Lets talk economics (repost)

[Tito]

allright, contrary to popular belief, the buisness cycle works in a series of ups and downs that are not stoppable by political policy or programs.

The idea is to make these drops less than the gains, this siginifies a growing economy. The way you do this is having an educated population that will not buy goods at inflated prices, and allow people to work for their money, therefore making it all the more valuable to them because they have put their blood sweat and tears into it. The great depression was caused by capitalism at its worst, you had a massive industrial base but public education was not widespread enough to educate the masses. This leaves you with people that play the stock market because it is the "IN" thing and dont really know what they are buying, and once it becomes apparent that you got taken, people want their money back (Black Thursday)because they have been ripped off because of their own stupidity. Keep in mind that this is not the govenrments job, it is the way the free market works, and if the people spend their hard earned money and get ripped, it is their fault not the govenrments.

Now, for trickle down economics. Socialism/Liberalism is all about the redistribution of wealth wich is a watered down version of communism/Fascism (Karl marks) also known as "Marxism" The only problem with this is that wealth is a process, not a value of money that can be handed out freely to all. This leaves the people that use their lives to achieve the American dream using what we have given them "Public Education" as a springboard to newer and better things and have worked their tails off to make it happen lose their money to the man that sits on the street corner all day, pays for his food with foodstamps, wearing the diamond necklace, and drives away in a brand new Nissan or Hyundai. In economic theory Socialism works, but as one will learn economics has a big BUT, when people are denied their hard work, they choose the easy way out when presented with the choices, I work as an educator of sorts and have seen it happen, children know what they want to do with their lives, they want to take the easy way out with the easy money and the good stuff because they can. This causes a massive amount of people that are feeding off the truly exceptional people at the top with the majority of the wealth, these people then lose all desire to continue to produce because it is not profitable for them to put in that kind of work and not recieve propper payment. Trickle down economics states that if we people their money in a percent form (their fair share of what they paid) that people get their money back, and the people at the top do what is best for themselves, they invest and create new stores/factories to employ good skilled workers at the wages they deserve. The bottom 1% got their chance in public education, they are allowed to go to any school of their chosing in the country, and they failed miserably. All are given a chance to learn a trade in grades 11 and 12, go there or accel academically to get out of your current economic position. As far as I'm concerned, they have failed numerous chances to redeem theriselves and are nolonger worthy of my hard earned money(or anyone elses) unless it is given to them charitably and not on the part of the govenrment. I am sick of being robbed by the govenrment of my money for the bottom!

I am not stating that there are not bright ones at the bottom that get shoved under the rug and deserve better, but we have given them that chance in public education, it is a chance to get anywhere you want to go in this country. THe system is not broken, it works fine, for the most part people are not leaving stupid, and if they do it is only by choice, therefore we should leave them where they wish to be.

The economic growth is because of the Bush tax cut that has finally come into effect. This tax cut I must also explain is not a rebate, it is simply less money you have to ship away to the govenrment. Therefore, it is simply a sale on doing buisness, nothing more, nothing less, Stores dont plan on losing money when they have a sale, they plan on making it big time. If i spend say 5,000 dollars on stock now I would be taxed to X, lets say 3500, If i spent that same amount of money pre tax cut I would be taxed to Y (2500)but seeing that I keep more of my money now, I spend an additional the other 1500 that saved on the same stock, it is taxed to 1000

I have spent 5000 dollars pre tax cut and got 2500 worth of stock and the govenment got 2500

I then spend $5000 get 3500 worth of stock and the govenrment gets roughly 1500-2000. Much more stock, only slightly less govenrment money, when people see that their money gets them more stuff, they increase their spending because they have more of it, The govenrment and the consumer and buisness comes out on top, FAR more effective.


Please reply in a constructive manner as the forum rules so nicely put it.

[mhr]

1. Way Off The Mark Tito!

Gloves Off,

Unemployed for 39 months.

Two College Degrees
BS Electrical Engineering
MBA

US Veteran
Officer Honorably Discharged

Commercial Pilot

Do not tell me I have not worked hard enough!

Do not tell me I have to work harder!

I have done everything this society has told me to do!

There are No Jobs!

What in this picture don't you get Tito?

[mlawson]

2. Marx was not a "communist/fascist'....

He never heard of Lenin OR Stalin, because they were children when he died. He never heard of the Russian Revolution, as that also happened many years layer. The best we can tell (he said not much about what would follow the fall of capitalism) is that he assumed the 'state' would wither away, and people would go back to doing whatever work was best suited to them. A safety net would be provided, as production would be distributed by NEED.

The Soviet Union co-opted the name, "Communist" for political reasons. That state was SOCIALIST, in that all factors of production were owned by the state, but there was also a tyrannical military dictatorship, as we all know. But there have been NO true 'communist' states, ever.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

3. If Bush Is An Economic Guru

and supply side economics work why did we loose 3,000,000, jobs during Bush's tenure....

The last pres to loose jobs during his administration was Herbert Hoover...

and why did we create 28,000,000 jobs during Clinton's tenure?



By the way I'm glad you enjoyed the proceeds from your tax cut.... Perhaps you can also buy a clue....

[RichM]

4. No offense, but you don't know what you're talking about.

This is just a bunch of gibberish & opinionated nonsense, some of it (unintentionally) very funny. Perhaps you studied economics with Archie Bunker?

If you (gulp) work as an "educator," why can't you write clearly-structured English sentences?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

6. ROTFLMFAO

Kudos....

[SharonAnn]

5. The government is going in major debt with the tax cut and we pay

the debt. That is, the taxpayers pay the debt. Those who don´t pay taxes, like some large companies and some wealthy people, don´t pay the debt.

What does this mean? It means that the government has less money to provide the services we expect because it is using some of its revenue (money from taxes) to pay the debt. Since the wealthy and big companies find ways to give large amounts of money to Republican politicians for ¨campaign¨ contributions, the services cut will not be the ones that the wealthy and that big companies want to receive from the Federal government. It will be the things that the regular people (the taxpayers) want.

So, by borrowing $1,000, giving us $250, and putting the rest of the debt ($750) in our name, the rich and big companies are getting all the advantages and we are getting all the debt.

And this is being done shortly before the baby boom needs Social Security. I, one of the first of the Baby Boom, am part of the first generation that not only paid into Social Security for my grandparents and my parents, I put aside money for myself so that future generations would not be so burdened. I am very angry about the Bush administration taking my Social Security money and squandering it.

The tax cuts are an economic horror that we have not yet begun to feel. They are timed so that the worst of them come after the 2004 election. The administration approach seems to be the same as that of King Louis ?? who said ´Apres moi, le deluge¨. In other words, it goes something like this - After I am gone, everyone else can go to H--l.

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[HFishbine]

14. I smell inherited wealth

"My family pays at least 8k$ a year on property taxes and probably a good 10k on income/sales tax."

Righto. So you live in a $300,000 to $500,000 home on an income of about $45,000.

[Woodstock]

16. he said he pays $18 K taxes

"I do not benefit from welfare, foodstamps, unemployment or anything of the like, yet 18k of my own money is going to support those that do benefit from it."

say he's in the 27% bracket, that =~ $65K (and that's doing damned nicely for someone who spells like that)

as for the family/property tax remark, I'd take that with a grain of salt, like you

his is not an upper class attitude - this sounds more like he got lucky and now looks down on those he left behind

[HFishbine]

18. Huh

You lost me. He said $8k is property taxes (unrelated to income) and the $10K is income AND sales tax. So he paid something less than $10K in income taxes.

We'll never know though. Thankfully he's been:

[Woodstock]

20. you are right, sir - has he been deep sixed yet?

It was fun while it lasted. :)

[HFishbine]

21. Dead and gone

I agree. Attitudinally, I think you had him pegged. I was playig along with his "figures" because they exposed his mendacity.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

19. Reagan's Term Ended In 1988....

There were two recessions during Papa Bush's term between 1989-1993...


So how did Reagan's tax cuts cause the Clinton boom?

[Resistance Is Futile]

23. Republican psuedo-economics

I do not benefit from welfare, foodstamps, unemployment or anything of the like, yet 18k of my own money is going to support those that do benefit from it.

$18,000 of society's money is going to provide services--among them the police, the legal system, the military, and the government bureaucracy--which exist primarily for the purpose of protecting the rich from the poor (not the other way around) and to enable the rich to expand the markets for their products. Look to Somalia for an example of how well an economy runs when the government collects no taxes and provides no services.

[mhr]

28. No Tito, You Are Way Off The Mark!

None of the other professionals I know have been interviewed in the last 18 months. We are all twiddling our thumbs. We all have college degrees and significant working experience. No employer is interested.

You can choose to live in your bubble of confusion; I live in the real world. In the real world, white collar working professionals are out of work because their jobs have been downsized or sent overseas. You need to do more research because you are seriously out of touch!

Do not ever put words in my mouth again or tell me I do not know what I am talking about!

I know full well what I am speaking about!

[Fovea]

7. Your definition is both incorrect and reductionist.

Hello Mr. Ailes, nice to see you here at DU.

Working backwards through your major points...

Your model for regressive taxation for capital gains suggests that
wealthy investors must be rewarded more for having more. I think the political underpinning of this idea went to the scaffold with Louis 16th, though some of its supporters were still screaming and making noise from time to time, they are not as impressive without the lace, white lead, and wig.

I cannot see much resemblance between real capital gains tax, and what you describe.

The economic growth is because the Fed has tanked the interest rate and the DoD is buying lots and lots of guns, the economy is not making any new butter... or domestic jobs, for that matter.


You do not have a clue about what socialism is about. Your description of the welfare queen/king was tired and disproven when Roger Ailes trotted it out in the 80's

Public education has been funded with less in real dollars in every successive year since 1968. Your 'paragraph' that starts out telling us that your are going to explain trickle down economics to us is not actually parsable, and nowhere actually explains anything about Stockman, and the cult of the Laffer curve, rather, it obliquely fellates Horatio Alger in a dark corner.

Your first sentence suggests you have not read anything by Keynes. Hard to take much anything that follows seriously. Sorry, this is as nice as I get, and far less than you deserve for making me slog through your attempt at a reasoned argument.

Might I sugesst Free Republic, where this reductionist, semi coherent free market flag waving seems to do a lot better?

PS: your food stamp clutching new car buyer is a pure fantasy Roger, and even you know better.

[Clete]

8. Tito said on my post that Medicare is charity.

Perhaps you can inform us where you got your degree in economics? It might explain your delusions to us.

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

9. You should read this link, I think it sums up your points nicely!

http://nymrecords.com/

[kodi]

10. you missed where he called the amish right wing extremists

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=619252#620197

i guess cow tipping is now a capital crime.

[MissMarple]

17. Gotcha, is this guy on crack or just playing a Halloween prank?

Good bitch slapping, though guys.

And just for clarification, I don't usually say things like that. The last time I used that term the girl child's jaw dropped. But sometimes,... it describes things so well. :evilgrin:

[Woodstock]

22. that's OK, Miss M

I'll assume you mean it's the "bitch" doing the slapping (not the other way around.)

The only time I used the word in a long time was recalling the story of the Brits calling Tony Blair:

Bush's Bitch

I don't like the word being overused/misused, but it seemed to fit there.

[Woodstock]

12. so, you think "liberalism is ...watered down... fascism"?

I don't even know where to start, to be honest. It's clear you disdain liberalism (You said: Socialism/Liberalism is all about the redistribution of wealth wich {sic} is a watered down version of communism/Fascism), so perhaps, "as the forum rules so nicely put it," you did not notice this was a forum for progressives. The world is not black and white. There are shades of gray. You say you are an "educator of sorts" so I can only guess your income level, but if it is about where I think it is (reading between the lines) - then I'd place you in the middle class. That would also place you as one who is, as you put it, "feeding off the truly exceptional people at the top with the majority of the wealth" - one among those who "worked their tails off" and lost their money to the man with the "foodstamps" who has a "diamond necklace" and a "brand new Nissan or Hyundai" - that is, you are not one of the wealthy. So, do you think you are getting a significant tax cut from Bush? Read on.

http://www.ufenet.org/research/BushStimulus.html

...Half of all Americans will receive less than $100 from the tax cut in 2003, according to Citizens for Tax Justice. But Americans making $1 million or more will receive $93,500 from the tax cut, according the Tax Policy Center.

Over the next four years, the bottom 60 percent of taxpayers will receive just 9 percent of all the tax cuts, while just the top one percent receives 39 percent of the tax cuts. The tax cut benefits flowing to the top 1% far outpace the 23% share of federal taxes they now pay.

The distribution of tax cuts do not get better with age. The tax cuts targeted at middle- and low-income families sunset, or disappear, after 2004. As a result, in 2006, 52 percent of the Bush tax cut goes to the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans...

Most states are constitutionally required to balance their budgets. So, in order to close their budget deficits, state legislatures will have to either cut spending or raise taxes. By cutting spending, they will layoff public sector workers leading to further declines in demand. Most states rely on the sales and property taxes for revenue, which most directly affect middle- and low-income families. If states raise sales or property taxes, they will take will take money out of the hands of those who received the least from the Bush tax cut...

[charlie]

13. Wow

The last standing supply sider in the wild and me without a camera.

[Capn Sunshine]

15. Don't worry, I got a picture!

<--"hey, I need to trickle!"

[kalian]

24. WTF are you jabbering about?!

:wtf:

You make about as much sense as a drunken baboon.

"communist/facist"...?! Where the hell did you come up with that?

[Woodstock]

25. if you accel in school you learn about Karl Marks

you aren't one of those feeders on the exceptional people, are you? :)

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

26. Bob Boudelang?

Is that you?

[kodi]

27. thinking pitt.

without the mullet, or tortoise.