Tax Cuts Steal Democracy

[The Derp]

What policy has she implemented that leads to that conclusion?

None yet, but she's only been on the job for a month or two. Plus, there's this from Politico.

 

[The Derp]

Since only one of your links worked, I'll quote from it.

But the study also found more nuanced evidence that the most effective charter schools are those serving lower-income students, especially in urban areas.

But largely, the policy as a whole does not show better outcomes. That is the point. What you are doing here is cherry-picking. Which would be a Russian Active Measure.

 

[hadit]

What policy has she implemented that leads to that conclusion?

None yet, but she's only been on the job for a month or two. Plus, there's this from Politico.

So, no evidence then. In fact, your source says this, which completely demolishes your argument.

But she said in the audio that she doesn’t want to destroy public education — only inject competition.

Seriously, you're not making your case very well.

 

[hadit]

Since only one of your links worked, I'll quote from it.

But the study also found more nuanced evidence that the most effective charter schools are those serving lower-income students, especially in urban areas.

But largely, the policy as a whole does not show better outcomes. That is the point. What you are doing here is cherry-picking. Which would be a Russian Active Measure.

No, I am illustrating that charter schools can indeed bring better educational outcomes to those traditionally underserved by the government schools of the day. There are good reasons for keeping them around. Let's just say it this way. If less than stellar performance in some places is a good reason to eliminate charter schools, what does that say about the truly abysmal schools they're not only competing successfully with, but outperforming?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Well, if you don't understand what "Real Irish GDP" and "Real US GDP" means, you may be a fucking moron.

By context, I meant within the context of its neighbors and competitors. But whatever. All that "growth", yet a persistently high unemployment rate. So if these tax cuts -that have been going on since 2006- have been so wonderful for Irish growth, where are all the jobs and why is their unemployment rate among the highest of western democracies?

I guess you could post a chart showing their unemployment rate over the last 20 years or so, along with another western economy that has higher corporate tax rates, you know, to contextualize it.

Well, I already did that several times. Starting out from the fact that Ireland's 6.4% unemployment rate is higher than the following countries:

Ireland: 6.4%
United States: 4.5%
United Kingdom: 4.8%
Scotland: 4.7%
Israel: 4.3%
Japan: 2.8%
Norway: 4.2%
Denmark: 4.3%
Germany: 3.9%
South Korea: 3.7%
Czech Republic: 4.8%
Iceland: 3.1%
Australia: 5.9%
Switzerland: 3.4%

So we are nearly 2 percentage points below Ireland in unemployment, yet our corporate tax rate is 35%.

So something in your argument doesn't jive because the facts do not.

Starting out from the fact that Ireland's 6.4% unemployment rate is higher than the following countries:

Well, that's just awful!!!
Has the Irish rate improved any since they started cutting their taxes?

 

[The Derp]

Has the Irish rate improved any since they started cutting their taxes?

No. Because they cut the tax rate waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay back in 2006. 11 years have passed. For this, they have only 130,000 jobs to show for it, according to a post from one of your Russian comrades. That's less than 12,000 jobs a year, 1,000 jobs a month. Obama created almost twice as many jobs in one month this past January than Ireland created from 11 years of tax cuts.

 

[The Derp]

So, no evidence then. In fact, your source says this, which completely demolishes your argument. But she said in the audio that she doesn’t want to destroy public education — only inject competition.

...by using taxpayer dollars to fund it. So it's not really "free market" or "competition" if the government is picking winners and losers by taking public school funding and giving it to charter schools, is it?

 

[The Derp]

No, I am illustrating that charter schools can indeed bring better educational outcomes to those traditionally underserved by the government schools of the day. T

And then, at the same time, charter schools bring worse educational outcomes to those traditionally underserved by public schools. That's why I said they do no better or worse.

 

[hadit]

So, no evidence then. In fact, your source says this, which completely demolishes your argument. But she said in the audio that she doesn’t want to destroy public education — only inject competition.

...by using taxpayer dollars to fund it. So it's not really "free market" or "competition" if the government is picking winners and losers by taking public school funding and giving it to charter schools, is it?

Not so. The government is still funding the government schools. If they have fewer kids because some lucky ones escape to better schools, they don't need the additional funding. Look at it this way. If the government builds more government schools, does that take money out of existing government schools?

 

[Penelope]

Tax Cuts do a lot of things; increase deficits, explode debts, hurt wage growth...but in concert with unlimited campaign contributions, they actually steal our democracy. The average politician spends about 80% of their time raising money. And from whom are they generally raising the most money? From wealthy donors. And what benefits wealthy donors? Tax cuts. Here are some handy charts showing the extent of the theft of wealth and democracy by the 1% and their Conservative and Neo-Liberal enablers. Since the Reagan tax cuts, working people’s share of the benefits from increased productivity took a sudden turn down:

This resulted in intense concentration of wealth at the top:

And forced working people to spend down savings to get by:

Which forced working people to go into debt: (total household debt as percentage of GDP)

None of which has helped economic growth much: (12-quarter rolling average nominal GDP growth.):

So the conclusion? Trump and the Conservatives' "tax reform" is just more of the same we've heard from them since 1980, and is just a thinly veiled attempt to redistribute wealth from the middle and bottom to the top.

Back in 1776 the tax rate on the US citizen was around 3% and the people rose up and went to war with the punishing government. Today many sheeple pay well over 33% of their hard earned income to a suppressing government just so they can redistribute it to lazy liberal mother fuckers who don't want to work so they can survive. Every time the liberals start campaigning they HOWL how Social Security is going bankrupt and the evil R's want to take it away, yet you never hear from the Libtards, that WELFARE is going bankrupt, because working people pay into the SS system, expecting something back when they retire, those that sit on their liberal sorry asses, expect something but never contribute into it. Liberals hate this country, they hate everyone who works, and really could care less about those that don't do anything, except continue to vote for the same people who give them free stuff. That right there is the "TRUE" stealing of "Democracy". What I earn should be mine not someone elses who didn't earn it. A good liberal is a dead liberal, please abort more liberals in planned parenthood.

View attachment 121451

Its like major thief. You do not know what you are talking about, you listen tot RWNJs.

 

[hadit]

No, I am illustrating that charter schools can indeed bring better educational outcomes to those traditionally underserved by the government schools of the day. T

And then, at the same time, charter schools bring worse educational outcomes to those traditionally underserved by public schools. That's why I said they do no better or worse.

Your source said they do better for those who need them the most. Tell you what, why don't we agree that charter schools should be first perfected in the inner city, where they do the most good?

 

[Penelope]

So, no evidence then. In fact, your source says this, which completely demolishes your argument. But she said in the audio that she doesn’t want to destroy public education — only inject competition.

...by using taxpayer dollars to fund it. So it's not really "free market" or "competition" if the government is picking winners and losers by taking public school funding and giving it to charter schools, is it?

Not so. The government is still funding the government schools. If they have fewer kids because some lucky ones escape to better schools, they don't need the additional funding. Look at it this way. If the government builds more government schools, does that take money out of existing government schools?

All schools are going to be For Profits same with prisons.

 

[hadit]

So, no evidence then. In fact, your source says this, which completely demolishes your argument. But she said in the audio that she doesn’t want to destroy public education — only inject competition.

...by using taxpayer dollars to fund it. So it's not really "free market" or "competition" if the government is picking winners and losers by taking public school funding and giving it to charter schools, is it?

Not so. The government is still funding the government schools. If they have fewer kids because some lucky ones escape to better schools, they don't need the additional funding. Look at it this way. If the government builds more government schools, does that take money out of existing government schools?

All schools are going to be For Profits same with prisons.

Where do you see that happening?

 

[Penelope]

They are getting rich on the ATM tax repeal note how they keep the charitable deduct. This is the biggest money distribution that has ever been, to the rich.

 

[The Derp]

Not so

Really?????? I thought you Conservatives hated the government picking winners and losers? Well this is another about-face Conservatives have done on yet another subject. Oy vey. By taking taxpayer money and giving it to private charter schools, that is quite literally the government picking winners and losers. If charter schools are so great, they shouldn't need public money to operate at all. Yet you are here arguing for that. So this "competition" you are talking about is all a load of horseshit, because if the product offered by charter schools was so wonderful, they wouldn't need taxpayer money to operate. Yet they do.

 

[Penelope]

So you don't have any evidence that tax cuts hurt wage growth?

So here's another one for ya...so take a look at the red line that represents real median weekly earnings for full-time workers and you can plainly see that starting around 1980, it declined and stagnated when prior to that, it was steadily growing.

you can plainly see that starting around 1980, it declined and stagnated when prior to that, it was steadily growing.

It looks like wages were falling from 1972-1980. Average real wages have increased since 1980.
Is that because of tax cuts, despite tax cuts or unrelated to tax cuts?

Well now that they have broken the unions and made states right to work, expect major unemployment and decrease in minimum wages.

 

[The Derp]

Your source said they do better for those who need them the most.

That's not what the source says. What the source says is that they perform no better or worse. And it's SAD! how suddenly, Conservatives are all about the government picking winners and losers.

If charter schools are so great, they wouldn't need public funds to operate, would they?

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Tax Cuts do a lot of things; increase deficits, explode debts, hurt wage growth...but in concert with unlimited campaign contributions, they actually steal our democracy. The average politician spends about 80% of their time raising money. And from whom are they generally raising the most money? From wealthy donors. And what benefits wealthy donors? Tax cuts. Here are some handy charts showing the extent of the theft of wealth and democracy by the 1% and their Conservative and Neo-Liberal enablers. Since the Reagan tax cuts, working people’s share of the benefits from increased productivity took a sudden turn down:

This resulted in intense concentration of wealth at the top:

And forced working people to spend down savings to get by:

Which forced working people to go into debt: (total household debt as percentage of GDP)

None of which has helped economic growth much: (12-quarter rolling average nominal GDP growth.):

So the conclusion? Trump and the Conservatives' "tax reform" is just more of the same we've heard from them since 1980, and is just a thinly veiled attempt to redistribute wealth from the middle and bottom to the top.

Back in 1776 the tax rate on the US citizen was around 3% and the people rose up and went to war with the punishing government. Today many sheeple pay well over 33% of their hard earned income to a suppressing government just so they can redistribute it to lazy liberal mother fuckers who don't want to work so they can survive. Every time the liberals start campaigning they HOWL how Social Security is going bankrupt and the evil R's want to take it away, yet you never hear from the Libtards, that WELFARE is going bankrupt, because working people pay into the SS system, expecting something back when they retire, those that sit on their liberal sorry asses, expect something but never contribute into it. Liberals hate this country, they hate everyone who works, and really could care less about those that don't do anything, except continue to vote for the same people who give them free stuff. That right there is the "TRUE" stealing of "Democracy". What I earn should be mine not someone elses who didn't earn it. A good liberal is a dead liberal, please abort more liberals in planned parenthood.

View attachment 121451

Its like major thief. You do not know what you are talking about, you listen tot RWNJs.

When you go to the store and give up freely your money to purchase a service or good, are you saying this is thievery? Yet when the government takes your money through taxes, then gives it to another, that this isn't?

 

[hadit]

Not so

Really?????? I thought you Conservatives hated the government picking winners and losers? Well this is another about-face Conservatives have done on yet another subject. Oy vey. By taking taxpayer money and giving it to private charter schools, that is quite literally the government picking winners and losers. If charter schools are so great, they shouldn't need public money to operate at all. Yet you are here arguing for that. So this "competition" you are talking about is all a load of horseshit, because if the product offered by charter schools was so wonderful, they wouldn't need taxpayer money to operate. Yet they do.

They're still public schools, only with fewer stupid regulations. Did you forget that and think they were private? If they ran totally without government money at all, guess what they'd be?

Answer: Not even on your radar.

 

[hadit]

Your source said they do better for those who need them the most.

That's not what the source says. What the source says is that they perform no better or worse. And it's SAD! how suddenly, Conservatives are all about the government picking winners and losers.

If charter schools are so great, they wouldn't need public funds to operate, would they?

If that was so, they'd be private schools, and we already know they perform better.