home, new conveniences, education and investment. Every businessman can keep a higher percentage of his profits in his cash register or put it to work expanding or improving his business, and as the national income grows, the federal government will ultimately end up with more revenues.”

– John F. Kennedy, Sept. 18, 1963, radio and television address to the nation on tax-reduction bill


Read more at John F. Kennedy on taxes

I don't know if I would support his 65% tax rate

Maybe 50%

NO LOOPHOLES though. Top rate of 70% for $100+ million incomes

That worked for the French, right?

Oh, wait

Sure it did. And MANY other nations, including the US UNTIL Ronnie's 'trickle down'

EFFECTIVE tax rates

 

[kiwiman127]

Thought we fixed the roads and bridges under O's shovel rdy jobs program

No matter how many times we approve tax increases for "roads and bridges," the Dims always come back for more.

It's very. very obvious that the "Dims" haven't asked for enough. It's also very obvious that some people don't care about something that is extremely serious that effects the future of this country's long-term economy.
America just keeps on sliding downwards and some people could give a shit.

Moron, how much do you think we need? How do you propose to get it?

Considering many in the GOP are sane enough to know that our highway infrastructure is in dire need of upgrades and open to taxes to pay for it, I'd would certainly agree with their approach.
It's been estimated the cost of getting our highway system up practical standards that the cost would be well over a trillion dollars. Obviously this is a long term project. The cost is huge but that's what we get for years of neglect.
Our highways are already incapable of handling the projected population growth.

Why do we pay a gasoline tax?????????????????

Tolls???????????????

It's very obvious that what this country has put into our highway system isn't enough based on several analyses of our highways.
Can any of you naysayers find anything that states our highways are good enough?
I'll wait. I'll be waiting until hell freezes over.

 

[Dad2three]

I can believe someone as stupid as you appear to be can even turn on a computer.

Now that's funny, especially since I imagine it wasn't intentional.

Reagan's tax cuts eliminated middle and working class deductions, such as tool purchases and union dues.

Why should union dues be a deduction?

And last time I checked you can still write off equipment costs

They had always been a deduction, why do you think Reagan signed off on the 'reform' of the tax code? I can't go through the entire tax code but unless someone can prove to me it is not as large as it is for any reason but to aid the special interests.
Face the truth, the tax system isn't fair and never will be. It is so because the nation needs the revenue and The Congress is owned by white collar criminals and populated by white collar criminals who write the laws.

When was the last time the Congress voted themselves a cut in salary or beneftis? They ask others to accept less and do more; The 113th Congress didn't earn a dime they accepted as pay.

So what if they always had been?

They shouldn't be

People used to be able to deduct the interest on the car loans too and that was done away with.

Yep, and most middle class and lower earners can't afford to pay cash for a new car or even a good used car. Those of us who can simply buy the car without needing a loan. So that elimination is regressive too.

Anyone can buy a car in cash.

All you have to do is pretend you have a car payment even when you don't.
I had one car loan my entire life and that was for my very first car. I paid the loan off in 2 years and kept the car for 6 years. For 4 years I simply pretended I had a car payment and saved the money. That little trick has allowed me to pay cash for every car since

Sure, you mean the bottom HALF of US who make enough to file income taxes that made less than $15,000 per FAMILY? That was less than 12% of the pie which IF they had kept the piece of the pie they had in 1980, would amount to almost $5,000 more?



Pay Fell 7% in Last Decade and Economists Say It Won’t Catch Up Before 2021; Even College Graduates See Salaries Slide

Americans’ incomes have dropped since 2000 and they aren’t expected to make up the lost ground before 2021, according to economists in the latest Wall Street Journal forecasting survey.

From 2000 to 2010, median income in the U.S. declined 7% after adjusting for inflation, according to Census data. That marks the worst 10-year performance in records going back to 1967.

U.S. Incomes Seen Stagnant Through 2021 - WSJ

They'll just put away a couple hundred a month right? lol

 

[Dot Com]

"trickle down" economics was a failure when the Gipper did it & it has devastated this great nation's middle-class. Thanks Ronnie.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Considering many in the GOP are sane enough to know that our highway infrastructure is in dire need of upgrades and open to taxes to pay for it, I'd would certainly agree with their approach.
It's been estimated the cost of getting our highway system up practical standards that the cost would be well over a trillion dollars. Obviously this is a long term project. The cost is huge but that's what we get for years of neglect.
Our highways are already incapable of handling the projected population growth.

Why do we pay a gasoline tax?????????????????

Tolls???????????????

Highway advocates often claim that roads “pay for themselves,” with gasoline taxes and other chargesto motorists covering—or nearly covering—the full cost of highway constructionand maintenance.

They are wrong.


Highways do not—and, except for briefperiods in our nation’s history—never havepaid for themselves through the taxes that highway advocates label “user fees"

http://cdn.publicinterestnetwork.or...d7884854/Do-Roads-Pay-for-Themselves_-wUS.pdf


Tolls

INEFFICIENCY

Waste of Taxpayer Money
Decades of data shows that toll infrastructure is inherently inefficient and takes many years to generate any net income.

According to the Transportation Research Board of the National Academy of Sciences, the administrative, collection and enforcement costs of a typical toll facility are 33.5% of the revenue generated. Compare this to the Board’s finding that the administrative cost of the fuel tax is about 1% of revenue.

Tolls Alliance for Toll-Free Interstates ATFI

For example, the federal motor fuels tax, 18.4 cents per gallon, generates one-third fewer dollars in real purchasing terms than when it was last increased in 1993, according to an estimate by the (ANTI) Tax Foundation, a nonpartisan research organization.


“At the state and local levels, gas taxes cover less than half of state and local transportation spending,” said Tax Foundation economist Joseph Henchman. He said proposals to cut mass transit funding or relax federal salary standards for laborers on public works projects won’t solve the underlying problem, which is that “every year we’re spending a little more and taking in a little less.”

The Problem with Cheap Gas

Quoting some dumbass progressive group...yeah, impressive

 

[Freewill]

"trickle down" economics was a failure when the Gipper did it & it has devastated this great nation's middle-class. Thanks Ronnie.

How exactly so? Considering Reagan saved the country from the malaise of Carter and ushered in the greatest expansion of the economy in peace time history one would think you folks would quite trying to blame the mess 8 years of democrat rule and 6 years of Obama has caused. Reagan was our last great president you need to show respect.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

JFK cut the upper tax rate from 90% to 65%

Are you supporting JFKs 65% tax rate?

So you believe in JFK's philosophy?

If you do then you should not be a Democrat because Democrats hates these ideas.

“Our tax system still siphons out of the private economy too large a share of personal and business purchasing power and reduces the incentive for risk, investment and effort – thereby aborting our recoveries and stifling our national growth rate.”

– John F. Kennedy, Jan. 24, 1963, message to Congress on tax reduction and reform, House Doc. 43, 88th Congress, 1st Session.

“A tax cut means higher family income and higher business profits and a balanced federal budget. Every taxpayer and his family will have more money left over after taxes for a new car, a new home, new conveniences, education and investment. Every businessman can keep a higher percentage of his profits in his cash register or put it to work expanding or improving his business, and as the national income grows, the federal government will ultimately end up with more revenues.”

– John F. Kennedy, Sept. 18, 1963, radio and television address to the nation on tax-reduction bill


Read more at John F. Kennedy on taxes

I don't know if I would support his 65% tax rate

Maybe 50%

NO LOOPHOLES though. Top rate of 70% for $100+ million incomes

That worked for the French, right?

Oh, wait

Sure it did. And MANY other nations, including the US UNTIL Ronnie's 'trickle down'

EFFECTIVE tax rates

D'oh!!!