The fact that we were able to lay the trap does feel pretty good

[The Infidel]

The government has different needs than a corporation.

There is NOT the need for profit in government actions

That's true. The government should break even: income = spending.

But they don't do that.

Obviously when they decrease income more than they decrease spending they won't, but people like you think decreasing income increases income.

Unfortunately that has never worked in the 6000 year history of the Earth lol.

Yes it has, and yes it does.... If you allow buisinesses (i.e. Americans) keep more of their money (decreased income) they are free to hire more employess and create more jobs... as long as there is a demand for their product... which goes hand in hand with how the economy is doing... b/c if Americans have more money in their pockets to buy more products, hence more money going into said buisiness... allowing said buisiness to pay more money into taxes... which brings more cash in for the Federal Gov't. (increased income).

See... was'nt that easy....?

 

[NYcarbineer]

The real numbers dont agree with you.

Bush created very few jobs and then crashed the economy.

I love how you try and pretend for hack political purposes that Obama did not inherit a huge fucking mess fresh off the Bush presses

More straw. You should start a hay farm.

Or you could use facts, but we realize that isnt something you are very good at.

Let's look at facts:

Here's the non-farm payroll numbers from Bush's 8 years. NOTE: under the zero line is where we lost jobs.

Let's compare that to a successful president, Bill Clinton:

Note where the zero line is.

That's what facts, unembellished, unspun, look like. Happy?

 

[NYcarbineer]

That's true. The government should break even: income = spending.

But they don't do that.

Obviously when they decrease income more than they decrease spending they won't, but people like you think decreasing income increases income.

Unfortunately that has never worked in the 6000 year history of the Earth lol.

Yes it has, and yes it does.... If you allow buisinesses (i.e. Americans) keep more of their money (decreased income) they are free to hire more employess and create more jobs... as long as there is a demand for their product... which goes hand in hand with how the economy is doing... b/c if Americans have more money in their pockets to buy more products, hence more money going into said buisiness... allowing said buisiness to pay more money into taxes... which brings more cash in for the Federal Gov't. (increased income).

See... was'nt that easy....?

That's ignorant. Labor costs aren't taxable in the first place. Business income tax is based on profit AFTER COSTS, including labor.

jeezus what is wrong with people?

 

[The T]

That's true. The government should break even: income = spending.

But they don't do that.

Obviously when they decrease income more than they decrease spending they won't, but people like you think decreasing income increases income.

Unfortunately that has never worked in the 6000 year history of the Earth lol.

Yes it has, and yes it does.... If you allow buisinesses (i.e. Americans) keep more of their money (decreased income) they are free to hire more employess and create more jobs... as long as there is a demand for their product... which goes hand in hand with how the economy is doing... b/c if Americans have more money in their pockets to buy more products, hence more money going into said buisiness... allowing said buisiness to pay more money into taxes... which brings more cash in for the Federal Gov't. (increased income).

See... was'nt that easy....?

Commerce...Commerce...and Commerce.

If people are jobless? No money? No commerce. They cease to be players and are sidelined to become takers instead of producers.

Government has made it far too difficult via regulation for them to go into business for themselves...so that's out.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

The government has different needs than a corporation.

There is NOT the need for profit in government actions

The government must believe in the profit system, or they would never give interest rates on U.S. savings bonds.

 

[The Infidel]

Well, gotta go spend some money and supply some buisiness with some much needed cash for their bottom line... (income which translates into more cash for the gov't to tax O-Reilly Auto Parts at the end of year)

 

[The T]

Well, gotta go spend some money and supply some buisiness with some much needed cash for their bottom line... (income which translates into more cash for the gov't to tax O-Reilly Auto Parts at the end of year)

Be Safe Brother.

 

[The T]

The government has different needs than a corporation.

There is NOT the need for profit in government actions

The government must believe in the profit system, or they would never give interest rates on U.S. savings bonds.

Correct. [Good post by the way]...now why would Government lop it's nose off to spite it's face?

 

[Avatar4321]

The government has different needs than a corporation.

There is NOT the need for profit in government actions

Perhaps they should need a profit.

If they were doing it right, we could have full government services and be completely self sufficient. The tax payers wouldnt need to do a thing.

 

[Truthmatters]

And you wish the government to compete with the private sector?

The profit will become the end instead of the service to the people.

Why is it you people think that chasing profit makes a system better?

Because you have bought a bag of goods from the corporate world.

 

[georgephillip]

Below are two images.
One is who the Democrats want you to believe that will pay more taxes.
The other is the real deal. The hard-working business owner/manager who is the very backbone of this country.

Is your personal tax rate closer to Warren Buffett's or his secretary?

"Now we are (or used to be) a pretty rich country and the median income of the 118M people who earn enough money to pay income taxes is about $50,000 but the cost of living in the same country as people who earn an average of 976 times more than that is pretty high as well (see "The Dooh Nibor Economy").

"Even worse, The (richest) 10,000 paid just $112Bn in taxes last year – that’s just over 20% of their income, while the rest of the country, of course, paid a much higher percentage of their income to make up for the shortfall.

"Warren Buffett, the third richest man in the world (behind Gates and Slim) paid 17.7% tax and made a point of checking and found out his employees paid an average of 32.9%.

"God bless Buffett becuase he made this point in a speech that was given to 400 of the 10,000, who were gathered at a Hillary Clinton fund raiser in 2007.

"It got a little attention at the time but then was swept under the rug – as if that didn’t matter. But it DOES MATTER and it matters a lot – the life of this country depends on it!

"If this were just a case of 10,000 people not paying $100Bn in taxes, maybe we could move on and forget it but it’s not. US corporations, who are (according to to the Supreme Court) also citizens of this country, paid just $300Bn in taxes last year on $6 TRILLION in income (5%).

"That’s right, if US corporations simply paid the same amount of tax as Mr. Buffett – that would, by itself, be enough to wipe out our deficit.

"But, things have gone decidedly the other way in the past 30 years..."

Phil's Stock World

 

[The T]

And you wish the government to compete with the private sector?

Your first mistake. Government should NEVER be in competition against the private sector. Without the private sector and the producers contained therin? Government becomes a tyranny.

The profit will become the end instead of the service to the people.

Government is in business of making a profit? Who knew?

Why is it you people think that chasing profit makes a system better?

See your above statement.

Because you have bought a bag of goods from the corporate world.

And where do you purchase yours? Isn't it time the government-issue nosering you bear is swappped ?

Again? Without corporations (which are few on par with small businesses that actually do most hiring)? Commerce ceases...Tax revenues go to nil. But you gotta punish those that make more than others don't ya?

Face it TM. You're a Drone.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

The government has different needs than a corporation.

There is NOT the need for profit in government actions

The government must believe in the profit system, or they would never give interest rates on U.S. savings bonds.

Correct. [Good post by the way]...now why would Government lop it's nose off to spite it's face?

I don't think it's all government just the current government that wants to cut it nose off to spite it's face.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

And you wish the government to compete with the private sector?

The profit will become the end instead of the service to the people.

Why is it you people think that chasing profit makes a system better?

Because you have bought a bag of goods from the corporate world.

Things are not free period. Without profits no one would have an income. The government would not have any tax revenue.

 

[The T]

And you wish the government to compete with the private sector?

The profit will become the end instead of the service to the people.

Why is it you people think that chasing profit makes a system better?

Because you have bought a bag of goods from the corporate world.

Things are not free period. Without profits no one would have an income. The government would not have any tax revenue.

Yep. And then our government would become that of the famed Robin Hood stories. A tyranny.

 

[The T]

The government must believe in the profit system, or they would never give interest rates on U.S. savings bonds.

Correct. [Good post by the way]...now why would Government lop it's nose off to spite it's face?

I don't think it's all government just the current government that wants to cut it nose off to spite it's face.

I differ with you in this respect. It's all government for now until January when the New State Legislatures, and the Federal House stoke up their boilers and get moving.

What they do remains to be seen.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Correct. [Good post by the way]...now why would Government lop it's nose off to spite it's face?

I don't think it's all government just the current government that wants to cut it nose off to spite it's face.

I differ with you in this respect. It's all government for now until January when the New State Legislatures, and the Federal House stoke up their boilers and get moving.

What they do remains to be seen.

I think we are saying the same thing the current government would be the one controling the government now. the up coming government will be a wait and see.

 

[sangha]

Howard Kurtz of the Daily Beast interviewed Andrew Card and Dan Bartlett, Bush's former chief-of-staff and communication director, and discovered how pleased Shrub and the Tulips are with the economic decay they helped germinate.

"When the tax cuts were enacted, with an expiration date, Republicans and Bush officials understood the political advantages of the 'fiscal time bomb' they were setting.

"As Kurtz puts it: 'At some point in the way distant future, Democrats could be accused of raising taxes if they tried to undo the Bush breaks and return to Clinton-era levels of taxation.'

"Democrats understood this, too: Sen. Kent Conrad (D-ND) told the Washington Post at the time that '[Bush is] going to be out of office when the roof falls in.'”

The actual costs of these cuts was carefully concealed from voters at the time of Senate passage.

"The various sunsets also hid the true cost of the bill.

"As Paul Krugman wrote at the time: 'The administration, knowing that its tax cut wouldn’t fit into any responsible budget, pushed through a bill that contains the things it wanted most — big tax cuts for the very, very rich — and used whatever accounting gimmicks it could find to make the overall budget impact seem smaller than it is.'”

'Think it's too late to send Dubya and Dick to Afghanistan?

Bush Officials Celebrate

And yet the deficits were decreasing year over year through 2007.

If this was a politically motivated economy, one might suppose that the Democrats taking power and not even submitting budgets to over run might have some culpability in the current economic problems.

Of course, one might be wrong.

In wingnut world, when clinton left bush* with a surplus, and bush* spent that into a deficit, that meant bush* decreased the deficit.

 

[daveman]

The government has different needs than a corporation.

There is NOT the need for profit in government actions

That's true. The government should break even: income = spending.

But they don't do that.

What you claim is they should break even at the end of each year.

That is bullshit.

LONG TERM Investment is prudent even for governments.

If the only way people could make large purchases was with cash then this economy would be REALLY FUCKED

You really have no clue what you're talking about. Perhaps you should just stop.

 

[sangha]

That's true. The government should break even: income = spending.

But they don't do that.

What you claim is they should break even at the end of each year.

That is bullshit.

LONG TERM Investment is prudent even for governments.

If the only way people could make large purchases was with cash then this economy would be REALLY FUCKED

You really have no clue what you're talking about. Perhaps you should just stop.

Wingnuts think people would still keep buying cars, homes, and other expensive assets even if they couldn't get a loan to pay for it