Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Morning Metaverse

Post Comment
Enter the details of the comment you'd like to post in the boxes below and click the button at the bottom of the form.

799. Re: Morning Metaverse Oct 31, 2013, 18:10 RollinThundr
 
Mad Max RW wrote on Oct 31, 2013, 17:34:
Beamer wrote on Oct 31, 2013, 17:08:
RollinThundr wrote on Oct 31, 2013, 17:02:
Beamer wrote on Oct 31, 2013, 16:59:
RollinThundr wrote on Oct 31, 2013, 16:55:
Beamer wrote on Oct 31, 2013, 16:50:
Mad Max RW wrote on Oct 31, 2013, 16:40:
Beamer wrote on Oct 31, 2013, 16:35:
Mad Max RW wrote on Oct 31, 2013, 16:13:
Shhhh. Don't tell Beamer the feds collected a record $2.77 trillion in tax revenue this year.

Do you understand how that's a meaningless data point?
1) What is it if you adjust for inflation? Here's a hint: it's on par with 12 years ago
2) What is it as a portion of the total US income?

Throwing out a number in a vacuum and comparing it to past years is utterly ridiculous

Read and dismiss the facts yourself.

Revenue jumped 15.2 percent to $301.4 billion in September from a year earlier, bringing the annual figure to $2.77 trillion, today’s report showed. Spending increased 21.5 percent to $226.4 billion last month, contributing to a 12-month total of $3.45 trillion, it showed.

What from that link had anything to do with anything?
You posted a meaningless data point. We took in more taxes. But we made more money. Doesn't that make sense?

Conveniently left out the we spent more part too.

That isn't what we were discussing, is it?

Of course not, how could spending ever have an effect on the economy, silly me, I forgot, liberal logic.

Honestly, I may have missed why he brought it up, I didn't see any mention of spending prior.

But, as I keep saying, my interest in taxes isn't in allowing our government to spend more, it's in encouraging our super wealthy to pay their employees more. Therefore I want taxes higher. I do not want the government spending all those taxes stupidly, I just do not want the wealthy having incentive to cut jobs and send them overseas. Spending is an entirely different discussion. As it always should be - when discussing problems, discussing each variable separately makes more sense than discussing them together, because they aren't necessarily related. We can tax as much as we want, or we can spend as much as we want, those aren't inherently tied together.

You always think I want the government spending tons and tons of money. I don't really care. I don't think that has a big impact on our economy. People spending money has a big impact. I've asked you, in the past, to explain how a government deficit impacts our economy. You've repeatedly said something like "use your head!" but never answered.
Pretend I'm a 5 year old and tell me why a deficit is holding our economy back. I'll do the same and explain to you why our rapidly rising wealth inequality (on par with most African warlords, truthfully) is totally flushing us.

So I had thought he brought it up as an example that our taxes are already quite high. In reality, they're about as low as they've been in over 100 years.

First of all, are you dreaming? Where has higher taxes, during a recession, encouraged businesses to do anything other than close up and move to another state or country? That's what we're talking about. And that's precisely what is happening here in liberal Connecticut. Higher taxes when the economy is still shit only makes it worse for everybody. Taxes are raised when the economy is doing well. When industry is booming. Especially post-WW2 industry when there was the US and nobody else. Those are the periods you are referencing but don't even realize it because you either don't know or deliberately ignore facts.

Also, if the $17 trillion debt doesn't matter then neither should taxes. How about eliminating all tax, ignore the debt, and let the fed continue printing trillions and spending it on more bullshit. Yeah, that never worked before but somehow OBAMA.

Almost makes one want to say Learn 2 Economics. This is why anytime we have liberals in office the economy eventually tanks, Carter, Clinton, Obama. What do they all have in common? Fucking up the economy, or taking a fucked up economy due to previous liberal choices and making it worse, in Obama's case, Clinton eliminating the Glass Steagall act and forcing banks to loan to people beyond their means eventually caused the bubble to burst, like simple economics would tell you it would.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
Subject
Comment
     
 
      ;)   ;)   :(   :(   :o   :o   %)   %)   :)   :)   :|   :|   ;P   ;P   X|   X|   :D   :D   More
 
Login Email   Password Remember Me
If you have a signature set up, it will be automatically appended to your comment.
If you don't already have a Blue's News user account, you can sign up here.
Forgotten your password? Click here.
 
          Email me when this topic is updated.
 

Special Codes

  • b[bold text]b
  • i[italic text]i
  • u[underline text]u
  • -[strikethrough text]-
  • c[code text]c
  • +[bullet point]+
  • q[quote text (indented)]q
  • [quote="Author"]quote text (indented)[/quote]
  • [url=Link]text[/url]
  • r{red text}r
  • g{green text}g
  • b{blue text}b
  • m{maroon text}m
  • s{secret text (shows in the background colour)}s

Forum Rules

  1. Disagree all you want but attacks of a personal nature will not be tolerated.
  2. Ethnic slurs and homophobic language will not be tolerated.
  3. Do not post spam, links to warez sites, or instructions on how to obtain pirated software.
  4. Abusing the forums in any manner that could be construed as 'griefing' will not be tolerated.


footer

.. .. ..

Blue's News logo