When Did Trump Make You A Keynesian?

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

People seem to think it is the kind of taxes we have which are the problem. It isn't. The problem is exemptions, credits, and deductions.

We could eliminate the federal income tax today, and replace it with a national sales tax, and the day after that both parties would be putting exemptions in the national sales tax code.

Democrats would be exempting milk, Republicans would be exempting yachts. And their campaign coffers would be overflowing with donations from dairy farmers and yacht manufacturers and retailers.

After $1.4 trillion of exemptions were put in the national sales tax, what would have to happen to make up the difference?

You got it. We would have to raise the tax rate on EVERYONE and borrow money.

Just. Like. We. Do. Now.

The problem is and always has been spending, whether in the form of crony handouts or tax expenditures (even though I hate characterizing expenditures as spending, as it is not the government's fucking money).

 

[g5000]

wages are not progressing; especially with no federal pay raise.

If wages are not progressing, demand is too low.

Do you see why we need to keep control of the job market?

Do you understand economics?

Another one of the things which frustrates the shit out of me is politicians who claim they will bring back the jobs which went overseas.

The jobs didn't go overseas. The vast majority of jobs were automated out of existence. They are gone forever.

Most Americans swallow this "I will bring the jobs back" horseshit because they are ignorant. They think we don't make as much stuff any more, and that someone else is making it.

In fact, we are making more stuff than we ever have.

This is another fact the propagandists keep from the rubes.

The fact is we make more stuff, but it takes a lot less people to make it.

So the solution to employment is to EDUCATE OUR WORKFORCE FOR THE JOBS OF TOMORROW.

And that's hard. Very hard. And our politicians are too fucking lazy and too fucking stupid to figure out how to do that. So they take the lazy motherfucking huckster route and tell the Rube Herd, "I'm going to bring back those jobs from overseas!"

Jesus H. Christ.

 

[g5000]

People seem to think it is the kind of taxes we have which are the problem. It isn't. The problem is exemptions, credits, and deductions.

We could eliminate the federal income tax today, and replace it with a national sales tax, and the day after that both parties would be putting exemptions in the national sales tax code.

Democrats would be exempting milk, Republicans would be exempting yachts. And their campaign coffers would be overflowing with donations from dairy farmers and yacht manufacturers and retailers.

After $1.4 trillion of exemptions were put in the national sales tax, what would have to happen to make up the difference?

You got it. We would have to raise the tax rate on EVERYONE and borrow money.

Just. Like. We. Do. Now.

The problem is and always has been spending, whether in the form of crony handouts or tax expenditures (even though I hate characterizing expenditures as spending, as it is not the government's fucking money).

Yes, exactly.

I'll tell you why tax expenditures are called spending.

If you are given food stamps, who paid for it?

Someone else. The government took money from someone else, and spent it on you.

If you are given a tax deduction, who paid for it?

Someone else. The government took money from someone else, and spent it on you.


Tax deductions are paid for by either raising tax rates or by borrowing (which has to be paid back by future taxpayers).

So when you get a tax deduction, you are not "getting to keep more of my own money". You are robbing someone else through higher tax rates and borrowing.

This fact is kept from the rubes. It is astonishing how dumbed down they have become that this simple thing does not penetrate their skulls. They never get it, no matter how many times or ways I explain it.

 

[Meathead]

We've all heard the pseudocon Rube Herd parrot the meme that "tax cuts increase revenues". They get this meme from their propagandists and then repeat it unthinkingly.

There are two key facts which expose the lie hidden in that meme. First, the obvious fact is that if you lower tax rates all the way to zero, you have zero revenues. So at some point, tax cuts fail to increase revenues.

The second fact is one which their propagandists deliberately keep from the rubes. This is a deliberate omission, and therefore a deliberately crafted lie. And that fact is that revenues have also increased after a tax INCREASE.

See for yourself. Here is a history of tax rates: https://files.taxfoundation.org/legacy/docs/fed_individual_rate_history_nominal.pdf

Notice how tax rates increased under Bill Clinton in 1993. The top marginal rate increased from 31 percent to 39.6 percent, and stayed that way until 2001.

Now here is a history of federal revenues: Who Really Pays Uncle Sam's Bills?

Notice how tax revenues INCREASED after the tax rates went UP a whopping 8.6 points:


FY 1991 - $1.05 trillion.
FY 1992 - $1.09 trillion.
FY 1993 - $1.15 trillion.
FY 1994 - $1.26 trillion.
FY 1995 - $1.35 trillion.
FY 1996 - $1.45 trillion.
FY 1997 - $1.58 trillion.
FY 1998 - $1.72 trillion.
FY 1999 - $1.82 trillion.
FY 2000 - $2.03 trillion

Just a few years after Clinton's tax increase, federal revenues had DOUBLED!!!

And after the Bush tax cut expired on the top marginal rate in 2013, federal revenues continued to increase:

FY 2012 - $2.45 trillion.
FY 2013 - $2.77 trillion.
FY 2014 - $3.02 trillion.
FY 2015 - $3.25 trillion.
FY 2016 - $3.27 trillion.
FY 2017 - $3.32 trillion.

So, clearly, increasing or decreasing tax rates a few points here and there has almost nothing to do with revenues.

As Bill Clinton said, "It's the economy, stupid."

By the way, job growth exploded during the higher tax Clinton years. 30 million jobs in 8 years, with less than 5 percent unemployment.

So the next time you are crowing about the current tax rate increasing revenues, you should know your propagandists are counting on you not looking beyond the carefully framed numbers they present to your dumb ass.


But it gets worse. Much worse. You are being even dumber than that.

Because while your pseudocon propagandists are crowing about revenues, they are counting on you not noticing that despite increased revenues, your party and your President are EXPLODING our deficits!

It's called misdirection. A classic magician's trick to fool the rubes.

Trump is on track to blow Obama's debt record wide open. And after whining and whining and whining and whining non-stop for eight years about Obama's spending, your propagandists have gone dark.

And so have you.

The stench of hypocrisy is all over you.

Trump? Hell! It was Reagan! It works!

 

[IM2]

The reason the Republican Party is getting more popular is because it’s the party of Donald Trump, which is the party of results and fulfilled promises

Except people are leaving the republican party.

 

[Meathead]

If you are given a tax deduction, who paid for it?

Someone else. The government took money from someone else, and spent it on you.

This is one of the stupidest things I've read yet.

 

[g5000]

People seem to think it is the kind of taxes we have which are the problem. It isn't. The problem is exemptions, credits, and deductions.

We could eliminate the federal income tax today, and replace it with a national sales tax, and the day after that both parties would be putting exemptions in the national sales tax code.

Democrats would be exempting milk, Republicans would be exempting yachts.

After $1.4 trillion of exemptions were put in the national sales tax, what would have to happen to make up the difference?

Exactly. We would have to raise the tax rate and borrow money.

Just. Like. We. Do. Now.

When you have a spending problem does it really matter?

It's like trying to legalize illegal aliens and not secure the border.

What we need it a control on spending, otherwise they will just spend the increased taxation.

The only way we will grow our economy at a healthy rate is to bring in a lot of immigrants. Another fact kept from pseudocons by their propagandists.

Our birth rate is now below 2. It is at a 30 year low.

To grow an economy, you have to grow your population. Our birth rate is below the replacement rate.

So...we need immigrants. A lot of them.

That's what made America great in the past. That's what will make us great again.

 

[g5000]

If you are given a tax deduction, who paid for it?

Someone else. The government took money from someone else, and spent it on you.

This is one of the stupidest things I've read yet.

Thank you for providing such an immediate example of the tards who never get it.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

So the solution to employment is to EDUCATE OUR WORKFORCE FOR THE JOBS OF TOMORROW.

That's way too cerebral for politicians. Geniuses have trouble forecasting future jobs. Then, there's the problem of paying for programs that will give the worker the education necessary to fill future jobs.

Jobs giving way to automation should put an end to any new immigration. We don't need to further saturate the job market when there are not nearly enough jobs to go around. If 5 workers are chasing the same position, the employer will get bottom dollar for sure.

 

[IM2]

We've all heard the pseudocon Rube Herd parrot the meme that "tax cuts increase revenues". They get this meme from their propagandists and then repeat it unthinkingly.

There are two key facts which expose the lie hidden in that meme. First, the obvious fact is that if you lower tax rates all the way to zero, you have zero revenues. So at some point, tax cuts fail to increase revenues.

The second fact is one which their propagandists deliberately keep from the rubes. This is a deliberate omission, and therefore a deliberately crafted lie. And that fact is that revenues have also increased after a tax INCREASE.

See for yourself. Here is a history of tax rates: https://files.taxfoundation.org/legacy/docs/fed_individual_rate_history_nominal.pdf

Notice how tax rates increased under Bill Clinton in 1993. The top marginal rate increased from 31 percent to 39.6 percent, and stayed that way until 2001.

Now here is a history of federal revenues: Who Really Pays Uncle Sam's Bills?

Notice how tax revenues INCREASED after the tax rates went UP a whopping 8.6 points:


FY 1991 - $1.05 trillion.
FY 1992 - $1.09 trillion.
FY 1993 - $1.15 trillion.
FY 1994 - $1.26 trillion.
FY 1995 - $1.35 trillion.
FY 1996 - $1.45 trillion.
FY 1997 - $1.58 trillion.
FY 1998 - $1.72 trillion.
FY 1999 - $1.82 trillion.
FY 2000 - $2.03 trillion

Just a few years after Clinton's tax increase, federal revenues had DOUBLED!!!

And after the Bush tax cut expired on the top marginal rate in 2013, federal revenues continued to increase:

FY 2012 - $2.45 trillion.
FY 2013 - $2.77 trillion.
FY 2014 - $3.02 trillion.
FY 2015 - $3.25 trillion.
FY 2016 - $3.27 trillion.
FY 2017 - $3.32 trillion.

So, clearly, increasing or decreasing tax rates a few points here and there has almost nothing to do with revenues.

As Bill Clinton said, "It's the economy, stupid."

By the way, job growth exploded during the higher tax Clinton years. 30 million jobs in 8 years, with less than 5 percent unemployment.

So the next time you are crowing about the current tax rate increasing revenues, you should know your propagandists are counting on you not looking beyond the carefully framed numbers they present to your dumb ass.


But it gets worse. Much worse. You are being even dumber than that.

Because while your pseudocon propagandists are crowing about revenues, they are counting on you not noticing that despite increased revenues, your party and your President are EXPLODING our deficits!

It's called misdirection. A classic magician's trick to fool the rubes.

Trump is on track to blow Obama's debt record wide open. And after whining and whining and whining and whining non-stop for eight years about Obama's spending, your propagandists have gone dark.

And so have you.

The stench of hypocrisy is all over you.

Trump? Hell! It was Reagan! It works!

Is that what they told you in Europe? I guess they didn't tell you Reagan raised taxes11 times because his economic policy failed.

 

[Meathead]

If you are given a tax deduction, who paid for it?

Someone else. The government took money from someone else, and spent it on you.

That is absolutely bizarre. Have you had yourself tested?

 

[Meathead]

We've all heard the pseudocon Rube Herd parrot the meme that "tax cuts increase revenues". They get this meme from their propagandists and then repeat it unthinkingly.

There are two key facts which expose the lie hidden in that meme. First, the obvious fact is that if you lower tax rates all the way to zero, you have zero revenues. So at some point, tax cuts fail to increase revenues.

The second fact is one which their propagandists deliberately keep from the rubes. This is a deliberate omission, and therefore a deliberately crafted lie. And that fact is that revenues have also increased after a tax INCREASE.

See for yourself. Here is a history of tax rates: https://files.taxfoundation.org/legacy/docs/fed_individual_rate_history_nominal.pdf

Notice how tax rates increased under Bill Clinton in 1993. The top marginal rate increased from 31 percent to 39.6 percent, and stayed that way until 2001.

Now here is a history of federal revenues: Who Really Pays Uncle Sam's Bills?

Notice how tax revenues INCREASED after the tax rates went UP a whopping 8.6 points:


FY 1991 - $1.05 trillion.
FY 1992 - $1.09 trillion.
FY 1993 - $1.15 trillion.
FY 1994 - $1.26 trillion.
FY 1995 - $1.35 trillion.
FY 1996 - $1.45 trillion.
FY 1997 - $1.58 trillion.
FY 1998 - $1.72 trillion.
FY 1999 - $1.82 trillion.
FY 2000 - $2.03 trillion

Just a few years after Clinton's tax increase, federal revenues had DOUBLED!!!

And after the Bush tax cut expired on the top marginal rate in 2013, federal revenues continued to increase:

FY 2012 - $2.45 trillion.
FY 2013 - $2.77 trillion.
FY 2014 - $3.02 trillion.
FY 2015 - $3.25 trillion.
FY 2016 - $3.27 trillion.
FY 2017 - $3.32 trillion.

So, clearly, increasing or decreasing tax rates a few points here and there has almost nothing to do with revenues.

As Bill Clinton said, "It's the economy, stupid."

By the way, job growth exploded during the higher tax Clinton years. 30 million jobs in 8 years, with less than 5 percent unemployment.

So the next time you are crowing about the current tax rate increasing revenues, you should know your propagandists are counting on you not looking beyond the carefully framed numbers they present to your dumb ass.


But it gets worse. Much worse. You are being even dumber than that.

Because while your pseudocon propagandists are crowing about revenues, they are counting on you not noticing that despite increased revenues, your party and your President are EXPLODING our deficits!

It's called misdirection. A classic magician's trick to fool the rubes.

Trump is on track to blow Obama's debt record wide open. And after whining and whining and whining and whining non-stop for eight years about Obama's spending, your propagandists have gone dark.

And so have you.

The stench of hypocrisy is all over you.

Trump? Hell! It was Reagan! It works!

Is that what they told you in Europe? I guess they didn't tell you Reagan raised taxes11 times because his economic policy failed.

I get that you're black and all that, but do you think you have a right to the property of others? You should get yourself tested too.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

If you are given a tax deduction, who paid for it?

Someone else. The government took money from someone else, and spent it on you.

This is one of the stupidest things I've read yet.

Thank you for providing such an immediate example of the tards who never get it.

He could have responded with some substance, rather than insults, but that reflects the rage that the "unpaid for tax cuts" narrative generates.

That's why I hate characterizing tax "breaks" as spending. It's not government's money. It pisses me off to the point of deadly violence when I hear that shit coming out of the mouths of public servants. It's our fucking money they are taking.

I would agree to some form of flat tax or "fair" tax if that change is accompanied by a constitutional amendment prohibiting deficit spending and borrowing tied to the GDP.

Otherwise, just repeal the 16th Amendment and let the Fed Gov return to its original purpose.

 

[g5000]

Pick a number, any number. Bloat the government spending as much as you want, or shrink it as much as you want. In the end, you will have a number. That is the amount you believe the government will need to perform the tasks you believe it should.

It does not matter if you're a big spending liberal or a tightwad conservative, we all believe the government has to spend money on SOMETHING.

So pick a number, I don't give a shit what that number is.

Now divide that number by the number of American taxpayers. That's the average amount each taxpayer owes the government. If everyone pays, then we have a balanced budget. Awesome.

Now take two neighbors who earn identical incomes. Bob and Jack. In a balanced universe, Bob and Jack would owe identical amounts of tax to the government because they earn identical incomes.

Let's say they each owe $5,000 in tax.

But wait!

Bob bought a certain kind of refrigerator last year that the government wanted him to buy. So he gets a $100 tax credit.

Now Bob only pays $4,900 in taxes instead of $5,000.

Uh oh.

That means the US government is going to be short $100. We will no longer have a balanced budget! We are going to have to borrow $100 from China.

But at least Bob bought the refrigerator the government wanted him to buy. That sure sounds like a conservative free market principle, right? I'm sure the company which makes that particular refrigerator thinks so, and they show their appreciation for America by donating some cash to the politicians who keep that tax credit alive.

But wait.

There are MILLIONS of Americans who took advantage of that tax credit last year! We are going to be HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS out of balance!

We need to fix this.

I'm afraid we are going to have to raise the tax rate on everyone to make up the difference.

And that is how Bob is stealing from every other taxpayer. He is paying less, and so everyone else is going to have to pay more. Or else we are going to have to borrow from China.

We actually do both. We have higher tax rates and massive borrowing.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

I get that you're black and all that, but do you think you have a right to the property of others? You should get yourself tested too.

What the fuck?

His race has exactly FUCKALL to do with this discussion!

Ask yourself why you brought it up.

 

[g5000]

If you don't buy the right kind of refrigerator, the government taxes you more than the person who did. You get punished for not behaving the way the government wants you to.

If you don't take out a mortgage, the government taxes you more than the person who did. You get punished for not behaving the way the government wants you to.

If you don't breed, the government taxes you more than the person who did. You get punished for not behaving the way the government wants you to.

Pseudocons think this interference in the markets and behavioral control is conservatism.

It was no leap at all to tax you more for not buying the right kind of health insurance.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Pick a number, any number. Bloat the government spending as much as you want, or shrink it as much as you want. In the end, you will have a number. That is the amount you believe the government will need to perform the tasks you believe it should.

It does not matter if you're a big spending liberal or a tightwad conservative, we all believe the government has to spend money on SOMETHING.

So pick a number, I don't give a shit what that number is.

Now divide that number by the number of American taxpayers. That's the average amount each taxpayer owes the government. If everyone pays, then we have a balanced budget. Awesome.

Now take two neighbors who earn identical incomes. Bob and Jack. In a balanced universe, Bob and Jack would owe identical amounts of tax to the government because they earn identical incomes.

Let's say they each owe $5,000 in tax.

But wait!

Bob bought a certain kind of refrigerator last year that the government wanted him to buy. So he gets a $100 tax credit.

Now Bob only pays $4,900 in taxes instead of $5,000.

Uh oh.

That means the US government is going to be short $100. We will no longer have a balanced budget! We are going to have to borrow $100 from China.

But at least Bob bought the refrigerator the government wanted him to buy. That sure sounds like a conservative free market principle, right? I'm sure the company which makes that particular refrigerator thinks so, and they show their appreciation for America by donating some cash to the politicians who keep that tax credit alive.

But wait.

There are MILLIONS of Americans who took advantage of that tax credit last year! We are going to be HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS out of balance!

We need to fix this.

I'm afraid we are going to have to raise the tax rate on everyone to make up the difference.

And that is how Bob is stealing from every other taxpayer. He is paying less, and so everyone else is going to have to pay more. Or else we are going to have to borrow from China.

We actually do both. We have higher tax rates and massive borrowing.

It's a spending problem, one way or another.

Why would Bob and Jack pay $5,000 while other people pay more or less? Theoretically, one person costs the government the same as another for services and protections. Why does one person owe more?

Milk costs the same for a filthy rich person and it does for a homeless person. Why is the cost of government more for one than another?

To take this a little further, shouldn't a person who pays more taxes get more voting power at the polls?

 

[Wyatt earp]

When did Trump make you a pussy and how many threads you going to start?

Trump may not have made you such a whiney beatch, but he has given you much much more to whine about.

Harrumph!

Says the dumb fuck posting threads in forums that have nothing to do with the forum.

 

[g5000]

So the solution to employment is to EDUCATE OUR WORKFORCE FOR THE JOBS OF TOMORROW.

That's way too cerebral for politicians. Geniuses have trouble forecasting future jobs. Then, there's the problem of paying for programs that will give the worker the education necessary to fill future jobs.

Jobs giving way to automation should put an end to any new immigration. We don't need to further saturate the job market when there are not nearly enough jobs to go around. If 5 workers are chasing the same position, the employer will get bottom dollar for sure.

Automation is why I believe it is just a matter of time before we transition to a 30-hour work week.

As for immigrants, it is a basic economic fact that to grow an economy, you have to grow the work force and the base of consumers.

 

[JBvM]

Says the dumb fuck posting threads in forums that have nothing to do with the forum.

I luv U 2