Incomes up and Poverty Down in 2019

DustyInfinity

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2018
Messages
2,484
Reaction score
1,162
Points
210
Location
Midwest
Great! Please explain what I mean by "the most active and aggressive Fed in the history of the country". And please break it down to the actions of the central Fed and the NY Fed over the last three years, AND the long term implications of those actions.

Go ahead. Feel free to get as specific as you'd like.

Oh, and then tell us how long we can engage in massive deficit spending increases.

Thanks in advance.
Meaning, you've got NOTHING!

If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bull s***!
'
Is that supposed to be some kind of answer?
I already asked you to provide details as to why you think the Biden/Harris plan will be successul and how the fed will change their monetary policy under Biden/Harris. Instead of answering, you filabuster.
So his big reason why people doing better financially doesn't matter is the fed, and the fed will do the exact same thing with Harris. Plus, everyone's gains will be removed, and spending will balloon even higher. Mac, why are you not rooting for people to win in any fashion?
Because we're being terribly fiscally irresponsible. This comes at a cost.

It's sad that I even have to say this.
You can see that lower taxes and regulations give people a better chance to take care of themselves? Despite what the fed is doing, I would have to think common sense practices would still allow wages to rise. Are you saying nothing Trump does is good for the country economically because of what the fed is doing? If nothing matters because of the fed, people have pointed out that the fed behavior will likey be the same under a democrat administration.
How do you make that connection. Wages rose under Obama despite more regulation. We have way more regulations and way higher taxes and people here are capable of taking better care of themselves and their family. I'm not trying to do some gotcha thing but I'd like to know what objective fact you're aware of that leads you to conclude that lower taxes and regulations lead to being better able to take care of yourself?
Note he said taking care of yourself, not being taken care of by the government. Europe has a larger welfare state than the US. Ironically, the US citizens give MUCH more to charity than those in Europe, who rely on government redistribution of wealth. We are much more in control of our personal welfare than those in Europe and I personally like that because I am willing to take on the personal responsibility and the risk that allows me to move up( and down) the economic ladder much more freely than in Europe.
If I work to earn a wage, a wage that allows you too
Great! Please explain what I mean by "the most active and aggressive Fed in the history of the country". And please break it down to the actions of the central Fed and the NY Fed over the last three years, AND the long term implications of those actions.

Go ahead. Feel free to get as specific as you'd like.

Oh, and then tell us how long we can engage in massive deficit spending increases.

Thanks in advance.
Meaning, you've got NOTHING!

If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bull s***!
'
Is that supposed to be some kind of answer?
I already asked you to provide details as to why you think the Biden/Harris plan will be successul and how the fed will change their monetary policy under Biden/Harris. Instead of answering, you filabuster.
So his big reason why people doing better financially doesn't matter is the fed, and the fed will do the exact same thing with Harris. Plus, everyone's gains will be removed, and spending will balloon even higher. Mac, why are you not rooting for people to win in any fashion?
Because we're being terribly fiscally irresponsible. This comes at a cost.

It's sad that I even have to say this.
You can see that lower taxes and regulations give people a better chance to take care of themselves? Despite what the fed is doing, I would have to think common sense practices would still allow wages to rise. Are you saying nothing Trump does is good for the country economically because of what the fed is doing? If nothing matters because of the fed, people have pointed out that the fed behavior will likey be the same under a democrat administration.
How do you make that connection. Wages rose under Obama despite more regulation. We have way more regulations and way higher taxes and people here are capable of taking better care of themselves and their family. I'm not trying to do some gotcha thing but I'd like to know what objective fact you're aware of that leads you to conclude that lower taxes and regulations lead to being better able to take care of yourself?
Note he said taking care of yourself, not being taken care of by the government. Europe has a larger welfare state than the US. Ironically, the US citizens give MUCH more to charity than those in Europe, who rely on government redistribution of wealth. We are much more in control of our personal welfare than those in Europe and I personally like that because I am willing to take on the personal responsibility and the risk that allows me to move up( and down) the economic ladder much more freely than in Europe.
If I work and make a wage. A wage that allows me to pay taxes and buy goods how am I letting the government take care of me? It's a disconnect I feel often occurs when talking to conservatives. For some reason services payed for by taxes are considered "given". They are not I paid for them.

As to social mobility. The whole concept of student debt is alien to people living here. Who do you think is more mobile in society. A person living in a country that allows everyone to have a higher education without accruing debt regardless of who you parents are? Or a person for whom the best universities are unaffordable unless they themselves are exceptional enough to qualify for a sholarship. And other higher education carries considerable financial burdens?
Even with the higher taxes in Europe, it is still in the taxpayers best interest to make things efficient. Having three agencies that oversee the same thing, and layers of overlapping government are wasteful and expensive. Trump reducing those in America was helpful. While you don't mind paying higher taxes for your services, I imagine if the government makes stupid decisions, and your taxes rise to a certain level, you might view those taxes differently. Trump increased efficiency, which is common sense. It works with both Europe and the US. Here in the US, people act like it had nothing to do with our success before the virus.
I have a very simple outlook. What's cheaper. Is my government wasteful? Yes, it is. Does it offer services at a cheaper price than I could myself? Yes, it does. Not for everything of course. I have experience in both the US and here and have an actual base for comparison. I prefer my high taxation and limitations that come with living here over the risks I run in the US in the hope I'll become a millionaire.
People in the US have said that government programs would be cheaper than private services, and they have been wrong every single time. By your outlook of what is cheaper, people who live in the US have an obvious choice, private services. It isn't even close. Government involvement normally causes a service's cost to explode far over the cost of if the government would have just stayed away.
PolitiFact - Comparing administrative costs for private insurance and Medicare They are wrong every single time? You are sure about that?
Yes, I am. In our country, the price of services explodes whenever our government is involved. I think it is interesting that politifact is talking about administrative overhead. Look at the actual cost of services. Our government has lied to us so many times, saying that they can be more efficient and provide cheaper services. Anytime someone in my country tells me the government can do something cheaper, I just shake my head. With the Affordable Care Act, they sold us the same bull. That disaster made healthcare go up for a majority of our citizens, and the quality of care went down at the same time. This isn't a unique situation. Every time the government promises us cheaper services, this happens. If our government could offer us cheaper services than the private sector, you wouldn't hear any complaints from anyone. It just simply hasn't, and many American''s are angry at the bungled attempts of altruism by our leaders. If our government tried to run a lemonade stand, it would end up costing twice as much as Starbucks. I'm going to be crass, but it is very accurate. Our government is like a shit fairy. Everything it touches turns to shit.
 
Last edited:

forkup

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2016
Messages
5,412
Reaction score
909
Points
195
Ok
1600372852325.png

Meaningless data points.

Again, meaningless due to diet and regional genetics.

No, you didn't you interjected yourself into a conversation where someone else did by trying to imply that deregulation works as long as Republicans do it or something.
Ok, how about this. Less overall regulations are better. Democrats always want more...in ad infinitum.

It became that because it was the only major industrialized nation that wasn't under direct threat and to the only major industrial nation that wasn't completely destroyed post world war 2. It benefited from its geography and its innate wealth.
The US benefited greatly from the US Constitution and a system that allowed people and business to flourish. There is a reason why the majority of the most successful and powerful companies in the world are from the US and it has nothing to do with geography nor innate wealth. 88% of millionaires in the US are self-made. This is not the case in countries like Switzerland, who has a very large concentration of millionaires. Keep in mind, they have a very favorable asset and inheritance taxes(the opposite of the Democratic Party in the US) and there and over 1/2 of their millionaires have come from other countries.
Meaningless data points.
This is the first response you made where I suspect you are responding in bad faith. I have to say, I'm disappointed. So far this conversation has been conspicuously on point. Not too many deflections and no ad hominem attacks, just 2 people expressing contrary viewpoints. It's far out of the norm in a place like this.


"Meaningless data points"? If you are arguing that that the US has more preeminent doctors and that having more of those prevents preventable deaths. Me showing that the US has more preventable deaths is the most relevant data point I can give. And if you assert that paying more for healthcare equals better results in healthcare average life expectancy is one of the most relevant single datapoints I can give. Especially coupled with the 2 previous ones.


Ok, how about this. Less overall regulations are better. Democrats always want more...in ad infinitum.
Again two opinions.
Regulations usually are a result of something actually happening that caused a problem. I work in a job where regulations get in the way of efficiency on a regular basis. On the other hand, my field (petrochemical industry) has a tendency to not just have problems but problems that literally blow up in your face, and every single one of those regulations, tedious as they are, can be traced back to a disaster that happened before. Is it better to not have them and increase the chance of a major disaster?

As to Democrats always wanting more. You can not have it both ways, either you blame Democrats for deregulating irresponsibly or you assert they always want to regulate.
 
Last edited:

forkup

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2016
Messages
5,412
Reaction score
909
Points
195
Great! Please explain what I mean by "the most active and aggressive Fed in the history of the country". And please break it down to the actions of the central Fed and the NY Fed over the last three years, AND the long term implications of those actions.

Go ahead. Feel free to get as specific as you'd like.

Oh, and then tell us how long we can engage in massive deficit spending increases.

Thanks in advance.
Meaning, you've got NOTHING!

If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bull s***!
'
Is that supposed to be some kind of answer?
I already asked you to provide details as to why you think the Biden/Harris plan will be successul and how the fed will change their monetary policy under Biden/Harris. Instead of answering, you filabuster.
So his big reason why people doing better financially doesn't matter is the fed, and the fed will do the exact same thing with Harris. Plus, everyone's gains will be removed, and spending will balloon even higher. Mac, why are you not rooting for people to win in any fashion?
Because we're being terribly fiscally irresponsible. This comes at a cost.

It's sad that I even have to say this.
You can see that lower taxes and regulations give people a better chance to take care of themselves? Despite what the fed is doing, I would have to think common sense practices would still allow wages to rise. Are you saying nothing Trump does is good for the country economically because of what the fed is doing? If nothing matters because of the fed, people have pointed out that the fed behavior will likey be the same under a democrat administration.
How do you make that connection. Wages rose under Obama despite more regulation. We have way more regulations and way higher taxes and people here are capable of taking better care of themselves and their family. I'm not trying to do some gotcha thing but I'd like to know what objective fact you're aware of that leads you to conclude that lower taxes and regulations lead to being better able to take care of yourself?
Note he said taking care of yourself, not being taken care of by the government. Europe has a larger welfare state than the US. Ironically, the US citizens give MUCH more to charity than those in Europe, who rely on government redistribution of wealth. We are much more in control of our personal welfare than those in Europe and I personally like that because I am willing to take on the personal responsibility and the risk that allows me to move up( and down) the economic ladder much more freely than in Europe.
If I work to earn a wage, a wage that allows you too
Great! Please explain what I mean by "the most active and aggressive Fed in the history of the country". And please break it down to the actions of the central Fed and the NY Fed over the last three years, AND the long term implications of those actions.

Go ahead. Feel free to get as specific as you'd like.

Oh, and then tell us how long we can engage in massive deficit spending increases.

Thanks in advance.
Meaning, you've got NOTHING!

If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bull s***!
'
Is that supposed to be some kind of answer?
I already asked you to provide details as to why you think the Biden/Harris plan will be successul and how the fed will change their monetary policy under Biden/Harris. Instead of answering, you filabuster.
So his big reason why people doing better financially doesn't matter is the fed, and the fed will do the exact same thing with Harris. Plus, everyone's gains will be removed, and spending will balloon even higher. Mac, why are you not rooting for people to win in any fashion?
Because we're being terribly fiscally irresponsible. This comes at a cost.

It's sad that I even have to say this.
You can see that lower taxes and regulations give people a better chance to take care of themselves? Despite what the fed is doing, I would have to think common sense practices would still allow wages to rise. Are you saying nothing Trump does is good for the country economically because of what the fed is doing? If nothing matters because of the fed, people have pointed out that the fed behavior will likey be the same under a democrat administration.
How do you make that connection. Wages rose under Obama despite more regulation. We have way more regulations and way higher taxes and people here are capable of taking better care of themselves and their family. I'm not trying to do some gotcha thing but I'd like to know what objective fact you're aware of that leads you to conclude that lower taxes and regulations lead to being better able to take care of yourself?
Note he said taking care of yourself, not being taken care of by the government. Europe has a larger welfare state than the US. Ironically, the US citizens give MUCH more to charity than those in Europe, who rely on government redistribution of wealth. We are much more in control of our personal welfare than those in Europe and I personally like that because I am willing to take on the personal responsibility and the risk that allows me to move up( and down) the economic ladder much more freely than in Europe.
If I work and make a wage. A wage that allows me to pay taxes and buy goods how am I letting the government take care of me? It's a disconnect I feel often occurs when talking to conservatives. For some reason services payed for by taxes are considered "given". They are not I paid for them.

As to social mobility. The whole concept of student debt is alien to people living here. Who do you think is more mobile in society. A person living in a country that allows everyone to have a higher education without accruing debt regardless of who you parents are? Or a person for whom the best universities are unaffordable unless they themselves are exceptional enough to qualify for a sholarship. And other higher education carries considerable financial burdens?
Even with the higher taxes in Europe, it is still in the taxpayers best interest to make things efficient. Having three agencies that oversee the same thing, and layers of overlapping government are wasteful and expensive. Trump reducing those in America was helpful. While you don't mind paying higher taxes for your services, I imagine if the government makes stupid decisions, and your taxes rise to a certain level, you might view those taxes differently. Trump increased efficiency, which is common sense. It works with both Europe and the US. Here in the US, people act like it had nothing to do with our success before the virus.
I have a very simple outlook. What's cheaper. Is my government wasteful? Yes, it is. Does it offer services at a cheaper price than I could myself? Yes, it does. Not for everything of course. I have experience in both the US and here and have an actual base for comparison. I prefer my high taxation and limitations that come with living here over the risks I run in the US in the hope I'll become a millionaire.
People in the US have said that government programs would be cheaper than private services, and they have been wrong every single time. By your outlook of what is cheaper, people who live in the US have an obvious choice, private services. It isn't even close. Government involvement normally causes a service's cost to explode far over the cost of if the government would have just stayed away.
PolitiFact - Comparing administrative costs for private insurance and Medicare They are wrong every single time? You are sure about that?
Yes, we are sure. As I mentioned before, you ignore glaring issues like reimbursement and a skewed administrative costs as a percentage of over all cost since Medicare deals with disabled and elderly patients. Nobody and I mean NOBODY who has any sense thinks the US government is efficient.
I'm not asserting that even my government is efficient. In fact, I flat out said mine wasn't. I asserted that they are more efficient in some areas than private industry is.
 

Ray From Cleveland

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
63,832
Reaction score
13,585
Points
2,290
Great! Please explain what I mean by "the most active and aggressive Fed in the history of the country". And please break it down to the actions of the central Fed and the NY Fed over the last three years, AND the long term implications of those actions.

Go ahead. Feel free to get as specific as you'd like.

Oh, and then tell us how long we can engage in massive deficit spending increases.

Thanks in advance.
Meaning, you've got NOTHING!

If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bull s***!
'
Is that supposed to be some kind of answer?
I already asked you to provide details as to why you think the Biden/Harris plan will be successul and how the fed will change their monetary policy under Biden/Harris. Instead of answering, you filabuster.
So his big reason why people doing better financially doesn't matter is the fed, and the fed will do the exact same thing with Harris. Plus, everyone's gains will be removed, and spending will balloon even higher. Mac, why are you not rooting for people to win in any fashion?
Because we're being terribly fiscally irresponsible. This comes at a cost.

It's sad that I even have to say this.
You can see that lower taxes and regulations give people a better chance to take care of themselves? Despite what the fed is doing, I would have to think common sense practices would still allow wages to rise. Are you saying nothing Trump does is good for the country economically because of what the fed is doing? If nothing matters because of the fed, people have pointed out that the fed behavior will likey be the same under a democrat administration.
How do you make that connection. Wages rose under Obama despite more regulation. We have way more regulations and way higher taxes and people here are capable of taking better care of themselves and their family. I'm not trying to do some gotcha thing but I'd like to know what objective fact you're aware of that leads you to conclude that lower taxes and regulations lead to being better able to take care of yourself?
Note he said taking care of yourself, not being taken care of by the government. Europe has a larger welfare state than the US. Ironically, the US citizens give MUCH more to charity than those in Europe, who rely on government redistribution of wealth. We are much more in control of our personal welfare than those in Europe and I personally like that because I am willing to take on the personal responsibility and the risk that allows me to move up( and down) the economic ladder much more freely than in Europe.
If I work to earn a wage, a wage that allows you too
Great! Please explain what I mean by "the most active and aggressive Fed in the history of the country". And please break it down to the actions of the central Fed and the NY Fed over the last three years, AND the long term implications of those actions.

Go ahead. Feel free to get as specific as you'd like.

Oh, and then tell us how long we can engage in massive deficit spending increases.

Thanks in advance.
Meaning, you've got NOTHING!

If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bull s***!
'
Is that supposed to be some kind of answer?
I already asked you to provide details as to why you think the Biden/Harris plan will be successul and how the fed will change their monetary policy under Biden/Harris. Instead of answering, you filabuster.
So his big reason why people doing better financially doesn't matter is the fed, and the fed will do the exact same thing with Harris. Plus, everyone's gains will be removed, and spending will balloon even higher. Mac, why are you not rooting for people to win in any fashion?
Because we're being terribly fiscally irresponsible. This comes at a cost.

It's sad that I even have to say this.
You can see that lower taxes and regulations give people a better chance to take care of themselves? Despite what the fed is doing, I would have to think common sense practices would still allow wages to rise. Are you saying nothing Trump does is good for the country economically because of what the fed is doing? If nothing matters because of the fed, people have pointed out that the fed behavior will likey be the same under a democrat administration.
How do you make that connection. Wages rose under Obama despite more regulation. We have way more regulations and way higher taxes and people here are capable of taking better care of themselves and their family. I'm not trying to do some gotcha thing but I'd like to know what objective fact you're aware of that leads you to conclude that lower taxes and regulations lead to being better able to take care of yourself?
Note he said taking care of yourself, not being taken care of by the government. Europe has a larger welfare state than the US. Ironically, the US citizens give MUCH more to charity than those in Europe, who rely on government redistribution of wealth. We are much more in control of our personal welfare than those in Europe and I personally like that because I am willing to take on the personal responsibility and the risk that allows me to move up( and down) the economic ladder much more freely than in Europe.
If I work and make a wage. A wage that allows me to pay taxes and buy goods how am I letting the government take care of me? It's a disconnect I feel often occurs when talking to conservatives. For some reason services payed for by taxes are considered "given". They are not I paid for them.

As to social mobility. The whole concept of student debt is alien to people living here. Who do you think is more mobile in society. A person living in a country that allows everyone to have a higher education without accruing debt regardless of who you parents are? Or a person for whom the best universities are unaffordable unless they themselves are exceptional enough to qualify for a sholarship. And other higher education carries considerable financial burdens?
Even with the higher taxes in Europe, it is still in the taxpayers best interest to make things efficient. Having three agencies that oversee the same thing, and layers of overlapping government are wasteful and expensive. Trump reducing those in America was helpful. While you don't mind paying higher taxes for your services, I imagine if the government makes stupid decisions, and your taxes rise to a certain level, you might view those taxes differently. Trump increased efficiency, which is common sense. It works with both Europe and the US. Here in the US, people act like it had nothing to do with our success before the virus.
I have a very simple outlook. What's cheaper. Is my government wasteful? Yes, it is. Does it offer services at a cheaper price than I could myself? Yes, it does. Not for everything of course. I have experience in both the US and here and have an actual base for comparison. I prefer my high taxation and limitations that come with living here over the risks I run in the US in the hope I'll become a millionaire.
People in the US have said that government programs would be cheaper than private services, and they have been wrong every single time. By your outlook of what is cheaper, people who live in the US have an obvious choice, private services. It isn't even close. Government involvement normally causes a service's cost to explode far over the cost of if the government would have just stayed away.
PolitiFact - Comparing administrative costs for private insurance and Medicare They are wrong every single time? You are sure about that?
Yes, I am. In our country, the price of services explodes whenever our government is involved. I think it is interesting that politifact is talking about administrative overhead. Look at the actual cost of services. Our government has lied to us so many times, saying that they can be more efficient and provide cheaper services. Anytime someone in my country tells me the government can do something cheaper, I just shake my head. With the Affordable Care Act, they sold us the same bull. That disaster made healthcare go up for a majority of our citizens, and the quality of care went down at the same time. This isn't a unique situation. Every time the government promises us cheaper services, this happens. If our government could offer us cheaper services than the private sector, you wouldn't hear any complaints from anyone. It just simply hasn't, and many American''s are angry at the bungled attempts of altruism by our leaders. If our government tried to run a lemonade stand, it would end up costing twice as much as Starbucks. I'm going to be crass, but it is very accurate. Our government is like a shit fairy. Everything it touches turns to shit.
Government has lots to do with our healthcare costs. Medicare and Medicaid often pay about 2/3 of the bill for their patients. Not a big deal for an office visit or outpatient surgery, but when talking about a heart transplant, it adds up in hundreds of thousands of dollars.

What doctors and facilities can't make on government, they increase the price of their services so the private sector makes up the loss, and that loss gets passed on to us in premium prices for private insurance.

With healthcare, government is rife for theft that amounts to billions of dollars every single year. Their administration doesn't have experts looking at these bills to detect fraud like private insurance does. Speaking of private insurance, when I was in that field of work, Medicare hired Prudential Insurance to handle many of it's claims.
 

skews13

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2017
Messages
4,010
Reaction score
1,553
Points
360
Just a does of reality for all you Trump haters. The proof is again in the pudding. interestingly, look who benefited the most. But alas, these are the folks that are lock-step with the Democrats. Ignorance at best. We know it has taken a hit due to COVID, but it can be fixed under Trump. It will plummet with Biden.

Real median incomes of white, Black, Asian, and Hispanic households all increased from the prior year. Lower-income households did particularly well after missing out on income gains earlier in the expansion. The mean income of the lowest fifth of households rose 9% last year, a larger gain than for any other quintile of households.

U.S. Incomes Up, Poverty Rate Down in 2019
Income down and poverty up in 2020

FTFY
 

forkup

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2016
Messages
5,412
Reaction score
909
Points
195
Great! Please explain what I mean by "the most active and aggressive Fed in the history of the country". And please break it down to the actions of the central Fed and the NY Fed over the last three years, AND the long term implications of those actions.

Go ahead. Feel free to get as specific as you'd like.

Oh, and then tell us how long we can engage in massive deficit spending increases.

Thanks in advance.
Meaning, you've got NOTHING!

If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bull s***!
'
Is that supposed to be some kind of answer?
I already asked you to provide details as to why you think the Biden/Harris plan will be successul and how the fed will change their monetary policy under Biden/Harris. Instead of answering, you filabuster.
So his big reason why people doing better financially doesn't matter is the fed, and the fed will do the exact same thing with Harris. Plus, everyone's gains will be removed, and spending will balloon even higher. Mac, why are you not rooting for people to win in any fashion?
Because we're being terribly fiscally irresponsible. This comes at a cost.

It's sad that I even have to say this.
You can see that lower taxes and regulations give people a better chance to take care of themselves? Despite what the fed is doing, I would have to think common sense practices would still allow wages to rise. Are you saying nothing Trump does is good for the country economically because of what the fed is doing? If nothing matters because of the fed, people have pointed out that the fed behavior will likey be the same under a democrat administration.
How do you make that connection. Wages rose under Obama despite more regulation. We have way more regulations and way higher taxes and people here are capable of taking better care of themselves and their family. I'm not trying to do some gotcha thing but I'd like to know what objective fact you're aware of that leads you to conclude that lower taxes and regulations lead to being better able to take care of yourself?
Note he said taking care of yourself, not being taken care of by the government. Europe has a larger welfare state than the US. Ironically, the US citizens give MUCH more to charity than those in Europe, who rely on government redistribution of wealth. We are much more in control of our personal welfare than those in Europe and I personally like that because I am willing to take on the personal responsibility and the risk that allows me to move up( and down) the economic ladder much more freely than in Europe.
If I work to earn a wage, a wage that allows you too
Great! Please explain what I mean by "the most active and aggressive Fed in the history of the country". And please break it down to the actions of the central Fed and the NY Fed over the last three years, AND the long term implications of those actions.

Go ahead. Feel free to get as specific as you'd like.

Oh, and then tell us how long we can engage in massive deficit spending increases.

Thanks in advance.
Meaning, you've got NOTHING!

If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bull s***!
'
Is that supposed to be some kind of answer?
I already asked you to provide details as to why you think the Biden/Harris plan will be successul and how the fed will change their monetary policy under Biden/Harris. Instead of answering, you filabuster.
So his big reason why people doing better financially doesn't matter is the fed, and the fed will do the exact same thing with Harris. Plus, everyone's gains will be removed, and spending will balloon even higher. Mac, why are you not rooting for people to win in any fashion?
Because we're being terribly fiscally irresponsible. This comes at a cost.

It's sad that I even have to say this.
You can see that lower taxes and regulations give people a better chance to take care of themselves? Despite what the fed is doing, I would have to think common sense practices would still allow wages to rise. Are you saying nothing Trump does is good for the country economically because of what the fed is doing? If nothing matters because of the fed, people have pointed out that the fed behavior will likey be the same under a democrat administration.
How do you make that connection. Wages rose under Obama despite more regulation. We have way more regulations and way higher taxes and people here are capable of taking better care of themselves and their family. I'm not trying to do some gotcha thing but I'd like to know what objective fact you're aware of that leads you to conclude that lower taxes and regulations lead to being better able to take care of yourself?
Note he said taking care of yourself, not being taken care of by the government. Europe has a larger welfare state than the US. Ironically, the US citizens give MUCH more to charity than those in Europe, who rely on government redistribution of wealth. We are much more in control of our personal welfare than those in Europe and I personally like that because I am willing to take on the personal responsibility and the risk that allows me to move up( and down) the economic ladder much more freely than in Europe.
If I work and make a wage. A wage that allows me to pay taxes and buy goods how am I letting the government take care of me? It's a disconnect I feel often occurs when talking to conservatives. For some reason services payed for by taxes are considered "given". They are not I paid for them.

As to social mobility. The whole concept of student debt is alien to people living here. Who do you think is more mobile in society. A person living in a country that allows everyone to have a higher education without accruing debt regardless of who you parents are? Or a person for whom the best universities are unaffordable unless they themselves are exceptional enough to qualify for a sholarship. And other higher education carries considerable financial burdens?
Even with the higher taxes in Europe, it is still in the taxpayers best interest to make things efficient. Having three agencies that oversee the same thing, and layers of overlapping government are wasteful and expensive. Trump reducing those in America was helpful. While you don't mind paying higher taxes for your services, I imagine if the government makes stupid decisions, and your taxes rise to a certain level, you might view those taxes differently. Trump increased efficiency, which is common sense. It works with both Europe and the US. Here in the US, people act like it had nothing to do with our success before the virus.
I have a very simple outlook. What's cheaper. Is my government wasteful? Yes, it is. Does it offer services at a cheaper price than I could myself? Yes, it does. Not for everything of course. I have experience in both the US and here and have an actual base for comparison. I prefer my high taxation and limitations that come with living here over the risks I run in the US in the hope I'll become a millionaire.
People in the US have said that government programs would be cheaper than private services, and they have been wrong every single time. By your outlook of what is cheaper, people who live in the US have an obvious choice, private services. It isn't even close. Government involvement normally causes a service's cost to explode far over the cost of if the government would have just stayed away.
PolitiFact - Comparing administrative costs for private insurance and Medicare They are wrong every single time? You are sure about that?
Yes, we are sure. As I mentioned before, you ignore glaring issues like reimbursement and a skewed administrative costs as a percentage of over all cost since Medicare deals with disabled and elderly patients. Nobody and I mean NOBODY who has any sense thinks the US government is efficient.
The administrative cost isn't half of the reason why private insurance and indeed healthcare is that much more expensive. The for-profit motive behind it adds to cost. Every middle man needs their commission. The cost of education, malpractice insurance, stock dividends all have to be paid, in the end, by the consumer.
 

Ray From Cleveland

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
63,832
Reaction score
13,585
Points
2,290
And if you assert that paying more for healthcare equals better results in healthcare average life expectancy is one of the most relevant single datapoints I can give.
Life expectancy has to do with a lot more than healthcare. In fact most of the people who die are on government healthcare.
 

Blaine Sweeter

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2019
Messages
3,578
Reaction score
2,605
Points
1,930
Just a does of reality for all you Trump haters. The proof is again in the pudding. interestingly, look who benefited the most. But alas, these are the folks that are lock-step with the Democrats. Ignorance at best. We know it has taken a hit due to COVID, but it can be fixed under Trump. It will plummet with Biden.

Real median incomes of white, Black, Asian, and Hispanic households all increased from the prior year. Lower-income households did particularly well after missing out on income gains earlier in the expansion. The mean income of the lowest fifth of households rose 9% last year, a larger gain than for any other quintile of households.

U.S. Incomes Up, Poverty Rate Down in 2019
A dose of reality? Ok if the proof is in the pudding I have to say that the income has been going up for five years. Meaning it started durimg Obama's tenure. And it's a virtual certainty the figures for 2020 will not be nearly as rosy of a picture.

So how's that for reality?
"A dose of reality? Ok if the proof is in the pudding I have to say that the income has been going up for five years. Meaning it started durimg Obama's tenure. And it's a virtual certainty the figures for 2020 will not be nearly as rosy of a picture."

Spot on.
I was wondering how long it was going to take him to fuck the economy up after he was elected.
 

forkup

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2016
Messages
5,412
Reaction score
909
Points
195
And if you assert that paying more for healthcare equals better results in healthcare average life expectancy is one of the most relevant single datapoints I can give.
Life expectancy has to do with a lot more than healthcare. In fact most of the people who die are on government healthcare.
I don't deny that but if there's a single data point that is capable of giving somewhat of an idea of the overall state of health in a country, life expectancy is the best IMO. You can, should and I did couple it to other more healthcare-specific data points but it does show a general picture.
 

JoeB131

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
127,044
Reaction score
13,123
Points
2,220
Location
Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
He has proposed raising taxes for those making over $400k per year. For starters, that isn't super wealthy.
Frankly, 400K a year is more than most Americans make in their entire lives... Those fucks can totally afford more taxes.

Maybe to a ditch digger like yourself that is a "rich" guy, but it really isn't. I might also add, Biden will cut taxes on the "rich" who have been harmed by the Trump's cap on SALT deductions.
Actually. that was all manner of fucked up, so the sooner we get rid of it, the better.

Trump ran up a Trillion dollar deficit last year and it will be FOUR TRILLION This year with Trillion dollar deficits as far as the eye can see.

1600380917111.png


Time to make the rich fucks put up like men and pay their fair share.
 

Ray From Cleveland

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
63,832
Reaction score
13,585
Points
2,290

DustyInfinity

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2018
Messages
2,484
Reaction score
1,162
Points
210
Location
Midwest
Great! Please explain what I mean by "the most active and aggressive Fed in the history of the country". And please break it down to the actions of the central Fed and the NY Fed over the last three years, AND the long term implications of those actions.

Go ahead. Feel free to get as specific as you'd like.

Oh, and then tell us how long we can engage in massive deficit spending increases.

Thanks in advance.
Meaning, you've got NOTHING!

If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bull s***!
'
Is that supposed to be some kind of answer?
I already asked you to provide details as to why you think the Biden/Harris plan will be successul and how the fed will change their monetary policy under Biden/Harris. Instead of answering, you filabuster.
So his big reason why people doing better financially doesn't matter is the fed, and the fed will do the exact same thing with Harris. Plus, everyone's gains will be removed, and spending will balloon even higher. Mac, why are you not rooting for people to win in any fashion?
Because we're being terribly fiscally irresponsible. This comes at a cost.

It's sad that I even have to say this.
You can see that lower taxes and regulations give people a better chance to take care of themselves? Despite what the fed is doing, I would have to think common sense practices would still allow wages to rise. Are you saying nothing Trump does is good for the country economically because of what the fed is doing? If nothing matters because of the fed, people have pointed out that the fed behavior will likey be the same under a democrat administration.
How do you make that connection. Wages rose under Obama despite more regulation. We have way more regulations and way higher taxes and people here are capable of taking better care of themselves and their family. I'm not trying to do some gotcha thing but I'd like to know what objective fact you're aware of that leads you to conclude that lower taxes and regulations lead to being better able to take care of yourself?
Note he said taking care of yourself, not being taken care of by the government. Europe has a larger welfare state than the US. Ironically, the US citizens give MUCH more to charity than those in Europe, who rely on government redistribution of wealth. We are much more in control of our personal welfare than those in Europe and I personally like that because I am willing to take on the personal responsibility and the risk that allows me to move up( and down) the economic ladder much more freely than in Europe.
If I work to earn a wage, a wage that allows you too
Great! Please explain what I mean by "the most active and aggressive Fed in the history of the country". And please break it down to the actions of the central Fed and the NY Fed over the last three years, AND the long term implications of those actions.

Go ahead. Feel free to get as specific as you'd like.

Oh, and then tell us how long we can engage in massive deficit spending increases.

Thanks in advance.
Meaning, you've got NOTHING!

If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bull s***!
'
Is that supposed to be some kind of answer?
I already asked you to provide details as to why you think the Biden/Harris plan will be successul and how the fed will change their monetary policy under Biden/Harris. Instead of answering, you filabuster.
So his big reason why people doing better financially doesn't matter is the fed, and the fed will do the exact same thing with Harris. Plus, everyone's gains will be removed, and spending will balloon even higher. Mac, why are you not rooting for people to win in any fashion?
Because we're being terribly fiscally irresponsible. This comes at a cost.

It's sad that I even have to say this.
You can see that lower taxes and regulations give people a better chance to take care of themselves? Despite what the fed is doing, I would have to think common sense practices would still allow wages to rise. Are you saying nothing Trump does is good for the country economically because of what the fed is doing? If nothing matters because of the fed, people have pointed out that the fed behavior will likey be the same under a democrat administration.
How do you make that connection. Wages rose under Obama despite more regulation. We have way more regulations and way higher taxes and people here are capable of taking better care of themselves and their family. I'm not trying to do some gotcha thing but I'd like to know what objective fact you're aware of that leads you to conclude that lower taxes and regulations lead to being better able to take care of yourself?
Note he said taking care of yourself, not being taken care of by the government. Europe has a larger welfare state than the US. Ironically, the US citizens give MUCH more to charity than those in Europe, who rely on government redistribution of wealth. We are much more in control of our personal welfare than those in Europe and I personally like that because I am willing to take on the personal responsibility and the risk that allows me to move up( and down) the economic ladder much more freely than in Europe.
If I work and make a wage. A wage that allows me to pay taxes and buy goods how am I letting the government take care of me? It's a disconnect I feel often occurs when talking to conservatives. For some reason services payed for by taxes are considered "given". They are not I paid for them.

As to social mobility. The whole concept of student debt is alien to people living here. Who do you think is more mobile in society. A person living in a country that allows everyone to have a higher education without accruing debt regardless of who you parents are? Or a person for whom the best universities are unaffordable unless they themselves are exceptional enough to qualify for a sholarship. And other higher education carries considerable financial burdens?
Even with the higher taxes in Europe, it is still in the taxpayers best interest to make things efficient. Having three agencies that oversee the same thing, and layers of overlapping government are wasteful and expensive. Trump reducing those in America was helpful. While you don't mind paying higher taxes for your services, I imagine if the government makes stupid decisions, and your taxes rise to a certain level, you might view those taxes differently. Trump increased efficiency, which is common sense. It works with both Europe and the US. Here in the US, people act like it had nothing to do with our success before the virus.
I have a very simple outlook. What's cheaper. Is my government wasteful? Yes, it is. Does it offer services at a cheaper price than I could myself? Yes, it does. Not for everything of course. I have experience in both the US and here and have an actual base for comparison. I prefer my high taxation and limitations that come with living here over the risks I run in the US in the hope I'll become a millionaire.
People in the US have said that government programs would be cheaper than private services, and they have been wrong every single time. By your outlook of what is cheaper, people who live in the US have an obvious choice, private services. It isn't even close. Government involvement normally causes a service's cost to explode far over the cost of if the government would have just stayed away.
PolitiFact - Comparing administrative costs for private insurance and Medicare They are wrong every single time? You are sure about that?
Yes, we are sure. As I mentioned before, you ignore glaring issues like reimbursement and a skewed administrative costs as a percentage of over all cost since Medicare deals with disabled and elderly patients. Nobody and I mean NOBODY who has any sense thinks the US government is efficient.
I'm not asserting that even my government is efficient. In fact, I flat out said mine wasn't. I asserted that they are more efficient in some areas than private industry is.
I think I am finally seeing the level of differences in our perspective. I want to look at things from a different angle. You have said that your government can provide services cheaper than private industry in certain areas, while at the same time saying your government isn't efficient. I'm going to make an assumption that you do not have a lot of private competition to your government programs. If an efficient, sharply led business which created a superior product at prices which match private competition levels offered to compete with your government on services, do you believe it could beat your government's prices? Are you really getting prices that are better than you can get anywhere else? In the US, it has been my experience that the best price was the original privately offered price, and then the government makes the costs rise sharply. I'm wondering if you have experienced any other options than the government option?
 

Ray From Cleveland

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
63,832
Reaction score
13,585
Points
2,290
And if you assert that paying more for healthcare equals better results in healthcare average life expectancy is one of the most relevant single datapoints I can give.
Life expectancy has to do with a lot more than healthcare. In fact most of the people who die are on government healthcare.
I don't deny that but if there's a single data point that is capable of giving somewhat of an idea of the overall state of health in a country, life expectancy is the best IMO. You can, should and I did couple it to other more healthcare-specific data points but it does show a general picture.
It really doesn't because there are way more factors in our society. We have a lot more murders than other countries, and many involve younger people which of course goes against our life expectancy. We also drive more than most countries, and that means we have more vehicular deaths.

Besides our obesity problem, we have a huge, huge drug problem. The drug problem not only gave us 100,000 deaths from overdoses last year, but it also dovetails with our murder rate since these dangerous narcotics are bought and sold on the street and often times leads to violence, again, mostly with younger people.

Besides the OD deaths, women who carry using these narcotics often have still born babies, or babies with serious birth defects leading to their death. Our females are also professionals with careers. They often skip prenatal care, and have children at a much more advanced age than women in other countries. The later age you decide to start having children, the less likely you will have a baby without major problems.

So when it comes to life expectancy, it's often self-inflicted via personal choice--not just healthcare.
 

Markle

Gold Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2016
Messages
20,338
Reaction score
4,300
Points
290
Location
Tallahassee, FL

Markle

Gold Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2016
Messages
20,338
Reaction score
4,300
Points
290
Location
Tallahassee, FL
I'm not asserting that even my government is efficient. In fact, I flat out said mine wasn't. I asserted that they are more efficient in some areas than private industry is.
I know of only one area in which government is more efficient than private industry. Writing checks. What else are they more efficient than private industry?
 

Markle

Gold Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2016
Messages
20,338
Reaction score
4,300
Points
290
Location
Tallahassee, FL
The administrative cost isn't half of the reason why private insurance and indeed healthcare is that much more expensive. The for-profit motive behind it adds to cost. Every middle man needs their commission. The cost of education, malpractice insurance, stock dividends all have to be paid, in the end, by the consumer.
As you know, we (America) has the highest quality healthcare in the world. That costs money.

Without the profit motive, what is the motivation to develop new life-extending and life-saving drugs, procedures, and technology?
 

Markle

Gold Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2016
Messages
20,338
Reaction score
4,300
Points
290
Location
Tallahassee, FL
Time to make the rich fucks put up like men and pay their fair share.
How much more should the "rich" pay and who do you classify as "rich"?

Specifically, what is a "fair share"?

Wealthy People Do Pay a Larger Share
The Pew Center’s analysis of IRS data showed that in 2014, people with an adjusted gross income, or AGI, above $250,000 paid 51.6% of all individual income taxes, even though they accounted for only 2.7% of all returns filed. These “wealthy” individuals paid an average tax rate (total taxes paid divided by cumulative AGI) of 25.7%.

By contrast, while people with adjusted gross incomes below $50,000 filed 62% of all individual returns in 2014, they paid only 5.7% of total taxes collected at an average tax rate of 4.3% per person.


You are well aware of those figures, why do you keep whining about the rich paying MORE. How about the low and middle-income households paying their "fair share"?
 

JoeB131

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
127,044
Reaction score
13,123
Points
2,220
Location
Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
How much more should the "rich" pay and who do you classify as "rich"?

Specifically, what is a "fair share"?
What the fucks were paying before Reagan. That would be their fair share.

You see, when they paid their fair share, we had enough money for schools, highways, and we were even able to have a space program.
 

Ray From Cleveland

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
63,832
Reaction score
13,585
Points
2,290
Oh yeah? And only Trump is responsible for that, huh?
Um, yeah, Trump Plague. Trump Riots, Trump Recession... Trump is totally responsible for the need for extra spending, but combined with the Trump Tax Giveaways to the rich, the deficits have gone through the roof.
Once again you failed to click on the link provided. Now had you done that, you would have read how Piglosi and the other commies are holding out to keep all their pork in the bill--trillions more than we actually need to spend on this virus.

Worried about the debt and deficit, the Republicans didn't want to allow 600 bucks a week of extra unemployment. They didn't want to bailout Democrat cities who have been overspending for years. They didn't want to give out stimulus checks since our economy is quickly recovering, and in order to get this through, they met over half-way on all that.

But the Democrats are saying "You spend every dime we demand, or all bets are off!" And now you're going to blame Trump for that? Such a hypocrite. Here's a clue: All appropriation bills originate in the House, not the White House.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top