Republicans: why raising taxes on the wealthy is good for the economy

[sealybobo]

This is Obamas recovery. You can't say Obama sucks and these guys are good. You'd have to prove that with examples of jobs they created.

It is Obama's recovery. Thanks for agreeing.
What does Obama's recovery look like:
Lowest work force participation rate since the 1970s
Stagnant household income
Stagnant GDP growth
Stagnant household wealth
High unemployment among 21-30 year old
Highest level of government dependence in history
Highest government deficits during a recovery.

In short it is the worst recovery on record. Because Obama's policies suck and have failed.

For you loser not us.

Are you a citizen of some other country? That would explain a lot.

The economy is great for me. Its also great for every cocky right winger on usmb. You must be a poor right winger. Go back to school or start a business whiner

It's great for all parasites sucking on the government teat. It sucks for people who actually have to produce something people want to buy.

I don't see people producing products people want complaining. What's your complaint whiner?

 

[sealybobo]

Great article. All should read.

Taxing the rich is good for the economy Marketplace.org

"One of the most pernicious economic falsehoods you'll hear during the next seven months of political campaigning is there's a necessary tradeoff between fairness and growth. By this view, if we raise taxes on the wealthy the economy can't grow as fast.

Wrong. Taxes were far higher on top incomes in the three decades after World War II than they've been since. And the distribution of income was far more equal. Yet the American economy grew faster in those years than it's grown since tax rates were slashed in 1981.

This wasn't a post-war aberration. Bill Clinton raised taxes on the wealthy in the 1990s, and the economy produced faster job growth and higher wages than it did after George W. Bush slashed taxes on the rich in his first term.

If you need more evidence, consider modern Germany, where taxes on the wealthy are much higher than they are here and the distribution of income is far more equal. But Germany's average annual growth has been faster than that in the United States.

You see, higher taxes on the wealthy can finance more investments in infrastructure and education, which are vital for growth and the economic prospects of the middle class.

Higher taxes on the wealthy also allow for lower taxes on the middle -- potentially restoring enough middle class purchasing power to keep the economy going."

not taxing the rich but giving them subsidies would be good for the country since the wealthy are wealthy because they ( think Steve Jobs) have invented things that we all want to buy to increase our standard of living.

Steve Jobs was an anomaly. Most rich people are more like that worthless sack of shit Lloyd Blankfein.

too stupid of course all the goods and service we use were invented and sold by someone. THe objective of govt should be to encourage the process that got us from the stone age to here, not to tax it and slow it down.

Most of the technological wonders that you admire were created by people in the upper end of the working class - not by the rich. A few marketing successes were created by the rich but that's not what makes our modern world great.

The people who created them became rich. Do the names Henry Ford, John D. Rockefeller, Cornelius Vanderbilt and Andrew Carnegie mean anything to you?

Are they complaining? No just u

 

[sealybobo]

not taxing the rich but giving them subsidies would be good for the country since the wealthy are wealthy because they ( think Steve Jobs) have invented things that we all want to buy to increase our standard of living.

Steve Jobs was an anomaly. Most rich people are more like that worthless sack of shit Lloyd Blankfein.

too stupid of course all the goods and service we use were invented and sold by someone. THe objective of govt should be to encourage the process that got us from the stone age to here, not to tax it and slow it down.

Most of the technological wonders that you admire were created by people in the upper end of the working class - not by the rich. A few marketing successes were created by the rich but that's not what makes our modern world great.

I wish Edison would have charged 1 billion for electricity and said "fuck you all free market capitalism bitches". Or he should have demanded yellowstone.

And why would you want him to do that, because you hate electric lighting?

Healthcare giants before obamacare priced their products so 50% couldn't afford it. I'd like for you not to have electricity.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Great article. All should read.

Taxing the rich is good for the economy Marketplace.org

"One of the most pernicious economic falsehoods you'll hear during the next seven months of political campaigning is there's a necessary tradeoff between fairness and growth. By this view, if we raise taxes on the wealthy the economy can't grow as fast.

Wrong. Taxes were far higher on top incomes in the three decades after World War II than they've been since. And the distribution of income was far more equal. Yet the American economy grew faster in those years than it's grown since tax rates were slashed in 1981.

This wasn't a post-war aberration. Bill Clinton raised taxes on the wealthy in the 1990s, and the economy produced faster job growth and higher wages than it did after George W. Bush slashed taxes on the rich in his first term.

If you need more evidence, consider modern Germany, where taxes on the wealthy are much higher than they are here and the distribution of income is far more equal. But Germany's average annual growth has been faster than that in the United States.

You see, higher taxes on the wealthy can finance more investments in infrastructure and education, which are vital for growth and the economic prospects of the middle class.

Higher taxes on the wealthy also allow for lower taxes on the middle -- potentially restoring enough middle class purchasing power to keep the economy going."

not taxing the rich but giving them subsidies would be good for the country since the wealthy are wealthy because they ( think Steve Jobs) have invented things that we all want to buy to increase our standard of living.

Steve Jobs was an anomaly. Most rich people are more like that worthless sack of shit Lloyd Blankfein.

too stupid of course all the goods and service we use were invented and sold by someone. THe objective of govt should be to encourage the process that got us from the stone age to here, not to tax it and slow it down.

Most of the technological wonders that you admire were created by people in the upper end of the working class - not by the rich. A few marketing successes were created by the rich but that's not what makes our modern world great.

I wish Edison would have charged 1 billion for electricity and said "fuck you all free market capitalism bitches". Or he should have demanded yellolwstone.

Lmao

God damn you are fucking ignorant and stupid as hell

You Don't even know the fight over A.C. And D.C. ? The fight between Edison and Telsa?

Yea you are 13

 

[sealybobo]

not taxing the rich but giving them subsidies would be good for the country since the wealthy are wealthy because they ( think Steve Jobs) have invented things that we all want to buy to increase our standard of living.

Steve Jobs was an anomaly. Most rich people are more like that worthless sack of shit Lloyd Blankfein.

too stupid of course all the goods and service we use were invented and sold by someone. THe objective of govt should be to encourage the process that got us from the stone age to here, not to tax it and slow it down.

Most of the technological wonders that you admire were created by people in the upper end of the working class - not by the rich. A few marketing successes were created by the rich but that's not what makes our modern world great.

I wish Edison would have charged 1 billion for electricity and said "fuck you all free market capitalism bitches". Or he should have demanded yellolwstone.

Lmao

God damn you are fucking ignorant and stupid as hell

You Don't even know the fight over A.C. And D.C. ? The fight between Edison and Telsa?

Yea you are 13

Oh yea. Sorry I'm high

 

[bripat9643]

It is Obama's recovery. Thanks for agreeing.
What does Obama's recovery look like:
Lowest work force participation rate since the 1970s
Stagnant household income
Stagnant GDP growth
Stagnant household wealth
High unemployment among 21-30 year old
Highest level of government dependence in history
Highest government deficits during a recovery.

In short it is the worst recovery on record. Because Obama's policies suck and have failed.

For you loser not us.

Are you a citizen of some other country? That would explain a lot.

The economy is great for me. Its also great for every cocky right winger on usmb. You must be a poor right winger. Go back to school or start a business whiner

It's great for all parasites sucking on the government teat. It sucks for people who actually have to produce something people want to buy.

I don't see people producing products people want complaining. What's your complaint whiner?

You've never heard anyone complain about paying taxes?

You're obviously just a lying hosebag.

 

[bripat9643]

Steve Jobs was an anomaly. Most rich people are more like that worthless sack of shit Lloyd Blankfein.

too stupid of course all the goods and service we use were invented and sold by someone. THe objective of govt should be to encourage the process that got us from the stone age to here, not to tax it and slow it down.

Most of the technological wonders that you admire were created by people in the upper end of the working class - not by the rich. A few marketing successes were created by the rich but that's not what makes our modern world great.

I wish Edison would have charged 1 billion for electricity and said "fuck you all free market capitalism bitches". Or he should have demanded yellowstone.

And why would you want him to do that, because you hate electric lighting?

Healthcare giants before obamacare priced their products so 50% couldn't afford it. I'd like for you not to have electricity.

Actually about 95% of the population could afford it, so you're obviously full of shit.

If I couldn't afford electric lighting, then neither would about 90% of the population. That's the logic of the liberal numskull: Deny something to 90% of the population because of their envy of the top 5%.

 

[Staidhup]

The very principle of increased taxation to solve what ails this nation is misguided for it will only enhance the further growth of government and program spending that is devoid of longevity and sustainability. Competition fuels innovation and growth. Would it not be wiser to enhance private sector job growth which would result in greater disposable income and tax revenue? A flat tax rate of 25% for both personal and corporate sectors would in my opinion rekindle opportunities and favor investment back into the country, economy, opportunity, jobs, and growth in the middle class. The primary problem as I see it is that the doctrine of John Maynard Keynes remains prevalent within academia yet has been proven to only serve government, large corporate interests, lobbyists, special interest groups, and Freedom of choice.

 

[JoeNormal]

We argued this in 2008. Stop defending the criminal mortgage and bankers and GOP. Next you'll bring up Freddy and fanny.

What was criminal about what they did? Who went to jail? Where are the charges?
More tlaking points debunked last Ice Age.

They should be charged with gross negligence and criminal incompetence for constructing such a fragile house of cards. They should be charged with fraud for claiming that it was sound and robust. And they should be charged with collusion for gaming the system and then covering each others backs.

In short, they didn't break any laws.

Thanks for playing!

There are laws against everything I listed.

There's a crime called "gaming the system?" Strange, I've never heard of it. Can you quote the statute?

It's called collusion, dummy. I guess you must've missed that part.

 

[JoeNormal]

Great article. All should read.

Taxing the rich is good for the economy Marketplace.org

"One of the most pernicious economic falsehoods you'll hear during the next seven months of political campaigning is there's a necessary tradeoff between fairness and growth. By this view, if we raise taxes on the wealthy the economy can't grow as fast.

Wrong. Taxes were far higher on top incomes in the three decades after World War II than they've been since. And the distribution of income was far more equal. Yet the American economy grew faster in those years than it's grown since tax rates were slashed in 1981.

This wasn't a post-war aberration. Bill Clinton raised taxes on the wealthy in the 1990s, and the economy produced faster job growth and higher wages than it did after George W. Bush slashed taxes on the rich in his first term.

If you need more evidence, consider modern Germany, where taxes on the wealthy are much higher than they are here and the distribution of income is far more equal. But Germany's average annual growth has been faster than that in the United States.

You see, higher taxes on the wealthy can finance more investments in infrastructure and education, which are vital for growth and the economic prospects of the middle class.

Higher taxes on the wealthy also allow for lower taxes on the middle -- potentially restoring enough middle class purchasing power to keep the economy going."

not taxing the rich but giving them subsidies would be good for the country since the wealthy are wealthy because they ( think Steve Jobs) have invented things that we all want to buy to increase our standard of living.

Steve Jobs was an anomaly. Most rich people are more like that worthless sack of shit Lloyd Blankfein.

too stupid of course all the goods and service we use were invented and sold by someone. THe objective of govt should be to encourage the process that got us from the stone age to here, not to tax it and slow it down.

Most of the technological wonders that you admire were created by people in the upper end of the working class - not by the rich. A few marketing successes were created by the rich but that's not what makes our modern world great.

The people who created them became rich. Do the names Henry Ford, John D. Rockefeller, Cornelius Vanderbilt and Andrew Carnegie mean anything to you?

You could list all the people who got rich from their inventions on a single sheet of paper. OTOH, there are millions of inventions the didn't earn their inventor much more than a pat on the back.

 

[Flash]

Steve Jobs was an anomaly. Most rich people are more like that worthless sack of shit Lloyd Blankfein.

More class envy and greed from a Moon Bat?

Most rich people have created many jobs and have paid tons in taxes to support your precious Libtard welfare state and have given a significant amount to charity. In addition they probably made their money providing goods or services other people desired.

Of course we do have dumbass billionaires like that idiot Tom Steyer that uses his money to buy environmental wacko Democrat votes. Is he the "worthless sack of shit" that you are talking about?

 

[Flash]

[


too stupid of course all the goods and service we use were invented and sold by someone. THe objective of govt should be to encourage the process that got us from the stone age to here, not to tax it and slow it down.

Correct.

The government should encourage capitalism, freedom and innovation so that more wealth will be created rather than punishing the creation of the wealth by taking the profits away from those that earned it and giving it to those that didn't earn it.

The best way to entourage those things is for the government simply to leave Americans alone with less taxation and regulation. It ain't rocket science.

 

[Flash]

Healthcare giants before obamacare priced their products so 50% couldn't afford it. I'd like for you not to have electricity.

Health insurance has always been affordable for most Americans. If you couldn't afford health insurance you probably were spending your money on other things like pot or Colt 45 Malt Liquor or you were simply too sorry to be productive.

However, Obama fixed that didn't he? He made health insurance much more expensive for everybody so that the sorry unproductive greedy welfare queens could get their filthy ass subsidies.

 

[zeke]

Health insurance has always been affordable for most Americans. If you couldn't afford health insurance you probably were spending your money on other things like pot or Colt 45 Malt Liquor or you were simply too sorry to be productive.

What good does it do you to put your stupidity on display? I mean you can and do all the time. But what do you get out of it? Besides being called stupid. Is that what your mom called you all the time? Stupid? Mothers know a lot about their kids.

 

[sealybobo]

Ford pay

not taxing the rich but giving them subsidies would be gmuch.for the country since the wealthy are wealthy because they ( think Steve Jobs) have invented things that we all want to buy to increase our standard of living.

Ste

too stupid of course all the goods and service we use were invented and sold by someone. THe objective of govt should be to encourage the process that got us from the stone age to here, not to tax it and slow it down.

Most of the technological wonders that you admire were created by people in the upper end of the working class - not by the rich. A few marketing successes were created by the rich but that's not what makes our modern world great.

The people who created them became rich. Do the names Henry Ford, John D. Rockefeller, Cornelius Vanderbilt and Andrew Carnegie mean anything to you?

You could list all the people who got rich from their inventions on a single sheet of paper. OTOH, there are millions of inventions the didn't earn their inventor much more than a pat on the back.

payspays employees if they invent something. Non union companies say anything you invented on the clock is their intellectual property.

And as a salesperson those arent your accounts they are the companies. I worked for a company they paid is 15%. This guy landed gm eds and all their partners and was selling $1 million a month and they changed the deal because 15% was too much

Healthcare giants before obamacare priced their products so 50% couldn't afford it. I'd like for you not to have electricity.

Health insurance has always been affordable for most Americans. If you couldn't afford health insurance you probably were spending your money on other things like pot or Colt 45 Malt Liquor or you were simply too sorry to be productive.

However, Obama fixed that didn't he? He made health insurance much more expensive for everybody so that the sorry unproductive greedy welfare queens could get their filthy ass subsidies.

The costs went up a lot from 2000 to 2006. How or why do you fucking think healthcare reform got passed? Remember those poor people don't vote so it was middle class people who wanted it.

And you complain the economy isn't good because no ones buying anything but meanwhile you want all their disposable income going to healthcare? You don't know what you're saying.

 

[Flash]

Health insurance has always been affordable for most Americans. If you couldn't afford health insurance you probably were spending your money on other things like pot or Colt 45 Malt Liquor or you were simply too sorry to be productive.

What good does it do you to put your stupidity on display? I mean you can and do all the time. But what do you get out of it? Besides being called stupid. Is that what your mom called you all the time? Stupid? Mothers know a lot about their kids.

I know this concept of personal responsibility always eludes you Moon Bats. You don't understand it so you ridicule it.

You hate the idea that people should be responsible to provide for their own health care, food, housing, birth control and everything else.

You, being a Moon Bat, think that you are entitled to those things simply because you are alive.

The stupid thing about health insurance in the US is that prior to this Obamacare disaster not having health insurance did not mean that you couldn't get health care if you really needed it. Even if you were a sorry ass pot smoking welfare queen.

All Obamacare did was create another expensive entitlement that ran up the cost for everybody in order to provide subsidies to those that neither needed it or deserved it.

 

[Flash]

The costs went up a lot from 2000 to 2006. How or why do you fucking think healthcare reform got passed? Remember those poor people don't vote so it was middle class people who wanted it.

And you complain the economy isn't good because no ones buying anything but meanwhile you want all their disposable income going to healthcare? You don't know what you're saying.

Prices increases in health insurance were largely caused by government interferences in the marketplace and the technology explosion that used more expensive equipment that somebody had to pay for.

It the filthy ass government hadn't put its stupid requirements on what insurance had to cover and tried to restrict interstate competitiveness the cost would have been a lot less.

Once again the government is the problem.

 

[RKMBrown]

Great article. All should read.

Taxing the rich is good for the economy Marketplace.org

"One of the most pernicious economic falsehoods you'll hear during the next seven months of political campaigning is there's a necessary tradeoff between fairness and growth. By this view, if we raise taxes on the wealthy the economy can't grow as fast.

Wrong. Taxes were far higher on top incomes in the three decades after World War II than they've been since. And the distribution of income was far more equal. Yet the American economy grew faster in those years than it's grown since tax rates were slashed in 1981.

This wasn't a post-war aberration. Bill Clinton raised taxes on the wealthy in the 1990s, and the economy produced faster job growth and higher wages than it did after George W. Bush slashed taxes on the rich in his first term.

If you need more evidence, consider modern Germany, where taxes on the wealthy are much higher than they are here and the distribution of income is far more equal. But Germany's average annual growth has been faster than that in the United States.

You see, higher taxes on the wealthy can finance more investments in infrastructure and education, which are vital for growth and the economic prospects of the middle class.

Higher taxes on the wealthy also allow for lower taxes on the middle -- potentially restoring enough middle class purchasing power to keep the economy going."

The OP is a MORON.

 

[The Rabbi]

Great article. All should read.

Taxing the rich is good for the economy Marketplace.org

"One of the most pernicious economic falsehoods you'll hear during the next seven months of political campaigning is there's a necessary tradeoff between fairness and growth. By this view, if we raise taxes on the wealthy the economy can't grow as fast.

Wrong. Taxes were far higher on top incomes in the three decades after World War II than they've been since. And the distribution of income was far more equal. Yet the American economy grew faster in those years than it's grown since tax rates were slashed in 1981.

This wasn't a post-war aberration. Bill Clinton raised taxes on the wealthy in the 1990s, and the economy produced faster job growth and higher wages than it did after George W. Bush slashed taxes on the rich in his first term.

If you need more evidence, consider modern Germany, where taxes on the wealthy are much higher than they are here and the distribution of income is far more equal. But Germany's average annual growth has been faster than that in the United States.

You see, higher taxes on the wealthy can finance more investments in infrastructure and education, which are vital for growth and the economic prospects of the middle class.

Higher taxes on the wealthy also allow for lower taxes on the middle -- potentially restoring enough middle class purchasing power to keep the economy going."

not taxing the rich but giving them subsidies would be good for the country since the wealthy are wealthy because they ( think Steve Jobs) have invented things that we all want to buy to increase our standard of living.

Steve Jobs was an anomaly. Most rich people are more like that worthless sack of shit Lloyd Blankfein.

too stupid of course all the goods and service we use were invented and sold by someone. THe objective of govt should be to encourage the process that got us from the stone age to here, not to tax it and slow it down.

Most of the technological wonders that you admire were created by people in the upper end of the working class - not by the rich. A few marketing successes were created by the rich but that's not what makes our modern world great.

I wish Edison would have charged 1 billion for electricity and said "fuck you all free market capitalism bitches". Or he should have demanded yellowstone.

Edison didnt create electricity.
Do you really think he could have charged 1B for lightbulbs? How many would he have sold? Why don't iPhones cost $10k a piece?

 

[The Rabbi]

What was criminal about what they did? Who went to jail? Where are the charges?
More tlaking points debunked last Ice Age.

They should be charged with gross negligence and criminal incompetence for constructing such a fragile house of cards. They should be charged with fraud for claiming that it was sound and robust. And they should be charged with collusion for gaming the system and then covering each others backs.

In short, they didn't break any laws.

Thanks for playing!

There are laws against everything I listed.

There's a crime called "gaming the system?" Strange, I've never heard of it. Can you quote the statute?

It's called collusion, dummy. I guess you must've missed that part.

What collusion occurred? PLease cite specifics.