Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Taxation is a fact of life in western societies. There are places that have the regressive tax structure and lack of social programs that conservatives seem to favor and they are among the poorest, most chaotic places on earth, but their rich live like royalty behind walls and armed guards and the peasants work for crumbs. Serfdom is the end game for supply-side economics.When all federal state and local taxes, fees, etc. are added together the working poor pay a large percentage of their income in taxes, no one gets off scot-free except the people who are adept at hiding income as the wealthy are.I understand that but the question of Trickle down VS Trickle up should have a much more definitive answer than it does and I believe it would if the trickle down champions were not wealthy people with a vested interest in making regular people believe that their livelihoods depend on the rich being untaxed and untouchable.There just isn't, though. There are far too many constantly floating variables that make macro forecasting so difficult. It's not only our economy, it's the economy of every other nation. Currency fluctuations, global bond prices, shifting political sands, taxation, sovereign spending, holy shit, war, commodity prices, on and on....there ought to be a better grasp of what works and what doesn't by now rather than this silly ideological war between opposing philosophies.
I agree with you, it would be nice. But when a person on either end of this argument tells you they have The Answer, they're pretty much talking out of their ass.
.
wealthy people with a vested interest in making regular people believe that their livelihoods depend on the rich being untaxed and untouchable.
Is that why the economy has been so slow?
The rich should be untaxed, but the top 10% pay 68% of Fed income taxes?
Of course, the rich also pay those same taxes... on TOP of the enormous level percentage of income taxes they pay.
Now, of the two competing sets of ideas: The Ideological Left and the Philosophical Right, which one is it that had demanded those taxes and fees, which in large measure serve to keep the poor... POOR?
They make the bulk of all income so it is fair that they pay the bulk of income taxes. That oft-quoted figure is the result of massive income inequality rather than an unfair tax structure.I understand that but the question of Trickle down VS Trickle up should have a much more definitive answer than it does and I believe it would if the trickle down champions were not wealthy people with a vested interest in making regular people believe that their livelihoods depend on the rich being untaxed and untouchable.There just isn't, though. There are far too many constantly floating variables that make macro forecasting so difficult. It's not only our economy, it's the economy of every other nation. Currency fluctuations, global bond prices, shifting political sands, taxation, sovereign spending, holy shit, war, commodity prices, on and on....there ought to be a better grasp of what works and what doesn't by now rather than this silly ideological war between opposing philosophies.
I agree with you, it would be nice. But when a person on either end of this argument tells you they have The Answer, they're pretty much talking out of their ass.
.
wealthy people with a vested interest in making regular people believe that their livelihoods depend on the rich being untaxed and untouchable.
Is that why the economy has been so slow?
The rich should be untaxed, but the top 10% pay 68% of Fed income taxes?
When all federal state and local taxes, fees, etc. are added together the working poor pay a large percentage of their income in taxes, no one gets off scot-free except the people who are adept at hiding income as the wealthy are.
When all federal state and local taxes, fees, etc. are added together the working poor pay a large percentage of their income in taxes
How much?
no one gets off scot-free except the people who are adept at hiding income as the wealthy are.
Scot free? But the top 10% pay 68% of all Federal income taxes.
Doesn't sound scot free to me.
Taxation is a fact of life in western societies....
They make the bulk of all income so it is fair that they pay the bulk of income taxes. That oft-quoted figure is the result of massive income inequality rather than an unfair tax structure.I understand that but the question of Trickle down VS Trickle up should have a much more definitive answer than it does and I believe it would if the trickle down champions were not wealthy people with a vested interest in making regular people believe that their livelihoods depend on the rich being untaxed and untouchable.There just isn't, though. There are far too many constantly floating variables that make macro forecasting so difficult. It's not only our economy, it's the economy of every other nation. Currency fluctuations, global bond prices, shifting political sands, taxation, sovereign spending, holy shit, war, commodity prices, on and on.
I agree with you, it would be nice. But when a person on either end of this argument tells you they have The Answer, they're pretty much talking out of their ass.
.
wealthy people with a vested interest in making regular people believe that their livelihoods depend on the rich being untaxed and untouchable.
Is that why the economy has been so slow?
The rich should be untaxed, but the top 10% pay 68% of Fed income taxes?
When all federal state and local taxes, fees, etc. are added together the working poor pay a large percentage of their income in taxes, no one gets off scot-free except the people who are adept at hiding income as the wealthy are.
When all federal state and local taxes, fees, etc. are added together the working poor pay a large percentage of their income in taxes
How much?
no one gets off scot-free except the people who are adept at hiding income as the wealthy are.
Scot free? But the top 10% pay 68% of all Federal income taxes.
Doesn't sound scot free to me.
I concede nothing except that you are a fool.Taxation is a fact of life in western societies....
Your concession is duly noted and summarily accepted.
You're a fruit loop, in a recursive rage loop. Who obviously can't stop swearing.Think he wants to use a bucket, till his boat capsizes, then blame 'liberals' for giving him too big a bucket. BritPat is still fuming from when Hoover lost to FDR.Keynes seems to be the only answer to a recession or depression at this time, unless you have another solution. Maybe trickle-something is the answer?Keynes was right as long as government spending and revenue remained balanced over the long run. Instead, we finance deficit spending with long term debt that we will never be able to repay.
Keynes wasn't right about anything. He became popular with politicians and other sorts of ticks on the ass of society because he gave politicians an excuse to go on a spending binge.
You're just a jackass with no facts or logic to offer.
So what? They get off easy compared with the rest of the developed world, none of those taxes take food off their tables or deprive their children of basic needs, many conservative regressive tax schemes would do exactly that to America's working poor whom republicans do not give two shits about. The working poor and lower middle-class already carry the bulk of state and local revenue but you would be as happy as a clam to make them carry the federal government also.They make the bulk of all income so it is fair that they pay the bulk of income taxes. That oft-quoted figure is the result of massive income inequality rather than an unfair tax structure.I understand that but the question of Trickle down VS Trickle up should have a much more definitive answer than it does and I believe it would if the trickle down champions were not wealthy people with a vested interest in making regular people believe that their livelihoods depend on the rich being untaxed and untouchable.
wealthy people with a vested interest in making regular people believe that their livelihoods depend on the rich being untaxed and untouchable.
Is that why the economy has been so slow?
The rich should be untaxed, but the top 10% pay 68% of Fed income taxes?
When all federal state and local taxes, fees, etc. are added together the working poor pay a large percentage of their income in taxes, no one gets off scot-free except the people who are adept at hiding income as the wealthy are.
When all federal state and local taxes, fees, etc. are added together the working poor pay a large percentage of their income in taxes
How much?
no one gets off scot-free except the people who are adept at hiding income as the wealthy are.
Scot free? But the top 10% pay 68% of all Federal income taxes.
Doesn't sound scot free to me.
They make the bulk of all income so it is fair that they pay the bulk of income taxes.
They make a lot less than 68% of all income.........
The soft science of economics has been manipulated for political purposes to the point that it is practically meaningless. The Koch brothers and other very wealthy people have generously endowed several schools of economics provided the focus is on free market dogma rather than observation and empiricism. Were the field actually approached as a science there would be no philosophical component whatsoever. There is nothing that generates more raw data for study than human commerce and it has been for decades, there ought to be a better grasp of what works and what doesn't by now rather than this silly ideological war between opposing philosophies.
So what? They get off easy compared with the rest of the developed world, none of those taxes take food off their tables or deprive their children of basic needs, many conservative regressive tax schemes would do exactly that to America's working poor whom republicans do not give two shits about. The working poor and lower middle-class already carry the bulk of state and local revenue but you would be as happy as a clam to make them carry the federal government also.They make the bulk of all income so it is fair that they pay the bulk of income taxes. That oft-quoted figure is the result of massive income inequality rather than an unfair tax structure.wealthy people with a vested interest in making regular people believe that their livelihoods depend on the rich being untaxed and untouchable.
Is that why the economy has been so slow?
The rich should be untaxed, but the top 10% pay 68% of Fed income taxes?
When all federal state and local taxes, fees, etc. are added together the working poor pay a large percentage of their income in taxes, no one gets off scot-free except the people who are adept at hiding income as the wealthy are.
When all federal state and local taxes, fees, etc. are added together the working poor pay a large percentage of their income in taxes
How much?
no one gets off scot-free except the people who are adept at hiding income as the wealthy are.
Scot free? But the top 10% pay 68% of all Federal income taxes.
Doesn't sound scot free to me.
They make the bulk of all income so it is fair that they pay the bulk of income taxes.
They make a lot less than 68% of all income.........
First, most of those unemployed men that were so lazy and wouldn't work, went to work or to the military, secondly by 1945 I in 4 women were now in the work force. Workers were hard to find. So if Keynes is not the answer, perhaps a draft of 18 million men is the key?Keynes seems to be the only answer to a recession or depression at this time, unless you have another solution. Maybe trickle-something is the answer?Economics is similar to history. Economists cannot experiment as do the natural sciences, they can generally tell us what happened and why they think it might happen again if all the economic components are in the same proportions and the conditions are exactly the same. Still, by using those methods we may have just escaped another Great Depression by studying the possible causes of the last. Come to think of it we haven't had another Great Depression for some years now and is that because of economists? Was Keynes right?
Keynes was right as long as government spending and revenue remained balanced over the long run. Instead, we finance deficit spending with long term debt that we will never be able to repay.
Keynes wasn't right about anything. He became popular with politicians and other sorts of ticks on the ass of society because he gave politicians an excuse to go on a spending binge.
Keynes' "solution" didn't work. The depression lasted another 8 years after the election of FDR. Some would argue it lasted until the end of WW II since the only thing that kept employment low during the war was drafting 18 million men into the military.
Oh! A Re-Concession? How sweet.I concede nothing except that you are a fool.Taxation is a fact of life in western societies....
Your concession is duly noted and summarily accepted.
Empiricism is possible in economics... In broad terms.The soft science of economics has been manipulated for political purposes to the point that it is practically meaningless. The Koch brothers and other very wealthy people have generously endowed several schools of economics provided the focus is on free market dogma rather than observation and empiricism. Were the field actually approached as a science there would be no philosophical component whatsoever. There is nothing that generates more raw data for study than human commerce and it has been for decades, there ought to be a better grasp of what works and what doesn't by now rather than this silly ideological war between opposing philosophies.
Empirical methods can't be used in economics because you can't do experiments where you can isolate the variable. Anyone who says economics needs to be more empirical to be more scientific doesn't know the first thing about science.
Whenever we use "observation" we observe that liberal economic theories don't work. For instance, whenever they decide to help hurricane victims by controlling the price of fresh water or generators, they supply of these products instantly dries up leaving the victims with no way to get fresh water or electricity, but the libturds never learn from these "observations."
Debunking Economics - Revised and Expanded Edition The Naked Emperor Dethroned Steve Keen 9781848139923 Amazon.com Books
book talking about how the whole "profession" is bunk
- "Nothing in these abstract economic models actually works in the real world. It doesn’t matter how many footnotes they put in, or how many ways they tinker around the edges. The whole enterprise is totally rotten at the core: it has no relation to reality."
Noam Chomsky, Understanding Power, pp. 254-5
- You can also construct models which have no relation to reality. Some free-market economic models, for example, abstract away from significant factors, such as state intervention or the fact that capital is mobile and labor relatively immobile and so on. They actually take you farther away from the way the world works.
Noam Chomsky - The Golden Age Is in Us Noam Chomsky interviewed by Alexander Cockburn
Noam Chomsky about economic models Resources for Economics Learners and Students.
book talking about how the whole "profession" is bunk
The Government loves Keynesian Economics because it is the economics of intervention and politicians LOVE to intervene.
You live in curious alternate reality, where only your immature insults count. Now, you are down to semantics.You're a fruit loop, in a recursive rage loop. Who obviously can't stop swearing.Think he wants to use a bucket, till his boat capsizes, then blame 'liberals' for giving him too big a bucket. BritPat is still fuming from when Hoover lost to FDR.Keynes seems to be the only answer to a recession or depression at this time, unless you have another solution. Maybe trickle-something is the answer?Keynes wasn't right about anything. He became popular with politicians and other sorts of ticks on the ass of society because he gave politicians an excuse to go on a spending binge.
You're just a jackass with no facts or logic to offer.
"Jackass" isn't a swear word.
True enough!!! No more depressions thanks to Bernanke, an economist, who just saved us from depression and then openly and very publicly thanked Milton Friedman for showing him how!! Keynes was a joke whose policies prolonged the Depression for 15 years when it could have been ended in one year or not allowed to develop at all.. Come to think of it we haven't had another Great Depression for some years now and is that because of economists? Was Keynes right?
- "Nothing in these abstract economic models actually works in the real world. It doesn’t matter how many footnotes they put in, or how many ways they tinker around the edges. The whole enterprise is totally rotten at the core: it has no relation to reality."
Noam Chomsky, Understanding Power, pp. 254-5
- You can also construct models which have no relation to reality. Some free-market economic models, for example, abstract away from significant factors, such as state intervention or the fact that capital is mobile and labor relatively immobile and so on. They actually take you farther away from the way the world works.
Noam Chomsky - The Golden Age Is in Us Noam Chomsky interviewed by Alexander Cockburn
Noam Chomsky about economic models Resources for Economics Learners and Students.
I'll quote Henry Hazlitt here:
“Economics is haunted by more fallacies than any other study known to man. This is no accident. The inherent difficulties of the subject would be great enough in any case, but they are multiplied a thousandfold by a factor that is insignificant in, say, physics, mathematics or medicine - the special pleading of selfish interests."
Economic calculus and modeling are a gift from John Maynard Keynes. Prior to Keynesian Economics the field relied on deductive reasoning to develop economic theory. Economics isn't a predictive science, though the Keynesians will strongly disagree! The track record of economic models and predictions are abysmal. It doesn't work. You can however, analyze the effects that policy had on the economy and use this knowledge to avoid repeating those mistakes (though we never seem to do this). For instance, it is evident that debasing a nations currency will have detrimental effecst on the economy, but exactly where the distortions will occur and how long it will take for the inflationary bubble to burst is anyone guess. There is no way to predict the actions of all of the economic players.
The only school of thought that still relies on deductive reasoning if the Austrian School. The Government loves Keynesian Economics because it is the economics of intervention and politicians LOVE to intervene.
Milton also fell in love with Pinochet's dictatorship cult, so he had his good and bad sides. Don't think the victims of Pinochet would cheer the bloody military coup, nor Milton's so called shock therapy.Debunking Economics - Revised and Expanded Edition The Naked Emperor Dethroned Steve Keen 9781848139923 Amazon.com Books
book talking about how the whole "profession" is bunk
bunk??? MIlton Friedman,an economist, told China to switch to capitalism, they did, and now instead of starving to death in the 10's of millions under liberal socialism they are getting rich. In fact Milton Friedman just eliminated 40% of world poverty with his gift to China.
It is safe to say conservative economists are Godly or saintly? Who in all of human history saved so many millions of lives from a certain liberal death??
