We Can't Grow Our Way Out of Debt

[georgephillip]

The OP shows why Progressive economies fail 100% of the time and have the highest misery and poverty rates ever recorded in human history

Or maybe capitalism is joining communism in history's dust bin?
"A very interesting and thought-provoking article - for those with minds to think.

"I am no economist but it strikes me that capitalism has failed. The fact that the state has had to bail out banks goes against capitalist principles. We have seen in the 20th century that Communism failed - even China is playing with capitalist-style methods."

We can t grow ourselves out of debt no matter what the Federal Reserve does Charles Eisenstein Comment is free The Guardian

 

[Iceweasel]

I'm not sure the increase in private debt over the past generation has been entirely a matter of personal choice; declining middle class standards of living, brought on by long-term wage stagnation, have made resort to "cheap credit" a necessity for many families.

That's stupid. Most of our parents had a very different set of standards. Getting a TV was a big deal and most people waited until they could afford it. These days, Americans want it all and they want it now. The problem with retards like you is you are literally incapable of assigning blame to anything other than your favorite political piñatas. It has to be the bank. The Republicans. The national debt. The TEA Party. Etc.

We as a nation have spent more but took in more GNP and with lower taxes, contrary to progressive dogma. To this day they refuse to see what can't happen in their religion so they seek to blame anything else, and blame they do. Morning, noon and night. 365 days a year. Crying like starving babies because they can't bankrupt people that own more than they do.

 

[danielpalos]

We have a Commerce Clause; only the Right prefers to lose money on Commerce in favor of ideology.

 

[georgephillip]

That's stupid. Most of our parents had a very different set of standards. Getting a TV was a big deal and most people waited until they could afford it. These days, Americans want it all and they want it now. The problem with retards like you is you are literally incapable of assigning blame to anything other than your favorite political piñatas. It has to be the bank. The Republicans. The national debt. The TEA Party. Etc.

 

[georgephillip]

We as a nation have spent more but took in more GNP and with lower taxes, contrary to progressive dogma. To this day they refuse to see what can't happen in their religion so they seek to blame anything else, and blame they do. Morning, noon and night. 365 days a year. Crying like starving babies because they can't bankrupt people that own more than they do

"The U.S. was the third least taxed country in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) in 2010, the most recent year for which OECD has complete data.

"Of all the OECD countries, which are essentially the countries the U.S. trades with and competes with, only Chile and Mexico collect less taxes as a percentage of their overall economy (as a percentage of gross domestic product, or GDP).

"This sharply contradicts the widely held view among many members of Congress that taxes are already high enough in the U.S. and that any efforts to reduce the federal deficit should therefore take the form of cuts in government spending."

It isn't necessary to bankrupt rich individuals and corporations to address the current record levels of income inequality in the US; however, that doesn't mean we can all suck every rich dick that swings into range, does it?

Don't forget to smile and swallow, Sucker.

The U.S. Continues to Be One of the Least Taxed of the Developed Countries CTJReports

 

[peach174]

We as a nation have spent more but took in more GNP and with lower taxes, contrary to progressive dogma. To this day they refuse to see what can't happen in their religion so they seek to blame anything else, and blame they do. Morning, noon and night. 365 days a year. Crying like starving babies because they can't bankrupt people that own more than they do

"The U.S. was the third least taxed country in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) in 2010, the most recent year for which OECD has complete data.

"Of all the OECD countries, which are essentially the countries the U.S. trades with and competes with, only Chile and Mexico collect less taxes as a percentage of their overall economy (as a percentage of gross domestic product, or GDP).

"This sharply contradicts the widely held view among many members of Congress that taxes are already high enough in the U.S. and that any efforts to reduce the federal deficit should therefore take the form of cuts in government spending."

It isn't necessary to bankrupt rich individuals and corporations to address the current record levels of income inequality in the US; however, that doesn't mean we can all suck every rich dick that swings into range, does it?

Don't forget to smile and swallow, Sucker.

The U.S. Continues to Be One of the Least Taxed of the Developed Countries CTJReports

Was that based on Federal Taxes only, or did it include all of our Taxes?
It's deceptive when State, City and County Taxes are not added also.

 

[Iceweasel]

We as a nation have spent more but took in more GNP and with lower taxes, contrary to progressive dogma. To this day they refuse to see what can't happen in their religion so they seek to blame anything else, and blame they do. Morning, noon and night. 365 days a year. Crying like starving babies because they can't bankrupt people that own more than they do

"The U.S. was the third least taxed country in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) in 2010, the most recent year for which OECD has complete data.

"Of all the OECD countries, which are essentially the countries the U.S. trades with and competes with, only Chile and Mexico collect less taxes as a percentage of their overall economy (as a percentage of gross domestic product, or GDP).

"This sharply contradicts the widely held view among many members of Congress that taxes are already high enough in the U.S. and that any efforts to reduce the federal deficit should therefore take the form of cuts in government spending."

It isn't necessary to bankrupt rich individuals and corporations to address the current record levels of income inequality in the US; however, that doesn't mean we can all suck every rich dick that swings into range, does it?

Don't forget to smile and swallow, Sucker.

The U.S. Continues to Be One of the Least Taxed of the Developed Countries CTJReports

Your argument is that there are other countries that punish earners more? What kind of defense is that? It's like breaking into a car and saying Johnny broke into a jewelry store.

 

[danielpalos]

We as a nation have spent more but took in more GNP and with lower taxes, contrary to progressive dogma. To this day they refuse to see what can't happen in their religion so they seek to blame anything else, and blame they do. Morning, noon and night. 365 days a year. Crying like starving babies because they can't bankrupt people that own more than they do

"The U.S. was the third least taxed country in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) in 2010, the most recent year for which OECD has complete data.

"Of all the OECD countries, which are essentially the countries the U.S. trades with and competes with, only Chile and Mexico collect less taxes as a percentage of their overall economy (as a percentage of gross domestic product, or GDP).

"This sharply contradicts the widely held view among many members of Congress that taxes are already high enough in the U.S. and that any efforts to reduce the federal deficit should therefore take the form of cuts in government spending."

It isn't necessary to bankrupt rich individuals and corporations to address the current record levels of income inequality in the US; however, that doesn't mean we can all suck every rich dick that swings into range, does it?

Don't forget to smile and swallow, Sucker.

The U.S. Continues to Be One of the Least Taxed of the Developed Countries CTJReports

Was that based on Federal Taxes only, or did it include all of our Taxes?
It's deceptive when State, City and County Taxes are not added also.

I thought Only income taxes mattered to the Right for social bashing purposes?

 

[Iceweasel]

Was that based on Federal Taxes only, or did it include all of our Taxes?
It's deceptive when State, City and County Taxes are not added also.

Don't expect honesty from some socialist wealth redistribution group. They want your money and will kill if they have to.

 

[georgephillip]

Was that based on Federal Taxes only, or did it include all of our Taxes?
It's deceptive when State, City and County Taxes are not added also.

"As the graph to the right illustrates, in 2010, the total (federal, state and local) tax revenue collected in the U.S. was equal to 24.8 percent of the U.S.’s GDP.

"The total taxes collected by other OECD countries that year was equal to 33.4 percent of combined GDP of those countries.

"As the table below illustrates, the U.S. has steadily moved closer and closer to becoming the least taxed OECD country over the past three decades."
The U.S. Continues to Be One of the Least Taxed of the Developed Countries CTJReports

Hypothetically, if government offered to decrease the tax burden of the poorest 90% of all taxpayers and make up the missing revenue by increasing taxes on the richest 10% of individuals and large corporations, would you support or oppose the changes?

 

[georgephillip]

Your argument is that there are other countries that punish earners more?

What's your definition of an "earner?" Are the Waltons "earners" in the same sense you are?
Just how wealthy is the Wal-Mart Walton family PolitiFact Wisconsin

 

[peach174]

Was that based on Federal Taxes only, or did it include all of our Taxes?
It's deceptive when State, City and County Taxes are not added also.

"As the graph to the right illustrates, in 2010, the total (federal, state and local) tax revenue collected in the U.S. was equal to 24.8 percent of the U.S.’s GDP.

"The total taxes collected by other OECD countries that year was equal to 33.4 percent of combined GDP of those countries.

"As the table below illustrates, the U.S. has steadily moved closer and closer to becoming the least taxed OECD country over the past three decades."
The U.S. Continues to Be One of the Least Taxed of the Developed Countries CTJReports

Hypothetically, if government offered to decrease the tax burden of the poorest 90% of all taxpayers and make up the missing revenue by increasing taxes on the richest 10% of individuals and large corporations, would you support or oppose the changes?

Almost half in this country pay no federal taxes and especially our poor.
The rich do not pay the most taxes they pay ALL the taxes
Buried inside a Congressional Budget Office report this week was this nugget: when it comes to individual income taxes, the top 40 percent of wage earners in America pay 106 percent of the taxes. The bottom 40 percent...pay negative 9 percent.

You read that right. One group is paying more than 100 percent of individual income taxes, the other is paying less than zero.

 

[danielpalos]

Was that based on Federal Taxes only, or did it include all of our Taxes?
It's deceptive when State, City and County Taxes are not added also.

"As the graph to the right illustrates, in 2010, the total (federal, state and local) tax revenue collected in the U.S. was equal to 24.8 percent of the U.S.’s GDP.

"The total taxes collected by other OECD countries that year was equal to 33.4 percent of combined GDP of those countries.

"As the table below illustrates, the U.S. has steadily moved closer and closer to becoming the least taxed OECD country over the past three decades."
The U.S. Continues to Be One of the Least Taxed of the Developed Countries CTJReports

Hypothetically, if government offered to decrease the tax burden of the poorest 90% of all taxpayers and make up the missing revenue by increasing taxes on the richest 10% of individuals and large corporations, would you support or oppose the changes?

Here is what some on the left consider supply side economics to be currently doing for the wealthiest until it "trickles down":

In 2007 the richest 1% of the American population owned 34.6% of the country's total wealth, and the next 19% owned 50.5%. The top 20% of Americans owned 85% of the country's wealth and the bottom 80% of the population owned 15%. From 1922 to 2010, the share of the top 1% varied from 19.7% to 44.2%, the big drop being associated with the drop in the stock market in the late 1970s. Ignoring the period where the stock market was depressed (1976-1980) and the period when the stock market was overvalued (1929), the share of wealth of the richest 1% remained extremely stable, at about a third of the total wealth.[20] Financial inequality was greater than inequality in total wealth, with the top 1% of the population owning 42.7%, the next 19% of Americans owning 50.3%, and the bottom 80% owning 7%.[21] However, after the Great Recession which started in 2007, the share of total wealth owned by the top 1% of the population grew from 34.6% to 37.1%, and that owned by the top 20% of Americans grew from 85% to 87.7%. The Great Recession also caused a drop of 36.1% in median household wealth but a drop of only 11.1% for the top 1%, further widening the gap between the 1% and the 99%.[19][20][21] During the economic expansion between 2002 and 2007, the income of the top 1% grew 10 times faster than the income of the bottom 90%. In this period 66% of total income gains went to the 1%, who in 2007 had a larger share of total income than at any time since 1928. -- Distribution of wealth - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Supply side economics should be supplying us with better governance at lower cost.

 

[georgephillip]

You read that right. One group is paying more than 100 percent of individual income taxes, the other is paying less than zero.

Which group is seeing a greater percentage of its earnings taxed when state and local taxes are factored in? How much federal income tax do you expect someone earning less than $10,000 a year to contribute? If the rich are upset at those with a negative federal income tax rate, the solution is to increase the pay at the bottom until it reaches a level where federal income taxes are due. The rich might also expect multi-billion dollar corporations like GE to contribute to the society that gave them life, as well.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Was that based on Federal Taxes only, or did it include all of our Taxes?
It's deceptive when State, City and County Taxes are not added also.

"As the graph to the right illustrates, in 2010, the total (federal, state and local) tax revenue collected in the U.S. was equal to 24.8 percent of the U.S.’s GDP.

"The total taxes collected by other OECD countries that year was equal to 33.4 percent of combined GDP of those countries.

"As the table below illustrates, the U.S. has steadily moved closer and closer to becoming the least taxed OECD country over the past three decades."
The U.S. Continues to Be One of the Least Taxed of the Developed Countries CTJReports

Hypothetically, if government offered to decrease the tax burden of the poorest 90% of all taxpayers and make up the missing revenue by increasing taxes on the richest 10% of individuals and large corporations, would you support or oppose the changes?

Here is what some on the left consider supply side economics to be currently doing for the wealthiest until it "trickles down":

In 2007 the richest 1% of the American population owned 34.6% of the country's total wealth, and the next 19% owned 50.5%. The top 20% of Americans owned 85% of the country's wealth and the bottom 80% of the population owned 15%. From 1922 to 2010, the share of the top 1% varied from 19.7% to 44.2%, the big drop being associated with the drop in the stock market in the late 1970s. Ignoring the period where the stock market was depressed (1976-1980) and the period when the stock market was overvalued (1929), the share of wealth of the richest 1% remained extremely stable, at about a third of the total wealth.[20] Financial inequality was greater than inequality in total wealth, with the top 1% of the population owning 42.7%, the next 19% of Americans owning 50.3%, and the bottom 80% owning 7%.[21] However, after the Great Recession which started in 2007, the share of total wealth owned by the top 1% of the population grew from 34.6% to 37.1%, and that owned by the top 20% of Americans grew from 85% to 87.7%. The Great Recession also caused a drop of 36.1% in median household wealth but a drop of only 11.1% for the top 1%, further widening the gap between the 1% and the 99%.[19][20][21] During the economic expansion between 2002 and 2007, the income of the top 1% grew 10 times faster than the income of the bottom 90%. In this period 66% of total income gains went to the 1%, who in 2007 had a larger share of total income than at any time since 1928. -- Distribution of wealth - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Supply side economics should be supplying us with better governance at lower cost.

Didn't Venezuela stick it to the rich to help the poor?
How'd that work out?

 

[Iceweasel]

Your argument is that there are other countries that punish earners more?

What's your definition of an "earner?" Are the Waltons "earners" in the same sense you are?
Just how wealthy is the Wal-Mart Walton family PolitiFact Wisconsin

I don't have a unique definition. There are many ways to earn money, more if you have money and more yet if you have money and are smart. The most dangerous thing any society can do it let somebody else decide if you deserve it. Wars have been fought over less.

 

[Iceweasel]

You read that right. One group is paying more than 100 percent of individual income taxes, the other is paying less than zero.

Which group is seeing a greater percentage of its earnings taxed when state and local taxes are factored in? How much federal income tax do you expect someone earning less than $10,000 a year to contribute? If the rich are upset at those with a negative federal income tax rate, the solution is to increase the pay at the bottom until it reaches a level where federal income taxes are due. The rich might also expect multi-billion dollar corporations like GE to contribute to the society that gave them life, as well.

None of that makes any sense. No one said the rich are upset. Fact is just the opposite. The rich are doing better than ever. Why? Because progressive retards are brainwashed and pull the lever for liberal politicians expecting different results. The raising incomes at the bottom mantra is more of the same. The top earners simply pass the costs on, the economy struggles even more, fewer opportunities exist and the rich have even more opportunity to call the shots. It's a beautiful system and with so many sleepwalkers pulling for them they know they can't lose.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The OP shows why Progressive economies fail 100% of the time and have the highest misery and poverty rates ever recorded in human history

Or maybe capitalism is joining communism in history's dust bin?
"A very interesting and thought-provoking article - for those with minds to think.

"I am no economist but it strikes me that capitalism has failed. The fact that the state has had to bail out banks goes against capitalist principles. We have seen in the 20th century that Communism failed - even China is playing with capitalist-style methods."

We can t grow ourselves out of debt no matter what the Federal Reserve does Charles Eisenstein Comment is free The Guardian

Obama's failed, not capitalism. Ask 400MM Chinese who just joined the Middle Class

 

[georgephillip]

Didn't Venezuela stick it to the rich to help the poor?
How'd that work out?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Didn't Venezuela stick it to the rich to help the poor?
How'd that work out?

That's a dollar more than you had yesterday.