(03-15-2021 06:10 PM)#1Lurker Wrote:  Because giving all our money to rich people and corporations has worked out sooooooo well over the past 35 years.

We cut the s#!t out of corp taxes, provided massive reductions to taxes on capital, and allowed corps to write their own loopholes into the tax code and guess what? These very same corps sent jobs tens of millions of high paying jobs overseas.

We cut the s#!t out of rich people's taxes and they "trickled down" exactly $el zippo.00 to the rest of us.

And I'm sure repealing the remainder of the estate tax on the 1% will solve all our financial problems because generational wealth has proven to be such an incredible economic stimulus.

Gimme a break.

Well, then those in Washington should be writing the tax code to make it advantageous to have jobs here and penalize those that offshore, not just raise the tax rates so that the US isn’t competitive with other Western locations.

Don’t forget, corporation or wealthy individual - they don’t have to park their money here. They can and will move it offshore....they have the means to do so........average Joe, not so much.

Quit chasing that dream of “taxing the rich” and just tax them like everyone else. Thinking you’re going to gouge them is a fools chase.......they have the wherewithal to make sure you don’t. In the process of your gouging attempt - capital flees the country.

Did anyone really think that they wouldn't? Really?

He's already raised the tax on gas, by jacking up gas prices.

It NEVER occurs to fools like Biden that we might have more of a spending problem than a revenue problem.

(03-15-2021 08:32 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  It NEVER occurs to fools like Bush and Trump that we might have more of a spending problem than a revenue problem.

FYP

I see we have a new troll on board.

Did you, by chance, also attend Memphis (if anywhere at all?)

(03-16-2021 05:37 AM)TheOriginalBigApp Wrote:  I see we have a new troll on board.

Did you, by chance, also attend Memphis (if anywhere at all?)

I graduated C*m Laude from a school worse than Memphis. It wasn't that difficult.

(03-16-2021 05:29 AM)#1Lurker Wrote:  

(03-15-2021 08:32 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  It NEVER occurs to fools like Bush and Trump that we might have more of a spending problem than a revenue problem.

FYP

I consider all politicians fools when it comes to spending...so...yes.

(03-15-2021 07:51 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  He's already raised the tax on gas, by jacking up gas prices.

in only a shade more than 2 mos., the rise in gas prices has cost me >1k/mo for a small business....2.69 from 1.69/gal

FOR NO FK'N REASON OTH3R THAN BITEM* + CORP = FK ME

(03-16-2021 07:33 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(03-16-2021 05:29 AM)#1Lurker Wrote:  

(03-15-2021 08:32 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  It NEVER occurs to fools like Bush and Trump that we might have more of a spending problem than a revenue problem.

FYP

I consider all politicians fools when it comes to spending...so...yes.

Shizz, that's twice in two threads we basically agree on something. And I'm shocked that I would ever agree with anyone flying the Gadson flag about anything. Does this mean there's hope for our nation?

Quote:Millions of Americans who received unemployment benefits last year are in for big-time tax relief thanks to the $1.9 trillion stimulus package that passed this week. You just might have to amend your taxes to get it.

In addition to extending federal $300 unemployment benefits through September, the American Rescue Plan allows tax exemptions for up to $10,200 in unemployment benefits paid in 2020. This applies only to taxpayers whose Adjusted Gross Income (AGI) for 2020 is less than $150,000.

How to Claim the Unemployment Tax Break: It’s Complicated, and You May Need to Wait

(03-15-2021 06:35 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-15-2021 06:10 PM)#1Lurker Wrote:  Because giving all our money to rich people and corporations has worked out sooooooo well over the past 35 years.
We cut the s#!t out of corp taxes, provided massive reductions to taxes on capital, and allowed corps to write their own loopholes into the tax code and guess what? These very same corps sent jobs tens of millions of high paying jobs overseas.

Because other countries cut those taxes more.

Quote:We cut the s#!t out of rich people's taxes and they "trickled down" exactly $el zippo.00 to the rest of us.

Again, because other countries cut their taxes more, too, so they moved their investments overseas and the middle classes grew rapidly there.

"Trickle down" is a fundamental misunderstanding of supply-side economics, held by Keynesians, because they don't understand the supply side and see everything as consumption. "Trickle down" says that consumption by rich people will "trickle down." That's not what supply side economics say at all. Investment by rich people creates jobs. And investment has to come from people who have money to invest.

Quote:And I'm sure repealing the remainder of the estate tax on the 1% will solve all our financial problems because generational wealth has proven to be such an incredible economic stimulus.
Gimme a break.

It has in the rest of the world, where the growth of the middle class has been fairly astronomical in the last half century.

Numbers, your post is so far above this guys head its not even funny. It demonstrates one of the differences between Rs and D's, but more it represents the difference between a 'rich person's' mentality and a 'poor person's' mentality.... and is part of WHY rich are rich and poor are poor. It's not the only reason by any measure and may not even be a primary reason, but its a reason.

When 'uninformed' people hear 'trickle-down' economics, they 'think' about their own lives and taxes, where someone can take a job with a 'guaranteed' but low return of $30,000 for his labors... he risks almost nothing but opportunity... Pay $2,000 into the IRS and get $10,000 back out. This is a 'lottery win' that most of these people think is what 'trickle down' is supposed to do.
Somehow, they're supposed to get some sort of 'windfall'. THAT'S how they see taxes, tax breaks and 'trickle down'... as some sort of windfall 'from the government'. With a few exceptions, that's not remotely how these 'loopholes' work.

First, the investor doesn't get a guaranteed low return... and if it fails, he can lose his investment. If you eliminate this 'loophole', they don't take those risks... and if they don't take those risks, THE OTHER GUY DOESN"T HAVE A JOB! THAT is the trickle down. The government tries to encourage specific investment in things that produce jobs... especially those it favors... see solar or EV tax credits... and this either reduces the risk to the investor (making a 'poor' investment competitive) OR it increases the return to the investor for the same risk. Either way, businesses that wouldn't otherwise have been invested in, get investment.... and people who wouldn't otherwise have been hired or gotten raises, get hired or get raises. If the investor doesn't make money, he doesn't pay taxes. That makes sense. If he does make money, he pays taxes. That makes sense. If he doesn't invest in this 'preferred' investment or in the US, then he doesn't create jobs in the US or accomplish the goals of the government... but that doesn't mean that he didn't invest. So the government may get less (or sometimes nothing... see every city when it reduces taxes to encourage a company to move there) but it gets less unemployment and other advantages.... and MAYBE it gets some taxes... 'Poor' people ***** that the government created this investment for the wealthy... and ignore the jobs that were created. SOMETIMES it is simply done because we need to keep up with foreign opportunities presented to these investors.

What's really funny is that the left (on this issue) thinks that US investors should simply 'invest in the US'... either by choice or by edict/taxes... but somehow 'America First' is a racial slur.

If 'Made in the USA' isn't worth a premium (because it is racist/nationalist) then why should an investor do that?? And if its not 'Made in the USA', is that investment and are those manufacturing jobs in the USA? So you've got a 90% tax rate on NOTHING, which is less than a 'reduced' tax rate on SOMETHING.

(03-16-2021 09:20 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(03-15-2021 06:35 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-15-2021 06:10 PM)#1Lurker Wrote:  Because giving all our money to rich people and corporations has worked out sooooooo well over the past 35 years.
We cut the s#!t out of corp taxes, provided massive reductions to taxes on capital, and allowed corps to write their own loopholes into the tax code and guess what? These very same corps sent jobs tens of millions of high paying jobs overseas.

Because other countries cut those taxes more.

Quote:We cut the s#!t out of rich people's taxes and they "trickled down" exactly $el zippo.00 to the rest of us.

Again, because other countries cut their taxes more, too, so they moved their investments overseas and the middle classes grew rapidly there.

"Trickle down" is a fundamental misunderstanding of supply-side economics, held by Keynesians, because they don't understand the supply side and see everything as consumption. "Trickle down" says that consumption by rich people will "trickle down." That's not what supply side economics say at all. Investment by rich people creates jobs. And investment has to come from people who have money to invest.

Quote:And I'm sure repealing the remainder of the estate tax on the 1% will solve all our financial problems because generational wealth has proven to be such an incredible economic stimulus.
Gimme a break.

It has in the rest of the world, where the growth of the middle class has been fairly astronomical in the last half century.

Numbers, your post is so far above this guys head its not even funny. It demonstrates one of the differences between Rs and D's, but more it represents the difference between a 'rich person's' mentality and a 'poor person's' mentality.... and is part of WHY rich are rich and poor are poor. It's not the only reason by any measure and may not even be a primary reason, but its a reason.

When 'uninformed' people hear 'trickle-down' economics, they 'think' about their own lives and taxes, where someone can take a job with a 'guaranteed' but low return of $30,000 for his labors... he risks almost nothing but opportunity... Pay $2,000 into the IRS and get $10,000 back out. This is a 'lottery win' that most of these people think is what 'trickle down' is supposed to do.
Somehow, they're supposed to get some sort of 'windfall'. THAT'S how they see taxes, tax breaks and 'trickle down'... as some sort of windfall 'from the government'. With a few exceptions, that's not remotely how these 'loopholes' work.

First, the investor doesn't get a guaranteed low return... and if it fails, he can lose his investment. If you eliminate this 'loophole', they don't take those risks... and if they don't take those risks, THE OTHER GUY DOESN"T HAVE A JOB! THAT is the trickle down. The government tries to encourage specific investment in things that produce jobs... especially those it favors... see solar or EV tax credits... and this either reduces the risk to the investor (making a 'poor' investment competitive) OR it increases the return to the investor for the same risk. Either way, businesses that wouldn't otherwise have been invested in, get investment.... and people who wouldn't otherwise have been hired or gotten raises, get hired or get raises. If the investor doesn't make money, he doesn't pay taxes. That makes sense. If he does make money, he pays taxes. That makes sense. If he doesn't invest in this 'preferred' investment or in the US, then he doesn't create jobs in the US or accomplish the goals of the government... but that doesn't mean that he didn't invest. So the government may get less (or sometimes nothing... see every city when it reduces taxes to encourage a company to move there) but it gets less unemployment and other advantages.... and MAYBE it gets some taxes... 'Poor' people ***** that the government created this investment for the wealthy... and ignore the jobs that were created. SOMETIMES it is simply done because we need to keep up with foreign opportunities presented to these investors.

What's really funny is that the left (on this issue) thinks that US investors should simply 'invest in the US'... either by choice or by edict/taxes... but somehow 'America First' is a racial slur.

If 'Made in the USA' isn't worth a premium (because it is racist/nationalist) then why should an investor do that?? And if its not 'Made in the USA', is that investment and are those manufacturing jobs in the USA? So you've got a 90% tax rate on NOTHING, which is less than a 'reduced' tax rate on SOMETHING.

Ham, I’m betting that while everything you have stated is totally logical, it will fly right over Lurker’s head.

One thing I’ve come to understand is that the left, time and again, espouse positions that ignore human nature. They expect people to “go against” things they perceive that are against their best interests.

It could be money like this or, shutting down the economy for a virus with a 99%+ survival rate. Almost without fail, the Progressive position is to “go against human nature”. It’s mind boggling, it really is........

(03-16-2021 09:35 AM)Crebman Wrote:  Ham, I’m betting that while everything you have stated is totally logical, it will fly right over Lurker’s head.

One thing I’ve come to understand is that the left, time and again, espouse positions that ignore human nature. They expect people to “go against” things they perceive that are against their best interests.

It could be money like this or, shutting down the economy for a virus with a 99%+ survival rate. Almost without fail, the Progressive position is to “go against human nature”. It’s mind boggling, it really is........

Agree 100%.

They think they can use the power of government to FORCE compliance... and then they call 'the other side' fascists as a deflection.... which is amusing to me because that too is human nature... to accuse your partner of 'cheating' because YOU are cheating lol

The Democrats helping the rich and widening the income gap between the middle class and the 1%ers. The rich just defer their income, raise prices on their products and the middle class gets hit with the tax increases in the form of higher prices. Always have and always will. When will those that get hurt from it and vote Democrat figure it out and stop voting for them? Fools.

(03-16-2021 09:49 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(03-16-2021 09:35 AM)Crebman Wrote:  Ham, I’m betting that while everything you have stated is totally logical, it will fly right over Lurker’s head.

One thing I’ve come to understand is that the left, time and again, espouse positions that ignore human nature. They expect people to “go against” things they perceive that are against their best interests.

It could be money like this or, shutting down the economy for a virus with a 99%+ survival rate. Almost without fail, the Progressive position is to “go against human nature”. It’s mind boggling, it really is........

Agree 100%.

They thinkare they can use using the power of government to FORCE compliance... and then they call 'the other side' fascists as a deflection.... which is amusing to me because that too is human nature... to accuse your partner of 'cheating' because YOU are cheating lol

easy fify...

(03-16-2021 08:08 AM)#1Lurker Wrote:  

(03-16-2021 07:33 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(03-16-2021 05:29 AM)#1Lurker Wrote:  

(03-15-2021 08:32 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  It NEVER occurs to fools like Bush and Trump that we might have more of a spending problem than a revenue problem.

FYP

I consider all politicians fools when it comes to spending...so...yes.

Shizz, that's twice in two threads we basically agree on something. And I'm shocked that I would ever agree with anyone flying the Gadson flag about anything. Does this mean there's hope for our nation?

The Gadsden was first flown on a ship in 1775 as a battle cry for independence from the rule of the crown and its onerous taxation without representation. It has been adopted today by 2nd amendment and small government types...like myself. The size of the government I envision would be unacceptable to either gang.

(03-16-2021 10:02 AM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  The Democrats helping the rich and widening the income gap between the middle class and the 1%ers. The rich just defer their income, raise prices on their products and the middle class gets hit with the tax increases in the form of higher prices. Always have and always will. When will those that get hurt from it and vote Democrat figure it out and stop voting for them? Fools.

Actually, the poor get a double whammy. First the guvmint raises taxes to the taxpayer, us, and also raise taxes on businesses which in turn raise their prices on everything that is sold. Oh, but to the idiot Demon it's okay because businesses, aka the rich people, will be getting taxed more. They are so stupid. Oh, and add the price of gasoline to that mix and you'll be losing a lot of money from your pocketbook in such little time. Guvmint don't care, they can raise their salaries at any time which is common.

(03-16-2021 09:20 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(03-15-2021 06:35 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-15-2021 06:10 PM)#1Lurker Wrote:  Because giving all our money to rich people and corporations has worked out sooooooo well over the past 35 years.
We cut the s#!t out of corp taxes, provided massive reductions to taxes on capital, and allowed corps to write their own loopholes into the tax code and guess what? These very same corps sent jobs tens of millions of high paying jobs overseas.

Because other countries cut those taxes more.

Quote:We cut the s#!t out of rich people's taxes and they "trickled down" exactly $el zippo.00 to the rest of us.

Again, because other countries cut their taxes more, too, so they moved their investments overseas and the middle classes grew rapidly there.

"Trickle down" is a fundamental misunderstanding of supply-side economics, held by Keynesians, because they don't understand the supply side and see everything as consumption. "Trickle down" says that consumption by rich people will "trickle down." That's not what supply side economics say at all. Investment by rich people creates jobs. And investment has to come from people who have money to invest.

Quote:And I'm sure repealing the remainder of the estate tax on the 1% will solve all our financial problems because generational wealth has proven to be such an incredible economic stimulus.
Gimme a break.

It has in the rest of the world, where the growth of the middle class has been fairly astronomical in the last half century.

Numbers, your post is so far above this guys head its not even funny. It demonstrates one of the differences between Rs and D's, but more it represents the difference between a 'rich person's' mentality and a 'poor person's' mentality.... and is part of WHY rich are rich and poor are poor. It's not the only reason by any measure and may not even be a primary reason, but its a reason.

When 'uninformed' people hear 'trickle-down' economics, they 'think' about their own lives and taxes, where someone can take a job with a 'guaranteed' but low return of $30,000 for his labors... he risks almost nothing but opportunity... Pay $2,000 into the IRS and get $10,000 back out. This is a 'lottery win' that most of these people think is what 'trickle down' is supposed to do.
Somehow, they're supposed to get some sort of 'windfall'. THAT'S how they see taxes, tax breaks and 'trickle down'... as some sort of windfall 'from the government'. With a few exceptions, that's not remotely how these 'loopholes' work.

First, the investor doesn't get a guaranteed low return... and if it fails, he can lose his investment. If you eliminate this 'loophole', they don't take those risks... and if they don't take those risks, THE OTHER GUY DOESN"T HAVE A JOB! THAT is the trickle down. The government tries to encourage specific investment in things that produce jobs... especially those it favors... see solar or EV tax credits... and this either reduces the risk to the investor (making a 'poor' investment competitive) OR it increases the return to the investor for the same risk. Either way, businesses that wouldn't otherwise have been invested in, get investment.... and people who wouldn't otherwise have been hired or gotten raises, get hired or get raises. If the investor doesn't make money, he doesn't pay taxes. That makes sense. If he does make money, he pays taxes. That makes sense. If he doesn't invest in this 'preferred' investment or in the US, then he doesn't create jobs in the US or accomplish the goals of the government... but that doesn't mean that he didn't invest. So the government may get less (or sometimes nothing... see every city when it reduces taxes to encourage a company to move there) but it gets less unemployment and other advantages.... and MAYBE it gets some taxes... 'Poor' people ***** that the government created this investment for the wealthy... and ignore the jobs that were created. SOMETIMES it is simply done because we need to keep up with foreign opportunities presented to these investors.

What's really funny is that the left (on this issue) thinks that US investors should simply 'invest in the US'... either by choice or by edict/taxes... but somehow 'America First' is a racial slur.

If 'Made in the USA' isn't worth a premium (because it is racist/nationalist) then why should an investor do that?? And if its not 'Made in the USA', is that investment and are those manufacturing jobs in the USA? So you've got a 90% tax rate on NOTHING, which is less than a 'reduced' tax rate on SOMETHING.

So many lazy generalizations. "THE LEFT!" "JOB CREATORS!" A fake strawman argument. Mixing of macro and micro economics. All you're missing is "ANTIFA!" It was pretty clear I was calling out the fallacy of supply side economic theory in response to this board's unhinged hysteria over upcoming tax increases. Y'all are so conditioned in the way you view challenges to the status quo on this board that this appears to have gone over your head.

We just provided a massive tax break to corporations. Businesses used that tax windfall to buy back over $trillion worth of stock which simply inflated the stock prices of said businesses thereby generating crazy stupid amounts of capital gains for the 1% (of which they'll pay less than 15% in personal taxes because they've gamed the system). According to the supply side economic geniuses on this board, this tax cut should result in the Garden of Eden of workers paradises. Yet plants are still being closed, jobs are still being shipped overseas, and wages are still stagnant. This latest supply side tax cut brought us el zippo investment, el zippo new high paying jobs, el zippo wage growth, and el zippo "trickling down" to the working class. Just as it's been for the past 35+ years. Thank you Tax Reform Act of 1986 <sarcasm>.

And the rich are getting richer in large part because they've gamed the system.

(03-15-2021 06:10 PM)#1Lurker Wrote:  Because giving all our money to rich people and corporations has worked out sooooooo well over the past 35 years.

We cut the s#!t out of corp taxes, provided massive reductions to taxes on capital, and allowed corps to write their own loopholes into the tax code and guess what? These very same corps sent jobs tens of millions of high paying jobs overseas.

We cut the s#!t out of rich people's taxes and they "trickled down" exactly $el zippo.00 to the rest of us.

And I'm sure repealing the remainder of the estate tax on the 1% will solve all our financial problems because generational wealth has proven to be such an incredible economic stimulus.

Gimme a break.

Why are you looking for someone else to give you money?

Why not try to go out there and earn your own wealth?

Do you think the government has a right or entitlement to the fruits of ones life's labors over his/her beneficiaries?

Wow. Spell it out for us here, comrade.