Americans tax burden lowest since 1965 as % of GDP (Graph)

[Ruby the Liberal]

[kenny blankenship]

1. We've almost caught up to Mexico!

Keep pushing America, you're almost there.

[Cool Logic]

2. On the other hand, the amount of $$$ collected by taxes has, for the most part, risen steadily...

Receipts dropped after 9-11 and after recession in 2008...

[Ruby the Liberal]

3. Do you get % of GDP? The reason for the chart?

As in this much $ in tax receipts compared to Gross Domestic Product $?

Happy to send you over a few Wiki pages. Just let me know which concept you aren't clear about.

[Cool Logic]

4. That slice of pie has steadily gotten larger as well...

[Ruby the Liberal]

5. The government is the employer of last resort - and thankful they are there

Guessing you all would prefer us all living under bridges while corps horde cash and pay out bonuses to the top 2%?

Happy (thrilled in fact) to have a discussion with you about supply side vs demand side economic policies.

[Cool Logic]

7. Actually, I would prefer that the minimum wage be raised to $1 trillion/hr and the retirement

age to be lowered to 18.

Seriously, why do you think 1% of the population controls 38% of the wealth?

Answer: Because the "employer of last resort" let them have it. They let the K-Street boys turn our free-market economy into a controlled-market economy, that benefits their contributors and restricts the rest of us.

[Ruby the Liberal]

9. So, the free-market is the path to prosperity?

No regulation (to favor a 'controlled' market)?

How do you account for greed in this libertarian utopia?

[Cool Logic]

10. I didn't say "no regulation," I said controlled...as in controlled by the few, to the detriment

of the many.

A true free-market economy, is not controlled by the rich or by the poor; rather, it is controlled by the simple law of supply and demand. That means the rules (regulations) are the same for everyone. Unlike Utopia, greed exists; however, it is the tightly controlled-market of the rich and powerful that does not "account" for greed, for the rich and the powerful are the ones who write the rules.

[Ruby the Liberal]

11. Can you please name me one successful nation operating under

this "true free-market" economic approach?

One where government spending isn't the main driver of GDP?

Trust me, I have studied Smith, Rand and Friedman. I *get* the concept. I am just waiting to see it actually work somewhere in reality as opposed to just laid out in economic theory texts.

Help a sister out with that one?

[Ruby the Liberal]

15. *crickets*

[Cool Logic]

16. I cannot do that, for one has never existed.

Likewise, when I advocate for the free-market, I do not mean pure, unbridled, laissez-faire capitalism. For that results in the same concentration of wealth that occurs when the rich and the powerful control the economy.

However, when the market is over-regulated by the powerful, consumers are not allowed to choose from the best products; they get to choose from products that are produced by companies with the best lobbyists. Or, as is the case with ethanol, we don't have choice; we are forced to buy the product.

And then there are the costs associated with their regulations --$1.75 trillion/yr by most estimates. The US is the world's leading producer of red tape and it is choking us to death. Well, not all of us. For the ones who write the rules get to sell us stuff we don't need and force us to pay them to regulate us.

In the same way and for the same reasons we have a separation of church and state, we need a separation of market and state.

[dissidentboomer]

12. How are things out there in lala land, you deluded fuck?

:rofl:

[Ruby the Liberal]

13. Did you bother to read the entire post?

Poster was making a point. Perhaps this conversation is a wee bit over your head.

[dissidentboomer]

14. The poster seems to be arguing that some utopian "free" market

is THE ANSWER. Please, if I'm wrong, let me know. Maybe the poster isn't expressing ideas clearly and directly.

[YouDontMakeEnough]

6. Blue States vs. Red States

Recently the Bureau of Economic Analysis released two reports which shed a lot of light on what's really going on in American politics. The reports show beyond question that the states that went for George W. Bush in the 2004 election were/are considerably poorer than the ones that went for Kerry. The notion that the GOP is the party of the rich simply doesn't match the economic reality.

States with the highest per capita income trend Democrat; the states with the lowest per capita income trend Republican. The top ten "blue states," for example, had an average per capita personal income of $36,327, which is 20 percent higher than the top ten "red states," which had an average of $30,275.


Yet today the top1% income earners in this country on avergae pay 17% in taxes. Again, You don't make enough money to be a republican. Why don't people get this?

www.youdontmakeenoughmoneytobearepublican.com

[Ruby the Liberal]

8. I see your income stats and raise you EDUCATION (and yes, they are tied)

Would love to hear your thoughts on which states have a higher HS (and College) graduation rate.