The Question Conservatives Can't Answer

[Foxfyre]

One of the fundamentals of economics is that if you want something to decrease, tax it. If you want something to increase, subsidize it.

If you want people less dependent on the taxpayer, you reduce taxes on unearned income to encourage savings and investments. The more savings and investments, the less need there is for social services and entitlements. Everybody hopes to not have to work until they die. Unearned income is often the only means they have to retire.

 

[georgephillip]

So then you can't prove that claim can you.... Didn't think so... SO then you are just a little liar making wild statements that have no truth to them.. Got it thanks

Get this.

"As Smith notes, the top 20% of the American populace holds roughly 93% of the country's financial wealth, and the top 1% of the country holds approximately 43% of the money in the U.S. Meanwhile, the middle 20% of the population -- what would, officially, be called the middle class -- holds only 6% of the country's total assets. While disturbing, even this minuscule share of the wealth pie dwarfs the bottom 40% of the country, who control less than 1%"

You're welcome.

Disturbing Statistics on the Decline of America's Middle Class - DailyFinance

Who the hell is Bruce Watson and who is "Smith"?

Your article must have taken a lot of digging, sadly it doesn't prove your statement.. Care to point out where it says the tax rates are lower than a half century ago? Saying you pay 35% today but your parents paid 30% back in the 60's is a false impression. Several factors need to be added in to show the "effective tax rate when comparing tax rates.

1. Inflation

2. Tax laws and exemptions that have changed over the years.

And many other things all make a claim like that nonsense.

But hey you go right on ahead spouting liberal propaganda and don't let reality or the truth stop you.

Who the hell is gslack?

Do you think the US elites really need the US worker or consumer anymore?
Why shouldn't those responsible for outsourcing millions of US manufacturing jobs be taxed into extinction?

 

[Foxfyre]

Get this.

"As Smith notes, the top 20% of the American populace holds roughly 93% of the country's financial wealth, and the top 1% of the country holds approximately 43% of the money in the U.S. Meanwhile, the middle 20% of the population -- what would, officially, be called the middle class -- holds only 6% of the country's total assets. While disturbing, even this minuscule share of the wealth pie dwarfs the bottom 40% of the country, who control less than 1%"

You're welcome.

Disturbing Statistics on the Decline of America's Middle Class - DailyFinance

Who the hell is Bruce Watson and who is "Smith"?

Your article must have taken a lot of digging, sadly it doesn't prove your statement.. Care to point out where it says the tax rates are lower than a half century ago? Saying you pay 35% today but your parents paid 30% back in the 60's is a false impression. Several factors need to be added in to show the "effective tax rate when comparing tax rates.

1. Inflation

2. Tax laws and exemptions that have changed over the years.

And many other things all make a claim like that nonsense.

But hey you go right on ahead spouting liberal propaganda and don't let reality or the truth stop you.

Who the hell is gslack?

Do you think the US elites really need the US worker or consumer anymore?
Why shouldn't those responsible for outsourcing millions of US manufacturing jobs be taxed into extinction?

Because then there would be no point in changing our tax and regulation policies to make it attractive to return those jobs to the United States. Did you ever hear of the saying: cutting off your nose to spite your face?

 

[gslack]

Get this.

"As Smith notes, the top 20% of the American populace holds roughly 93% of the country's financial wealth, and the top 1% of the country holds approximately 43% of the money in the U.S. Meanwhile, the middle 20% of the population -- what would, officially, be called the middle class -- holds only 6% of the country's total assets. While disturbing, even this minuscule share of the wealth pie dwarfs the bottom 40% of the country, who control less than 1%"

You're welcome.

Disturbing Statistics on the Decline of America's Middle Class - DailyFinance

Who the hell is Bruce Watson and who is "Smith"?

Your article must have taken a lot of digging, sadly it doesn't prove your statement.. Care to point out where it says the tax rates are lower than a half century ago? Saying you pay 35% today but your parents paid 30% back in the 60's is a false impression. Several factors need to be added in to show the "effective tax rate when comparing tax rates.

1. Inflation

2. Tax laws and exemptions that have changed over the years.

And many other things all make a claim like that nonsense.

But hey you go right on ahead spouting liberal propaganda and don't let reality or the truth stop you.

Who the hell is gslack?

Do you think the US elites really need the US worker or consumer anymore?
Why shouldn't those responsible for outsourcing millions of US manufacturing jobs be taxed into extinction?

SOOOO... the article doesn't prove your statement.... Yeah we knew that...

Dude all you have done is make one bold claim after another and when challenged you just posy an article and make another bold claim. The article doesn't even have to be related to your last claim, you pretend it is and move on to the next shouting BS in you nonsense.

Can you defend any of your claims? I think not and so far you haven't defended one. I fgure you're just mad or something and want to rant and rave about somebody other than yourself causing it. When you actually want to have a real discussion let me know..

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

"The government took over the mortgage lending guarantors Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (privatizing the profits, 'socializing' the losses) for $5.3 trillion – almost as much as the entire national debt.

Yes, the government probably lost a few hundred billion thanks to Barney Frank and the rest of the Dem enablers of Fannie and Freddie. Just awful, isn't it?

"The Treasury lent $700 billion under the Troubled Asset Relief Plan (TARP) to Wall Street’s largest banks and brokerage houses.

The bank portion of TARP was repaid at a profit to the Treasury.

"The latter re-incorporated themselves as 'banks' to get Federal Reserve handouts and access to the Fed’s $2 trillion in 'cash for trash' swaps crediting Wall Street with Fed deposits for otherwise 'illiquid' loans and securities (the euphemism for toxic, fraudulent or otherwise insolvent and unmarketable debt instruments) – at 'cost' based on full mark-to-model fictitious valuations.

All the short term loans have been repaid and the collateral returned. The Fed made a profit which they then turned over to the Treasury.

"Altogether, the post-2008 crash saw some $13 trillion in such obligations transferred onto the government’s balance sheet from high finance, euphemized as 'the private sector' as if it were the core economy itself, rather than its calcifying shell.

Transferred to the balance sheet? LOL!
Someone doesn't know what a balance sheet is.

"Instead of losing on their bad bets, bad loans, toxic mortgages and outright fraudulent claims, the financial institutions cleaned up, at public expense.

"They collected enough to create a new century’s power elite to lord it over “taxpayers” in industry, agriculture and commerce who will be charged to pay off this debt.

Private firms took billions in losses on their bad loans. The taxpayer got stuck with hundreds of billions in losses from Fannie and Freddie. While Franklin Raines walked away with tens of millions in fraudulent bonuses based on faked earnings.

"If there was a silver lining to all this, it has been to demonstrate that if the Treasury and Federal Reserve can create $13 trillion of public obligations – money – electronically on computer keyboards, there really is no Social Security problem at all, no Medicare shortfall, no inability of the American government to rebuild the nation’s infrastructure."

How a $13 Trillion Cover Story was Written | Michael Hudson

When the Fed creates money, how is that a "public obligation"?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Mark Pittman had much better eyesight than you do.
Maybe he still does?

"A former police-beat reporter who joined Bloomberg News in 1997, Pittman wrote stories in 2007 predicting the collapse of the banking system.

"That year, he won the Gerald Loeb Award from the UCLA Anderson School of Management, the highest accolade in financial journalism, for 'Wall Street’s Faustian Bargain,' a series of articles on the breakdown of the U.S. mortgage industry..."

Look harder.

Mark Pittman, Reporter Who Challenged Fed Secrecy, Dies at 52 - Bloomberg

Look harder to prove your claim?
I'm not sure you understand how this debate thingie works.

I'm not sure you understand corruption.

"His (Mark Pittman's) June 29, 2007, article, headlined 'S&P, Moody’s Hide Rising Risk on $200 Billion of Mortgage Bonds,' was excoriated at the time by Portfolio.com for 'trying to play "gotcha" with the ratings agencies.'

“'And that really isn’t helpful,' said the posting.

"Pittman’s story proved prescient.

"So did his reports on U.S. banks exporting toxic mortgages overseas, on Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson’s role in creating those troubled assets while he was chief executive officer of Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and on the U.S. bailout of American International Group Inc."

Mark Pittman, Reporter Who Challenged Fed Secrecy, Dies at 52 - Bloomberg

Yeah, I'm pretty sure we agree about the corruption and cronyism that the Dems commited at Fannie and Freddie.
Just awful.
And now the taxpayers are stuck with the tab.
Awful!

 

[georgephillip]

One of the fundamentals of economics is that if you want something to decrease, tax it. If you want something to increase, subsidize it.

If you want people less dependent on the taxpayer, you reduce taxes on unearned income to encourage savings and investments. The more savings and investments, the less need there is for social services and entitlements. Everybody hopes to not have to work until they die. Unearned income is often the only means they have to retire.

Have you noticed any tax increases on unearned income since January 2008?

Since that time, there's been a decrease of 8.7 million American jobs.

Before-tax US corporate profits increased by $140.3 billion in the first quarter of 2011 while 13.9 million Americans were unemployed.

If you want rich Americans less dependent on the conservative nanny state, decrease borrowing from them and increase their levels of taxation to what they paid 50s and 60s.

 

[georgephillip]

Who the hell is Bruce Watson and who is "Smith"?

Your article must have taken a lot of digging, sadly it doesn't prove your statement.. Care to point out where it says the tax rates are lower than a half century ago? Saying you pay 35% today but your parents paid 30% back in the 60's is a false impression. Several factors need to be added in to show the "effective tax rate when comparing tax rates.

1. Inflation

2. Tax laws and exemptions that have changed over the years.

And many other things all make a claim like that nonsense.

But hey you go right on ahead spouting liberal propaganda and don't let reality or the truth stop you.

Who the hell is gslack?

Do you think the US elites really need the US worker or consumer anymore?
Why shouldn't those responsible for outsourcing millions of US manufacturing jobs be taxed into extinction?

Because then there would be no point in changing our tax and regulation policies to make it attractive to return those jobs to the United States. Did you ever hear of the saying: cutting off your nose to spite your face?

Where's the profit in changing tax and regulation policies when US elites no longer need US consumers or workers?

"Annual rate at which the GDP grew this year: 1.3 percent between April and June, 0.4 percent between January and March
Average annual GDP growth from 1998-2007: 3.02 percent
Total jobs lost since January 2008: 8.7 million
Total jobs recovered since January 2008: 1.8 million
Recession technically ended: over two years ago, in June 2009
Unemployment rate in July 2011: 9.1 percent
The 'natural unemployment rate: 5 percent
Months that the unemployment rate has been around 9 percent or more: 28
Number of unemployed people in July 2011: 13.9 million
Number of long-term unemployed people in June 2011: 6.3 million, or 44.4 percent of the unemployed..."

Better to lose your nose than to let the rich cut your throat.

The Latest on Our Sputtering Economy, by the Numbers - ProPublica

 

[georgephillip]

If it's true the top 20% of American families hold 93% of the country's financial wealth with the top 1% controlling 43% of the money, it's only logical to ask why their tax rates are lower today than half-a-century ago.

Do you think it has anything to do with campaign contributions?

Where's the logic in US elites increasing their share of national income and wealth over the last ten years while the country lost 42,400 factories between 2001 and 2009. There's only been one country in history to lose more jobs in a single ten year period than the US lost between 2001 -'09, and that was the USSR during the last decade of its existence.

Apparently, you see a Constitutional justification for the current level of US inequality.

Care to share it?

Disturbing Statistics on the Decline of America's Middle Class - DailyFinance

Prove that claim I bolded and enlarged in your post..... Be warned I do not tolerate liars nor people who make extreme claims that are utterly false in every aspect... I will give a chance to back up the claim before I correct it...

Why would I care what you "tolerate?"

"...But a growing cadre of economic analysts note the steady erosion of the middle class, and the loss of its massive buying power. In a recent article, my Daily Finance colleague Charles Hugh Smith laid out a fairly clear argument for the disappearance of the middle class, at least in terms of wealth.

"As Smith notes, the top 20% of the American populace holds roughly 93% of the country's financial wealth, and the top 1% of the country holds approximately 43% of the money in the U.S.

"Meanwhile, the middle 20% of the population -- what would, officially, be called the middle class -- holds only 6% of the country's total assets. While disturbing, even this minuscule share of the wealth pie dwarfs the bottom 40% of the country, who control less than 1%."

Still waiting on that correction.
Dude.

Disturbing Statistics on the Decline of America's Middle Class - DailyFinance

 

[georgephillip]

Look harder to prove your claim?
I'm not sure you understand how this debate thingie works.

I'm not sure you understand corruption.

"His (Mark Pittman's) June 29, 2007, article, headlined 'S&P, Moody’s Hide Rising Risk on $200 Billion of Mortgage Bonds,' was excoriated at the time by Portfolio.com for 'trying to play "gotcha" with the ratings agencies.'

“'And that really isn’t helpful,' said the posting.

"Pittman’s story proved prescient.

"So did his reports on U.S. banks exporting toxic mortgages overseas, on Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson’s role in creating those troubled assets while he was chief executive officer of Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and on the U.S. bailout of American International Group Inc."

Mark Pittman, Reporter Who Challenged Fed Secrecy, Dies at 52 - Bloomberg

Yeah, I'm pretty sure we agree about the corruption and cronyism that the Dems commited at Fannie and Freddie.
Just awful.
And now the taxpayers are stuck with the tab.
Awful!

I'm fine with sending corrupt Democrats to prison for the rest of their lives.
I'm pretty sure you don't feel the same way about Hank "RICO" Paulson:

"Hank Paulson and Goldman Sachs Are RICO Enterprises

"This New York Times expose on Henry Paulson and Goldman Sachs makes one thing clear: There is now no doubt that Henry Paulson and Goldman Sachs have violate numerous federal laws. Paulson laundered several billion dollars of money to Goldman Sachs, through A.I.G. Paulson lied to Congress about the true nature of TARP. Paulson lied to Congress about his role in the Federal Reserve's decision to give over $185 billion to A.I.G.

"Paulson has also violated the federal honest service statute, which makes it a felony for a government official to breach his fidicuariy obligation to taxpayers. See 18 U.S.C. 1346 ('the term "scheme or artifice to defraud" includes a scheme or artifice to deprive another of the intangible right of honest services.')

"Paulson clearly violated his duties to American taxpayers when he transferred billions of dollars of wealth to Goldman Sachs under false pretenses; when he lied to Congress in order to obtains hundreds-of-billions of dollars in TARP funds; when he conspired with Goldman Sachs to "save" A.I.G. for Goldman's sake; and when he lied to Congress about his role in 'saving" A.I.G.'

Crime & Federalism: Hank Paulson and Goldman Sachs Are RICO Enterprises

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I'm not sure you understand corruption.

"His (Mark Pittman's) June 29, 2007, article, headlined 'S&P, Moody’s Hide Rising Risk on $200 Billion of Mortgage Bonds,' was excoriated at the time by Portfolio.com for 'trying to play "gotcha" with the ratings agencies.'

“'And that really isn’t helpful,' said the posting.

"Pittman’s story proved prescient.

"So did his reports on U.S. banks exporting toxic mortgages overseas, on Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson’s role in creating those troubled assets while he was chief executive officer of Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and on the U.S. bailout of American International Group Inc."

Mark Pittman, Reporter Who Challenged Fed Secrecy, Dies at 52 - Bloomberg

Yeah, I'm pretty sure we agree about the corruption and cronyism that the Dems commited at Fannie and Freddie.
Just awful.
And now the taxpayers are stuck with the tab.
Awful!

I'm fine with sending corrupt Democrats to prison for the rest of their lives.
I'm pretty sure you don't feel the same way about Hank "RICO" Paulson:

"Hank Paulson and Goldman Sachs Are RICO Enterprises

"This New York Times expose on Henry Paulson and Goldman Sachs makes one thing clear: There is now no doubt that Henry Paulson and Goldman Sachs have violate numerous federal laws. Paulson laundered several billion dollars of money to Goldman Sachs, through A.I.G. Paulson lied to Congress about the true nature of TARP. Paulson lied to Congress about his role in the Federal Reserve's decision to give over $185 billion to A.I.G.

"Paulson has also violated the federal honest service statute, which makes it a felony for a government official to breach his fidicuariy obligation to taxpayers. See 18 U.S.C. 1346 ('the term "scheme or artifice to defraud" includes a scheme or artifice to deprive another of the intangible right of honest services.')

"Paulson clearly violated his duties to American taxpayers when he transferred billions of dollars of wealth to Goldman Sachs under false pretenses; when he lied to Congress in order to obtains hundreds-of-billions of dollars in TARP funds; when he conspired with Goldman Sachs to "save" A.I.G. for Goldman's sake; and when he lied to Congress about his role in 'saving" A.I.G.'

Crime & Federalism: Hank Paulson and Goldman Sachs Are RICO Enterprises

If you can prove Paulson broke any laws, he should go to jail.

Maybe he can have the cell next to all the Dem crooks from Fannie?

 

[georgephillip]

Any rich Republicans deserving of jail time?

You're welcome.

Any rich Republicans work for Fannie Mae?

Any rich Republicans work for Goldman Sachs?

"While Mr. Paulson spoke to many Wall Street executives during [the early days of the economic crisis], he was in very frequent contact with Lloyd C. Blankfein, Goldman’s chief executive, according to a copy of Mr. Paulson’s calendars acquired by The New York Times through a Freedom of Information Act request.

"During the week of the A.I.G. bailout alone, Mr. Paulson and Mr. Blankfein spoke two dozen times, the calendars show, far more frequently than Mr. Paulson did with other Wall Street executives.

"What did they talk about? We are left to draw reasonable inferences. Clearly they discussed how to launder money through A.I.G. into Goldman Sachs."

Crime & Federalism: Hank Paulson and Goldman Sachs Are RICO Enterprises

 

[gslack]

I am pretty sure georgephillip is trolling to get people riled up. He doesn't defend any position and when he does try to use a link to back a claim, the link rarely if at all is related to his claim. Even when it does, its usually nonsense...

He just re-posted a response, I would bet we will see him do that a lot... I refuse to feed a troll, and I refuse to empower anyone who has no desire to back up a claim they make. Not to mentions anyone who shows so little actual common sense or knowledge on what they do post... georgephillip, you are not going to get anymore responses from me until you show that you are actually wanting to back up your claims...

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Any rich Republicans deserving of jail time?

You're welcome.

Any rich Republicans work for Fannie Mae?

Any rich Republicans work for Goldman Sachs?

"While Mr. Paulson spoke to many Wall Street executives during [the early days of the economic crisis], he was in very frequent contact with Lloyd C. Blankfein, Goldman’s chief executive, according to a copy of Mr. Paulson’s calendars acquired by The New York Times through a Freedom of Information Act request.

"During the week of the A.I.G. bailout alone, Mr. Paulson and Mr. Blankfein spoke two dozen times, the calendars show, far more frequently than Mr. Paulson did with other Wall Street executives.

"What did they talk about? We are left to draw reasonable inferences. Clearly they discussed how to launder money through A.I.G. into Goldman Sachs."

Crime & Federalism: Hank Paulson and Goldman Sachs Are RICO Enterprises

I don't know of any rich Republicans who work for Goldman, just rich Democrats.
They were Obama's largest contributors in 2008.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I am pretty sure georgephillip is trolling to get people riled up. He doesn't defend any position and when he does try to use a link to back a claim, the link rarely if at all is related to his claim. Even when it does, its usually nonsense...

He just re-posted a response, I would bet we will see him do that a lot... I refuse to feed a troll, and I refuse to empower anyone who has no desire to back up a claim they make. Not to mentions anyone who shows so little actual common sense or knowledge on what they do post... georgephillip, you are not going to get anymore responses from me until you show that you are actually wanting to back up your claims...

He keeps making silly claims and after I call him on it, multiple times, he still can't find any proof. It's kind of amusing.

 

[edthecynic]

Any rich Republicans deserving of jail time?

You're welcome.

Any rich Republicans work for Fannie Mae?

Daniel Mudd, Bush's President and CEO of Fannie Mae who in 2004, dropped the anti-predatory lending rules that were put into place in 2000 that disallowed risky, high-cost loans from being credited toward affordable housing goals, and allowed these high-risk loans to be counted toward affordable housing goals

 

[gslack]

I am pretty sure georgephillip is trolling to get people riled up. He doesn't defend any position and when he does try to use a link to back a claim, the link rarely if at all is related to his claim. Even when it does, its usually nonsense...

He just re-posted a response, I would bet we will see him do that a lot... I refuse to feed a troll, and I refuse to empower anyone who has no desire to back up a claim they make. Not to mentions anyone who shows so little actual common sense or knowledge on what they do post... georgephillip, you are not going to get anymore responses from me until you show that you are actually wanting to back up your claims...

He keeps making silly claims and after I call him on it, multiple times, he still can't find any proof. It's kind of amusing.

he is most likely someones alter ego to use as support or a pretend backer sometime. Most likely edtheeunuch's but who knows really. Either way hes an idiot and post drivel he cannot back up nor does he have any intention of trying. He is too idiotic and phony to be real... I'm done with him..

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Any rich Republicans deserving of jail time?

You're welcome.

Any rich Republicans work for Fannie Mae?

Daniel Mudd, Bush's President and CEO of Fannie Mae who in 2004, dropped the anti-predatory lending rules that were put into place in 2000 that disallowed risky, high-cost loans from being credited toward affordable housing goals, and allowed these high-risk loans to be counted toward affordable housing goals

"Daniel Mudd, Bush's President and CEO of Fannie Mae"

He's Bush's? How does that work?

 

[edthecynic]

Any rich Republicans work for Fannie Mae?

Daniel Mudd, Bush's President and CEO of Fannie Mae who in 2004, dropped the anti-predatory lending rules that were put into place in 2000 that disallowed risky, high-cost loans from being credited toward affordable housing goals, and allowed these high-risk loans to be counted toward affordable housing goals

"Daniel Mudd, Bush's President and CEO of Fannie Mae"

He's Bush's? How does that work?

He donated to Bush's 2004 campaign, and was appointed by Bush to take Raines' place as head of Fannie Mae as a reward. As Bush's lackey, he then dropped the anti-preditory lending rules that had been in place since 2000 and Freddie and Fannie's purchases of subprime-backed securities increased significantly in 2004 to 44% of the subprime market.

 

[georgephillip]

Get this.

"As Smith notes, the top 20% of the American populace holds roughly 93% of the country's financial wealth, and the top 1% of the country holds approximately 43% of the money in the U.S. Meanwhile, the middle 20% of the population -- what would, officially, be called the middle class -- holds only 6% of the country's total assets. While disturbing, even this minuscule share of the wealth pie dwarfs the bottom 40% of the country, who control less than 1%"

You're welcome.

Disturbing Statistics on the Decline of America's Middle Class - DailyFinance

Who the hell is Bruce Watson and who is "Smith"?

Your article must have taken a lot of digging, sadly it doesn't prove your statement.. Care to point out where it says the tax rates are lower than a half century ago? Saying you pay 35% today but your parents paid 30% back in the 60's is a false impression. Several factors need to be added in to show the "effective tax rate when comparing tax rates.

1. Inflation

2. Tax laws and exemptions that have changed over the years.

And many other things all make a claim like that nonsense.

But hey you go right on ahead spouting liberal propaganda and don't let reality or the truth stop you.

Yes. When comparing tax rates, much much more has to be considered in addition to the rate. Changes in how AGI is computed, the changing picture of deductions and credits, and what will be considered income and what can be excluded all have to be considered. For instance those 'rich' who saw their tax rates decline since the mid 1900's have also lost a lot of the deductions, exclusiions, and credits they once could take.

But once all the factors were counted in, the lowered tax rates actually spurred increased economic activity and generated more revenues from those same people because with certainty that they will be able to keep more of profits generated, they take the risks necessary to generate those profits.

It's an interesting economic world out there for those who can set aside their class envy and strident partisanship long enough to see the bigger picture.

Whether the rich have "lost a lot of the deductions, exclusions, and credits they once could take" or not they haven't shared the spoils of "increased economic activity" with those who supply 90% of the labor.

"In 1980, the richest 1% of Americans "earned" about 8% of the total US income. In 2008 they "earned" 20%. They probably "earn" a greater share today after their financial gurus' pillaged $7.8 trillion of US home values in 2008, nearly crashing the global economy.

That "bigger picture" you referred to hasn't changed much in 5000 years.
Rich parasites use government to socialize cost and privatize profit to their exclusive benefit.
"Class envy and strident partisanship" are their biggest allies.