Republican tax cut will not trickle down

[The Derp]

Ireland set for fastest euro zone growth for fourth year in a row

Too bad it's not helping Ireland's actual economy any, as it experienced an economic contract of 3.5% in the first quarter of this year.

And no argument from me that corporate profits and the incomes of the 1% are soaring there. It's the same thing that happened here that you previously excoriated Obama for. So you're just a double-talking hypocrite.

In fact, over the last 20 years, Ireland's only managed an average growth of 1.5%...which is less than Obama's GDP growth rate.

Ireland can't attract any internal investment. So all those businesses relocating their pass-throughs there aren't actually expanding into the Irish market. And why would they? Ireland's economy contracts 33% of the time, it's unemployment rate is high, and wages are among the lowest and slowest growing in all of Europe.

In fact, over the last 20 years, Ireland's only managed an average growth of 1.5%

You're working off some bad data there.

View attachment 165803

GDP growth (annual %) | Data

Nope. You're working off some bad math. I'm using tradingeconomics.com

 

[deanrd]

Republican tax cut will not trickle down

It was never meant to.

Not even the most uneducated Republican buried in the heart of the Deep South believes that. Not anymore.

Now, it's mostly about "race".

 

[The Derp]

If debt doesn't matter then why pay any taxes at all? Why do we need to give the government any of our money?

Because government's job is to provide for the common defense and general welfare. You don't seem to understand the Constitution at all. And why would you? You're not even American.

If debt doesn't matter, then why do we need to work, why not have the government provide everything?

Well, government already provides a lot, so I don't know what point you're trying to make. Seems to me you want to make this a hyperbolic and emotional discussion because you're a hyperbolic and emotional person.

If debt doesn't matter, then why not have the states take the federal money instead of taxing us?The whole premise is silly on it's face.

So this conversation started with your insistence that a high debt-to-GDP ratio is bad for growth. When provided with links to the debunking of that idea, rather than accept those conclusion like an adult, you screech and whine like a child. You refuse to take your medicine. You refuse to accept truths. I think it's because of your insatiable ego that is pretending not to be just a giant pile of insecurity. I think you're a garbage person, and know you're a garbage person. So you seek validation on anonymous message boards because you're too antisocial to get it in real life. Tell me I'm wrong.

 

[Vandalshandle]

Every time I hear the words, "trickle down economics", I envision a dog and a fire plug, with some poor out of work slob leaning next to it.

 

[The Derp]

Ireland set for fastest euro zone growth for fourth year in a row

Too bad it's not helping Ireland's actual economy any, as it experienced an economic contract of 3.5% in the first quarter of this year.

And no argument from me that corporate profits and the incomes of the 1% are soaring there. It's the same thing that happened here that you previously excoriated Obama for. So you're just a double-talking hypocrite.

In fact, over the last 20 years, Ireland's only managed an average growth of 1.5%...which is less than Obama's GDP growth rate.

Ireland can't attract any internal investment. So all those businesses relocating their pass-throughs there aren't actually expanding into the Irish market. And why would they? Ireland's economy contracts 33% of the time, it's unemployment rate is high, and wages are among the lowest and slowest growing in all of Europe.

In fact, over the last 20 years, Ireland's only managed an average growth of 1.5%

You're working off some bad data there.

View attachment 165803

GDP growth (annual %) | Data

Also, the chart you posted...annual...not quarterly. So you did that deliberately. So this is just another example of you being a sophist. You use exclusively broad numbers then stop short of doing the due diligence necessary to understand what you're representing. That's because you don;'t know what you're talking about, and do sloppy work to bang out a response rather than comprehend what you're posting.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Which is why corporations rushed to expand in Ireland. Because investment is pre-tax......but, wait.....
profit is post-tax. They must have decided higher post-tax profit is better than lower post-tax profit, eh?

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

They didn't expand into Ireland. They relocated their pass-throughs there, but that's not the same thing as expanding into the Irish market. And you know that. So you're being a sophist. Apple moved its pass-through there, but did Apple open up a plant in Ireland? No. Did they open up Apple stores because of the tax cut? No. In fact, there isn't even an Apple Store in Ireland, period. So you are misrepresenting "expansion" deliberately because you're a dishonest person by nature and that's how you operate. Relocating a pass-through isn't an expansion into a market. That's why the Canary Islands aren't an economic powerhouse. Nice try, sophist.

And yet, their economy has grown much, much faster than those other EU nations, since the tax cut.

Which means it's not benefiting Irish workers at all. Which means it won't benefit American workers if done here. So you're just making the rich, richer and everyone else deals with diminshed wages. So how is that proof that tax cuts are good for the economy? It's not.

And their unemployment rate is much lower than before the tax cut.
The gap between Irish and UK unemployment is much, much lower than before the tax cut.

But if these dramatic tax cuts were so wonderful, then why wouldn't they have lower unemployment? Unless you're now gonna say that relocating pass-throughs doesn't create jobs. And if it doesn't create jobs there, why would it create jobs here? You're not expanding into the Irish market, you're just relocating your pass-through there. Expanding into the market would entail expanding operations and sales. Which they're not doing. ****, even Apple hasn't opened an Apple Store in Ireland despite its pass-through HQ relocating there. Operations aren't relocating there. It's just a tax haven.

and the economy contracts 33% of the time
Ireland set for fastest euro zone growth for fourth year in a row
Ireland set for fastest euro zone growth for fourth year in a row

You can keep repeating that prediction all you want, but the facts show that Ireland's economy is unstable (contracting by 3.5% in Q1 of 2017 alone). That's why no businesses are expanding into the Irish market. Because Irish consumers have low wages, high unemployment, and no economic stability. Ireland's trade surplus means it's not importing products into the Irish market. Which means businesses aren't expanding into that market. You conflate relocating pass-throughs with market expansion because you're a fraud.

They didn't expand into Ireland. They relocated their pass-throughs there, but that's not the same thing as expanding into the Irish market. And you know that. So you're being a sophist. Apple moved its pass-through there, but did Apple open up a plant in Ireland? No.

When people talk about Apple’s Irish operations, it’s normally negatively, regarding questionable tax practices. But the company operates a 4,000-person factory in Cork, Ireland, that builds iMacs — and it’s the only Apple-owned manufacturing facility in the world.


The Irish Examiner recently got a peek inside the secretive Apple manufacturing plant in Cork. Check out some photos below.

Apple manufacturing: Inside the secretive iMac plant in Ireland

DURR!

But if these dramatic tax cuts were so wonderful, then why wouldn't they have lower unemployment?

DURR!


You can keep repeating that prediction all you want, but the facts show that Ireland's economy is unstable (contracting by 3.5% in Q1 of 2017 alone).


The EY study added that Ireland’s GDP is expected to grow 4.9% this year compared with 1.4% for Northern Ireland.

Ireland ranks as one of the fastest growing economies in the EU and Northern Ireland ranks as the poorest performing of the 12 regions of the UK in terms of economic growth.

Economic gap across Irish border 'set to widen' as Brexit looms

December 11th article.......DURR!

But if these dramatic tax cuts were so wonderful, then why wouldn't they have lower unemployment?

The gap between Irish and UK unemployment is much, much lower than before the tax cut. DURR!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Ireland set for fastest euro zone growth for fourth year in a row

Too bad it's not helping Ireland's actual economy any, as it experienced an economic contract of 3.5% in the first quarter of this year.

And no argument from me that corporate profits and the incomes of the 1% are soaring there. It's the same thing that happened here that you previously excoriated Obama for. So you're just a double-talking hypocrite.

In fact, over the last 20 years, Ireland's only managed an average growth of 1.5%...which is less than Obama's GDP growth rate.

Ireland can't attract any internal investment. So all those businesses relocating their pass-throughs there aren't actually expanding into the Irish market. And why would they? Ireland's economy contracts 33% of the time, it's unemployment rate is high, and wages are among the lowest and slowest growing in all of Europe.

In fact, over the last 20 years, Ireland's only managed an average growth of 1.5%

You're working off some bad data there.

View attachment 165803

GDP growth (annual %) | Data

Also, the chart you posted...annual...not quarterly. So you did that deliberately. So this is just another example of you being a sophist. You use exclusively broad numbers then stop short of doing the due diligence necessary to understand what you're representing. That's because you don;'t know what you're talking about, and do sloppy work to bang out a response rather than comprehend what you're posting.

Also, the chart you posted...annual...not quarterly.

Yup. Annual.

You use exclusively broad numbers

If you can pull a 20 year quarterly chart out of your sandy vagina, post it.
Or you could just whine some more.

 

[The Derp]

When people talk about Apple’s Irish operations, it’s normally negatively, regarding questionable tax practices. But the company operates a 4,000-person factory in Cork, Ireland, that builds iMacs — and it’s the only Apple-owned manufacturing facility in the world.

So, lesson for everyone paying attention: Be wary of Conservatives bearing links.

Did you happen to miss the part of the article where it says the plant was built in 1980? Now when were those tax cuts? Oh right, the 1990's. So you have a bit of a time gap to explain, and you'll have to explain why you were trying to pretend that the tax cut in the 1990's caused Apple to open a plant there 15 years earlier.

This is what you always do...you always misrepresent things and when subject to the very slightest scrutiny, it all starts crumbling down.

DURR!

Yeah, durrr...the chart shows Ireland's unemployment is higher than UK's.

The EY study added that Ireland’s GDP is expected to grow 4.9% this year compared with 1.4% for Northern Ireland.

That's great. Unfortunately, the quarterly growth tells a different story...one of instability. That's why Ireland has a trade surplus. It can't attract imports because the Irish economy is shit and consumers there have low wages and high unemployment.

The gap between Irish and UK unemployment is much, much lower than before the tax cut. DURR!

Is it? Doesn't look much different to me. It's still well above the UK's.

 

[The Derp]

up. Annual..

So you did that to make your argument look better. So you went broad because when you get into the details, the picture looks less rosy. That's intentional on your part. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!

If you can pull a 20 year quarterly chart out of your sandy vagina, post it.
Or you could just whine some more.

HERE YA GO YOU WHINY LITTLE *****:

LOOK AT HOW SHITTY AND UNSTABLE THAT ECONOMY IS. WHO WOULD EXPAND INTO IT? NO ONE. THAT'S WHY IRELAND HAS A TRADE SURPLUS RIGHT NOW.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

When people talk about Apple’s Irish operations, it’s normally negatively, regarding questionable tax practices. But the company operates a 4,000-person factory in Cork, Ireland, that builds iMacs — and it’s the only Apple-owned manufacturing facility in the world.

So, lesson for everyone paying attention: Be wary of Conservatives bearing links.

Did you happen to miss the part of the article where it says the plant was built in 1980?????

Now when were those tax cuts? Oh right, the 1990's. So you have a bit of a time gap to explain, and you'll have to explain why you were trying to pretend that the tax cut in the 1990's caused Apple to open a plant there 15 years earlier.

This is what you always do...you always misrepresent things and when subject to the very slightest scrutiny, it all starts crumbling down.

DURR!

Yeah, durrr...the chart shows Ireland's unemployment is higher than UK's.

The EY study added that Ireland’s GDP is expected to grow 4.9% this year compared with 1.4% for Northern Ireland.

That's great. Unfortunately, the quarterly growth tells a different story...one of instability. That's why Ireland has a trade surplus. It can't attract imports because the Irish economy is shit and consumers there have low wages and high unemployment.

The gap between Irish and UK unemployment is much, much lower than before the tax cut. DURR!

Is it? Doesn't look much different to me. It's still well above the UK's.

Did you happen to miss the part of the article where it says the plant was built in 1980?????

I did!

Did you notice this part......

Apple’s Hollyhill plant in Cork first opened its doors in November 1980, with Steve Jobs and chairman Mike Markkula among those who attended the opening. At the time, the manufacturing staff numbered just 60 people

Now it employs 4000.

you'll have to explain why you were trying to pretend that the tax cut in the 1990's caused Apple to open a plant there 15 years earlier.

You said they didn't open a plant in Apple, it sure looks like they expanded one, doesn't it?

Is it? Doesn't look much different to me. It's still well above the UK's.

Doesn't look much different? Oh, that's right, you're a liberal. Not good at math.
I'll try to explain it, let me know if I need to dumb it down more for you......

In the early 90s, Ireland had an unemployment rate over 15%. 7.22% higher than unemployment in the UK. After they cut corporate taxes in the mid 90s, their unemployment rate improved much faster than the UK's improvement. So much faster that by 1999, Ireland's unemployment rate was lower than the UK's rate. Lower for a solid 8 years.

Lower until the crisis. Now that both UK and Irish unemployment rates are falling, after peaking in 2011-2012, the gap between UK and Irish rates is 3.24%.
3.24% is a smaller gap than the pre-tax cut rate of 7.22%.

If this is still confusing to you, and no nearby adult is interested in assisting your comprehension, feel free to get back to me and I will search for even smaller words to assist you.

 

[danielpalos]

We need to vote them all out. With a solid economy we should be dealing with the debt.

I agree, we need to cut spending and raise taxes. The economy is perfect for this, like The Derp has pointed out in the short run it would slow the economy down. In all reality, which party wants to take credit for slowing down the economy?

Maybe with term limits politicians would actually make the tough decisions to benefit us in the long run, I'm not sure, what are your thoughts?

I would be fine if they cut some spending and simplified taxes in a revenue neutral manner.

I would like to see corporate welfare go away, that will have a negative impact on the economy initially however, if we can wean them off the government then we would have healthier businesses and a healthier government. I definitely agree that we need to simplify the tax code.

Providing for the general welfare is Constitutional, providing for the general warfare is not.

Not sure what your point is, since we aren't discussing that aspect.

LOL. Where are the cuts coming from?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

up. Annual..

So you did that to make your argument look better. So you went broad because when you get into the details, the picture looks less rosy. That's intentional on your part. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!

If you can pull a 20 year quarterly chart out of your sandy vagina, post it.
Or you could just whine some more.

HERE YA GO YOU WHINY LITTLE *****:

LOOK AT HOW SHITTY AND UNSTABLE THAT ECONOMY IS. WHO WOULD EXPAND INTO IT? NO ONE. THAT'S WHY IRELAND HAS A TRADE SURPLUS RIGHT NOW.

Could you get a crappier chart? One that's even more difficult to decipher?
All those 5% increments are just too precise for me........

 

[Papageorgio]

If debt doesn't matter then why pay any taxes at all? Why do we need to give the government any of our money?

Because government's job is to provide for the common defense and general welfare. You don't seem to understand the Constitution at all. And why would you? You're not even American.

If debt doesn't matter, then why do we need to work, why not have the government provide everything?

Well, government already provides a lot, so I don't know what point you're trying to make. Seems to me you want to make this a hyperbolic and emotional discussion because you're a hyperbolic and emotional person.

If debt doesn't matter, then why not have the states take the federal money instead of taxing us?The whole premise is silly on it's face.

So this conversation started with your insistence that a high debt-to-GDP ratio is bad for growth. When provided with links to the debunking of that idea, rather than accept those conclusion like an adult, you screech and whine like a child. You refuse to take your medicine. You refuse to accept truths. I think it's because of your insatiable ego that is pretending not to be just a giant pile of insecurity. I think you're a garbage person, and know you're a garbage person. So you seek validation on anonymous message boards because you're too antisocial to get it in real life. Tell me I'm wrong.

I understand the Constitution, it seems you don't understand economics.

The government can provide common defense and general welfare without taxing us because you claim debt doesn't matter.The government can continue to add debt and it won't hurt the economy as you are claiming. The government can also add free health care, free food, free homes and free highways because as you claim debt doesn't matter. So a zero tax rate for all of us should be easy because as you claim, debt doesn't matter.

Tax cuts should not matter because it would increase a national debt that you claim does not matter. If I am wrong in what I am reading from you, please tell me when the debt does matter.

 

[The Derp]

I did! Did you notice this part......Apple’s Hollyhill plant in Cork first opened its doors in November 1980, with Steve Jobs and chairman Mike Markkula among those who attended the opening. At the time, the manufacturing staff numbered just 60 peopleNow it employs 4000.

And the plant hadn't been adding jobs since it was opened? So for your argument to work, you'd have to prove that those jobs were added after the tax cut. And your article doesn't say that, and I absolutely do not expect you to have that level of knowledge because you've already proven you're too lazy to do that kind of work.

You said they didn't open a plant in Apple, it sure looks like they expanded one, doesn't it?.

First of all, what I said was that they didn't build one after the tax cuts.

Secondly, you have to prove that expansion occurred after the tax cut, which you cannot do because your one singular source doesn't say that, and you're too ******* lazy a person to do the work to make sure it's true. You don't do that level of due diligence because you're too lazy, or because you know it's not going to help your argument. So you keep things vague and general by design, relying on pure innuendo to carry your message. I wish you were better at this.

Doesn't look much different? Oh, that's right, you're a liberal. Not good at math.
I'll try to explain it, let me know if I need to dumb it down more for you......In the early 90s, Ireland had an unemployment rate over 15%. 7.22% higher than unemployment in the UK. After they cut corporate taxes in the mid 90s, their unemployment rate improved much faster than the UK's improvement. So much faster that by 1999, Ireland's unemployment rate was lower than the UK's rate. Lower for a solid 8 years.Lower until the crisis. Now that both UK and Irish unemployment rates are falling, after peaking in 2011-2012, the gap between UK and Irish rates is 3.24%. 3.24% is a smaller gap than the pre-tax cut rate of 7.22%.

Actually, it's pretty much the same gap. Because your unemployment numbers are also lower than then. So proportionately, it's pretty much the same. And you do that thing where you use gross numbers out of context because that's how you operate, being a sophist.

Ireland's unemployment rate wasn't 7.22% higher...it was 80% higher.

The UK's unemployment at the start of the arbitrary data set you selected looks to be about 8.75%, and Ireland's looks to be about 15.75%. That's an unemployment rate 80% higher than UK's.

The UK's unemployment at the end of the arbitrary data set you selected looks to be about 4.9%, and Ireland's looks to be about 8.1%. That's an unemployment rate 65% higher than UK's.

So that's not something to write home about. It's certainly not something you can use to cheer-lead your garbage policies. And while it's an improvement, it's not enough of an improvement that you can credit to the tax cuts. And I was eyeballing those numbers from your chart, so it's probably closer to within the margin of error.

 

[The Derp]

Could you get a crappier chart? One that's even more difficult to decipher?
All those 5% increments are just too precise for me........

So now you try to gaslight the chart. Typical.

If you want to look at it yourself, here's the link. Fire away.

Now you're whining about the chart, while you post garbage charts all the time????

 

[danielpalos]

If debt doesn't matter then why pay any taxes at all? Why do we need to give the government any of our money?

Because government's job is to provide for the common defense and general welfare. You don't seem to understand the Constitution at all. And why would you? You're not even American.

If debt doesn't matter, then why do we need to work, why not have the government provide everything?

Well, government already provides a lot, so I don't know what point you're trying to make. Seems to me you want to make this a hyperbolic and emotional discussion because you're a hyperbolic and emotional person.

If debt doesn't matter, then why not have the states take the federal money instead of taxing us?The whole premise is silly on it's face.

So this conversation started with your insistence that a high debt-to-GDP ratio is bad for growth. When provided with links to the debunking of that idea, rather than accept those conclusion like an adult, you screech and whine like a child. You refuse to take your medicine. You refuse to accept truths. I think it's because of your insatiable ego that is pretending not to be just a giant pile of insecurity. I think you're a garbage person, and know you're a garbage person. So you seek validation on anonymous message boards because you're too antisocial to get it in real life. Tell me I'm wrong.

I understand the Constitution, it seems you don't understand economics.

The government can provide common defense and general welfare without taxing us because you claim debt doesn't matter.The government can continue to add debt and it won't hurt the economy as you are claiming. The government can also add free health care, free food, free homes and free highways because as you claim debt doesn't matter. So a zero tax rate for all of us should be easy because as you claim, debt doesn't matter.

Tax cuts should not matter because it would increase a national debt that you claim does not matter. If I am wrong in what I am reading from you, please tell me when the debt does matter.

Providing for the general welfare engenders a positive multiplier, providing for the general warfare does not.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I did! Did you notice this part......Apple’s Hollyhill plant in Cork first opened its doors in November 1980, with Steve Jobs and chairman Mike Markkula among those who attended the opening. At the time, the manufacturing staff numbered just 60 peopleNow it employs 4000.

And the plant hadn't been adding jobs since it was opened? So for your argument to work, you'd have to prove that those jobs were added after the tax cut. And your article doesn't say that, and I absolutely do not expect you to have that level of knowledge because you've already proven you're too lazy to do that kind of work.

You said they didn't open a plant in Apple, it sure looks like they expanded one, doesn't it?.

First of all, what I said was that they didn't build one after the tax cuts.

Secondly, you have to prove that expansion occurred after the tax cut, which you cannot do because your one singular source doesn't say that, and you're too ******* lazy a person to do the work to make sure it's true. You don't do that level of due diligence because you're too lazy, or because you know it's not going to help your argument. So you keep things vague and general by design, relying on pure innuendo to carry your message. I wish you were better at this.

Doesn't look much different? Oh, that's right, you're a liberal. Not good at math.
I'll try to explain it, let me know if I need to dumb it down more for you......In the early 90s, Ireland had an unemployment rate over 15%. 7.22% higher than unemployment in the UK. After they cut corporate taxes in the mid 90s, their unemployment rate improved much faster than the UK's improvement. So much faster that by 1999, Ireland's unemployment rate was lower than the UK's rate. Lower for a solid 8 years.Lower until the crisis. Now that both UK and Irish unemployment rates are falling, after peaking in 2011-2012, the gap between UK and Irish rates is 3.24%. 3.24% is a smaller gap than the pre-tax cut rate of 7.22%.

Actually, it's pretty much the same gap. Because your unemployment numbers are also lower than then. So proportionately, it's pretty much the same. And you do that thing where you use gross numbers out of context because that's how you operate, being a sophist.

Ireland's unemployment rate wasn't 7.22% higher...it was 80% higher.

The UK's unemployment at the start of the arbitrary data set you selected looks to be about 8.75%, and Ireland's looks to be about 15.75%. That's an unemployment rate 80% higher than UK's.

The UK's unemployment at the end of the arbitrary data set you selected looks to be about 4.9%, and Ireland's looks to be about 8.1%. That's an unemployment rate 65% higher than UK's.

So that's not something to write home about. It's certainly not something you can use to cheer-lead your garbage policies. And while it's an improvement, it's not enough of an improvement that you can credit to the tax cuts. And I was eyeballing those numbers from your chart, so it's probably closer to within the margin of error.

Actually, it's pretty much the same gap.

No, a 7% gap, to a surplus, to a 3.24% gap is not pretty much the same.

 

[Papageorgio]

If debt doesn't matter then why pay any taxes at all? Why do we need to give the government any of our money?

Because government's job is to provide for the common defense and general welfare. You don't seem to understand the Constitution at all. And why would you? You're not even American.

If debt doesn't matter, then why do we need to work, why not have the government provide everything?

Well, government already provides a lot, so I don't know what point you're trying to make. Seems to me you want to make this a hyperbolic and emotional discussion because you're a hyperbolic and emotional person.

If debt doesn't matter, then why not have the states take the federal money instead of taxing us?The whole premise is silly on it's face.

So this conversation started with your insistence that a high debt-to-GDP ratio is bad for growth. When provided with links to the debunking of that idea, rather than accept those conclusion like an adult, you screech and whine like a child. You refuse to take your medicine. You refuse to accept truths. I think it's because of your insatiable ego that is pretending not to be just a giant pile of insecurity. I think you're a garbage person, and know you're a garbage person. So you seek validation on anonymous message boards because you're too antisocial to get it in real life. Tell me I'm wrong.

I understand the Constitution, it seems you don't understand economics.

The government can provide common defense and general welfare without taxing us because you claim debt doesn't matter.The government can continue to add debt and it won't hurt the economy as you are claiming. The government can also add free health care, free food, free homes and free highways because as you claim debt doesn't matter. So a zero tax rate for all of us should be easy because as you claim, debt doesn't matter.

Tax cuts should not matter because it would increase a national debt that you claim does not matter. If I am wrong in what I am reading from you, please tell me when the debt does matter.

So you first insisted that debt was going to drag down the economy.

When that turned out to be a crock of shit, you migrated your argument to hysterically screeching about the debt.

Yet, when Bush the Dumber erased a surplus and produced four record deficits, nary a peep from your kind.

Which means you don't really understand debt, you're just trying to co-opt it to help your garbage message because you're a garbage person.

I didn't change my view, you just won't answer my questions so you twist and turn and make personal insults because that is all you can do. It's okay by me that you can't answer the questions I made in the previous post. I understand perfectly why you refuse to.

Your turn now to claim "what questions?" and to personally attack me because that is all you got.

 

[Papageorgio]

If debt doesn't matter then why pay any taxes at all? Why do we need to give the government any of our money?

Because government's job is to provide for the common defense and general welfare. You don't seem to understand the Constitution at all. And why would you? You're not even American.

If debt doesn't matter, then why do we need to work, why not have the government provide everything?

Well, government already provides a lot, so I don't know what point you're trying to make. Seems to me you want to make this a hyperbolic and emotional discussion because you're a hyperbolic and emotional person.

If debt doesn't matter, then why not have the states take the federal money instead of taxing us?The whole premise is silly on it's face.

So this conversation started with your insistence that a high debt-to-GDP ratio is bad for growth. When provided with links to the debunking of that idea, rather than accept those conclusion like an adult, you screech and whine like a child. You refuse to take your medicine. You refuse to accept truths. I think it's because of your insatiable ego that is pretending not to be just a giant pile of insecurity. I think you're a garbage person, and know you're a garbage person. So you seek validation on anonymous message boards because you're too antisocial to get it in real life. Tell me I'm wrong.

I understand the Constitution, it seems you don't understand economics.

The government can provide common defense and general welfare without taxing us because you claim debt doesn't matter.The government can continue to add debt and it won't hurt the economy as you are claiming. The government can also add free health care, free food, free homes and free highways because as you claim debt doesn't matter. So a zero tax rate for all of us should be easy because as you claim, debt doesn't matter.

Tax cuts should not matter because it would increase a national debt that you claim does not matter. If I am wrong in what I am reading from you, please tell me when the debt does matter.

Providing for the general welfare engenders a positive multiplier, providing for the general warfare does not.

So you are in favor of corporate welfare. Interesting because I am against it. Corporate welfare makes the playing field uneven and plays favorites, I am against the government stepping into the private sector's business. Why are you for corporate welfare? How does corporate welfare benefit general welfare of America?

 

[danielpalos]

If debt doesn't matter then why pay any taxes at all? Why do we need to give the government any of our money?

Because government's job is to provide for the common defense and general welfare. You don't seem to understand the Constitution at all. And why would you? You're not even American.

If debt doesn't matter, then why do we need to work, why not have the government provide everything?

Well, government already provides a lot, so I don't know what point you're trying to make. Seems to me you want to make this a hyperbolic and emotional discussion because you're a hyperbolic and emotional person.

If debt doesn't matter, then why not have the states take the federal money instead of taxing us?The whole premise is silly on it's face.

So this conversation started with your insistence that a high debt-to-GDP ratio is bad for growth. When provided with links to the debunking of that idea, rather than accept those conclusion like an adult, you screech and whine like a child. You refuse to take your medicine. You refuse to accept truths. I think it's because of your insatiable ego that is pretending not to be just a giant pile of insecurity. I think you're a garbage person, and know you're a garbage person. So you seek validation on anonymous message boards because you're too antisocial to get it in real life. Tell me I'm wrong.

I understand the Constitution, it seems you don't understand economics.

The government can provide common defense and general welfare without taxing us because you claim debt doesn't matter.The government can continue to add debt and it won't hurt the economy as you are claiming. The government can also add free health care, free food, free homes and free highways because as you claim debt doesn't matter. So a zero tax rate for all of us should be easy because as you claim, debt doesn't matter.

Tax cuts should not matter because it would increase a national debt that you claim does not matter. If I am wrong in what I am reading from you, please tell me when the debt does matter.

Providing for the general welfare engenders a positive multiplier, providing for the general warfare does not.

So you are in favor of corporate welfare. Interesting because I am against it. Corporate welfare makes the playing field uneven and plays favorites, I am against the government stepping into the private sector's business. Why are you for corporate welfare? How does corporate welfare benefit general welfare of America?

It always depends on implementation. General welfare benefits engender a positive multiplier on our economy.