Why can't Republicans explain their "Fiscal Policy"?

[ReallyMeow]

Ok, if demand is down, why would anyone hire?

if demand is down they would not hire.The issue is where does real demand come from. It comes from real supply. People like Gates and Jobs create real supply that leads to real demand and hiring.

We got from the stone age to here thanks to real supply. Got it now??

I dont know how you could be any dumber, but there you go. Supply is only rewarded by demand, go ahead go make bricks by hand out of mud down by the river, how many will you make before demand picks up? Ten thousand? A million? Whats the tipping point where people will want to buy your third world gimmick? Computer didnt create a demand, retard, there was already a huge need for managing information which they excel at.

Ok, if demand is down, why would anyone hire? If demand is up then you're losing money by not hiring /expanding. WOW look at that, demand really does drive the economy, nimrod. If more people were earning wages so that 60k seemed like a reasonable price, then they would make that investment, but instead a third of Americans are working, yet are in poverty for it (18k), they're doing their part, and yet you expect them to live under a bridge when theyre too old to work.

So by your own admission, investors dont create jobs, they are just lazy shiftless piles of money that need to be plied, coerced and bribed into going along with someone who actually cares about America. Right now, everyones just piling their money into short term t bills, you know the things that lose money vs inflation, savings only grow the economy when there is a demand for money to be lent, some dingleberry flush with cash isnt going to help apple one bit when apple isnt looking to borrow money to expand.

Employers hire because they see opportunity to make a profit. What part of that can't you grasp? The truth is...there is no such thing as "trickle down" economics. It's actually profit that trickles UP. Jobs are created and people hired LONG before most profits are ever realized (if a profit ever is!). You REALLY want to have more people employed? Provide more opportunities to make a profit so that investors are willing to risk their capital.

There is a simple reason why capital is now flowing into things like T-bills instead of start-ups like Apple. Investors are seeking tax shelters to protect their capital from an Administration that sees them as walking, talking ATM's to pay for Barack Obama's "agenda". Seeking tax shelters is what people with large amounts of capital DO when the government comes after them with tax increases. That's another basic economic premise that you don't seem to be able to understand.

So they should be coddled because they have an irrational sense of entitlement? Lets put the income tax on wealth above 1 mil back up to 94% then, thatll shut them up about this 20% vs 28%, 35% vs 39% baloney.

Yes, working class people keeping more of their salary means more demand in the economy, creating more jobs, amazingly enough its just just the rich who can invest, so spare me your "if the rish dont have it, it doesnt exist" melodrama.

 

[Katzndogz]

The rich should just take their marbles to another country like the wealthy of France are doing. They don't owe theiving democrats jack.

 

[ReallyMeow]

Dont let the door hit your ass on the way out.

 

[Oldstyle]

Ok, if demand is down, why would anyone hire? If demand is up then you're losing money by not hiring /expanding. WOW look at that, demand really does drive the economy, nimrod. If more people were earning wages so that 60k seemed like a reasonable price, then they would make that investment, but instead a third of Americans are working, yet are in poverty for it (18k), they're doing their part, and yet you expect them to live under a bridge when theyre too old to work.

So by your own admission, investors dont create jobs, they are just lazy shiftless piles of money that need to be plied, coerced and bribed into going along with someone who actually cares about America. Right now, everyones just piling their money into short term t bills, you know the things that lose money vs inflation, savings only grow the economy when there is a demand for money to be lent, some dingleberry flush with cash isnt going to help apple one bit when apple isnt looking to borrow money to expand.

Employers hire because they see opportunity to make a profit. What part of that can't you grasp? The truth is...there is no such thing as "trickle down" economics. It's actually profit that trickles UP. Jobs are created and people hired LONG before most profits are ever realized (if a profit ever is!). You REALLY want to have more people employed? Provide more opportunities to make a profit so that investors are willing to risk their capital.

There is a simple reason why capital is now flowing into things like T-bills instead of start-ups like Apple. Investors are seeking tax shelters to protect their capital from an Administration that sees them as walking, talking ATM's to pay for Barack Obama's "agenda". Seeking tax shelters is what people with large amounts of capital DO when the government comes after them with tax increases. That's another basic economic premise that you don't seem to be able to understand.

"So they should be coddled because they have an irrational sense of entitlement? Lets put the income tax on wealth above 1 mil back up to 94% then, thatll shut them up about this 20% vs 28%, 35% vs 39% baloney.

Yes, working class people keeping more of their salary means more demand in the economy, creating more jobs, amazingly enough its just just the rich who can invest, so spare me your "if the rish dont have it, it doesnt exist" melodrama.[/QUOTE]" ReallyMeow

What's "irrational" is passing fiscal policy that punishes the very people you need to invest their capital because you have some misguided notion that you need to "shut them up". Bill Clinton understood what you obviously DON'T because he lowered the capital gains tax from 28% to 20%. Why did he do that? Because Clinton understood basic economics enough to know that lowering the tax on profits induces investment. Your "solution"...raising taxes to 94% would chase investment capital out of the economy and into tax shelters. It is...to use a simple description...IDIOTIC!

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

I'm watching Michael Steele talk about Republican "fiscal policy". His only policy is "cut taxes". He said cutting taxes will lift people out of poverty.

No mention of education.

No mention of the job's bill Republicans blocked.

No mention of building up American infrastructure.

Just "cut taxes".

I hate to break it to him, if you don't have a job, you aren't worrying about "taxes".

So is that it? Cut taxes? Nothing else? If there is more, what is it?

That is their solution to every problem

Economy good? Cut taxes
Economy bad? Cut taxes
Need Jobs? Cut taxes
Reduce debt? Cut tasxes
Healthcare? Cut taxes

And this is your solution to every problem

Economy good? Raise taxes
Economy bad? Raise taxes
Need Jobs? Raise taxes
Reduce debt? Raise taxes
Healthcare? Raise taxes


And how's that working now that 70%+ of Americans just got another tax increase? Oh, yeah, they're calling for more tax increases.

You leftwing moonbat fuckers are insane... you really are.

 

[ReallyMeow]

Ok, if demand is down, why would anyone hire? If demand is up then you're losing money by not hiring /expanding. WOW look at that, demand really does drive the economy, nimrod. If more people were earning wages so that 60k seemed like a reasonable price, then they would make that investment, but instead a third of Americans are working, yet are in poverty for it (18k), they're doing their part, and yet you expect them to live under a bridge when theyre too old to work.

So by your own admission, investors dont create jobs, they are just lazy shiftless piles of money that need to be plied, coerced and bribed into going along with someone who actually cares about America. Right now, everyones just piling their money into short term t bills, you know the things that lose money vs inflation, savings only grow the economy when there is a demand for money to be lent, some dingleberry flush with cash isnt going to help apple one bit when apple isnt looking to borrow money to expand.

Employers hire because they see opportunity to make a profit. What part of that can't you grasp? The truth is...there is no such thing as "trickle down" economics. It's actually profit that trickles UP. Jobs are created and people hired LONG before most profits are ever realized (if a profit ever is!). You REALLY want to have more people employed? Provide more opportunities to make a profit so that investors are willing to risk their capital.

There is a simple reason why capital is now flowing into things like T-bills instead of start-ups like Apple. Investors are seeking tax shelters to protect their capital from an Administration that sees them as walking, talking ATM's to pay for Barack Obama's "agenda". Seeking tax shelters is what people with large amounts of capital DO when the government comes after them with tax increases. That's another basic economic premise that you don't seem to be able to understand.

"So they should be coddled because they have an irrational sense of entitlement? Lets put the income tax on wealth above 1 mil back up to 94% then, thatll shut them up about this 20% vs 28%, 35% vs 39% baloney.

Yes, working class people keeping more of their salary means more demand in the economy, creating more jobs, amazingly enough its just just the rich who can invest, so spare me your "if the rish dont have it, it doesnt exist" melodrama.

" ReallyMeow

What's "irrational" is passing fiscal policy that punishes the very people you need to invest their capital because you have some misguided notion that you need to "shut them up". Bill Clinton understood what you obviously DON'T because he lowered the capital gains tax from 28% to 20%. Why did he do that? Because Clinton understood basic economics enough to know that lowering the tax on profits induces investment. Your "solution"...raising taxes to 94% would chase investment capital out of the economy and into tax shelters. It is...to use a simple description...IDIOTIC!

There you go again with your irrational, classist bigotry, the middle class is just as capable of making investments, so dont even start with your "if we dont heap money on the rich, the economy will collapse" dribble. Do you even understand that tax evasion is a criminal offense? ffs, start enforcing the law instead of droning on about how if you're mean to the thief's they might steal more.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

the middle class is just as capable of making investments,

if so why not present your best examples?? What does your fear tell us about the liberal IQ and character???

Don't liberals love to proclaim the middle class has no wealth and is disappearing??

 

[Rshermr]

So, Oldstyle says:

What's "irrational" is passing fiscal policy that punishes the very people you need to invest their capital because you have some misguided notion that you need to "shut them up".

Uh, I am a bit confused. Who is getting punished??? You are saying that raising taxes to provide revenue for deficit spending, as Clinton did when he was faced with a bad economy, punished someone. Perhaps you would like to show who was punished during that time. Best economy this century, me boy. Stimulus workes, as it did for Reagan, and as it did for Clinton.

Bill Clinton understood what you obviously DON'T because he lowered the capital gains tax from 28% to 20%. Why did he do that? Because Clinton understood basic economics enough to know that lowering the tax on profits induces investment.

Now I see who is confused. You think that Clinton lowered capital gains tax rates by 8% in an economy similar to ours NOW. What you must get through your little con tool brain is that there is no problem with lowering taxes. A tax decrease in a really, really good economy, is not a bad thing, all else being equal. So, what does that have to do with today, me boy??? Obviously, nothing at all.

Tax increases, as Oldstyle well knows, since I have explained it to him at least 20 times by now, are not the issue in a bad unemployment economy. What Clinton did when he raised taxes to the same level that the current administration is doing, was generating revenue to spend in a stimulative way. What Oldstyle is saying is that lowering taxes in a booming economy proves that one should always simply lower taxes, no matter what. And that therefor raising taxes would be bad. And that is NONSENSE.
Here, Oldstyle, are the UE rates for 1997. Perhaps you can show when they compared with our current UE rates.

Unemployment Rates in 1997
January 1997 - 5.3%
February 1997 - 5.2%
March 1997 - 5.2%
April 1997 - 5.1%
May 1997 - 4.9%
June 1997 - 5%
July 1997 - 4.9%
August 1997 - 4.8%
September 1997 - 4.9%
October 1997 - 4.7%
November 1997 - 4.6%
December 1997 - 4.7%

Your "solution"...raising taxes to 94% would chase investment capital out of the economy and into tax shelters. It is...to use a simple description...IDIOTIC!

There is no proposal out there, me boy, to raise income taxes on 94%. You may actually want to try to stick with the facts.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

There is no proposal out there, me boy, to raise income taxes on 94%. You may actually want to try to stick with the facts.

Democrats always want more tax and more government. Since the government does not invent new products and services any increased transfer to them can only further slow the economy.

 

[Rshermr]

There is no proposal out there, me boy, to raise income taxes on 94%. You may actually want to try to stick with the facts.

Democrats always want more tax and more government. Since the government does not invent new products and services any increased transfer to them can only further slow the economy.

And there is ED, still pushing his con dogma. Truth be damned.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

There is no proposal out there, me boy, to raise income taxes on 94%. You may actually want to try to stick with the facts.

Democrats always want more tax and more government. Since the government does not invent new products and services any increased transfer to them can only further slow the economy.

And there is ED, still pushing his con dogma. Truth be damned.

of course as a typical liberal you lack the IQ to say where truth is lacking.


See why we are positive a liberal will be slow??

 

[Rshermr]

Democrats always want more tax and more government. Since the government does not invent new products and services any increased transfer to them can only further slow the economy.

And there is ED, still pushing his con dogma. Truth be damned.

of course as a typical liberal you lack the IQ to say where truth is lacking.


See why we are positive a liberal will be slow??

Ed, I know you can not help it. You are mentally ill. Not your problem. Just plain bad luck.

But for others with some brain cycles, one could look at all the impartial studies.

Brock University Study Low IQ & Conservative Beliefs Linked to Prejudice | Racism, Bias & Politics | Right-Wing and Left-Wing Ideology | LiveScience

New Study Reveals That Stupidity Can Make You Conservative And Racist

U of Arkansas study Study ?Proves? Conservatism Linked To Stupidity - The Ulsterman Report

British Cohort study Right-wingers are less intelligent than left wingers, says controversial study - and conservative politics can lead people to be racist | Mail Online

LiveScience study Social conservatives have a lower I.Q.? (probably) : Gene Expression

Watching Fox makes you stupid Study: Watching Fox News Actually Makes You Stupid | Jillian Rayfield | Politics News | Rolling Stone

 

[Rshermr]

Democrats always want more tax and more government. Since the government does not invent new products and services any increased transfer to them can only further slow the economy.

And there is ED, still pushing his con dogma. Truth be damned.

of course as a typical liberal you lack the IQ to say where truth is lacking.


See why we are positive a liberal will be slow??

Ed, I know you can not help it. You are mentally ill. Not your problem. Just plain bad luck.

But for others with some brain cycles, one could look at all the impartial studies.

Brock University Study Low IQ & Conservative Beliefs Linked to Prejudice | Racism, Bias & Politics | Right-Wing and Left-Wing Ideology | LiveScience

New Study Reveals That Stupidity Can Make You Conservative And Racist

U of Arkansas study Study ?Proves? Conservatism Linked To Stupidity - The Ulsterman Report

British Cohort study Right-wingers are less intelligent than left wingers, says controversial study - and conservative politics can lead people to be racist | Mail Online

LiveScience study Social conservatives have a lower I.Q.? (probably) : Gene Expression

Watching Fox makes you stupid Study: Watching Fox News Actually Makes You Stupid | Jillian Rayfield | Politics News | Rolling Stone

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

And there is ED, still pushing his con dogma. Truth be damned.

of course as a typical liberal you lack the IQ to say where truth is lacking.


See why we are positive a liberal will be slow??

Ed, I know you can not help it. You are mentally ill. Not your problem. Just plain bad luck.

But for others with some brain cycles, one could look at all the impartial studies.

Brock University Study Low IQ & Conservative Beliefs Linked to Prejudice | Racism, Bias & Politics | Right-Wing and Left-Wing Ideology | LiveScience

New Study Reveals That Stupidity Can Make You Conservative And Racist

U of Arkansas study Study ?Proves? Conservatism Linked To Stupidity - The Ulsterman Report

British Cohort study Right-wingers are less intelligent than left wingers, says controversial study - and conservative politics can lead people to be racist | Mail Online

LiveScience study Social conservatives have a lower I.Q.? (probably) : Gene Expression

Watching Fox makes you stupid Study: Watching Fox News Actually Makes You Stupid | Jillian Rayfield | Politics News | Rolling Stone

well then if Aristotle Jefferson Friedman Buckley and Nosick were stupid why be so afraid to say why?? What does your fear tell us about the liberal character and IQ???

 

[Rshermr]

of course as a typical liberal you lack the IQ to say where truth is lacking.


See why we are positive a liberal will be slow??

Ed, I know you can not help it. You are mentally ill. Not your problem. Just plain bad luck.

But for others with some brain cycles, one could look at all the impartial studies.

Brock University Study Low IQ & Conservative Beliefs Linked to Prejudice | Racism, Bias & Politics | Right-Wing and Left-Wing Ideology | LiveScience

New Study Reveals That Stupidity Can Make You Conservative And Racist

U of Arkansas study Study ?Proves? Conservatism Linked To Stupidity - The Ulsterman Report

British Cohort study Right-wingers are less intelligent than left wingers, says controversial study - and conservative politics can lead people to be racist | Mail Online

LiveScience study Social conservatives have a lower I.Q.? (probably) : Gene Expression

Watching Fox makes you stupid Study: Watching Fox News Actually Makes You Stupid | Jillian Rayfield | Politics News | Rolling Stone

well then if Aristotle Jefferson Friedman Buckley and Nosick were stupid why be so afraid to say why?? What does your fear tell us about the liberal character and IQ???

Ed, i know that the concept is difficult. So I did not expect you to understand it. It simply says MOST conservatives are stupid. And then again, some are well paid to say what they say. Like most Libertarians, if they have half a brain. Sorry, i did not intend for my post to be so complex for you. The studies all prove that most, me boy, MOST, conservatives are stupid. Look up most, and best of luck to you, me poor ignorant con. I know, it is not your fault. just plain bad luck.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

It simply says MOST conservatives are stupid.

well if they are who cares as long as they vote conservative as Aristotle Jefferson Friedman Nosick would have wanted???

See why we say a liberal will be slow???

 

[Rshermr]

It simply says MOST conservatives are stupid.

well if they are who cares as long as they vote conservative as Aristotle Jefferson Friedman Nosick would have wanted???

See why we say a liberal will be slow???

So you say liberals are slow. One of your little lines you cut and paste over and over.
But the problem is, me poor mentally ill con, is that that is simply your opinion. And you know how much everyone respects your opinion.

On the other hand, all of the impartial studies say the opposite. Who to believe, crazy ed or the studies. My money is on the studies.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

So you say liberals are slow.

yes average liberals are slow and the Marxist intellectual leadership is stupid and so won't and can't defend liberalism. It's as if the failure of the USSR and Red China and FDR and BO and their spying must be overlooked to maintain their sanity.

But the problem is, me poor mentally ill con, is that that is simply your opinion. And you know how much everyone respects your opinion.

too stupid!! Its not my opinion. It's fact and its easy to prove. Please say something intelligent in support of liberalism. Got it now??

On the other hand, all of the impartial studies say the opposite. Who to believe, crazy ed or the studies. My money is on the studies.

so then why be so afraid to say what the studes say about Aristotle and Jefferson???? What does your fear tell us about the liberal IQ and character??

 

[Oldstyle]

"So they should be coddled because they have an irrational sense of entitlement? Lets put the income tax on wealth above 1 mil back up to 94% then, thatll shut them up about this 20% vs 28%, 35% vs 39% baloney.

Yes, working class people keeping more of their salary means more demand in the economy, creating more jobs, amazingly enough its just just the rich who can invest, so spare me your "if the rish dont have it, it doesnt exist" melodrama.

" ReallyMeow

What's "irrational" is passing fiscal policy that punishes the very people you need to invest their capital because you have some misguided notion that you need to "shut them up". Bill Clinton understood what you obviously DON'T because he lowered the capital gains tax from 28% to 20%. Why did he do that? Because Clinton understood basic economics enough to know that lowering the tax on profits induces investment. Your "solution"...raising taxes to 94% would chase investment capital out of the economy and into tax shelters. It is...to use a simple description...IDIOTIC!

There you go again with your irrational, classist bigotry, the middle class is just as capable of making investments, so dont even start with your "if we dont heap money on the rich, the economy will collapse" dribble. Do you even understand that tax evasion is a criminal offense? ffs, start enforcing the law instead of droning on about how if you're mean to the thief's they might steal more.

The Middle Class is just as capable of making investments as the wealthy? Did you really just make that idiotic statement? No, the Middle Class is not just as "capable" of making investments in start up companies as venture capitalists are. First of all they don't have the large amounts of capital that start ups need and they don't have the business acumen to put together such a deal.

We're not "heaping money on the rich" by the way. What we ARE doing is enticing those with capital to invest it here in the US rather than invest elsewhere or put it into tax shelters...neither one of which does anything to alleviate the lack of jobs in this country. You're not "giving" them anything...you're simply not "taking" so much from them that you dissuade them from investing in the first place.

And who's talking about "tax evasion"? The wealthy aren't breaking any tax laws when they put their money into tax shelters to avoid paying taxes. You don't have the faintest idea what you're talking about on this issue, do you?

 

[Votto]

I'm watching Michael Steele talk about Republican "fiscal policy". His only policy is "cut taxes". He said cutting taxes will lift people out of poverty.

No mention of education.

No mention of the job's bill Republicans blocked.

No mention of building up American infrastructure.

Just "cut taxes".

I hate to break it to him, if you don't have a job, you aren't worrying about "taxes".

So is that it? Cut taxes? Nothing else? If there is more, what is it?

That is their solution to every problem

Economy good? Cut taxes
Economy bad? Cut taxes
Need Jobs? Cut taxes
Reduce debt? Cut tasxes
Healthcare? Cut taxes

And they can never, ever show when decreasing taxes has helped in a bad economy. So they commission a study by the Congressional Research Service, a non partisan group, and then suppress the findings when the study is released. Because the study finds that tax decreases have no effect on economic growth. "In fact, the study found that higher tax rates for the wealthy are statistically associated with higher levels of growth."
Study: Tax Cuts for the Rich Don

So, the tax decrease "policy" is meant to make the gov smaller and put more $ in the back pocket of those with very high incomes. Because, after all, those very wealthy are the very ones who support the repubs. What a surprise.

Just like Democrats have never shown how raising taxes will improve an economy.

Go figure.