The GOP vs. Hurricane Isaac: Which is the bigger washout? in Off Topic Forum

0 Points

The GOP vs. Hurricane Isaac: Which is the bigger washout?

Started By	Comment
Licorice		#3901	[-]
Posts: 15883 05/06/12 04:27 PM Reply Quote More Recent Posts	UrbanSprawl wrote: Money is like the lifeblood of an economy. It has to continuously flow between hands. The threat is when the currency becomes clotted in one area, like clotted in a small group of private holders or in a couple of banks. In this scenario, there are two things that can happen: austerity or forcing the money back into the economy. With austerity, people just accept there's a clot and the economy won't be working. Austerity isn't a cure for anything; it's an acceptance of dysfunction. But by forcing the money to flow back into the economy rather than letting it accumulate in one location, you can essentially fix the ills of the economy and get it back into health. The world is turning against the "tax cuts for billionaires, austerity for everyone else" crowd.
	Remove this ad
memyselfandi		#3902	[-]
Posts: 33127 05/06/12 04:44 PM Registered user Reply Quote More Recent Posts	Licorice wrote: CBRetriever wrote: yep - he's conceded already wonderful election process - no television ads allowed, one debate total, remarkably civil except during the debate, posters/signs only allowed on offical billboards put up X number of days before the election, the candidates had to go on TV to get any public exposure and answer any questions (no pre-screening) asked of them which is where Laurence Ferrari (cute blonde woman) blindsided Sarko with the Gaddafi thing. The discussions would get pretty heated with the newscasters interrrupting the candidates even. Sarko was trying to put in place some of the same things that the Republican Party is and tampering with retirement age, benefits, etc - that's pretty much what brought him down People watching this knew it was coming, but this really does tip the scales against the "austerity" pushers - not just in the Eurozone, but globally. Especially combined with Labour's big gains in the UK's local elections last week at the expense of the Conservative-Lib Dem coalition showing that Cameron is pretty much a dead PM walking.
Trainwreck		#3903	[-]
Posts: 9305 05/06/12 05:03 PM Registered user Reply Quote More Recent Posts	Licorice wrote: UrbanSprawl wrote: Money is like the lifeblood of an economy. It has to continuously flow between hands. The threat is when the currency becomes clotted in one area, like clotted in a small group of private holders or in a couple of banks. In this scenario, there are two things that can happen: austerity or forcing the money back into the economy. With austerity, people just accept there's a clot and the economy won't be working. Austerity isn't a cure for anything; it's an acceptance of dysfunction. But by forcing the money to flow back into the economy rather than letting it accumulate in one location, you can essentially fix the ills of the economy and get it back into health. The world is turning against the "tax cuts for billionaires, austerity for everyone else" crowd. It's like putting a band aid on a flesh wound, they you send the wrong message for entrepreneurs and you final put a nail in the coffin.
UrbanSprawl		#3904	[-]
Posts: 8772 05/06/12 05:18 PM Just ignore me Reply Quote More Recent Posts	Entrepreneurs like it when there's a middle class with a lot of disposable income. They don't like it when all the money is in a tight-fisted bank or in a small group of rich people.
BrandonsExWife		#3905	[-]
Posts: 1821 05/06/12 06:17 PM Reply Quote More Recent Posts	We can learn a lot about what not to do in our country just by watching the EU nations. There is no scenario by which the governments of Europe will ever pay their bills.
memyselfandi		#3906	[-]
Posts: 33127 05/06/12 06:43 PM Registered user Reply Quote More Recent Posts	Trainwreck wrote: Licorice wrote: UrbanSprawl wrote: Money is like the lifeblood of an economy. It has to continuously flow between hands. The threat is when the currency becomes clotted in one area, like clotted in a small group of private holders or in a couple of banks. In this scenario, there are two things that can happen: austerity or forcing the money back into the economy. With austerity, people just accept there's a clot and the economy won't be working. Austerity isn't a cure for anything; it's an acceptance of dysfunction. But by forcing the money to flow back into the economy rather than letting it accumulate in one location, you can essentially fix the ills of the economy and get it back into health. The world is turning against the "tax cuts for billionaires, austerity for everyone else" crowd. It's like putting a band aid on a flesh wound, they you send the wrong message for entrepreneurs and you final put a nail in the coffin. Entrepreneurs are going to look to create new businesses and make investments they think will make them the most money whatever the tax rate is. It's not like the founders of Facebook and Google founded those companies because of the Bush tax cuts, but if a higher tax rate was in place they would have been like... oh never mind.
BrandonsExWife		#3907	[-]
Posts: 1821 05/06/12 07:34 PM Reply Quote More Recent Posts	Why do libs use multi billionaires as examples of the rich and then talk about raising taxes on families makig $250k?
memyselfandi		#3908	[-]
Posts: 33127 05/06/12 07:48 PM Registered user Reply Quote More Recent Posts	Because it's the multibillionaires that people like Trainwreck are concerned about just giving up on trying to create companies and make money, based on these entrepreneurs supposedly going Galt and giving up on doing anything productive in business over a measly tax increase to Clinton-era levels. But if you want to add to this argument that a family making $250k a year is going to go Galt or quit their jobs and go on welfare in protest over a tax increase to Clinton-era levels, then I am happy to hear more about this ridiculous assertion.
Licorice		#3909	[-]
Posts: 15883 05/06/12 09:30 PM Reply Quote More Recent Posts	It is absolutely amazing the amount of bellyaching over the prospect of moving the highest tax rate back up to 39.6%.
BrandonsExWife		#3910	[-]
Posts: 1821 05/06/12 11:22 PM Reply Quote More Recent Posts	memyselfandi wrote: Because it's the multibillionaires that people like Trainwreck are concerned about just giving up on trying to create companies and make money, based on these entrepreneurs supposedly going Galt and giving up on doing anything productive in business over a measly tax increase to Clinton-era levels. But if you want to add to this argument that a family making $250k a year is going to go Galt or quit their jobs and go on welfare in protest over a tax increase to Clinton-era levels, then I am happy to hear more about this ridiculous assertion. In my own case there is money I make pretty easily and money that is a lot harder to make. For instance I distribute a product that barely makes a profit in the summer, but kills in the fall and winter. I continue to distribute it during the summer to keep one guy employed. Any more taxes or if gas goes up much more in price and I'm done, I'm not going to lose money just to keep one guy working. I will still golf, my wife and daughter will still ride their horses. But that guy who has a job in the wretched Las Vegas economy will be off in the summer.
	Remove this ad
memyselfandi		#3911	[-]
Posts: 33127 05/06/12 11:44 PM Registered user Reply Quote More Recent Posts	So basically you think the government should keep your taxes lower to subsidize your conscience when you have to cut back on workers when it makes business sense to do so?
BrandonsExWife		#3912	[-]
Posts: 1821 05/06/12 11:53 PM Reply Quote More Recent Posts	No, it's better when government takes my money and uses it to assuage the consciences of guilt ridden liberals.
memyselfandi		#3913	[-]
Posts: 33127 05/07/12 12:20 AM Registered user Reply Quote More Recent Posts	It's not about assuaging consciences. It's about having the revenue that meets the necessary government expenditures for broad-based prosperity in the economy. Taxes are the price of civilization. It's not a tithe.
Beefcake		#3914	[-]
Posts: 21518 05/07/12 05:22 AM Thinks astrology is real Reply Quote More Recent Posts	memyselfandi wrote: It's not about assuaging consciences. It's about having the revenue that meets the necessary government expenditures for broad-based prosperity in the economy. Taxes are the price of civilization. It's not a tithe. I'm happy to pay taxes for necessary government expenditures. It's the other 80% of the federal budget that I don't want to pay for. So let's cut tax rates to 20% and have the government QUIT SPENDING SO MUCH FUCKING MONEY.
springfeverish		#3915	[-]
Posts: 8166 05/07/12 05:26 AM Registered User Reply Quote More Recent Posts	Care to provide a breakdown of what constitutes the 20%? B ecause that doesn't sound like it barely covers our military and border expenditures, nevermind keeping our infrastructure in usuable condition.
Beefcake		#3916	[-]
Posts: 21518 05/07/12 05:33 AM Thinks astrology is real Reply Quote More Recent Posts	No, because I pulled it out of my ass. It might be 25%. The point is that the government's problem isn't a lack of revenue. The government's problem is that IT'S SPENDING TOO MUCH FUCKING MONEY.
Licorice		#3917	[-]
Posts: 15883 05/07/12 05:55 AM Reply Quote More Recent Posts	It's too early in the morning to be this angry.
Beefcake		#3918	[-]
Posts: 21518 05/07/12 06:31 AM Thinks astrology is real Reply Quote More Recent Posts	Libtards piss me off.
8trackmind		#3919	[-]
Posts: 3625 05/07/12 07:53 AM Registered user Reply Quote More Recent Posts	Beefcake, you might be less pissed off at Democrats if you realized that there is a big difference between what YOU want to see in the way of spending cuts and what Romney wants to see. A few days ago he was asked about what specific spending cuts he'd make if elected, and as usual he completely dodged the question. There are plenty of spending cuts that moderate Democrats and libertarian-minded Republicans could probably agree on (Medicaid, farm subsidies, funding for weapons systems that don't work, etc) but until Romney gets a lot more specific about this issue, don't expect much cutting to happen anytime soon.
VincentAccordionGuy		#3920	[-]
Posts: 1528 05/07/12 07:55 AM Reply Quote More Recent Posts	40 cents of every dollar the government spends is borrowed. Lets cut that.
	Remove this ad

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Yuku free message boards

The GOP vs. Hurricane Isaac: Which is the bigger washout?