Republican tax cut will not trickle down

[The Derp]

Conservatives are fiscal terrorists.

They deliberately manufacture deficits and debt by flying a plane of tax cuts into the budget, then use the resulting debt hysteria as an excuse to cut the spending they are ideologically opposed to, but lack the courage and support to repeal through legislation, all to push through a fundamentalist and dogmatic agenda with no proven track record of success for no other reason to inflict pain on those they judge.

And they rely on the help of Russian trolls because they're too fucking lazy to do the job themselves.

Conservatism is a stain on society.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Because I'd rather have MY money in MY pocket as opposed to some secret Shush Fund to pay off victims of sexual harassment! That's why!

Tax cuts don't mean more money in your pocket. It means less because to pay for tax cuts, essential services are cut which forces you to spend more out of pocket on health care and education. That's why household debt increased during Reagan and Bush the Dumber; they cut taxes, paid for it with cuts to spending, which forced workers to go into debt to send their kids to college or get much-needed health care.

WHY DO YOU THINK CONSERVATIVES ARE SAYING THEY NEED TO CUT SOCIAL SECURITY, MEDICARE and MEDICAID after they cut taxes????

Tax cuts don't mean more money in your pocket. It means less because to pay for tax cuts, essential services are cut

If that were the case, tax cuts would lead to reduced spending and no deficits.

 

[Thinker101]

They should increase for everybody.....like they did during the recession.
Like they do during every recession.

Except that because of your policies, the middle and lower classes were in debt before and during your recession. You can't save when you're in debt. All you can do is pay down the debt, but that's not savings...that's paying down debt.

And as they pay down their debt they begin to save. Maybe even learning to not spend so much.

Right wing policies will add to the debt.

Why is that, because lefties want more free stuff.

 

[The Derp]

If that were the case, tax cuts would lead to reduced spending and no deficits.

The result in economic contraction. That's why Bush's economy was shit, and relied on debt to grow:

If the tax cut supposedly gave them more money, why were they having to use their homes as ATMs to pay for things? Obviously because the tax cut is a crock, like everything you believe and represent.

 

[The Derp]

Why is that, because lefties want more free stuff.

Conservatives are the ones who use welfare to pay for tax cuts. Which would make your entire belief system welfare-dependent.

 

[Boss]

US dollars are only valuable in the US. They have no monetary value elsewhere. Ultimately, US dollars spent in other countries make their way back into the US when those countries purchase products and services from the US.

US dollars aren't valuable outside the US? WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA? US currency is the standard reserve currency for the world, you stupid bastard.

So now you're just spouting off anything off the top oif your head, either unaware or cognizant of doing it. That technically makes you a propagandist.

It's like the more you post, the less convinced I become that you're what you claim to be.

You can't buy a damn thing in Europe, Asia or Africa with an American dollar. You can exchange them for whatever the national currency is... but then, they are exchanged back to the US where they stimulate US economy.

Derp...Derp..Derp... Fap...Fap...Fap!

 

[The Derp]

You can't buy a damn thing in Europe, Asia or Africa with an American dollar. You can exchange them for whatever the national currency is... but then, they are exchanged back to the US where they stimulate US economy.

Obviously, you've never traveled outside the country. Not a shock there, Conservatives like to play pretend to make themselves seem more important, more worldly, more educated, more experienced than they really are. There are only two whose currency is worth more than ours: The Euro (which has always been worth more) and the British Pound (which also has always been worth more).

Nothing you are saying is true, You're just lying because that's all you know how to do.

Why are you even posting at this point? It's like watching a glass-jawed boxer square off against Evander Holyfield. It's an embarrassment that you would even post. And it speaks to your wild insecurities that you have to save face on a message board by posting shit you haven't researched because you're either too fucking lazy or too fucking inept.

 

[Thinker101]

Why is that, because lefties want more free stuff.

Conservatives are the ones who use welfare to pay for tax cuts. Which would make your entire belief system welfare-dependent.

Sure, welfare dependent would be the system Obama, the welfare president, wanted to implement.

 

[Boss]

Why is that, because lefties want more free stuff.

The dirty little secret is, it's not really about wanting free stuff. They know that stuff isn't free. These people are Marxist-Socialists. They want to usher in national Socialism where the government controls the means of production. The initial phase requires them to destroy the free market system by collapsing it. The "free stuff" policies are a means to the end. It's how they are going about destroying the free market economic system. This is all by design.

 

[Papageorgio]

All you have is personal insults. Love you lefty’s. Can’t address the logic, of the argument. So go personal.

I did address the logic directly. You refused to even read it because you just invent imaginary friends and circumstances that just so happen to confirm your biases when the facts don't. Funny how that works, right? But then when asked to validate and prove your claims, you suddenly back away from them and say you don't care if I believe them. Well, obviously you do care and obviously because they're central to your shit argument. So you lie, then make an argument based on that lie, refuse to validate what you're saying, then abscond responsibility for the whole thing.

So childish. So trollish.

For example...one of you trolls might say that Obamacare caused your premiums to spike 400000%. When asked to prove that, you don't. Instead, you insist I take your word for it while simultaneously saying you don't care if I do! So then why say it in the first place? The answer is obvious; you are bullshitting and are trying to cast yourself as a victim because you can't accept personal responsibility over the life that didn't turn out the way you had hoped or your parents had promised.

Why not cut all taxes if as you claim deficits don’t matter? Can’t answer it can you?

The deficit means nothing to me. I'm interested in only good economic policy, and your shit tax cuts aren't good policy and never have been. And you know it. That's why you have to foist straw men on me about the deficit...the very deficit you were just screeching about during Obama. Unbelievable. No shame.

Why are tax cuts bad policy? Why is increasing government spending a good policy? Don’t they both increase the deficit?

To me raising taxes and cutting spending are the solution. It will never happen because we can’t make tough choice, we just kick the can down the road for the next generation.

 

[The Derp]

Sure, welfare dependent would be the system Obama, the welfare president, wanted to implement.

You're the ones who literally use welfare from the welfare block grant to pay for tax cuts that never seem to pay for themselves.

 

[Thinker101]

Why is that, because lefties want more free stuff.

The dirty little secret is, it's not really about wanting free stuff. They know that stuff isn't free. These people are Marxist-Socialists. They want to usher in national Socialism where the government controls the means of production. The initial phase requires them to destroy the free market system by collapsing it. The "free stuff" policies are a means to the end. It's how they are going about destroying the free market economic system. This is all by design.

True, but a bit over the head of most liberals...they understand free stuff.

 

[Boss]

You can't buy a damn thing in Europe, Asia or Africa with an American dollar. You can exchange them for whatever the national currency is... but then, they are exchanged back to the US where they stimulate US economy.

Obviously, you've never traveled outside the country. Not a shock there, Conservatives like to play pretend to make themselves seem more important, more worldly, more educated, more experienced than they really are. There are only two whose currency is worth more than ours: The Euro (which has always been worth more) and the British Pound (which also has always been worth more).

Nothing you are saying is true, You're just lying because that's all you know how to do.

Why are you even posting at this point? It's like watching a glass-jawed boxer square off against Evander Holyfield. It's an embarrassment that you would even post. And it speaks to your wild insecurities that you have to save face on a message board by posting shit you haven't researched because you're either too fucking lazy or too fucking inept.

Again... Try giving a shop owner in the UK a US dollar and see what he says! US dollars are essentially worthless overseas in terms of spendable currency. There are some places which will accept US dollars... I think Australia still does... maybe the Philippines. But, by and large, you're going to be required to exchange your dollars for whatever the currency is.... when you do that, your dollar is then exchanged back to the US in the form of trade. So the dollar ultimately still grows OUR economy. It's simply in a more roundabout way and perhaps a few more steps.

 

[Thinker101]

Sure, welfare dependent would be the system Obama, the welfare president, wanted to implement.

You're the ones who literally use welfare from the welfare block grant to pay for tax cuts that never seem to pay for themselves.

Explain that to the people in cities like Detroit.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Based on what metric?
Based on the weakest recovery since WWII.

Largest collapse since then too. Thanks, Bush and Conservatives for that. So all you're doing is Monday Morning Quarterbacking the recovery that you refused to help and participate in because you were personally upset that a black guy became President, achieving something you will never be able to do.

Corporate tax rates.

The corporate tax rate has no bearing on consumer demand, business growth, or business investment.

Weird, their GDP per capita is even higher than ours..

But it grew at nearly the same rate. Which means that if it was anything like here in the US, the GDP-per-capita for the 1% grew astronomically, while per-capita-GDP grew nominally for everyone else.

Post your data and prove your own point.

No, no. It's your data, so you should know it inside and out before posting it. Seems to me you did a very rushed, sloppy job of it because you cannot speak to what the GDP growth per capita, per income group was/is. Which is something you should know before posting, specifically because you're most likely misrepresenting the growth in GDP-per-capita. Knowing that information lets us know that the "growth" in Ireland was almost entirely growth at the top, while everyone else was left behind. Just like what you say happened here. So until you can accurately defend you data set, it can't be submitted into this debate because it's rushed, sloppy, and incomplete. I actually think you have the numbers on individual income groups and their per-capita-GDP growth and are deliberately holding those numbers back because they show that while growth for the 1% was great, it wasn't for anyone else, and that the per-capita-GDP is skewed upward by the top.

And if you don't have that data, then you just admitted to posting crap you didn't bother to vet, which means you're just a troll.

To prove they made things worse you'd have to show Ireland would be better off with the old, higher rates.

Actually, that's on you to prove since you're the one making the claim that it helped them (and you haven't posted any economic numbers about Ireland this entire thread, which means you're in the "take my word for it" space. We can find this out rather quickly if you posted information about per-capita GDP growth by income group, but you refuse. Obviously because it proves my point, or because you didn't bother to put in the effort. I did. And in doing so, saw that the results of 20 years of Ireland's tax cuts are a highly volatile and unstable economy, one that contracts on average at least once a year.

Weird, their GDP per capita is even higher than ours..

But it grew at nearly the same rate.

In 1995, their GDP per capita was about 1/3rd lower than ours.
In 2005, their GDP per capita was about 10% higher than ours.

If you think that's "nearly the same rate", you may be a liberal idiot.

Actually, that's on you to prove since you're the one making the claim that it helped them

Ummmm....67% our GDP per capita to 110% our GDP per capita in 10 years....pretty clear it helped them.

Seems to me you did a very rushed, sloppy job of it because you cannot speak to what the GDP growth per capita, per income group was/is.

Waaaahhh.....here's a little info to stop your sobbing.....

The Average Industrial Wage and the Irish Economy - CSO - Central Statistics Office

Sectoral Earnings - CSO - Central Statistics Office

Feel free to go to my source to try to prove their huge GDP growth was bad for them.

 

[The Derp]

Why are tax cuts bad policy? Why is increasing government spending a good policy? Don’t they both increase the deficit?

Because tax cuts result in less spending, and spending results in spending. The economy only grows through spending. We have data that shows when taxes are cut, the spending rate decreases and debt increases. So the result is economic contraction (because you increased savings and didn't increase spending to make up for the drop there).

Your shit polices universally cause that to happen. We know because we just lived through it during Bush the Dumber, who cut taxes, then saw economic growth so pitiful he had to inflate a mortgage bubble.

If tax cuts somehow increased spending, then this chart would show the red bars taller than the blue bars after the tax cuts in 2001. Only, that doesn't happen...because all tax cuts do is create debt. Just like how Reagan's economy also operated on debt, which meant when the S&L's collapsed, it wasn't that much of a surprise. Clinton had multiple years where the red topped the blue. Bush never had a single year when that was the case. All his tax cuts did was create debt, plunge people into debt, and cause a housing bubble thanks to that debt. Why would your policies lead to anything different today? Because you really, really want to will them into being? Desperate posturing frauds, all of you.

 

[Boss]

Why is that, because lefties want more free stuff.

The dirty little secret is, it's not really about wanting free stuff. They know that stuff isn't free. These people are Marxist-Socialists. They want to usher in national Socialism where the government controls the means of production. The initial phase requires them to destroy the free market system by collapsing it. The "free stuff" policies are a means to the end. It's how they are going about destroying the free market economic system. This is all by design.

True, but a bit over the head of most liberals...they understand free stuff.

There are two categories of leftists... The Marxists who are fully aware of the agenda and the modern progressive liberal who is what Lenin called "Useful Idiots." They have no clue... the "free stuff" policies just strike an emotive chord.

 

[The Derp]

Explain that to the people in cities like Detroit.

Oh, you mean the city under Conservative control since 2012? It's been five years, what the fuck have you clueless idiots done to improve detroit? Nothing. You deliberately keep it shitty just so you can use it as a talking point.

And by the way, Republicans in the Michigan State Legislature cut welfare spending to put towards reducing the astronomical deficit they caused.

 

[Papageorgio]

Based on what metric?
Based on the weakest recovery since WWII.

Largest collapse since then too. Thanks, Bush and Conservatives for that. So all you're doing is Monday Morning Quarterbacking the recovery that you refused to help and participate in because you were personally upset that a black guy became President, achieving something you will never be able to do.

Corporate tax rates.

The corporate tax rate has no bearing on consumer demand, business growth, or business investment.

Weird, their GDP per capita is even higher than ours..

But it grew at nearly the same rate. Which means that if it was anything like here in the US, the GDP-per-capita for the 1% grew astronomically, while per-capita-GDP grew nominally for everyone else.

Post your data and prove your own point.

No, no. It's your data, so you should know it inside and out before posting it. Seems to me you did a very rushed, sloppy job of it because you cannot speak to what the GDP growth per capita, per income group was/is. Which is something you should know before posting, specifically because you're most likely misrepresenting the growth in GDP-per-capita. Knowing that information lets us know that the "growth" in Ireland was almost entirely growth at the top, while everyone else was left behind. Just like what you say happened here. So until you can accurately defend you data set, it can't be submitted into this debate because it's rushed, sloppy, and incomplete. I actually think you have the numbers on individual income groups and their per-capita-GDP growth and are deliberately holding those numbers back because they show that while growth for the 1% was great, it wasn't for anyone else, and that the per-capita-GDP is skewed upward by the top.

And if you don't have that data, then you just admitted to posting crap you didn't bother to vet, which means you're just a troll.

To prove they made things worse you'd have to show Ireland would be better off with the old, higher rates.

Actually, that's on you to prove since you're the one making the claim that it helped them (and you haven't posted any economic numbers about Ireland this entire thread, which means you're in the "take my word for it" space. We can find this out rather quickly if you posted information about per-capita GDP growth by income group, but you refuse. Obviously because it proves my point, or because you didn't bother to put in the effort. I did. And in doing so, saw that the results of 20 years of Ireland's tax cuts are a highly volatile and unstable economy, one that contracts on average at least once a year.

Weird, their GDP per capita is even higher than ours..

But it grew at nearly the same rate.

In 1995, their GDP per capita was about 1/3rd lower than ours.
In 2005, their GDP per capita was about 10% higher than ours.

If you think that's "nearly the same rate", you may be a liberal idiot.

Actually, that's on you to prove since you're the one making the claim that it helped them

Ummmm....67% our GDP per capita to 110% our GDP per capita in 10 years....pretty clear it helped them.

Seems to me you did a very rushed, sloppy job of it because you cannot speak to what the GDP growth per capita, per income group was/is.

Waaaahhh.....here's a little info to stop your sobbing.....

View attachment 165642

View attachment 165645

The Average Industrial Wage and the Irish Economy - CSO - Central Statistics Office

View attachment 165646

Sectoral Earnings - CSO - Central Statistics Office

Feel free to go to my source to try to prove their huge GDP growth was bad for them.

That pretty much blows that theory out of the water. Thank you.

 

[Papageorgio]

Why are tax cuts bad policy? Why is increasing government spending a good policy? Don’t they both increase the deficit?

Because tax cuts result in less spending, and spending results in spending. The economy only grows through spending. We have data that shows when taxes are cut, the spending rate decreases and debt increases. So the result is economic contraction (because you increased savings and didn't increase spending to make up for the drop there).

Your shit polices universally cause that to happen. We know because we just lived through it during Bush the Dumber, who cut taxes, then saw economic growth so pitiful he had to inflate a mortgage bubble.

If tax cuts somehow increased spending, then this chart would show the red bars taller than the blue bars after the tax cuts in 2001. Only, that doesn't happen...because all tax cuts do is create debt. Just like how Reagan's economy also operated on debt, which meant when the S&L's collapsed, it wasn't that much of a surprise. Clinton had multiple years where the red topped the blue. Bush never had a single year when that was the case. All his tax cuts did was create debt, plunge people into debt, and cause a housing bubble thanks to that debt. Why would your policies lead to anything different today? Because you really, really want to will them into being? Desperate posturing frauds, all of you.

Cutting the spending and raising the taxes, is my idea of strengthening our country not sure why you think I want to cut taxes, I want to raise them and cut spending but I have told you that over and over. The smaller the deficit the better our economy will become as it is not dependent on government to take care of our needs.

If you have proof I am a Russian, then post it or shut up about it, I tire you you left wingers playing silly and childish personal games are used to minimize others arguments and are extremely dishonest. So put up or shut up.

Your personal attacks in zone 2 are against the TOS.