I Have A Question For Republicans

[ClosedCaption]

I'm not pretending to be a tax expert but what I do know is how to look up information and recognize when people are lying.

You say
Experts say:

Budget surplus is a phenomena that is opposite of budget deficit. It is an important tool of fiscal policy. A government runs a budget surplus when the economy is under inflationary pressure. A budget surplus means either an increase in income through increase in taxes or decrease in government expenditures or both. This decreases aggregate demand, brings down price level and cools off the economy.

Formula
Budget Surplus = Government's Total Income − Government's Total Expenditures

Budget Surplus | Definition | Formula | Example


Not one independent body is claiming there was no surplus. That news only comes from Reality haters like yourself who like to replace words with other words. I say Surplus you deficit

You just agreed with me ...

Budget Surplus = Government's Total Income − Government's Total Expenditures

So, since every year the national debt went up, government's total expenditures were greater than its total income and there was never a "surplus"

You should send your resume to the CBO

Why? They are a political organization not an economic one. Which his why they lie to you.

In your world things are whatever you say they are.


I can only deal in facts, and people much smarter than you or I agree there was a surplus. You can talk in circles all you like but we had one. Bush admitted we did and used it as a justification for tax cuts.

Now years later you decide to put some spin on it

 

[Redfish]

Your issue is not with rich people, its with the tax code which was written mostly by democrats.

I hope you washed your hands after "expelling" that bolded statement above.

which party has controlled congress for most of the last 80 years? THAT party is responsible for most of the tax code that gives breaks to the rich.

 

[kaz]

You just agreed with me ...

Budget Surplus = Government's Total Income − Government's Total Expenditures

So, since every year the national debt went up, government's total expenditures were greater than its total income and there was never a "surplus"

You should send your resume to the CBO

Why? They are a political organization not an economic one. Which his why they lie to you.

In your world things are whatever you say they are.


I can only deal in facts, and people much smarter than you or I agree there was a surplus. You can talk in circles all you like but we had one. Bush admitted we did and used it as a justification for tax cuts.

Now years later you decide to put some spin on it

Yes, my world is the field of economics. Yours is leftist political ideology.

Explain how if your income exceeds your expenditures your debt can go up

 

[JoeNormal]

So, if I manage to have a pretty good business profit one year, I can buy myself a Lear Jet and simply state that my business expense was more than my profit so screw you, tax man. Love capitalism.

Can you? Depends whether that's a legitimate expense for the business you're in or not

I've never seen a business that couldn't justify a boondoggle one way or another.

Sweeping statement. Here and there, sure. But it's not just the government who cares if you waste money, it's the owners/investors

Owners and investors know just above 0 about how things get done in a corporation. They get their gut-feel investment information from the CEO who obviously makes the future look as bright as possible.

Bull crap, that's just your communist swill. I do this for a living, you're full of shit

You do what for a living, offer investment advice on companies you've never worked for?

 

[kaz]

Can you? Depends whether that's a legitimate expense for the business you're in or not

I've never seen a business that couldn't justify a boondoggle one way or another.

Sweeping statement. Here and there, sure. But it's not just the government who cares if you waste money, it's the owners/investors

Owners and investors know just above 0 about how things get done in a corporation. They get their gut-feel investment information from the CEO who obviously makes the future look as bright as possible.

Bull crap, that's just your communist swill. I do this for a living, you're full of shit

You do what for a living, offer investment advice on companies you've never worked for?

MBA, career in management and management consulting and I've bought and sold five businesses

 

[JoeNormal]

I've never seen a business that couldn't justify a boondoggle one way or another.

Sweeping statement. Here and there, sure. But it's not just the government who cares if you waste money, it's the owners/investors

Owners and investors know just above 0 about how things get done in a corporation. They get their gut-feel investment information from the CEO who obviously makes the future look as bright as possible.

Bull crap, that's just your communist swill. I do this for a living, you're full of shit

You do what for a living, offer investment advice on companies you've never worked for?

MBA, career in management and management consulting and I've bought and sold five businesses

Yet you proudly announce that your background is in economics as if that field still had any cachet. What's your preferred method of prediction these days, tea leaves or entrails?

 

[kaz]

Sweeping statement. Here and there, sure. But it's not just the government who cares if you waste money, it's the owners/investors

Owners and investors know just above 0 about how things get done in a corporation. They get their gut-feel investment information from the CEO who obviously makes the future look as bright as possible.

Bull crap, that's just your communist swill. I do this for a living, you're full of shit

You do what for a living, offer investment advice on companies you've never worked for?

MBA, career in management and management consulting and I've bought and sold five businesses

Yet you proudly announce that your background is in economics as if that field still had any cachet. What's your preferred method of prediction these days, tea leaves or entrails?

We weren't talking about economic predictions, we were discussing measuring profits and losses. Try to keep up

 

[g5000]

Clinton never left a surplus....end of thread.

Does not negate the question. The deficit was near zero, and Bush skyrocketed it again.

Not even Gingrich believes that bullshit

Bill Clinton Legacy of Myththology and Surplus.

You'll notice the article conveniently stops before Bush's deficits. We went from an $18 billion deficit under Clinton to a $1.9 trillion deficit under Bush.

Government - Historical Debt Outstanding - Annual 2000 - 2015

 

[g5000]

If you remember, Clinton also left a recession. A dot-com collapse and Y2K. What Bush did was stop the recession without a huge effect on the economy. Something that Obama should have taken note.

That recession doesn't even compare to the crash at the end of the Bush years.

Not even close.

 

[nat4900]

You'll notice the article conveniently stops before Bush's deficits. We went from an $18 billion deficit under Clinton to a $1.9 trillion deficit under Bush.

Government - Historical Debt Outstanding - Annual 2000 - 2015

.....AND, the wars' cost were "off-budget".....

 

[g5000]

We had a booming economy during the Clinton years, and we created 23 million jobs.

Bush had a net loss of jobs, and the economy crashed catastrophically. The entire planet damn near plunged into the worst Depression in history.

But this isn't a Republican or Democrat thing. That's just what the powers-that-be want you rubes to bleev, it's all the other guys' fault.

You've been divided and conquered, rubes. The politicians live in mortal fear you will catch on and unite and throw them all into the fires of hell.

So you just go on and keep blaming them Republicans, or keep blaming the Democrats. You just go right on and play into their hands over and over and over and over.

 

[JoeNormal]

Owners and investors know just above 0 about how things get done in a corporation. They get their gut-feel investment information from the CEO who obviously makes the future look as bright as possible.

Bull crap, that's just your communist swill. I do this for a living, you're full of shit

You do what for a living, offer investment advice on companies you've never worked for?

MBA, career in management and management consulting and I've bought and sold five businesses

Yet you proudly announce that your background is in economics as if that field still had any cachet. What's your preferred method of prediction these days, tea leaves or entrails?

We weren't talking about economic predictions, we were discussing measuring profits and losses. Try to keep up

Ok, then. How do you PREDICT profits and losses? That's what investing is all about.

 

[kaz]

Bull crap, that's just your communist swill. I do this for a living, you're full of shit

You do what for a living, offer investment advice on companies you've never worked for?

MBA, career in management and management consulting and I've bought and sold five businesses

Yet you proudly announce that your background is in economics as if that field still had any cachet. What's your preferred method of prediction these days, tea leaves or entrails?

We weren't talking about economic predictions, we were discussing measuring profits and losses. Try to keep up

Ok, then. How do you PREDICT profits and losses? That's what investing is all about.

That's a pretty broad question, are we talking about individual investors? Companies? In what context? Can you clarify that question a bit?

 

[JoeNormal]

You do what for a living, offer investment advice on companies you've never worked for?

MBA, career in management and management consulting and I've bought and sold five businesses

Yet you proudly announce that your background is in economics as if that field still had any cachet. What's your preferred method of prediction these days, tea leaves or entrails?

We weren't talking about economic predictions, we were discussing measuring profits and losses. Try to keep up

Ok, then. How do you PREDICT profits and losses? That's what investing is all about.

That's a pretty broad question, are we talking about individual investors? Companies? In what context? Can you clarify that question a bit?

You took issue with my statement that investors know practically nothing about how things get done in a corporation so base their willingness to invest in whatever pretty story the CEO can sell. That context.

 

[kaz]

MBA, career in management and management consulting and I've bought and sold five businesses

Yet you proudly announce that your background is in economics as if that field still had any cachet. What's your preferred method of prediction these days, tea leaves or entrails?

We weren't talking about economic predictions, we were discussing measuring profits and losses. Try to keep up

Ok, then. How do you PREDICT profits and losses? That's what investing is all about.

That's a pretty broad question, are we talking about individual investors? Companies? In what context? Can you clarify that question a bit?

You took issue with my statement that investors know practically nothing about how things get done in a corporation so base their willingness to invest in whatever pretty story the CEO can sell. That context.

Yes investors are all over corporations. Particularly large shareholders and institutional investors. Your view that Corporations are unaccountable to their shareholders is retarded, there is intense scrutiny and demand for performance

 

[JoeNormal]

Yet you proudly announce that your background is in economics as if that field still had any cachet. What's your preferred method of prediction these days, tea leaves or entrails?

We weren't talking about economic predictions, we were discussing measuring profits and losses. Try to keep up

Ok, then. How do you PREDICT profits and losses? That's what investing is all about.

That's a pretty broad question, are we talking about individual investors? Companies? In what context? Can you clarify that question a bit?

You took issue with my statement that investors know practically nothing about how things get done in a corporation so base their willingness to invest in whatever pretty story the CEO can sell. That context.

Yes investors are all over corporations. Particularly large shareholders and institutional investors. Your view that Corporations are unaccountable to their shareholders is retarded, there is intense scrutiny and demand for performance

I didn't say corporations were unaccountable to their stockholders. I said their stockholders know almost nothing about what goes on within them. Their decision to invest is based on whatever the CEO wants to tell them. The investment can be disastrous if the corporation that they know almost nothing about takes a dive.

 

[Jarhead]

If you know the answers to most...or ANY of these questions, you would never had made the statement you made.

The question WAS and IS.....Can a Trump bitch about the U.S. having the highest tax rate for businesses and STILL pay ZERO in taxes???

I assumed your understanding of the tax code, c-corps, employer match tax, etc. would have made your question invalid as he has not paid "zero" in taxes.

My mistake was assuming you understood the details of a subject you are debating on.

I was wrong.

 

[Jarhead]

We weren't talking about economic predictions, we were discussing measuring profits and losses. Try to keep up

Ok, then. How do you PREDICT profits and losses? That's what investing is all about.

That's a pretty broad question, are we talking about individual investors? Companies? In what context? Can you clarify that question a bit?

You took issue with my statement that investors know practically nothing about how things get done in a corporation so base their willingness to invest in whatever pretty story the CEO can sell. That context.

Yes investors are all over corporations. Particularly large shareholders and institutional investors. Your view that Corporations are unaccountable to their shareholders is retarded, there is intense scrutiny and demand for performance

I didn't say corporations were unaccountable to their stockholders. I said their stockholders know almost nothing about what goes on within them. Their decision to invest is based on whatever the CEO wants to tell them. The investment can be disastrous if the corporation that they know almost nothing about takes a dive.

one walks a dangerous legal line if one opts to invest in a corporation based on the words of the CEO. Such can be misconstrued as insider trading.
Most make decisions based on LEGAL press releases and advice by their financial advisors based on market trends.

 

[JoeNormal]

Ok, then. How do you PREDICT profits and losses? That's what investing is all about.

That's a pretty broad question, are we talking about individual investors? Companies? In what context? Can you clarify that question a bit?

You took issue with my statement that investors know practically nothing about how things get done in a corporation so base their willingness to invest in whatever pretty story the CEO can sell. That context.

Yes investors are all over corporations. Particularly large shareholders and institutional investors. Your view that Corporations are unaccountable to their shareholders is retarded, there is intense scrutiny and demand for performance

I didn't say corporations were unaccountable to their stockholders. I said their stockholders know almost nothing about what goes on within them. Their decision to invest is based on whatever the CEO wants to tell them. The investment can be disastrous if the corporation that they know almost nothing about takes a dive.

one walks a dangerous legal line if one opts to invest in a corporation based on the words of the CEO. Such can be misconstrued as insider trading.
Most make decisions based on LEGAL press releases and advice by their financial advisors based on market trends.

I'm really talking about stockholder meetings, TV appearances, press releases and such.

 

[Redfish]

If you remember, Clinton also left a recession. A dot-com collapse and Y2K. What Bush did was stop the recession without a huge effect on the economy. Something that Obama should have taken note.

That recession doesn't even compare to the crash at the end of the Bush years.

Not even close.

Got it, Bush was responsible for everything including the demise of the dinosaurs and the Chicago fire. we understand your illogical partisan rants.

Now, there was no recession in 2008. There was a market correction. Those happen periodically. When everyone was selling in 08, I bought. Now that the market has turned around very nicely I am enjoying profits of 200 and 300% on some stocks. So are other intelligent investors who understand the that the left wing bullshit about recession was just that, bullshit.