America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 6 years ago by Phil222. 171 replies replies.
4 Pages<1234
Tremendously Great article about the Orange Cretin-in-Chief...........
Jump to Bottom | Previous Topic | Next Topic
tailgater Offline
#151 Posted: Wed, Jan 10 2018, 1:06 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
victor809 wrote:
Its only a hole if you have faith that the stimulated spending in the private sector will be taxed sufficiently to add that money back in.
If you reduce your tax income by 200$, that 200$ needs to stimulate sufficient spending that the government will get it back.... ie about 600$ worth of spending (assuming the gov't is able to efficiently collect 30% of the spending).

I don't have a ton of faith that this will happen, and you don't either given that you hedged your statement with "I'm not saying it will happen". If you aren't saying it will happen, then you aren't pointing out an "obvious hole in your argument". You're pointing out a potential hole.


I didn't hedge anything. It's just that every time anyone says something positive about something Trump does or says you wet your pants and claim they're defending him. I excused myself from that sophomoric discussion by qualifying my statement. It matters not if the plan will work. But to omit what I stated is indeed an obvious hole, because it is the premise of the entire tax cut. It is the sole purpose. Without that growth it is not even a plan.
So yes. Your hole is gaping.



victor809 wrote:

Money that was going to be taken from you based on agreements you are involved in, which the intended recipient decides you may keep, is substantially equivalent to giving someone money.

Let's say you were going to buy your wife a necklace. Retail price is 20,000$. You decide you are going to buy it. You have committed to paying 20,000$ for said necklace. During the sales transaction, the jeweler tells you they will give you the return customer discount of 20%.

They have now given you $4,000.

Sure it was your money originally. But it was earmarked to be spent on jewelry. Now it isn't.

Alternatively, they could have kept that 20% return customer discount, and spent it themselves.

Or they could have not given you the return customer discount and given it to a poor person sitting outside the store. (that would be what the dems are accused of)

Or they could have kept that 20% return customer discount and given you 2% of it back and given 18% of it to a different customer. (this is closer to what the tax cuts is turning into)

Of course you prefer the scenario where they give you 4k.

But for years I've been watching unimaginative morons (drafter) talk about how all the democrats do is give away money to the poor to get votes. Well. Now the republicans are giving money for votes. They're taking it from somewhere, because they haven't actually reduced spending.


Holy crap. You just used an argument that a wife would use to justify buying clothing at a sales event:
"With the money I saved on my dress we could buy you that new cordless drill". As if it's found money.

You've become the brain dead wife and CBid is your hubby.

Now go make me a sammich.
teedubbya Offline
#152 Posted: Wed, Jan 10 2018, 1:20 PM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
in the mean time president golden shower is still president and should remain so until the next erection.
frankj1 Offline
#153 Posted: Wed, Jan 10 2018, 1:59 PM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,221
where can i get one of these gaping holes everyone else seems to have?
Kawaksback Offline
#154 Posted: Wed, Jan 10 2018, 2:11 PM EST
Joined: 12-14-2017
Posts: 48
teedubbya wrote:
in the mean time president golden shower is still president and should remain so until the next erection.


And in the mean time, mean time, the corrupt hag that lost and paid for the made up golden shower is getting fitted for orange jump suits to go with her Kim Jong Un inspired pant suits .
Kawaksback Offline
#155 Posted: Wed, Jan 10 2018, 2:14 PM EST
Joined: 12-14-2017
Posts: 48
victor809 wrote:


Let's say you were going to buy your wife a necklace. Retail price is 20,000$. You decide you are going to buy it. You have committed to paying 20,000$ for said necklace. During the sales transaction, the jeweler tells you they will give you the return customer discount of 20%.

They have now given you $4,000.

Sure it was your money originally. But it was earmarked to be spent on jewelry. Now it isn't.

Alternatively, they could have kept that 20% return customer discount, and spent it themselves.

Or they could have not given you the return customer discount and given it to a poor person sitting outside the store. (that would be what the dems are accused of)

Or they could have kept that 20% return customer discount and given you 2% of it back and given 18% of it to a different customer. (this is closer to what the tax cuts is turning into)

Of course you prefer the scenario where they give you 4k.

But for years I've been watching unimaginative morons (drafter) talk about how all the democrats do is give away money to the poor to get votes. Well. Now the republicans are giving money for votes. They're taking it from somewhere, because they haven't actually reduced spending.


Vicky, I've officially informed CBID moderators about your thought processing. I'm genuinely concerned. Anxious
RMAN4443 Offline
#156 Posted: Wed, Jan 10 2018, 2:17 PM EST
Joined: 09-29-2016
Posts: 7,683
victor809 wrote:
Don't pretend you weren't given money.

You earn money.
You pay taxes on that money to maintain certain aspects of the government. Infrastructure, military etc. You know the drill.
A tax plan that reduces the amount of money you have to pay into those aspects of the government without significantly reducing the amount of money the government is spending is giving you money.
We know this because the money has to come from somewhere. So if your taxes went down, someone elses went up, or we went deeper into debt, which means a future person's taxes went up.

You were given money.

You can pretend it's your money and you earned it and no one should be taking any of it, let alone as much as they do. But unless a complete elimination of the federal government, all federal activities and agencies as well as a default on federal debt is associated with the tax reduction... you're just taking money from someone else. Just like the democrats.

Nope, not what I said...........The company I work for is booming, new contracts coming in every day, new machinery being purchased to handle the increased workload........more employees being hired.........I was called into office the other day and given a YUUUUUGGGGGGGEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!! wage increase "because of my performance and the fact that they need a 2nd shift leader in the Mfg. Dept. to train and oversee all the new employees being hired". Since Trump has become president we have more work than we can handle with the current workforce.
As far as taxes go, I pay them as required and they weren't even a consideration when I made my OP. Not saying I like paying them, but I do and I understand the necessity of them.
I've been working and paying taxes and SS since I was 12 years old, so I think I'm pretty well versed in the way the system works..........I don't think I need economics lessons from you or anybody else...........as I said in Op, I earned what I got and your Damn right.........I am VERY VERY proud of what I've earned........the only people I'm taking money from is the company who sat me down and said I deserved it..........maybe you would have told them you didn't want it or deserve it, but from where I sit I'll go to work and take the money when they sit me down and tell me I deserve it!!!!!
As I said before, PM me and I'll give you my addy and you can send me what you aren't proud of or what you feel you haven't earned.....Brick wall Not talking
Kawaksback Offline
#157 Posted: Wed, Jan 10 2018, 2:24 PM EST
Joined: 12-14-2017
Posts: 48
RMAN4443 wrote:
Nope, not what I said...........The company I work for is booming, new contracts coming in every day, new machinery being purchased to handle the increased workload........more employees being hired.........I was called into office the other day and given a YUUUUUGGGGGGGEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!! wage increase "because of my performance and the fact that they need a 2nd shift leader in the Mfg. Dept. to train and oversee all the new employees being hired". Since Trump has become president we have more work than we can handle with the current workforce.
As far as taxes go, I pay them as required and they weren't even a consideration when I made my OP. Not saying I like paying them, but I do and I understand the necessity of them.
I've been working and paying taxes and SS since I was 12 years old, so I think I'm pretty well versed in the way the system works..........I don't think I need economics lessons from you or anybody else...........as I said in Op, I earned what I got and your Damn right.........I am VERY VERY proud of what I've earned........the only people I'm taking money from is the company who sat me down and said I deserved it..........maybe you would have told them you didn't want it or deserve it, but from where I sit I'll go to work and take the money when they sit me down and tell me I deserve it!!!!!
As I said before, PM me and I'll give you my addy and you can send me what you aren't proud of or what you feel you haven't earned.....Brick wall Not talking


Please don't rub success in Vicky's face. The Libs need people to be downtrodden and under class to support their views. You only got a raise because the government allowed it. Your success is going to sting.

victor809 Offline
#158 Posted: Wed, Jan 10 2018, 2:28 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
tailgater wrote:
I didn't hedge anything. It's just that every time anyone says something positive about something Trump does or says you wet your pants and claim they're defending him. I excused myself from that sophomoric discussion by qualifying my statement. It matters not if the plan will work. But to omit what I stated is indeed an obvious hole, because it is the premise of the entire tax cut. It is the sole purpose. Without that growth it is not even a plan.
So yes. Your hole is gaping.


You can dream of gaping holes all you want, but the moment you said "I'm not saying it will happen" you hedged. trickle down theory has nothing to do with trump whether it works or not. Pretending someone will accuse you of supoorting trump just because you believe in trickle down economics is just as dumb as someone accusing a person of being an obama supporter because they believe in climate change... (oh... that happens here all the time....)



Quote:

Holy crap. You just used an argument that a wife would use to justify buying clothing at a sales event:
"With the money I saved on my dress we could buy you that new cordless drill". As if it's found money.

You've become the brain dead wife and CBid is your hubby.

Now go make me a sammich.



Then your reading comprehension is poor and you failed to understand the statement. That's ok. Not everyone is cut out for activities that require thinking.

Now, go dig me a ditch.
victor809 Offline
#159 Posted: Wed, Jan 10 2018, 2:35 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
RMAN4443 wrote:
Nope, not what I said...........The company I work for is booming, new contracts coming in every day, new machinery being purchased to handle the increased workload........more employees being hired.........I was called into office the other day and given a YUUUUUGGGGGGGEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!! wage increase "because of my performance and the fact that they need a 2nd shift leader in the Mfg. Dept. to train and oversee all the new employees being hired". Since Trump has become president we have more work than we can handle with the current workforce.
As far as taxes go, I pay them as required and they weren't even a consideration when I made my OP. Not saying I like paying them, but I do and I understand the necessity of them.
I've been working and paying taxes and SS since I was 12 years old, so I think I'm pretty well versed in the way the system works..........I don't think I need economics lessons from you or anybody else...........as I said in Op, I earned what I got and your Damn right.........I am VERY VERY proud of what I've earned........the only people I'm taking money from is the company who sat me down and said I deserved it..........maybe you would have told them you didn't want it or deserve it, but from where I sit I'll go to work and take the money when they sit me down and tell me I deserve it!!!!!
As I said before, PM me and I'll give you my addy and you can send me what you aren't proud of or what you feel you haven't earned.....Brick wall Not talking


Perhaps I misunderstood your original post then. When you referenced "take home pay" I assumed you were referring to less taxation on the money you earned. That was the topic we were discussing a few posts above.

If you're just talking about doing more work... I aint gonna argue with you.
victor809 Offline
#160 Posted: Wed, Jan 10 2018, 2:36 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Kawaksback wrote:
Please don't rub success in Vicky's face. The Libs need people to be downtrodden and under class to support their views. You only got a raise because the government allowed it. Your success is going to sting.



You aren't real smart are you.... I would make the assumption that everyone who posts on this forum is reasonably successful. Everyone discusses burning 20$ items regularly, and enjoys expensive scotch or wine....

The default expectation should be everyone here is at least in the top 10% of the income bracket of the USA. Why would anyone be upset about someone's success?
dstieger Offline
#161 Posted: Wed, Jan 10 2018, 2:39 PM EST
Joined: 06-22-2007
Posts: 10,889
victor809 wrote:
I aint gonna argue with you.


Holy crap!
tailgater Offline
#162 Posted: Wed, Jan 10 2018, 2:40 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
^158

Since you are either incapable or uninterested in a logical thought we can end this discussion right here.

In the meantime, maybe you should tell Frank where to get a gaping hole.
If it's on sale maybe he could buy cigars with the money he'll make...

(and I still don't have that damn sammich!)
Phil222 Offline
#163 Posted: Wed, Jan 10 2018, 3:27 PM EST
Joined: 10-01-2017
Posts: 1,911
tailgater wrote:
Demand side economics?

The GOP readily admit that corporate tax cuts are trickle down.

The so-called stimulus package was for "shovel ready" jobs yet resulted in cronyism payouts.
The only "demand" was found AFTER the money was wafted under the politician's nose.



I should've been more specific. You stated that both of these plans were examples of trickle-down economics. Yes, the corporate tax cuts are part of trickle-down theory. Obama's plan was coming from the theory of demand-side economics, or Keynesian economics. I call this "trickle-up" economics.

It's the total opposite of trickle-down. I'm not arguing which is I think is better or whether they were successful, just that the two plans come from completely different economic theories.
opelmanta1900 Offline
#164 Posted: Wed, Jan 10 2018, 4:15 PM EST
Joined: 01-10-2012
Posts: 13,954
Damn Obama and his Kenya-nesian economics...
tailgater Offline
#165 Posted: Wed, Jan 10 2018, 5:32 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
Phil222 wrote:
I should've been more specific. You stated that both of these plans were examples of trickle-down economics. Yes, the corporate tax cuts are part of trickle-down theory. Obama's plan was coming from the theory of demand-side economics, or Keynesian economics. I call this "trickle-up" economics.

It's the total opposite of trickle-down. I'm not arguing which is I think is better or whether they were successful, just that the two plans come from completely different economic theories.


The intent was trickle up, although even that is disingenuous.
The result was trickle down. Through the layers of bureaucracy, with each taking their own slice of the pie along the way.

Truth is, it was a good concept if enacted correctly.
The scope was too massive for starters.
But in the rush to identify "shovel ready" jobs that weren't already funded it created what you'd expect from the government: fraud and waste.
Phil222 Offline
#166 Posted: Wed, Jan 10 2018, 6:36 PM EST
Joined: 10-01-2017
Posts: 1,911
tailgater wrote:

The result was trickle down. Through the layers of bureaucracy, with each taking their own slice of the pie along the way.


That still wouldn't be considered supply-side economics (trickle-down), but I get what you're trying to say.
tailgater Offline
#167 Posted: Thu, Jan 11 2018, 10:37 AM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
Great. Now please explain it to me.
Herfing
Phil222 Offline
#168 Posted: Thu, Jan 11 2018, 11:35 AM EST
Joined: 10-01-2017
Posts: 1,911
I’m far from the foremost authority on economic theory, but my understanding is that supply-side economics, which is also known as “trickle-down,” attempts to boost the economy through deregulation and tax cuts.

Demand-side economics, also called Keynesian economics, tries to boost the economy through government intervention, e.g., spending, job programs, etc.

Trickle-down says things will go better when corporations have more money, and Keynesian economics says things will go better when people have more money to spend on products and services. At least that is my understanding of the two concepts. There is a lot of debate as to which is better.
frankj1 Offline
#169 Posted: Thu, Jan 11 2018, 1:35 PM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,221
opelmanta1900 wrote:
Damn Obama and his Kenya-nesian economics...

I love what you've done here
tailgater Offline
#170 Posted: Thu, Jan 11 2018, 2:16 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
Phil222 wrote:
I’m far from the foremost authority on economic theory, but my understanding is that supply-side economics, which is also known as “trickle-down,” attempts to boost the economy through deregulation and tax cuts.

Demand-side economics, also called Keynesian economics, tries to boost the economy through government intervention, e.g., spending, job programs, etc.

Trickle-down says things will go better when corporations have more money, and Keynesian economics says things will go better when people have more money to spend on products and services. At least that is my understanding of the two concepts. There is a lot of debate as to which is better.


You and I need to sit down and have a smoke.

Where you from?
Phil222 Offline
#171 Posted: Thu, Jan 11 2018, 4:01 PM EST
Joined: 10-01-2017
Posts: 1,911
I'm from Mississippi but currently live in Florida. How long does it take to become a Floridian, anyway? I might be getting close...
Users browsing this topic
Guest
4 Pages<1234
Back to Top