[quote]Gael wrote:
… Revenue increased during the Bush years, not because of his tax cuts, but because the economy grew.
[/quote]
You do realize you just shot your self in the foot with that, right? And why do you think the economy grew, sun spots?
[quote]Gael wrote:
Sloth wrote:
The American people, as private individuals create productive jobs. Not the left, not the right. And certainely not the government.
Government creates the circumstances in which job creation can flourish. If you do not believe this, try going to Somalia and set up shop with the brightest entrepreneurs you can find. But you probably won’t be able to convince any to go.[/quote]
Not even close. Read a book, please.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
Gael wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
My friends company already started layoffs from the fear of being excessively taxed in the near future. Announced it the day after the election.
In the 20th century, every period of Democratic presidency has ended in lower unemployment, and every period of republican presidency has resulted in higher unemployment. This is a rule that has NEVER been violated. It’s time for the right to admit they are wrong when it comes to job creation.
DO you have a source for this?
I can remember coming out of the Carter years, and the ensuing 12 years after that. I don’t think that Bush Senior’s economy and unemployment were anywhere close to what Carter had when he left in January of 1981.
For your statement to be true, we would have to have been in worse shape in 1992 than we were in 1980. We weren’t.
If high taxes are better for the economy, why should any of us get to keep anything we make? We should turn it all over to the government. More is better, especially if it is the government taking private money.
I bet you and the rest of the pro-tax left are fucking giddy over the notion of the government confiscating private tax deferred investments, aren’t you? I mean, 401K’s would be much better in the hands of the government, right?
Why is it that the motherfuckers who think they know so much are still in school, and have yet to make a fucking dime? [/quote]
Unemployment at the end of Carter’s tenure was 7.2%.
[quote]The Mage wrote:
The author is a moron, and anyone who says we are not allowed to disagree with an author is a moron.
That would mean they would not be able to disagree with Bush. (But I think this logic will be lost on them.)
Now the author completely twisted the facts around. FDR in fact took a recession, (yes what they used to call a depression,) and turned it into the Great Depression. How? Giant tax increases.
He even tried to get a 99.9% tax rate on anyone making over $25K. Even Congress found this to go too far.
After his first giant tax increase, he was pissed off at the rich for investing in tax free bonds, and taking their money overseas instead of just paying the taxes. (Gee, who would have thought that would happen?)
Historically we have had recessions in:
1902
1907
1910
1913
1918
1920
1923
1926
1929
1937
1945
1948
1953
1957
1960
1969
1973
1980
1981
1990
2001
20 in the last century, so one ever 5 years. Recessions are a perfectly normal part of the business cycle.
It is a little more complex then this, but is obviously easy for somebody, like this author, who’s history of articles have an obvious political bent to them, to twist the facts around.
He forgets that the Bush (1) recession was after he reneged on his “No New Taxes” pledge. Also is forgotten is the recession ended before Clinton came into office, after which he raised taxes. While we did not go back into a recession, the economy did slow to a crawl until the Republican takeover of Congress. (I was there, I remember this.)
He states that 1932 tax increases caused a growing economy, he omits the following year record 25% unemployment, nor the recession that hit 4 years after that. Sound like an economic boom?
If you look at 1901 to 1980, recessions occurred on average every 4.44 years. Since the reduction in the tax rate, they have occurred every 7 years, and so far have not been very strong.
I fully admit this is not the full story, and obviously I have left tons out. But unlike the author of this article, I am attempting to put out facts, not political propaganda.[/quote]
Oh yeah, the Hoover tax increases…I laughed my ass off at that one. As most anybody who ever bothered to look at history realized that this move absolutely crippled the economy and fleshed out the recession into full blown depression. FDR’s socialistic welfare programs further ensured we stayed in depression.
[quote]dhickey wrote:
Gael wrote:
Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
Wow, it’s a good thing you guys know more about tax policy than this author. Why don’t they pay you guys to write columns?
/painfully thick sarcasm
Welcome to T-Nation, where people blabber endlessly about gay marriage and racism, but brush aside legitimate criticism of far right economics because it’s, duh, stupid.
Why don’t either one of you guys read a book on economics? If you are able to do this, you will quickly see the complete lack of logic and reason in this article.
There is no “far right” economics. There’s classic economics, Keynesian economics, fascism, socialism. Do you know the difference?
[/quote]
Exactly.
[quote]Gael wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Gael wrote:
Sloth wrote:
The American people, as private individuals create productive jobs. Not the left, not the right. And certainely not the government.
Government creates the circumstances in which job creation can flourish. If you do not believe this, try going to Somalia and set up shop with the brightest entrepreneurs you can find. But you probably won’t be able to convince any to go.
Give me actual courts, law enforcement, national defense, a culture of individual freedom and responsibility, and Somalia would prosper.
So now you’re admitting that a certain flavor of government will help job creation, all except for that culture bit. Which gets us back to where we started with the question as to whether the right or the left fosters circumstances that lead to more job creation.
American history offers perfect testimony to the fact that the left does it better. So what if the right was never your pure textbook fiscal conservatism. If your model is best, than partially following your model should be better. But it was always worse.
Every red presidential period ended in higher unemployment, and every blue presidential period ended in lower unemployment.
[/quote]
Can tell your a student , write back when you have experience.
Jobs are created with low business taxes, when you give incentive to create jobs , and with lower capital gains tax. None of which fall into the left view category,
I can name 5 major employers in the area I live in thatare either cutting jobs or having a higherin freeze specifically because Obama won the election,
Clinton started driving the business out and Bush had to deal with trying to bring it back.
Seriously get a clue, quit spitting out this new generation liberal indoctorination.
Innovation comes from america because we are a capialist society. The french and canadian divisions of the company I work for are far behind us in this area.
Your ideas take motivation and competitiveness out of society, that is why this capitalist socieyt is starting to drown now because we have socialist restraints and legislation tying us down.
The economy is not creating jobs right now. It is shedding them. My customers have scaled back and I will shortly.
Nearly every business owner I know is looking for ways to shed employees in anticipation of pending tax changes and dismal forecasts.
Higher taxes will prolong the downturn and lower the standard of living in the US. They always have. I can’t help but think this is all part of the messiah’s plan to placate the global warming nutjobs.
[quote]hedo wrote:
The economy is not creating jobs right now. It is shedding them. My customers have scaled back and I will shortly.
Nearly every business owner I know is looking for ways to shed employees in anticipation of pending tax changes and dismal forecasts.
Higher taxes will prolong the downturn and lower the standard of living in the US. They always have. I can’t help but think this is all part of the messiah’s plan to placate the global warming nutjobs.
[/quote]
well they keep everyone happy with crumbs unless we are all poor and without jobs or the means to make money.
[quote]apbt55 wrote:
hedo wrote:
The economy is not creating jobs right now. It is shedding them. My customers have scaled back and I will shortly.
Nearly every business owner I know is looking for ways to shed employees in anticipation of pending tax changes and dismal forecasts.
Higher taxes will prolong the downturn and lower the standard of living in the US. They always have. I can’t help but think this is all part of the messiah’s plan to placate the global warming nutjobs.
well they keep everyone happy with crumbs unless we are all poor and without jobs or the means to make money.[/quote]
At least when the soviets did it, they made sure there was plenty of vodka and cigarettes.
[quote]pat wrote:
apbt55 wrote:
hedo wrote:
The economy is not creating jobs right now. It is shedding them. My customers have scaled back and I will shortly.
Nearly every business owner I know is looking for ways to shed employees in anticipation of pending tax changes and dismal forecasts.
Higher taxes will prolong the downturn and lower the standard of living in the US. They always have. I can’t help but think this is all part of the messiah’s plan to placate the global warming nutjobs.
well they keep everyone happy with crumbs unless we are all poor and without jobs or the means to make money.
At least when the soviets did it, they made sure there was plenty of vodka and cigarettes.
[/quote]
What about the Carbon Footprint on those things? Remember the Oceans are going to recede and the planet has to heal before we can enjoy ourselves.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
The American people, as private individuals create productive jobs. Not the left, not the right. And certainely not the government.[/quote]
I’m confused as to how the thread got any farther than this.
[quote]Beowolf wrote:
Sloth wrote:
The American people, as private individuals create productive jobs. Not the left, not the right. And certainely not the government.
I’m confused as to how the thread got any farther than this.[/quote]
Now your part of the problem…
[quote]rainjack wrote:
Gael wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
My friends company already started layoffs from the fear of being excessively taxed in the near future. Announced it the day after the election.
In the 20th century, every period of Democratic presidency has ended in lower unemployment, and every period of republican presidency has resulted in higher unemployment. This is a rule that has NEVER been violated. It’s time for the right to admit they are wrong when it comes to job creation.
DO you have a source for this?
I can remember coming out of the Carter years, and the ensuing 12 years after that. I don’t think that Bush Senior’s economy and unemployment were anywhere close to what Carter had when he left in January of 1981.
For your statement to be true, we would have to have been in worse shape in 1992 than we were in 1980. We weren’t.[/quote]
Wrong. Unemployment was 7.1 in 1980 and 7.5 in 1992. I do not have a cite my general claim because no one has analyzed this data besides myself. The US BLS publishes these statistics back to 1940, but if you do some research, you can find the earlier data as well.
Specious. I could just as easily say that since taxes are bad, why don’t we eliminate taxes altogether? Neither argument holds water. Why? Because there is a sweet spot to be found that is not entirely predicted by the simplistic Laffer curve.
Everyone wants government spending to be as low and efficient as we can get it. Is anyone really in favor of waste? No, people just disagree on what programs should be cut.
Anyway, which is worse: a spending increase, or tax cuts accompanied by a spending increase that far exceeds additional revenue?
[quote]pat wrote:
Gael wrote:
… Revenue increased during the Bush years, not because of his tax cuts, but because the economy grew.
You do realize you just shot your self in the foot with that, right? And why do you think the economy grew, sun spots?[/quote]
Ignorant. Any economy that is not in a recession will grow. Slow growth economies can still qualify as a recession. The economy grew, but not as much as the historical average, and certainly not as much as it did during the Clinton years.
Why is it that you can post stupid shit, and no one will call you out on it as long as you are on the right?
[quote]Gael wrote:
Anyway, which is worse: a spending increase, or tax cuts accompanied by a spending increase that far exceeds additional revenue?[/quote]
Both are worse than big tax cuts accompanied with HUUUUGGGEE spending cuts.
[quote]dhickey wrote:
Gael wrote:
Ryan P. McCarter wrote:
Wow, it’s a good thing you guys know more about tax policy than this author. Why don’t they pay you guys to write columns?
/painfully thick sarcasm
Welcome to T-Nation, where people blabber endlessly about gay marriage and racism, but brush aside legitimate criticism of far right economics because it’s, duh, stupid.
Why don’t either one of you guys read a book on economics? If you are able to do this, you will quickly see the complete lack of logic and reason in this article.
There is no “far right” economics. There’s classic economics, Keynesian economics, fascism, socialism. Do you know the difference?
[/quote]
You are a shining beacon of the far right. You pretend to oppose socialism, but have no problem with bailing out GM. Government giveaways are a moral hazard for others, but not for yourself. Personal responsibility for me, but not for you. There is no underlying cohesion to your views. Headhunter is more ideologically consistent than you are. Natural law trumps utilitarianism, except where you find this inconvenient.
[quote]apbt55 wrote:
Gael wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Gael wrote:
Sloth wrote:
The American people, as private individuals create productive jobs. Not the left, not the right. And certainely not the government.
Government creates the circumstances in which job creation can flourish. If you do not believe this, try going to Somalia and set up shop with the brightest entrepreneurs you can find. But you probably won’t be able to convince any to go.
Give me actual courts, law enforcement, national defense, a culture of individual freedom and responsibility, and Somalia would prosper.
So now you’re admitting that a certain flavor of government will help job creation, all except for that culture bit. Which gets us back to where we started with the question as to whether the right or the left fosters circumstances that lead to more job creation.
American history offers perfect testimony to the fact that the left does it better. So what if the right was never your pure textbook fiscal conservatism. If your model is best, than partially following your model should be better. But it was always worse.
Every red presidential period ended in higher unemployment, and every blue presidential period ended in lower unemployment.
Can tell your a student , write back when you have experience.[/quote]
I can tell you likely never even graduated high school, given your inability to spell and communicate some semblance of intelligence. Of course, if you’re going to attack me, rather than my content, two can play that game.
[quote]Jobs are created with low business taxes, when you give incentive to create jobs , and with lower capital gains tax. None of which fall into the left view category,
I can name 5 major employers in the area I live in thatare either cutting jobs or having a higherin freeze specifically because Obama won the election, [/quote]
This is business as usual, and has nothing to do with Obama. We will see an expanded workforce in the next 4 years, as we do under every democrat president.
We aren’t exactly placing excessive taxes on businesses. Over 60% of corporations do not even pay any income tax in any given year, according to the GAO. We aren’t discouraging investment.
That said, investment doesn’t necessarily bring about the creation of new jobs. There are many ways for corporations to invest, and no guarantee that job creation will come out of it.
What does bring about a guarantee of newly created jobs? Tax cuts to the employees. When you make employees more affordable, business can afford more of them. People will be more likely to work at lower wages because they do not have to pay as much income tax.
This is not true of tax cuts for the rich end of the spectrum. If anything, placing high taxes on overpaid executives discourages the waste of money that could go into long term investment.
LOL. So, my “idea” (the correct term is observation) – that job creation is always greater under democratic presidents – somehow takes competetiveness out of the market? That’s a good one, I’d love to see you reason your way through it.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Gael wrote:
Anyway, which is worse: a spending increase, or tax cuts accompanied by a spending increase that far exceeds additional revenue?
Both are worse than big tax cuts accompanied with HUUUUGGGEE spending cuts.[/quote]
I agree, but you know that this ducks the question.
[quote]Gael wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Gael wrote:
Anyway, which is worse: a spending increase, or tax cuts accompanied by a spending increase that far exceeds additional revenue?
Both are worse than big tax cuts accompanied with HUUUUGGGEE spending cuts.
I agree, but you know that this ducks the question.[/quote]
Your question actually makes the tax cuts sound better, if the spending increased by the same amount in both scenarios. Which of course means that the spending is the problem and not the tax cuts.
Gael,
I’d like to know where you’re getting your numbers from. Links please.