Walkaway video....No longer a Democrat????

golf

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 11, 2015
Messages
1,039
Reaction score
411
Points
83
Obama's recovery was historically slow because 1) it was a deeper and longer recession than any since the Great Depression due to multiple collapses in significant economic sectors and 2) the GOP congress (in McConnell's own words) was committed to limiting his stimulus efforts as much as possible in order to make him a "one-term president."
May be correct. My point is that deregulation and tax policy were huge for extending and even heating up our recovery past what the gurus thought. This can be clearly seen in small business optimism surveys under trump compared to obama.
 

golf

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 11, 2015
Messages
1,039
Reaction score
411
Points
83
The progressiveness of the income tax structure is only part of the story. Whether the USA should do more (and how much more) is a matter of debate but just citing that attribute of the income tax distorts the overall picture.

From the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities:

Critics of proposals to make the tax system more progressive or to take other steps to help lessen widening income inequality[2] sometimes cite a 2008 Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD) report stating that the United States has the most progressive tax system among developed countries.[3] The implication is that, with a progressive tax system, the United States is already taking very substantial steps to address income inequality.

But to cite the report’s finding on the progressivity of the U.S. tax system while ignoring its other findings amounts to cherry picking and distorts the report’s overall findings. The report also shows that the United States does less to reduce income inequality than every other OECD country examined except Korea, when one considers both various taxes and cash transfer programs such as Social Security, unemployment insurance, and means-tested assistance programs.

View attachment 9286


There are two main reasons for the United States’ comparatively poor performance in reducing inequality:

  • While the taxes that the OECD analysis examined are more progressive in the United States than in other OECD countries, they also are smaller (in terms of the revenue they collect) in the United States than the OECD average.
  • Cash transfers are smaller and less progressive in the United States than in other OECD countries.
Going to take this report with a large grain of salt as the CBPP comes from a place of trying to promote a certain narrative.
 
Last edited:

cjbfbp

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
6,482
Reaction score
1,110
Points
113
Going to take this report with a large grain of salt as the CBPP comes from a place of trying to promote a certin narrative.
There is nothing "partisan" about the GINI coefficient ranking which has been used as a measure of inequality for over forty years. What is "partisan" is refusing to look at the overall picture and only cherry picking those measures which support a viewpoint. Barney Frank once spoke about the biggest difference in politics in the 21st century versus the 20th. He said we all used to watch and read the same news so we had a basic agreement about facts even though we disagreed on policy prescriptions. Now news is presented so that there isn't even an agreement about the facts.

Again, whether the USA does enough or not enough to reduce income inequality and how much more, if any, the nation should do to attack that condition is a reasonable matter for debate. What is not reasonable is to suggest that the USA already does more than any other nation to address this condition.
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
1,075
Reaction score
266
Points
83
Point is that obama's recovery was historically slow. When trump took over we were way past due for a downturn. Instead, the recovery heated up. Record unemployment. Wage growth for the lower class. Deregulation played a big role. Credit Trump.

Small business is called the enigine of the American economy and their optimism has gone way up under trump as compared to obama. This has contributed greatly to trump's economy as optimism of course leads to hiring and investment. Check out this article:

Recovery went nuts because Trump spent like a drunken sailor.
Living the high life on borrowed money, the American way.
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
1,075
Reaction score
266
Points
83
It's really simple to tackle inequality, revert to the income tax rates of the 1950's, the good old days, Republicans would love to go back to the 50's right?
 

golf

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 11, 2015
Messages
1,039
Reaction score
411
Points
83
Recovery went nuts because Trump spent like a drunken sailor.
Living the high life on borrowed money, the American way.
Agree to disagree. See previous posts.
 
Last edited:

golf

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 11, 2015
Messages
1,039
Reaction score
411
Points
83
There is nothing "partisan" about the GINI coefficient ranking which has been used as a measure of inequality for over forty years. What is "partisan" is refusing to look at the overall picture and only cherry picking those measures which support a viewpoint. Barney Frank once spoke about the biggest difference in politics in the 21st century versus the 20th. He said we all used to watch and read the same news so we had a basic agreement about facts even though we disagreed on policy prescriptions. Now news is presented so that there isn't even an agreement about the facts.

Again, whether the USA does enough or not enough to reduce income inequality and how much more, if any, the nation should do to attack that condition is a reasonable matter for debate. What is not reasonable is to suggest that the USA already does more than any other nation to address this condition.
Agree with your first paragraph. Check out this article regarding the gini coefficient.

 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
45,140
Reaction score
1,954
Points
113
There is nothing "partisan" about the GINI coefficient ranking which has been used as a measure of inequality for over forty years. What is "partisan" is refusing to look at the overall picture and only cherry picking those measures which support a viewpoint. Barney Frank once spoke about the biggest difference in politics in the 21st century versus the 20th. He said we all used to watch and read the same news so we had a basic agreement about facts even though we disagreed on policy prescriptions. Now news is presented so that there isn't even an agreement about the facts.

Again, whether the USA does enough or not enough to reduce income inequality and how much more, if any, the nation should do to attack that condition is a reasonable matter for debate. What is not reasonable is to suggest that the USA already does more than any other nation to address this condition.
I don’t think income inequality is a thing any government or person should care about in the least. Only injustice. If your neighbor works harder or is smarter and makes more than you, would you care? But if he’s running a scam, or stealing, now you care.
our income inequality is mainly driven by the Fed. And it is a gigantic injustice. The question is not, are we doing enough as a country to reduce inequality? The question is, what is government doing to create it?
 

golf

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 11, 2015
Messages
1,039
Reaction score
411
Points
83
I don’t think income inequality is a thing any government or person should care about in the least. Only injustice. If your neighbor works harder or is smarter and makes more than you, would you care? But if he’s running a scam, or stealing, now you care.
our income inequality is mainly driven by the Fed. And it is a gigantic injustice. The question is not, are we doing enough as a country to reduce inequality? The question is, what is government doing to create it?
Yes. Equality of outcome has been tried, unsuccessfully.
 

Spoofin

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2013
Messages
16,630
Reaction score
2,087
Points
113
Why on earth would income equality be a necessary goal? Isn’t America the land of opportunity? There are Governments that make all citizens “equal” and the result is something no one is happy with.
 

cjbfbp

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
6,482
Reaction score
1,110
Points
113
Agree with your first paragraph. Check out this article regarding the gini coefficient.

I actually calculated Gini coefficients for some research I did many years ago on an unrelated matter. As I remember, they were easy to calculate and were flexible enough to use for various purposes. I don't remember the calculation anymore as I haven't used them for anything since.

I wasn't trying to advocate for the Gini measure per se. I think the appeal of the measure is that it is easy to calculate and widely used. It is a simple measure and, as such, is always going to have some limitations.
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
8,101
Reaction score
511
Points
113
It's funny how some here think that socialism/communism somehow results in equity and the 1% not having the vast amount of the money. It seems they refuse to observe the government/party leaders who have all the wealth while the rest are begging for scraps from the party.
Socialism/Communism supports the equity of poverty for the masses while the Party lives in luxury. It denies the capitalist opportunity of all to gain wealth through individual effort and achievement. It imagines that intellectual elites know what is best for the "ignorant" masses who can't care for themselves. Moreso, the intellectuals create barriers to ensure that the poor are dependent upon them with no recourse for gaining independence.

That is progressive liberalism in the US. It's slavery, 'guised as freedom.
 

cjbfbp

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
6,482
Reaction score
1,110
Points
113
It's funny how some here think that socialism/communism somehow results in equity and the 1% not having the vast amount of the money.
You keep repeating this over and over (almost like it's a chant to keep you mentally grounded) but you can't point to one example where one of us has advocated for "socialism/communism" or where one of us has said that everyone should be economically equal.
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
45,464
Reaction score
3,634
Points
113
Recovery went nuts because Trump spent like a drunken sailor.
Living the high life on borrowed money, the American way.
We're at the "declare bankruptcy and walk away scott free" phase of the Trump University business cycle. Unfortunately we can't.
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
45,140
Reaction score
1,954
Points
113
You keep repeating this over and over (almost like it's a chant to keep you mentally grounded) but you can't point to one example where one of us has advocated for "socialism/communism" or where one of us has said that everyone should be economically equal.
Maybe you should elaborate on whether you think income inequality is a problem for government to solve, or whether income equality is a good goal for society or an example of justice
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
45,140
Reaction score
1,954
Points
113
It's really simple to tackle inequality, revert to the income tax rates of the 1950's, the good old days, Republicans would love to go back to the 50's right?
Wrong. Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos and Warren Buffett are unaffected by income tax rates. Lawyers, doctors, and other high earning professionals ARE.
By far the greatest driver of income inequality is the Fed which destroys savings and props up stocks and other assets which are owned in much greater percentages by the wealthy.
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
1,075
Reaction score
266
Points
83
Why on earth would income equality be a necessary goal? Isn’t America the land of opportunity? There are Governments that make all citizens “equal” and the result is something no one is happy with.
There are no governments that make all citizens equal.

If inequality keeps growing there are two likely outcomes, revolution or effective slavery for majority of the population.

There are many ways to a more equal society. I feel it is important for the long term stability and future of this country and the world....
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
1,075
Reaction score
266
Points
83
Wrong. Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos and Warren Buffett are unaffected by income tax rates. Lawyers, doctors, and other high earning professionals ARE.
By far the greatest driver of income inequality is the Fed which destroys savings and props up stocks and other assets which are owned in much greater percentages by the wealthy.
Wrong.
If they have to pay 90% tax on any of there stock they sell they will be affected at one time or another. It's simple really. Capital gains should be taxed as normal income and there should be no cap on Social security tax. That would solve many of our problems....

I say this while over half of my families income is a distribution from a small business which is only taxed at 15%. I am making out like a bandit right now.
 
Last edited:

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
1,075
Reaction score
266
Points
83
I was once a Republican in the Regan era and the reason was greed and selfishness....
 

Spoofin

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2013
Messages
16,630
Reaction score
2,087
Points
113
There are no governments that make all citizens equal.

If inequality keeps growing there are two likely outcomes, revolution or effective slavery for majority of the population.

There are many ways to a more equal society. I feel it is important for the long term stability and future of this country and the world....
Well, I don’t think it is the Govt’s responsibility to play Robin Hood like that. I’m for personal success and personal responsibility. If you are in the bottom, then do something about it and stop asking someone else to do it for you. I think we as a Country already give too many handouts to the bottom and ask more than we should from the top.
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
1,075
Reaction score
266
Points
83
Well, I don’t think it is the Govt’s responsibility to play Robin Hood like that. I’m for personal success and personal responsibility. If you are in the bottom, then do something about it and stop asking someone else to do it for you. I think we as a Country already give too many handouts to the bottom and ask more than we should from the top.
I disagree, the country was in a much better place before taxes on the rich were massively cut starting with Nixon straight up until today. It's benefited me greatly but I don't think it's making the country stable in long term.
 

golf

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 11, 2015
Messages
1,039
Reaction score
411
Points
83
You keep repeating this over and over (almost like it's a chant to keep you mentally grounded) but you can't point to one example where one of us has advocated for "socialism/communism" or where one of us has said that everyone should be economically equal.
1619 project being inserted in curricula, defund the police , free college and health care, removing God from pledge and kneeling before flag at dem convention, rioting, requiring use of deisired gender names at colleges, VP saying fracking should be banned which would destroy our energy sector, the squad and their supporters dont seem to be disappearing.

These are examples i can think off the top of my head. The dem party has taken a hard left turn the last 2-3 years. Now Sanders is saying how happy he is with Biden's pisitions after working with him to come up with a consensus.

If biden wins will sanity return? Maybe, but maybe not. On the other hand have trump with rock- solid policies.
 
Last edited:

Norseland Store

Active member
Joined
Nov 28, 2008
Messages
276
Reaction score
61
Points
28
I disagree, the country was in a much better place before taxes on the rich were massively cut starting with Nixon straight up until today. It's benefited me greatly but I don't think it's making the country stable in long term.
No one is stopping you from writing a check to the US treasury if you feel you’re not being taxed enough. I happen to think I have a better idea than the federal government what I would do with my earnings.
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
8,101
Reaction score
511
Points
113
You keep repeating this over and over (almost like it's a chant to keep you mentally grounded) but you can't point to one example where one of us has advocated for "socialism/communism" or where one of us has said that everyone should be economically equal.
You advocate for progressive liberalism, which calls for the equity of poverty while the politicians feed their pockets with money (look at Omar and her "husband's" consulting firm).
You seem to enjoy sticking your head in the sand and saying you can't see.
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
1,075
Reaction score
266
Points
83
You advocate for progressive liberalism, which calls for the equity of poverty while the politicians feed their pockets with money (look at Omar and her "husband's" consulting firm).
You seem to enjoy sticking your head in the sand and saying you can't see.
If she broke the law lock her up, I don't care the party.
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
45,140
Reaction score
1,954
Points
113
Wrong.
If they have to pay 90% tax on any of there stock they sell they will be affected at one time or another. It's simple really. Capital gains should be taxed as normal income and there should be no cap on Social security tax. That would solve many of our problems....

I say this while over half of my families income is a distribution from a small business which is only taxed at 15%. I am making out like a bandit right now.
Well that’s not what you said, is it.
Your ideas wouldn’t have the effects that you predict.
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
45,140
Reaction score
1,954
Points
113
I disagree, the country was in a much better place before taxes on the rich were massively cut starting with Nixon straight up until today. It's benefited me greatly but I don't think it's making the country stable in long term.
You might not be smart enough to avoid taxes, but the rich are. They weren’t paying 90% rates.

if you could somehow capture 90% of the wealth and earnings of private citizens, it would lead to mass poverty and economic collapse. When top marginal rates were 90%, almost no one paid it, and government Revenue as % of GDP was not very different from today.
Here is an absolute truth: there is never enough tax revenue. There is never enough spending. You think if we just took a little more, we could solve all our problems. It never will. Government solutions create more problems than they solve.
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
1,075
Reaction score
266
Points
83
You might not be smart enough to avoid taxes, but the rich are. They weren’t paying 90% rates.

if you could somehow capture 90% of the wealth and earnings of private citizens, it would lead to mass poverty and economic collapse. When top marginal rates were 90%, almost no one paid it, and government Revenue as % of GDP was not very different from today.
Here is an absolute truth: there is never enough tax revenue. There is never enough spending. You think if we just took a little more, we could solve all our problems. It never will. Government solutions create more problems than they solve.
I NEVER said we need more tax revenue, if I were to decide I would bet many would pay less actually.
 

Ogee Oglethorpe

Over Macho Grande?
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
9,664
Reaction score
1,357
Points
113
I NEVER said we need more tax revenue, if I were to decide I would bet many would pay less actually.
Right. Always a good argument. Take more money from the people who own businesses and create jobs. They always seem to have plenty and most of them just fell into it without any risk or hard work anyway, right?
 
Top Bottom