Republicans so worried about the debt, yet they cause most of it.

[Cellblock2429]

/—-/ Department stores cut prices to drive more traffic in the store and increase revenue. Lowering taxes increases economic spending which increases employment. More workers = more tax revenue

Lowering taxes has never, does not, and will never increase revenues by increased consumption. That's the trickle-down argument. Also, cutting taxes has never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever created a job. Businesses don't hire because of tax rates. They hire because of demand. If there's no demand, then the business has no reason to hire more labor. Tax cuts do not increase demand. Never have, never will.

Time to let it go from your thinking. I know that is gonna be hard for you because it involves admitting you don't know what the fuck you're talking about. But it's OK to say you were wrong. I won't hold you being wrong against you. What I will hold against you is your insistence in policy you know doesn't work. That's where I draw the line.

/—-/ I believe the heritage foundation, not your lib talking points.
. In 1980, the last year before the tax cuts, tax revenues were $956 billion (in constant 1996 dollars).

Revenues exceeded that 1980 level in eight of the next 10 years. Annual revenues over the next decade averaged $102 billion above their 1980 level (in constant 1996 dollars).

Any increase in budget deficits was therefore the result of spending increases rather than tax cut-induced revenue decreases.
Tax Cuts Increase Federal Revenues

 

[hadit]

How would you like it if I showed you how a 19 year old, making $25,000 a year (investing $100/month), could earn enough IN 12 YEARS to retire as a millionaire (actually, a millionaire and a half - $1.5 million) at age 65? Then, show you how - at age 31 (19 +12) create an environment that will convert that million dollars into $3.6 million in his retirement portfolio?

You're kidding yourself that someone making $25K can save for anything. Also, without a college degree, that 19 year old will not see themselves be a high-earner, and their income will be capped below that of those with college degrees. You live in a fantasy world.

BTW - someone making $25K a year qualifies for all sorts of income-determinant benefits including SNAP, Medicaid, EiTC, and other forms of welfare.

So, all your whining about not enough to save, and not enough to pay for healthcare, not enough for this, not enough for that is simply three things - 1) fiscal ignorance, 2) a lack of commitment to your responsibilities, and 3) begging for more and more of somebody else's money.

No, you're just refusing to accept the reality of wages of today because you've never had to work for anything in your life.

There are ways to become a high earner without a degree.

1. Own a business.
2. Learn a skilled trade.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Cellblock2429]

/—-/ Letting people keep more of their own money does cost anything

Clearly that's not the case, and we can use the "laboratory of democracy" of Kansas as the example. Here's the budget both with the tax cut and without (SB 30). What is it you see? What do your eyes tell you? You can fool your small mind, but you cannot fool your own eyes:

/——/ If I don’t rob you of half of your pay check every week how does that cost me money?

 

[Cellblock2429]

/—-/ Letting people keep more of their own money does cost anything

Clearly that's not the case, and we can use the "laboratory of democracy" of Kansas as the example. Here's the budget both with the tax cut and without (SB 30). What is it you see? What do your eyes tell you? You can fool your small mind, but you cannot fool your own eyes:

/—-/ I’m on my iPhone and it’s hard to read the chart but it looks like spending projections through 2021 are increasing. Kansas needs to cut spending

 

[The Derp]

/—-/ I believe the heritage foundation, not your lib talking points.

That's the problem. Heritage is a right-wing think tank that gets paid to produce false conclusions.

In 1980, the last year before the tax cuts, tax revenues were $956 billion (in constant 1996 dollars).Revenues exceeded that 1980 level in eight of the next 10 years. Annual revenues over the next decade averaged $102 billion above their 1980 level (in constant 1996 dollars).

That's because Reagan raised taxes 11 times and increased spending in Congress. Also, what about the deficit and debt? For all your crowing about tax revenues, you are strangely silent on the debt and deficit during Reagan. Well, Reagan doubled the deficit and tripled the debt. So where is all your debt outrage? Nowhere. Because you're a poseur.

Any increase in budget deficits was therefore the result of spending increases rather than tax cut-induced revenue decreases.

LOL! SO, WE CAN VERY EASILY DEBUNK THIS SHIT.

Here's Kansas' budget. You'll notice that it runs massive deficits. Then you'll notice right below it that once the tax cuts were repealed, suddenly those deficits turn into surpluses:

So since spending in that budget remained unchanged, yet the deficit was turned into surpluses, the only conclusion we can reach is that tax cuts create deficits by reducing revenue.

 

[The Derp]

There are ways to become a high earner without a degree.
1. Own a business.
2. Learn a skilled trade.

Nope. Wrong.

1. The average small business income is merely $100K a year, with the bulk of small businesses earning below that. So talking point #1 of yours is flushed down the toilet.

2. How are you to learn a skilled trade if you have no money to pay for that training? Secondly, even getting a skilled trade doesn't result in you being a high earner. On average, going without a college degree means you'll earn 56% less than someone with a college degree. More facts that you seem unable to reconcile because you live in fantasyland.

College graduates, on average, earned 56% more than high school grads in 2015, according to data compiled by the Economic Policy Institute. That was up from 51% in 1999 and is the largest such gap in EPI's figures dating to 1973.

​

So you tell people if they want to earn more, to forego college (!) and learn a skilled trade even though those with skilled trades earn less than half of those with a college degree. So you're telling people lies.

 

[The Derp]

/——/ If I don’t rob you of half of your pay check every week how does that cost me money?

1. You're not paying half of your paycheck in taxes
2. What you get from what you pay in taxes more than makes up the gap for what you get if you didn't. Higher taxes means you spend less on education, health care, fees/registrations.

Conservatives make shitty, emotional tax arguments because they are shitty, emotional people.

 

[The Derp]

/—-/ I’m on my iPhone and it’s hard to read the chart but it looks like spending projections through 2021 are increasing. Kansas needs to cut spending

LOL!

Now you're not being honest. It's pretty simple.

READ THE CHART AGAIN, SHITHEAD...This time, pay attention to the balance line:

With the tax cuts, the balances are:

2018: $436M deficit
2019: $564M deficit
2020: $821M deficit
2021: $864M deficit

Without ther tax cuts, the balances are:

2018: $155M surplus
2019: $223M surplus
2020: $19M surplus
2021: $261M deficit

Spending remained constant.

So your tax cuts from 2018-2021 would cost KS $2.6T

Repealing the tax cuts from 2018-21 would save KS $136M

So which is better in your world? $2.6T of debt or $136M of surplus?

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

Following your tainted logic, all we have to do to "fix" America is have the government take 100% of everyones income.

Hmmm....North Korea does something like that.

What an idiot

Oh...and he isn't posting SOURCE LINKS.....wonder why....

 

[The Derp]

Following your tainted logic, all we have to do to "fix" America is have the government take 100% of everyones income.

That's not following any logic, that's you constructing an emotional strawman because you are an emotional person. We don't have to -nor should we- pay off our debt all at once. Anyone who argues we should simply doesn't know what the fuck they're saying.

You all screech about debt, yet you don't know why debt is a big deal, nor do you actually give a shit about debt when it's your tax cuts that cause it.

You cut taxes, which reduces revenue and produces deficits, then scream bloody murder about the deficit you just created with your tax cuts.

So how are you not the cause of the very thing you are complaining about?

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

to the contrary....
You show an absolute lack of understand for basic economics...then you post nonsesne without source links but "emotionally" you expect intelligent people to follow along?

Good luck

btw...to say that "Tax cuts cause the national debt" is all the proof that's needed to debunk you completely. It's laughable if not hysterical.

If you actually believe the crap you're posting then you are beyond repair.

 

[jknowgood]

Obama outspent all presidents combined. Little fact the Op forgets. I do agree that republicans aren't trying to save money though.

 

[The Derp]

You show an absolute lack of understand for basic economics.

Nah, what is happening is that you don't know what the fuck you're talking about then posture and preen that you do, while not offering any evidence to support your insistence. When a Conservative tells me that I don't know basic economics, that's usually code for "My dogma is my dogma and all the evidence in the world isn't going to change my mind". That doesn't make you educated, it makes you a zealot.

then you post nonsesne without source links but "emotionally" you expect intelligent people to follow along?

WTF are you talking about? All I do is source links. What isn't sourced that you would like sourced? And are you telling me that if it is sourced, you will then accept the conclusions? Because it seems like you're looking for any excuse you can to avoid reconciling the truth...which is that your trickle-down, tax cutting, bullshit policies have not produced one single thing in 37 years. Other than debt of course.

You're just a big, fat baby. And you don't want to admit that your conventional wisdom is wrong. Doing so would pretty much undermine your entire belief system, so I get why you are so resistant.

btw...to say that "Tax cuts cause the national debt" is all the proof that's needed to debunk you completely.

Hey idiot...take a look at the below from Kansas. This proves tax cuts cause debt. You'll see that with the tax cuts, KS finds itself $2.6T in the hole after 4 years, whereas with a repeal of the tax cuts, Kansas saves $136M.

So if the trickle-down policy of tax cuts produces deficits and debt in the "laboratory of democracy" that is Kansas, why would it have the opposite effect nationally, when we already did that very thing back in 2001 and the result was Bush erasing a surplus and doubling the debt by 2009?

 

[Cellblock2429]

/—-/ I’m on my iPhone and it’s hard to read the chart but it looks like spending projections through 2021 are increasing. Kansas needs to cut spending

LOL!

Now you're not being honest. It's pretty simple.

READ THE CHART AGAIN, SHITHEAD...This time, pay attention to the balance line:

With the tax cuts, the balances are:

2018: $436M deficit
2019: $564M deficit
2020: $821M deficit
2021: $864M deficit

Without ther tax cuts, the balances are:

2018: $155M surplus
2019: $223M surplus
2020: $19M surplus
2021: $261M deficit

Spending remained constant.

So your tax cuts from 2018-2021 would cost KS $2.6T

Repealing the tax cuts from 2018-21 would save KS $136M

So which is better in your world? $2.6T of debt or $136M of surplus?

/——/ let me educate you Libtard: Projections are simply wild guesses. There is no allowance for future economic growth.

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

Obama outspent all presidents combined. Little fact the Op forgets. I do agree that republicans aren't trying to save money though.

The government cannot operate without funding...that is true.
However, the government has become a cash cow for too many corrupt politicians and ultra wealthy manipulators.
As corruption increases, so will the debt as money that "should" have been used for the benefit of the public is diverted. Solyndra and the lack of infrastructure improvements during the Obama administration in the face of record "stimulus" spending is proof.

The OP is simply arguing that the solution to more corruption (and therefore waste spending) is to throw even more money into those same corrupt hands.

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

Derp...I actually feel sorry for you. You are angry that everyone doesn't agree with you. Yet you are wrong but obviously truly believe what you are saying.

Hopefully one day you will have a paradigm shift and something will click and you will see through your current beliefs.

You still didn't post the link btw.

 

[The Derp]

Obama outspent all presidents combined. Little fact the Op forgets. I do agree that republicans aren't trying to save money though.

In terms of gross numbers, sure. But looking at it in those terms just ignores the broader point. For all his spending, we actually got stuff in return; 11 million net private sector jobs, a stock market above 20,000, unemployment reduced to below 4.5%, uninsured rate to a record low, renewable energy prices cut by more than half.

What did we get for the $5T Bush added to the debt? Net job loss of 460,000, a stock market dropped to 6,500, economic collapse, unfunded entitlement expansion, 2 unwinnable wars of occupation, record high uninsured rate, household debt soaring to 40% above GDP, and the erasing of a surplus producing four record high deficits that doubled the debt in 8 years.

So it's not about the gross numbers, it's about what we got out of those gross numbers. We got nothing from Bush, plenty from Obama.

So why would repeating what we did 15 years ago result in anything different?

 

[Spare_change]

I think we could write reasonable exception for unexpected expenses into an amendment. If they become too burdensome we'd need to cut spending or raise more revenue because you can't or shouldn't run deficits forever.

1. If you're making exceptions for deficits, then it's not a balanced budget amendment.

2. Why can't we run deficits forever? What's the reason?

Deficits forever mean increasing debt forever.
Debt forever means interest forever.
Interest forever means interest on interest.
Interest on interest means increasing interest levels.
Increasing interest levels means less faith in the US dollar.
Less faith in the US dollar means collateralized loans.

 

[The Derp]

Derp...I actually feel sorry for you. You are angry that everyone doesn't agree with you. Yet you are wrong but obviously truly believe what you are saying.

No, the problem is that you're too much of a chickenshit to admit your belief system is crap. So what we have is you insisting on something, then turning tail and running away the moment the discussion starts looking bad for you.

Run along, you little wuss. Fly away and hide! You won't be missed.

You still didn't post the link btw.

Link to what? What do you want a link to? I think now you're just shitting out random words in the hopes you can fatigue the debate so you don't have to admit you're wrong. That's pretty shitty, even for a Conservative.

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

Can you not discuss without acting so emotional? You come across as a child.

Most people do not believe much of the statistics coming out of government. Especially under the Obama administration. We have yet to see how much corruption is in the Trump administration.

You believe the things that you feel support your own beliefs.

I try not to be so emotional and study the larger picture and all points of view.

Honestly, if I took the time I could gather the evidence to completely shut you down....but in all honesty....it is not worth my time. My time is much better spent doing things off the forum that make a real difference in stopping people who believe such nonsense.