(12-18-2017 10:01 AM)fsquid Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 09:33 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 09:24 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  The corporate tax rate cut is necessary and long overdue. Many on the left even agree with that. The rest of it, I'm sorta "meh" about. Bottom line is that we aren't going to come close to balancing the budget without a consumption tax.

Bull. ****.

no, he's correct.

Right...corporations have been struggling mightily lately here in the USA.

But I'm sure you're both on board that significant increases in the minimum wage are also necessary and long overdue, right?

(12-18-2017 10:00 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Mach and RedTom can't help it. They have never tried to look at things from a producer point of view. Their combination of left-wing politics and Keynesian economic theory does not permit them to do so. They don't understand that producers and investors will always chase the highest ROI. That's not evil greed, it's just reasonable and rational behavior.

The good thing about it is that in a capitalist economy that can be used to the advantage of everyone. The best way to make the highest sustained ROI is to produce a quality product or service at a reasonable price.

From the standpoint of government policy, it's very simple--you want more investment and jobs and growth, you make your country a more attractive place to invest. You cannot get to a better life for everyone through redistribution. At some point you have to produce something. And bringing production home is the best way to spur the domestic economy.

Dude...we get it and are well aware. But you're still missing the fundamental part of the equation. Producers WILL NOT produce more just because they have money to do so. They will produce more when they have buyers with money and a demand for their product. This bill in no way guarantees that. Especially with no stimulus for those who don't pay much tax and non-permanent tax cuts for the middle class and tax increases on many other individuals.

(12-18-2017 10:16 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 10:00 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Mach and RedTom can't help it. They have never tried to look at things from a producer point of view. Their combination of left-wing politics and Keynesian economic theory does not permit them to do so. They don't understand that producers and investors will always chase the highest ROI. That's not evil greed, it's just reasonable and rational behavior.
The good thing about it is that in a capitalist economy that can be used to the advantage of everyone. The best way to make the highest sustained ROI is to produce a quality product or service at a reasonable price.
From the standpoint of government policy, it's very simple--you want more investment and jobs and growth, you make your country a more attractive place to invest. You cannot get to a better life for everyone through redistribution. At some point you have to produce something. And bringing production home is the best way to spur the domestic economy.

Dude...we get it and are well aware. But you're still missing the fundamental part of the equation. Producers WILL NOT produce more just because they have money to do so. They will produce more when they have buyers with money and a demand for their product. This bill in no way guarantees that. Especially with no stimulus for those who don't pay much tax and non-permanent tax cuts for the middle class and tax increases on many other individuals.

Dude, you don't get two things:

1) We have demand now. Companies are expanding overseas operations to meet that demand, because their ROI is better there.

2) Having more dead may create retail jobs, where there's no room to pay high wages. Production is where the money is made, and that's where the high-paying jobs are. And they're going overseas.

Explain to me how giving every poor American, say, $1,000, that he/she will use to go to Walmart to buy some electronic gadget made in China, effects any significant lasting improvement in our economy.

(12-18-2017 10:16 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 10:00 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Mach and RedTom can't help it. They have never tried to look at things from a producer point of view. Their combination of left-wing politics and Keynesian economic theory does not permit them to do so. They don't understand that producers and investors will always chase the highest ROI. That's not evil greed, it's just reasonable and rational behavior.

The good thing about it is that in a capitalist economy that can be used to the advantage of everyone. The best way to make the highest sustained ROI is to produce a quality product or service at a reasonable price.

From the standpoint of government policy, it's very simple--you want more investment and jobs and growth, you make your country a more attractive place to invest. You cannot get to a better life for everyone through redistribution. At some point you have to produce something. And bringing production home is the best way to spur the domestic economy.

Dude...we get it and are well aware. But you're still missing the fundamental part of the equation. Producers WILL NOT produce more just because they have money to do so. They will produce more when they have buyers with money and a demand for their product. This bill in no way guarantees that. Especially with no stimulus for those who don't pay much tax and non-permanent tax cuts for the middle class and tax increases on many other individuals.

What right do those people have to some sort of "stimulus"? Why should they receive a portion of another taxpayer's dollars instead of allowing taxpayers to keep more of their money?

(12-18-2017 09:33 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 09:24 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  The corporate tax rate cut is necessary and long overdue. Many on the left even agree with that. The rest of it, I'm sorta "meh" about. Bottom line is that we aren't going to come close to balancing the budget without a consumption tax.

Bull. ****.

Im pinning this for future RTW bashing.

(12-18-2017 10:44 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 10:16 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 10:00 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Mach and RedTom can't help it. They have never tried to look at things from a producer point of view. Their combination of left-wing politics and Keynesian economic theory does not permit them to do so. They don't understand that producers and investors will always chase the highest ROI. That's not evil greed, it's just reasonable and rational behavior.
The good thing about it is that in a capitalist economy that can be used to the advantage of everyone. The best way to make the highest sustained ROI is to produce a quality product or service at a reasonable price.
From the standpoint of government policy, it's very simple--you want more investment and jobs and growth, you make your country a more attractive place to invest. You cannot get to a better life for everyone through redistribution. At some point you have to produce something. And bringing production home is the best way to spur the domestic economy.

Dude...we get it and are well aware. But you're still missing the fundamental part of the equation. Producers WILL NOT produce more just because they have money to do so. They will produce more when they have buyers with money and a demand for their product. This bill in no way guarantees that. Especially with no stimulus for those who don't pay much tax and non-permanent tax cuts for the middle class and tax increases on many other individuals.

Dude, you don't get two things:

1) We have demand now. Companies are expanding overseas operations to meet that demand, because their ROI is better there.

2) Having more dead may create retail jobs, where there's no room to pay high wages. Production is where the money is made, and that's where the high-paying jobs are. And they're going overseas.

Explain to me how giving every poor American, say, $1,000, that he/she will use to go to Walmart to buy some electronic gadget made in China, effects any significant lasting improvement in our economy.

1) How is the tax reduction going to be anywhere near the increase in payroll should companies move these jobs back here? It won't be. So they'll pocket the tax money for stock and executive pay and continue to make the stuff overseas.

(12-18-2017 12:42 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 10:44 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 10:16 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 10:00 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Mach and RedTom can't help it. They have never tried to look at things from a producer point of view. Their combination of left-wing politics and Keynesian economic theory does not permit them to do so. They don't understand that producers and investors will always chase the highest ROI. That's not evil greed, it's just reasonable and rational behavior.
The good thing about it is that in a capitalist economy that can be used to the advantage of everyone. The best way to make the highest sustained ROI is to produce a quality product or service at a reasonable price.
From the standpoint of government policy, it's very simple--you want more investment and jobs and growth, you make your country a more attractive place to invest. You cannot get to a better life for everyone through redistribution. At some point you have to produce something. And bringing production home is the best way to spur the domestic economy.

Dude...we get it and are well aware. But you're still missing the fundamental part of the equation. Producers WILL NOT produce more just because they have money to do so. They will produce more when they have buyers with money and a demand for their product. This bill in no way guarantees that. Especially with no stimulus for those who don't pay much tax and non-permanent tax cuts for the middle class and tax increases on many other individuals.

Dude, you don't get two things:

1) We have demand now. Companies are expanding overseas operations to meet that demand, because their ROI is better there.

2) Having more dead may create retail jobs, where there's no room to pay high wages. Production is where the money is made, and that's where the high-paying jobs are. And they're going overseas.

Explain to me how giving every poor American, say, $1,000, that he/she will use to go to Walmart to buy some electronic gadget made in China, effects any significant lasting improvement in our economy.

1) How is the tax reduction going to be anywhere near the increase in payroll should companies move these jobs back here? It won't be. So they'll pocket the tax money for stock and executive pay and continue to make the stuff overseas.

How about we try this and see if some manufacturing comes back here. Skipping the overseas shipping is worth something.

Since your hero, St. Obama never did anything for the economy, lets see how this works before condemning it. At this point, it's better than the big nothing burger Obama did in 8 years.

file:///C:/Users/Robert/AppData/Local/Packages/Microsoft.MicrosoftEdge_8wekyb3d8bbwe/TempState/Downloads/x-67-17.pdf

Summary of the provisions and impacts.

(12-18-2017 11:11 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 10:16 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 10:00 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Mach and RedTom can't help it. They have never tried to look at things from a producer point of view. Their combination of left-wing politics and Keynesian economic theory does not permit them to do so. They don't understand that producers and investors will always chase the highest ROI. That's not evil greed, it's just reasonable and rational behavior.

The good thing about it is that in a capitalist economy that can be used to the advantage of everyone. The best way to make the highest sustained ROI is to produce a quality product or service at a reasonable price.

From the standpoint of government policy, it's very simple--you want more investment and jobs and growth, you make your country a more attractive place to invest. You cannot get to a better life for everyone through redistribution. At some point you have to produce something. And bringing production home is the best way to spur the domestic economy.

Dude...we get it and are well aware. But you're still missing the fundamental part of the equation. Producers WILL NOT produce more just because they have money to do so. They will produce more when they have buyers with money and a demand for their product. This bill in no way guarantees that. Especially with no stimulus for those who don't pay much tax and non-permanent tax cuts for the middle class and tax increases on many other individuals.

What right do those people have to some sort of "stimulus"? Why should they receive a portion of another taxpayer's dollars instead of allowing taxpayers to keep more of their money?

bumpity bump bump

(12-14-2017 02:40 PM)Mr_XcentricK Wrote:  

(12-14-2017 01:00 PM)UofMTigerTim Wrote:  

(12-14-2017 12:59 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-14-2017 12:38 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  Investment flows back into America...Economy is revved up....tax revenues increase....people get to keep more of the fruits of their labors. Nothing to be unhappy about IMO.

LOL. Bush tried that, how did that turnout?

Ronald Regan tried that and how did it turn out?

leave out skewed data from '83 and '84 and what did it do?

El. O. El.

My goodness, go read a book or do history or something. Is this a joke?

And what is “skewed data”? You mean data? As in actual numbers?

That period set the table for 20 years or so, until the socialists mucked it up again.

And they try, try again.

Rust never sleeps...

(12-18-2017 09:12 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  This is a straight give away of 1.5 trillion to the donor class from our nations future. You won't get economists on board. The vast majority of economist hate it. This will not help out the average American and will continue the squeezing of the middle class. The rich will get richer and the poor will get poorer and the Corker kick back is the swampiest of swampy things ever. Pure pathetic and it will hang around the GOP's heads in 18.

(12-18-2017 09:19 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  What happened to that board I used to read that complained about the debt and running deficits??????? Where did it go. I guess making sure people can go see a Dr. is way way worse than giving 1.5 trillion to the donor class. We have elections to win and all. Oh wellzy.

If I had more time on my hands, I would code a bot that would automatically reply to any post you made on a piece of debt increasing Democrat legislation with your above posts. Because the double standard here is breathtaking.

(12-18-2017 04:40 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 09:12 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  This is a straight give away of 1.5 trillion to the donor class from our nations future. You won't get economists on board. The vast majority of economist hate it. This will not help out the average American and will continue the squeezing of the middle class. The rich will get richer and the poor will get poorer and the Corker kick back is the swampiest of swampy things ever. Pure pathetic and it will hang around the GOP's heads in 18.

(12-18-2017 09:19 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  What happened to that board I used to read that complained about the debt and running deficits??????? Where did it go. I guess making sure people can go see a Dr. is way way worse than giving 1.5 trillion to the donor class. We have elections to win and all. Oh wellzy.

If I had more time on my hands, I would code a bot that would automatically reply to any post you made on a piece of debt increasing Democrat legislation with your above posts. Because the double standard here is breathtaking.

Not the point though GTS, We're not the ones who in the past continually lamented the debt and deficit and how everything had to be paid for. Now, the R's seemingly want to ignore that. That's why mach's talking about.

(12-18-2017 04:53 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 04:40 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 09:12 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  This is a straight give away of 1.5 trillion to the donor class from our nations future. You won't get economists on board. The vast majority of economist hate it. This will not help out the average American and will continue the squeezing of the middle class. The rich will get richer and the poor will get poorer and the Corker kick back is the swampiest of swampy things ever. Pure pathetic and it will hang around the GOP's heads in 18.

(12-18-2017 09:19 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  What happened to that board I used to read that complained about the debt and running deficits??????? Where did it go. I guess making sure people can go see a Dr. is way way worse than giving 1.5 trillion to the donor class. We have elections to win and all. Oh wellzy.

If I had more time on my hands, I would code a bot that would automatically reply to any post you made on a piece of debt increasing Democrat legislation with your above posts. Because the double standard here is breathtaking.

Not the point though GTS, We're not the ones who in the past continually lamented the debt and deficit and how everything had to be paid for. Now, the R's seemingly want to ignore that. That's why mach's talking about.

Except you libtards chose to ignore it when Obama was running it up at record levels, and now you choose not to

(12-18-2017 09:52 AM)Crebman Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 09:43 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  A donor give away borrowed from millennials...........................

It's easy to say that "assuming" the economy is static and unchanging. I'm willing to see if it kicks the economy into gear and that $1.5 trillion loss turns out to be much smaller or goes away.

Mach, you can't have a tax system that punishes the corporate world for staying here because, as we have seen, in today's world - they will just up and leave.

It's like choking the goose that lays the golden eggs and saying that if I just squeeze harder, it will lay more eggs.

If this tax bill doesn't kick start the economy and lead to higher tax revenues, then maybe I'll agree with you. But the one thing we can't afford to do is continue the "Obama path' of ever higher government expenditures with nothing done to increase the economy..........

Most of the socialist left WORKS for the government at some level. It’s the biggest social welfare program in the world, go to an actual post office once or twice and look around.

Of course they want ever increasing taxes and in hand ever increasing governmental budgets.

What these leeches don’t understand is that without those of us in the private sector creating business, jobs, wealth and tax revenues, THEY don’t have jobs, a check and give-away “pension” to hammock on for 30 years after age 53 or so.

Wait til cesspools like Illinois, new yawk, beautiful, totally trashed, California can no longer support their welfare class and the wagon riders.

Then they’ll be back at the federal trough begging for another Fed handout at all of our expenses. Just like little piggy’s.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(12-18-2017 10:14 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 10:01 AM)fsquid Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 09:33 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 09:24 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  The corporate tax rate cut is necessary and long overdue. Many on the left even agree with that. The rest of it, I'm sorta "meh" about. Bottom line is that we aren't going to come close to balancing the budget without a consumption tax.

Bull. ****.

no, he's correct.

Right...corporations have been struggling mightily lately here in the USA.

But I'm sure you're both on board that significant increases in the minimum wage are also necessary and long overdue, right?

Do you still not get that corporations don’t pay taxes?

Wow

(12-18-2017 12:42 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  1) How is the tax reduction going to be anywhere near the increase in payroll should companies move these jobs back here? It won't be. So they'll pocket the tax money for stock and executive pay and continue to make the stuff overseas.

Number one, a lot of manufacturing has reached the stage where labor costs are not the main cost driver. The increase in labor costs to come back here would not be great, because the portion of total cost represented by labor is small.

Number two, remember that cheap labor comes with low productivity. For high productivity you need more capable and hence more expensive labor. So we don't sew up our Nikes, we let Cambodia do that, and we focus on sending them the high end technical products they want.

Number three, ask Germany. Their labor costs are close to ours, and they still manage to be a net exporter. If labor costs were all you make them out to be, how do you explain Germany? They focus on what they can do better. So should we.

Those will do for now.

(12-18-2017 05:08 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 10:14 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 10:01 AM)fsquid Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 09:33 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 09:24 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  The corporate tax rate cut is necessary and long overdue. Many on the left even agree with that. The rest of it, I'm sorta "meh" about. Bottom line is that we aren't going to come close to balancing the budget without a consumption tax.

Bull. ****.

no, he's correct.

Right...corporations have been struggling mightily lately here in the USA.

But I'm sure you're both on board that significant increases in the minimum wage are also necessary and long overdue, right?

Do you still not get that corporations don’t pay taxes?

Wow

Yes...I get your implication. However, you and I both know that if/when corporate taxes are reduced that corporations WILL NO WAY IN HELL pass that savings along to their customers with cheaper prices, so just stop. K?

If I had more time on my hands, I would code a bot that would automatically reply to any post you made on a piece of debt increasing Democrat legislation with your above posts. Because the double standard here is breathtaking.


Have at it. I don't think you will find what you seek. Also I think there is one HELL of a difference between supporting legislation that allows for a family to help their kid with cancer versus a straight up money grab for future generations but knock yourself out. If anything I have posted links that show Obamacare to be deficit neutral. it's YOU Republicans that undermine the taxes to make it revenue neutral.

You stick on the side that keeps giving to the 1%. I'll stick on the side that it shouldn't matter that the health care you receive is determined by whose ****** you came out of.

I'll sleep fine at night with my conscience.

(12-19-2017 09:46 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 05:08 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 10:14 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 10:01 AM)fsquid Wrote:  

(12-18-2017 09:33 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Bull. ****.

no, he's correct.

Right...corporations have been struggling mightily lately here in the USA.
But I'm sure you're both on board that significant increases in the minimum wage are also necessary and long overdue, right?

Do you still not get that corporations don’t pay taxes?
Wow

Yes...I get your implication. However, you and I both know that if/when corporate taxes are reduced that corporations WILL NO WAY IN HELL pass that savings along to their customers with cheaper prices, so just stop. K?

So what will they do instead?

Yes...I get your implication. However, you and I both know that if/when corporate taxes are reduced that corporations WILL NO WAY IN HELL pass that savings along to their customers with cheaper prices, so just stop. K?
(quote from Red)

Corporations do not sit on their assets, aka, profits. The only way for companies to make more money, acquire more assets is to grow their products. Take those people that go to Shark Tank asking for money. Why is it they need more money? If I remember it's that they want to GROW their products and that's with start ups. Can you imagine a large corporation not doing the same. Why do many of these corporations BUY/MERGE with other like minded businesses? They (again, this is getting monotonous, all this repetition) need to grow their name/products to make more money. Sure, you think that they'll just sit on those profits, but that's the Demoncratic thinking because most of them only take in and never give out. Anddddd... if they grow their products you will need more factories, more tools, more workers, more need for other companies products. In other words, let's say you're building tanks, you'll need steel, people to truck in the materials, people to build things YOU don't, etc. Like the guy who bought a new Corvette got hassled by the Liberal for spending so much money on a car. That Liberal doesn't realize that to produce a car you need other businesses to furnish items the manufacturer doesn't thus creating MORE jobs, thus creating more taxable INCOME.