Religion, Economics and Obama

...The question is whether rate cuts have raised revenue. Please tell me if you can imagine sometime somewhere that revenue increased after tax rates were lowered from an excessively extreme burden...
You would be really hard pressed to find a situation where it ever happened in real life...
The request was to imagine --as with a mere hypothetical case. Please suppose a king on an island that demanded the fruits of everyone's labors, and then think what would logically follow.

In 'real life' it's actually it's an age old dilemma. Louis XVII (iirc) said taxation was the art of plucking the goose for the most down and least squawk. That gang eventually lost their heads over tax'n'spending (as it were...) and after the chaos of zero taxes Napoleon rose to have access to far greater funding than the royalists ever saw. The USSR had a 100% rate that failed and was replaced by a regime that was able to cover the gov't payroll by dropping the 100% rate.
...Please describe what possible observation would there be that we could make together that would convince you that this has ever happened in real life...
...There is only one standard, and it's totally objective: increases in real revenues. You'll notice that it's never happened...
Please help me follow your thoughts here and say what do you mean by 'real revenue'. If we're talking about total federal revenue changes over time adjusted for inflation, please show how current revenues are less than they were say, three decades ago in real $.

Real, as opposed to nominal, so yes, I'm talking about federal revenue adjusted for inflation. Federal revenues today are higher than they were 30 years ago, but that doesn't help your argument because the economy is also larger.
 
So Politicalchic, as she is wont to do, starts out a thread with a bold faced lie. She says:
The Laffer Curve is accepted by all knowledgeable economists, professional or avocational, as a graphic representation of revenue accrued due to taxation.
Truth is, few actual economists believe in the Laffer curve. A quick google search would prove that. For instance:
Laughing at the Laffer Curve

Via the IGM Forum:

Question B: A cut in federal income tax rates in the US right now would raise taxable income enough so that the annual total tax revenue would be higher within five years than without the tax cut.
The resultant answers were: Not sure, 5%, Strongly Disagree, 38%, Disagree, 33%, Agree And Strongly Agree, 0%

Economist's View: Laughing at the Laffer Curve

This is a group of economists who regularly discuss and vote on economic issues. But you said all, PC, which is a complete lie. Why would you lie, PC. Would it be to sell a concept that you have no valid proof for??
So, starting with that, what is left is simply more dogma from the right, and accusations made in the form of attacks. No valid statements anywhere, which is how it works with PoliticalChic.

By the way, the tax rate paid by companies has very little to do with the actual rate, as deductions actually do make a difference, PC. Actual rate paid is what matters, and that is well under 20%.

The laffer curve. You have got to be kidding.

And Ann Coulter. Anyone who would post her quote would have to be not just nuts, but bat shit nuts.

Typtical responce from an obama asslicker,please research before posting uninformed comments Rshermr asslicker....
 
So Politicalchic, as she is wont to do, starts out a thread with a bold faced lie. She says:
The Laffer Curve is accepted by all knowledgeable economists, professional or avocational, as a graphic representation of revenue accrued due to taxation.
Truth is, few actual economists believe in the Laffer curve. A quick google search would prove that. For instance:
Laughing at the Laffer Curve

Via the IGM Forum:

Question B: A cut in federal income tax rates in the US right now would raise taxable income enough so that the annual total tax revenue would be higher within five years than without the tax cut.
The resultant answers were: Not sure, 5%, Strongly Disagree, 38%, Disagree, 33%, Agree And Strongly Agree, 0%

Economist's View: Laughing at the Laffer Curve

This is a group of economists who regularly discuss and vote on economic issues. But you said all, PC, which is a complete lie. Why would you lie, PC. Would it be to sell a concept that you have no valid proof for??
So, starting with that, what is left is simply more dogma from the right, and accusations made in the form of attacks. No valid statements anywhere, which is how it works with PoliticalChic.

By the way, the tax rate paid by companies has very little to do with the actual rate, as deductions actually do make a difference, PC. Actual rate paid is what matters, and that is well under 20%.

The laffer curve. You have got to be kidding.

And Ann Coulter. Anyone who would post her quote would have to be not just nuts, but bat shit nuts.

Typtical responce from an obama asslicker,please research before posting uninformed comments Rshermr asslicker....
Another profound post from nova. You seem to have a unusual prurient interest in ass-licking, nova. Have you given it up yet??
 
So Politicalchic, as she is wont to do, starts out a thread with a bold faced lie. She says:

Truth is, few actual economists believe in the Laffer curve. A quick google search would prove that. For instance:
Laughing at the Laffer Curve

Via the IGM Forum:

Question B: A cut in federal income tax rates in the US right now would raise taxable income enough so that the annual total tax revenue would be higher within five years than without the tax cut.
The resultant answers were: Not sure, 5%, Strongly Disagree, 38%, Disagree, 33%, Agree And Strongly Agree, 0%

Economist's View: Laughing at the Laffer Curve

This is a group of economists who regularly discuss and vote on economic issues. But you said all, PC, which is a complete lie. Why would you lie, PC. Would it be to sell a concept that you have no valid proof for??
So, starting with that, what is left is simply more dogma from the right, and accusations made in the form of attacks. No valid statements anywhere, which is how it works with PoliticalChic.

By the way, the tax rate paid by companies has very little to do with the actual rate, as deductions actually do make a difference, PC. Actual rate paid is what matters, and that is well under 20%.

The laffer curve. You have got to be kidding.

And Ann Coulter. Anyone who would post her quote would have to be not just nuts, but bat shit nuts.

Typtical responce from an obama asslicker,please research before posting uninformed comments Rshermr asslicker....
Another profound post from nova. You seem to have a unusual prurient interest in ass-licking, nova. Have you given it up yet??

of course as a general principle the Laffer Curve is 100% correct: the bigger the government the smaller the private economy. This is because the governent wastes money while the private sector invests money to grow the economy.

A liberal will lack the IQ to understand the basic concept behind capitalism.
 
It's hilarious when "Let him die" and "feed the poor and they will breed" Republicans talk about Religion.
 
So Politicalchic, as she is wont to do, starts out a thread with a bold faced lie. She says:
The Laffer Curve is accepted by all knowledgeable economists, professional or avocational, as a graphic representation of revenue accrued due to taxation.
Truth is, few actual economists believe in the Laffer curve. A quick google search would prove that. For instance:
Laughing at the Laffer Curve

Via the IGM Forum:

Question B: A cut in federal income tax rates in the US right now would raise taxable income enough so that the annual total tax revenue would be higher within five years than without the tax cut.
The resultant answers were: Not sure, 5%, Strongly Disagree, 38%, Disagree, 33%, Agree And Strongly Agree, 0%

Economist's View: Laughing at the Laffer Curve

This is a group of economists who regularly discuss and vote on economic issues. But you said all, PC, which is a complete lie. Why would you lie, PC. Would it be to sell a concept that you have no valid proof for??
So, starting with that, what is left is simply more dogma from the right, and accusations made in the form of attacks. No valid statements anywhere, which is how it works with PoliticalChic.

By the way, the tax rate paid by companies has very little to do with the actual rate, as deductions actually do make a difference, PC. Actual rate paid is what matters, and that is well under 20%.

The laffer curve. You have got to be kidding.

And Ann Coulter. Anyone who would post her quote would have to be not just nuts, but bat shit nuts.

Typtical responce from an obama asslicker,please research before posting uninformed comments Rshermr asslicker....

as a liberal he lacks the IQ to see that as government grows the private sector shrinks.
 
So Politicalchic, as she is wont to do, starts out a thread with a bold faced lie. She says:

Truth is, few actual economists believe in the Laffer curve. A quick google search would prove that. For instance:
Laughing at the Laffer Curve

Via the IGM Forum:

Question B: A cut in federal income tax rates in the US right now would raise taxable income enough so that the annual total tax revenue would be higher within five years than without the tax cut.
The resultant answers were: Not sure, 5%, Strongly Disagree, 38%, Disagree, 33%, Agree And Strongly Agree, 0%

Economist's View: Laughing at the Laffer Curve

This is a group of economists who regularly discuss and vote on economic issues. But you said all, PC, which is a complete lie. Why would you lie, PC. Would it be to sell a concept that you have no valid proof for??
So, starting with that, what is left is simply more dogma from the right, and accusations made in the form of attacks. No valid statements anywhere, which is how it works with PoliticalChic.

By the way, the tax rate paid by companies has very little to do with the actual rate, as deductions actually do make a difference, PC. Actual rate paid is what matters, and that is well under 20%.

The laffer curve. You have got to be kidding.

And Ann Coulter. Anyone who would post her quote would have to be not just nuts, but bat shit nuts.

Typtical responce from an obama asslicker,please research before posting uninformed comments Rshermr asslicker....

as a liberal he lacks the IQ to see that as government grows the private sector shrinks.
Wow. Nova and Ed. Between the two, almost enough smarts to equal the average IQ of a chimpanzee.
 
Typtical responce from an obama asslicker,please research before posting uninformed comments Rshermr asslicker....

as a liberal he lacks the IQ to see that as government grows the private sector shrinks.
Wow. Nova and Ed. Between the two, almost enough smarts to equal the average IQ of a chimpanzee.

as a liberal Rshermr lacks the IQ to see that as government grows the private sector shrinks.

as a liberal he lacks the IQ to respond and so is forced to use personal attack and hope no one notices he has tried to change the subject
 
as a liberal he lacks the IQ to see that as government grows the private sector shrinks.
Wow. Nova and Ed. Between the two, almost enough smarts to equal the average IQ of a chimpanzee.

as a liberal Rshermr lacks the IQ to see that as government grows the private sector shrinks.

as a liberal he lacks the IQ to respond and so is forced to use personal attack and hope no one notices he has tried to change the subject
Ah, ed, me boy. Posting opinion, eh. As usual. No proof of what you say. You know that the intelligence of cons and libs has been studied. And you do not want to bring that up, now. do you ed. Because you know that your opinion is worthless. If only you could find a link to proof that libs were stupid.

But, of course you can not, can you, now, ed.

So, here is the latest study, carefully conducted by a Canadian college, and completely impartial:
The right's stupidity spreads, enabled by a too-polite left | George Monbiot | Comment is free | The Guardian

Daily Kos: Another study says watching Fox News makes you dumber
So, ed. We have all come to understand that you are ignorant. You have proven it over and over and over. But this explains why. It is really not your fault, ed. You are simply stupid. Not your fault at all.
 
You know that the intelligence of cons and libs has been studied. And you do not want to bring that up, now. do you ed. .

so then if you think our Founders were not intelligent why be so afraid to present your best example for the whole world to see? What does your fear tell us about your IQ and character??



PS: don't mean to burst an idiot liberal's bubble

The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness by Lyle H. Rossiter, Jr. and M.D. (Oct 30, 2006)
(64 customer reviews)
 
Last edited:

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top