Econ 101 for Obamites

What are Obamites?

I'm guessing people who love and worship Obama.
Sort of like a cult thing....

And we have those lovable lefties on the board here calling right wingers repugs.
I see that one from time to time. :D

Worship is a religious thing.

I'm an atheist.

And I don't "love" people I don't know.

So at least in my case..it doesn't apply.

:DAnd just remember Ubama doesn't love you either...just your money.
 
Do you really believe the highlighted above?

Can you prove to us that revenues would remain the same if tax rates were lowered to zero?


Typical of an Obamite to post an inane question/deflection instead of addressing the facts.

Yes, I do believe the charts because they are fact.

OF COURSE you have to have tax rates in a certain range to keep revenue coming in DUH...

I truly believe that folks who gravitate to liberalism are brain-damaged and/or drug-addled.

Plenty of evidence on this forum and MANY others of it.

No. You said revenues don't change NO MATTER WHERE TAX RATES ARE.

So you're retracting that claim. You're admitting that tax rates do affect revenue.

Fine. That was my point. You need to first learn plain English before you attempt Economics.
 
What is it that raising taxes on the rich is supposed to accomplish?

:lol:Covering eight days of gov't costs and a grin on Ubama's face.

Not even that much. That would have been if over $200K had a tax hike. This deal, over $400K, will only bring in a few days worth.

And by the next year they will adjust by laying off and finding tax shelters, and it will mean nothing, but some lost jobs.

Really, it's just not a good idea to have a POTUS who has NO clue about how the economy runs, or how business operates.

He's a post turtle.
 
When the economy gets worse in 2013 and 2014.....who will the Democraps blame????

Oh, the GOP will be blamed for going along with the Democraps' tax increases on "rich people."

Very predictable, since Buuuuuuuuuush can't be blamed anymore.
 
Do you really believe the highlighted above?

Can you prove to us that revenues would remain the same if tax rates were lowered to zero?


Typical of an Obamite to post an inane question/deflection instead of addressing the facts.

Yes, I do believe the charts because they are fact.

OF COURSE you have to have tax rates in a certain range to keep revenue coming in DUH...

I truly believe that folks who gravitate to liberalism are brain-damaged and/or drug-addled.

Plenty of evidence on this forum and MANY others of it.

No. You said revenues don't change NO MATTER WHERE TAX RATES ARE.

So you're retracting that claim. You're admitting that tax rates do affect revenue.

Fine. That was my point. You need to first learn plain English before you attempt Economics.

You "debate" like a child.

Go outside and play, kid.
 
How is this kook allowed out of its closet????

So....the Bush Tax Cuts that obamination kept in place until last week caused the mortgage and banking messes that blew up when Bush was sitting in the White House???

You are so fucking stupid.

If that was true, then why did obamination keep those EVIL tax cuts in place until last week.....oh we were so lucky to avoid another housing and banking disaster because granny's taxes were "too low."

Look at the crappe that happened under W's tax rates (a step too far), and of course the cronyism and corruption meltdown (typical and iconic of Pub economies). What we need now is an end to pandering to the bloated rich voodoo has produced, and help for the nonrich and infrastructure, that voodoo has ignored.

That's not comunism or a new entitlement attitude, Rush/Beck/Pub dupes, that's fact.

No, dumbass, that was Pub cronyism and corruption that caused the meltdown. Reaganist tax rates and screwing with the workers caused the worst rich/poor gap and upward social mobility ever, and lack of demand.
 
The idiots here have never taken Economics even in high school, so this is like Chinese to them.

They are reliant on the media and their leaders telling them how things work and what is going to happen based on their lies. Take money from people that create jobs doesn't harm job creation because they are told that and they believe it.

Nancy Pelosi claims welfare simulates the economy.....this is the fucking idiots we're dealing with here. She thinks taking $10 from you, then giving $8 of that money to someone else has stimulated the economy.

And the other $2 goes into wasteful pork spending.
 

The tax experts we spoke with agreed with Stockman. In this climate, raising the top tax rates from 35 to 39.6 percent would increase revenues. The effect Pence is talking about would not happen at this level of taxation, they said.

"There is some rate at which it would be true," said Roberton Williams of the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center. "But I don't think there are any established economists who would argue that we're near that."

"At current tax rates, most tax increases will increase revenues, at least in the short and medium run," said Brian Riedl of the conservative Heritage Foundation. "The caveat is that in a fragile economy, it can be unpredictable."

"There is no real dispute among economists that broad-based federal income tax cuts reduce revenue (except when tax rates are much higher than they are now)," said Alan D. Viard of the conservative American Enterprise Institute. "Revenue is lower than it would be without the Bush tax cuts -- liberal and conservative economists are in accord on this question."

To recap, Pence said that, "Anybody who is familiar with the historical data from the IRS knows that raising income tax rates will likely actually reduce federal revenues." Actually, the historical data doesn't show that. Experts said the economic theory Pence is drawing from doesn't apply in the current situation, and an increase in tax rates would not cause tax revenues to decline. So we rate his statement False.

PolitiFact | Mike Pence says raising taxes lowers tax revenues

:DAnd if Ubama would just keep his fingers out of the piggybank then higher tax rates wouldn't be necessary. He knows he only has 4 more years in office and he's unable to think past that point.
 
Well, I'd say $1 goes to operate their govt scam and $1 to the pork.

The idiots here have never taken Economics even in high school, so this is like Chinese to them.

They are reliant on the media and their leaders telling them how things work and what is going to happen based on their lies. Take money from people that create jobs doesn't harm job creation because they are told that and they believe it.

Nancy Pelosi claims welfare simulates the economy.....this is the fucking idiots we're dealing with here. She thinks taking $10 from you, then giving $8 of that money to someone else has stimulated the economy.

And the other $2 goes into wasteful pork spending.
 
Stupid insults and dumazz talking points- very impressive.

Reaganist policies and tax rates have ruined the non rich, and Pub cronyism and corruption (see also S+L scandal) wrecked the world 2003-8. Capital gains going up was just that BS bubble. Laugh on, shyttehead chumps of the greedy idiot rich.
 
Stupid insults and dumazz talking points- very impressive.

Reaganist policies and tax rates have ruined the non rich, and Pub cronyism and corruption (see also S+L scandal) wrecked the world 2003-8. Capital gains going up was just that BS bubble. Laugh on, shyttehead chumps of the greedy idiot rich.

It's not an insult if its true.

You're either stupid or lying
 
You're dealing with stupid people who believe that the federal government IS the US economy


Yes, I realize that. Their World begins and ends with a Centralized federal gov't Those of us in the private sector who earn our living, non-union, are the enemy, only to be demonized and taxed to death to pay for their entitlements and cushy public sector union jobs and FAT pensions.

So, it appears, you are envious of others and have a poor paying job with few benefits. Rather than being personally responsible and getting an education or training which would improve your lot in life you would rather bring everyone else down to your level.

That in a nutshell is today's Reagan Republican.


Isn't that "envy" thing something they like to hang on Libs?
 

The tax experts we spoke with agreed with Stockman. In this climate, raising the top tax rates from 35 to 39.6 percent would increase revenues. The effect Pence is talking about would not happen at this level of taxation, they said.

"There is some rate at which it would be true," said Roberton Williams of the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center. "But I don't think there are any established economists who would argue that we're near that."

"At current tax rates, most tax increases will increase revenues, at least in the short and medium run," said Brian Riedl of the conservative Heritage Foundation. "The caveat is that in a fragile economy, it can be unpredictable."

"There is no real dispute among economists that broad-based federal income tax cuts reduce revenue (except when tax rates are much higher than they are now)," said Alan D. Viard of the conservative American Enterprise Institute. "Revenue is lower than it would be without the Bush tax cuts -- liberal and conservative economists are in accord on this question."

To recap, Pence said that, "Anybody who is familiar with the historical data from the IRS knows that raising income tax rates will likely actually reduce federal revenues." Actually, the historical data doesn't show that. Experts said the economic theory Pence is drawing from doesn't apply in the current situation, and an increase in tax rates would not cause tax revenues to decline. So we rate his statement False.

PolitiFact | Mike Pence says raising taxes lowers tax revenues

:DAnd if Ubama would just keep his fingers out of the piggybank then higher tax rates wouldn't be necessary. He knows he only has 4 more years in office and he's unable to think past that point.

Congress has funding control. The people voted for the Congress that passed spending bills.

why do you hate representative democracy?
 
What is it that raising taxes on the rich is supposed to accomplish?

They haven't been raised.

They've been cut..a great deal..since the 1980s.

What happened?

Bailouts.
Debt.
Deficits.
Wage stagnation.

It really hasn't worked out to well.

Time to go back to 1950s rates.

Just sayin'.

:thup:


You forgot the 2 unfunded invasions you mentioned earlier.

Although I guess you could include in the "Deficits" part...
 
Market-oriented research. This means they have an outcome they desire and THEN they sift through the facts to support a preordained conclusion.

To hell with supply side nonsense.

A demand-side cut rests on the Keynesian theory that public consumption spurs economic activity. Government puts money in people's hands, as a temporary measure, so that they'll spend it. A supply-side cut sees business investment as the key to growth. Government gives money to businesses and wealthy individuals to invest, ultimately benefiting all Americans. Back in the early 1960s, tax cutting was as contentious as it is today, but it was liberal demand-siders who were calling for the cuts and generating the controversy.
Ryan on Kennedy (and Reagan) (Oh: and the One He Didn



The tax experts we spoke with agreed with Stockman. In this climate, raising the top tax rates from 35 to 39.6 percent would increase revenues. The effect Pence is talking about would not happen at this level of taxation, they said.

"There is some rate at which it would be true," said Roberton Williams of the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center. "But I don't think there are any established economists who would argue that we're near that."

"At current tax rates, most tax increases will increase revenues, at least in the short and medium run," said Brian Riedl of the conservative Heritage Foundation. "The caveat is that in a fragile economy, it can be unpredictable."

"There is no real dispute among economists that broad-based federal income tax cuts reduce revenue (except when tax rates are much higher than they are now)," said Alan D. Viard of the conservative American Enterprise Institute. "Revenue is lower than it would be without the Bush tax cuts -- liberal and conservative economists are in accord on this question."

To recap, Pence said that, "Anybody who is familiar with the historical data from the IRS knows that raising income tax rates will likely actually reduce federal revenues." Actually, the historical data doesn't show that. Experts said the economic theory Pence is drawing from doesn't apply in the current situation, and an increase in tax rates would not cause tax revenues to decline. So we rate his statement False.

PolitiFact | Mike Pence says raising taxes lowers tax revenues

nuf said
 
Government puts money in people's hands, as a temporary measure, so that they'll spend it.

Government first must take money out of the economy and run it through corrupt and inefficient bureaucracies before it can be put it into people's hands to spend.

It's akin to robbing a grocery store of the till, taking a few bucks for your efforts, and giving the rest to a bum...and then when the bum goes into the grocery store you robbed to buy beer, call it stimulus. It's patently ridiculous...unless you're the bum.

Oh, and "temporary" my ass.
 
Capital gains taxes went up because of a corrupt mortgage bubble that led to the SECOND Pub DEPRESSION. SPARE US!

"These two entities—Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac—are not facing any kind of financial crisis" -- Democrat 2008


A) EVERYONE was saying things were under control, and crossing their fingers.

B) F+F share of the market went from 75 to 25% of the market when Pub cronies took over 2003- ...Give it up, dupes.
 

Forum List

Back
Top