|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 5 months, 15 days
|
Re: Let's give Newt's latest editorial a hard read [Re: Economist]
#6189418 - 10/20/06 02:38 AM (17 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Economist said: If the tax cut was 10% across the board, the lowest wouldn't pay any taxes at all, and all of the government services they provide would be an entirely free ride, leeching off of the rich.
I actually meant 10% off of what they're paying now. So a 10% tax would be reduced to 9%, and 30% tax would be reduced to 27%. The rich are getting a higher percentage decuction under Bush.
Quote:
"no child left behind" really helps people whose children were already in private school.
Schools in rich neighborhoods have better students (for whatever reason), so this will primarily help the rich school districts get more money.
Quote:
This would be a sensible argument, except for the fact that Bush Sr. and Clinton both presided over significantly reduced government spending. And yet the prosperity of Reagan's era never subsided.
I think this actually helps my point. Regardless, there are so many other factors that could contribute to economic prosperity, that it's silly to think it's all due to trickle down. Simple logic as I posted above shows why it isn't better.
Quote:
Or because the Democrats use taxpayer money to buy labor votes. Sounds like corruption to me.
How do democrats use taxpayer money to buy labor votes?
Quote:
Quote:
The difference being there's nothing wrong with welfare reform.
Sure, that's your opinion.
I assume you mean it's my opinion is that there's something wrong with bigotry. Would anyone have a problem with welfare reform?
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 5 months, 15 days
|
Re: Let's give Newt's latest editorial a hard read [Re: Economist]
#6189426 - 10/20/06 02:43 AM (17 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Economist said: short of shoving their money in a mattress, pretty much anything that the rich do with their money will result in increasing economic growth.
The same can be said of money that goes to the poor. The big difference is if you give it to the poor, it necessarily trickles from the poor to the rich when they spend it. When it is given to the rich, it goes from the rich back to the rich.
Job creation, etc, is the same in both cases.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Zogby
This is Sussudio


Registered: 10/16/06
Posts: 125
Last seen: 15 years, 9 days
|
Re: Let's give Newt's latest editorial a hard read [Re: Economist]
#6189492 - 10/20/06 04:22 AM (17 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Economist said: We know from the BLS and Census[dot]gov that real wages have grown in America, meaning that everyone is outpacing inflation. You can check out the report at www.census[dot]gov/prod/2006pubs/p60-231.pdf to see proof of this.
Economist, you are truly clueless. First off, the word "wages" is used once in the BLS report on page 29 and isnt referring to "real wages" as you so eloquently put. Secondly, even if "real wages" grew, that doesnt mean that "everyone is outpacing inflation." On page 6 the report says that median incomes grew 1.1% According to readily available statistics, in 2005 the inflation rate was at 3.4% How does 1.1% "outpace" 3.4% in your narrow Republican mind? Come on dude you are embarassing yourself. You need to lose the Economist name and finish highschool macroeconomics buddy :P
Edited by Zogby (10/20/06 04:30 AM)
|
Redstorm
Prince of Bugs



Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,175
Last seen: 4 months, 5 days
|
Re: Let's give Newt's latest editorial a hard read [Re: Zogby]
#6191480 - 10/20/06 03:05 PM (17 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
No flames or personal attacks are allowed in PAL. If you can not debate civilly, stay out of my forum. This is your only warning; the next infraction will result in a ban.
|
|