An Economy Drowning in Obama Fairness

[Rion]

An economy drowning in Obama's 'fairness' - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review

 

[Viren]

Has the Bush tax cuts, which mainly went to the wealthy, helped the economy the last 10 years?

Guess what the top taxes were during the 1950's-60's when we saw over 4% growth. 90%

Roosevelt doubled taxes on the wealthy when he took office and the economy took off.

Clinton raised taxes on the rich and created 23 million new jobs with a growth rate of 3-4%

 

[Paulos23]

Has the Bush tax cuts, which mainly went to the wealthy, helped the economy the last 10 years?

Guess what the top taxes were during the 1950's-60's when we saw over 4% growth. 90%

Roosevelt doubled taxes on the wealthy when he took office and the economy took off.

Clinton raised taxes on the rich and created 23 million new jobs with a growth rate of 3-4%

So Obama is behind the curve and needs to raise the taxes now to get the economy going.

Or at least to pay off some of that debt....

 

[stamperben]

So Obama is behind the curve and needs to raise the taxes now to get the economy going.

Or at least to pay off some of that debt....

DING DING DING! We have a winner!

Get the economy going and revenues will rise as income earners pay taxes thus paying down the debt. It won't happen overnight, but its the right direction.

 

[Autumnleaf]

Its idiotic to suggest taxing people will help the economy. Taxes take money out of the economy. It would be like taking pints of blood out of a sick person to try to make them better. It doesn't work that way. Its always fashionable to suggest taxing people who have more money than you do, even though doing so is short sighted and stupid.

The government is involved in excessive waste with these ongoing wars and government funding asinine things like 'green' companies that keep going bankrupt, of course the 'deal' is the owners of the green companies donated heavily to Obama and the democratic party in general. Add to that the bank bailouts and buying GM and it snowballs. Government needs to provide for the defense of the country and a very basic safety net for people who find themselves poor through no fault of their own. Government is bloated beyond what is necessary and the economy is dying because of it. Government is symbiotic with the economy up to a point, beyond that it is parasitic.

 

[Rion]

Its idiotic to suggest taxing people will help the economy. Taxes take money out of the economy. It would be like taking pints of blood out of a sick person to try to make them better. It doesn't work that way. Its always fashionable to suggest taxing people who have more money than you do, even though doing so is short sighted and stupid.

The government is involved in excessive waste with these ongoing wars and government funding asinine things like 'green' companies that keep going bankrupt, of course the 'deal' is the owners of the green companies donated heavily to Obama and the democratic party in general. Add to that the bank bailouts and buying GM and it snowballs. Government needs to provide for the defense of the country and a very basic safety net for people who find themselves poor through no fault of their own. Government is bloated beyond what is necessary and the economy is dying because of it. Government is symbiotic with the economy up to a point, beyond that it is parasitic.

It's always nice when someone understands economics.

 

[Paulos23]

Its idiotic to suggest taxing people will help the economy. Taxes take money out of the economy. It would be like taking pints of blood out of a sick person to try to make them better. It doesn't work that way. Its always fashionable to suggest taxing people who have more money than you do, even though doing so is short sighted and stupid.

Except we have had lower taxes throughout the recession and it hasn't brought a quick recovery. What the past shows is that taxing the wealthy more doesn't have any effect on the economy. It doesn't slow it down nor speed it up. Any recovery is based on economic factors, like how many people have jobs, how much they are spending, and how much they are saving. Taxing the rich 10% doesn't effect how the other 90% spends.

And money that goes into the government via taxes doesn't just sit there, it goes right back out (unless it is used to pay interest rates) to pay for services and peoples salaries, which in turn adds to the economy.

Granted, paying off the debt will suck tax money to the people that hold that debt. But it is a short term pain that can help us long term, and it doesn't have to be done all at once or very painfully.

 

[Umaro]

Its idiotic to suggest taxing people will help the economy. Taxes take money out of the economy. It would be like taking pints of blood out of a sick person to try to make them better. It doesn't work that way. Its always fashionable to suggest taxing people who have more money than you do, even though doing so is short sighted and stupid.

The government is involved in excessive waste with these ongoing wars and government funding asinine things like 'green' companies that keep going bankrupt, of course the 'deal' is the owners of the green companies donated heavily to Obama and the democratic party in general. Add to that the bank bailouts and buying GM and it snowballs. Government needs to provide for the defense of the country and a very basic safety net for people who find themselves poor through no fault of their own. Government is bloated beyond what is necessary and the economy is dying because of it. Government is symbiotic with the economy up to a point, beyond that it is parasitic.

Where do you think all that waste goes? The government certainly doesn't have the money, and the workers certainly don't, so where did it all go? Perhaps we should ask the group that's gotten exponentially wealthier over the last 30 years? Raising taxes only hurts the people that can't make ends meet, not the people who couldn't spend it fast enough if they tried.

 

[Autumnleaf]

Except we have had lower taxes throughout the recession and it hasn't brought a quick recovery. What the past shows is that taxing the wealthy more doesn't have any effect on the economy. It doesn't slow it down nor speed it up. Any recovery is based on economic factors, like how many people have jobs, how much they are spending, and how much they are saving. Taxing the rich 10% doesn't effect how the other 90% spends.

Taxing people physically takes money out of the 'real' economy. If money is not in the economy then it slows down the economy.

And money that goes into the government via taxes doesn't just sit there, it goes right back out (unless it is used to pay interest rates) to pay for services and peoples salaries, which in turn adds to the economy.

In a roundabout inefficient way you are sort of right. It doesn't work very well though, as you can see by the current economy where the government is huge. The government related economy is akin to the Soviet Union way of doing things. Its a command economy that is inefficient and wasteful. Does it make everyone's life better to have guys frisking us at the airport while our border with Mexico is wide open? Did bailing out the banks while many Americans lose their homes and become homeless really make sense? I'm sure JP Morgan is wisely spending the bailout money we gave them on more derivative swaps since we didn't stop them from continuing that line of gambling, er I mean investing.

Granted, paying off the debt will suck tax money to the people that hold that debt. But it is a short term pain that can help us long term, and it doesn't have to be done all at once or very painfully.

It is impossible to pay back the debt. With the obligations we have to pensioners it will never happen, unless WWIII happens and the US is once again left intact while the rest of the world is in ruins.

The heavy taxes after WWII were okay because America was the only country in the world with intact manufacturing capacity, we could afford to pay them. That is no longer the case. America has huge financial obligations that were made during sunnier days. As the population gets older those obligations increase while the rest of the world gets more competitive.

 

[Wolseley]

Get the economy going and revenues will rise as income earners pay taxes thus paying down the debt.

Yeah, but it's "getting the economy going" again that's the sticky point, isn't it? Reminds me of a story I heard recently:

It's a slow day in the small town of Pumphandle, and the streets are deserted. Times are tough, everybody is in debt, and everybody is living on credit.

One day, a big, shiny new Cadillac drives into town and stops in front of the hotel. A well-dressed tourist gets out of the car, enters the hotel, and lays a $100 bill on the desk saying he wants to inspect the rooms upstairs to pick one for the night.

As soon as he walks upstairs, the hotel owner grabs the $100 bill and runs next door to pay his debt to the grocer for the food he's been buying on credit.

The grocer takes the $100 and runs across the street to pay his debt to the butcher for the meat he's been buying on credit.

The butcher takes the $100 and runs down the street to pay off his debt to the pig farmer for the pork he's been buying on credit.

The pig farmer takes the $100 and heads off to pay the guy at the co-op for the grain he's been buying on credit.

The guy at the co-op takes the $100 and runs down to the coffee shop to pay his debt to the local prostitute, who has been offering her "services" on credit.

The hooker takes the $100 and runs across the street into the hotel to pay off her debt for the room she's been using on credit.

At that point, the hotel owner hears the tourist coming back down the stairs, and places the $100 back on the counter so the traveler won't suspect anything.

The tourist walks up to the counter, states that none of the rooms are satisfactory, picks up the $100 bill and leaves.

No one produced anything; no one earned anything; absolutely nothing in this little town has changed in the slightest. None of the underlying causes of the economic malaise have been addressed or corrected. However, everybody in town now thinks that they're out of debt and there is a pervading atmosphere of happiness and optimism.

And that, my friends, is how a "stimulus package" works.

 

[kermit]

It's always nice when someone understands economics.

Funny, I was just thinking if he understood economics he wouldn't have posted that.

 

[stamperben]

Yeah, but it's "getting the economy going" again that's the sticky point, isn't it? Reminds me of a story I heard recently:

It's a slow day in the small town of Pumphandle, and the streets are deserted. Times are tough, everybody is in debt, and everybody is living on credit.

One day, a big, shiny new Cadillac drives into town and stops in front of the hotel. A well-dressed tourist gets out of the car, enters the hotel, and lays a $100 bill on the desk saying he wants to inspect the rooms upstairs to pick one for the night.

As soon as he walks upstairs, the hotel owner grabs the $100 bill and runs next door to pay his debt to the grocer for the food he's been buying on credit.

The grocer takes the $100 and runs across the street to pay his debt to the butcher for the meat he's been buying on credit.

The butcher takes the $100 and runs down the street to pay off his debt to the pig farmer for the pork he's been buying on credit.

The pig farmer takes the $100 and heads off to pay the guy at the co-op for the grain he's been buying on credit.

The guy at the co-op takes the $100 and runs down to the coffee shop to pay his debt to the local prostitute, who has been offering her "services" on credit.

The hooker takes the $100 and runs across the street into the hotel to pay off her debt for the room she's been using on credit.

At that point, the hotel owner hears the tourist coming back down the stairs, and places the $100 back on the counter so the traveler won't suspect anything.

The tourist walks up to the counter, states that none of the rooms are satisfactory, picks up the $100 bill and leaves.

No one produced anything; no one earned anything; absolutely nothing in this little town has changed in the slightest. None of the underlying causes of the economic malaise have been addressed or corrected. However, everybody in town now thinks that they're out of debt and there is a pervading atmosphere of happiness and optimism.

And that, my friends, is how a "stimulus package" works.

Just imagine what might have happened though if the rooms were decent.

 

[TerranceL]

Has the Bush tax cuts, which mainly went to the wealthy

Except for the parts of it that actually went to the middle class and the poor.

 

[TerranceL]

Except we have had lower taxes throughout the recession and it hasn't brought a quick recovery. What the past shows is that taxing the wealthy more doesn't have any effect on the economy.

Tell that to the state of california.

 

[JoyJuice]

An economy drowning in Obama's 'fairness' - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review

Not sure how raising capital gains tax from 15% to 20% is going to kill the desire to invest, while his cigarette tax comparison is just embarrassing as an equivalent.

In totality, that is one horrid article.

 

[Viren]

Its idiotic to suggest taxing people will help the economy. Taxes take money out of the economy. It would be like taking pints of blood out of a sick person to try to make them better. It doesn't work that way. Its always fashionable to suggest taxing people who have more money than you do, even though doing so is short sighted and stupid.

You don't increase taxes on everyone. FDR raised the taxes on the top earners from 25% to 60% and used the money to stimulate the economy. This is what happened.

 

[JoyJuice]

An economy drowning in Obama's 'fairness' - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review

Funny, I was just thinking if he understood economics he wouldn't have posted that.

Agreed.

 

[heymikey80]

You don't increase taxes on everyone. FDR raised the taxes on the top earners from 25% to 60% and used the money to stimulate the economy. This is what happened.

Very cool of you to prove the point.

Tax increases kicked in with payment of the 1936 taxes. In 1937.

That second downtick in the Great Depression occurred in 1937.

Now, true, FDR was reacting to try to balance the budget. But going into the Depression (and during it), FDR wasn't facing a government debt approaching the GDP.

We are.

 

[Viren]

Very cool of you to prove the point.

Tax increases kicked in with payment of the 1936 taxes. In 1937.

That second downtick in the Great Depression occurred in 1937.

Now, true, FDR was reacting to try to balance the budget. But going into the Depression (and during it), FDR wasn't facing a government debt approaching the GDP.

We are.

The Debt to GDP ratio is a concern, but we still haven't reached the all time peak which was hit in the 1940's at 127%.

Also, the top tax bracket rates we have now at 35% is nowhere near the 60% that FDR used to fund the spending.

 

[Umaro]

Yeah, but it's "getting the economy going" again that's the sticky point, isn't it? Reminds me of a story I heard recently:

It's a slow day in the small town of Pumphandle, and the streets are deserted. Times are tough, everybody is in debt, and everybody is living on credit.

One day, a big, shiny new Cadillac drives into town and stops in front of the hotel. A well-dressed tourist gets out of the car, enters the hotel, and lays a $100 bill on the desk saying he wants to inspect the rooms upstairs to pick one for the night.

As soon as he walks upstairs, the hotel owner grabs the $100 bill and runs next door to pay his debt to the grocer for the food he's been buying on credit.

The grocer takes the $100 and runs across the street to pay his debt to the butcher for the meat he's been buying on credit.

The butcher takes the $100 and runs down the street to pay off his debt to the pig farmer for the pork he's been buying on credit.

The pig farmer takes the $100 and heads off to pay the guy at the co-op for the grain he's been buying on credit.

The guy at the co-op takes the $100 and runs down to the coffee shop to pay his debt to the local prostitute, who has been offering her "services" on credit.

The hooker takes the $100 and runs across the street into the hotel to pay off her debt for the room she's been using on credit.

At that point, the hotel owner hears the tourist coming back down the stairs, and places the $100 back on the counter so the traveler won't suspect anything.

The tourist walks up to the counter, states that none of the rooms are satisfactory, picks up the $100 bill and leaves.

No one produced anything; no one earned anything; absolutely nothing in this little town has changed in the slightest. None of the underlying causes of the economic malaise have been addressed or corrected. However, everybody in town now thinks that they're out of debt and there is a pervading atmosphere of happiness and optimism.

And that, my friends, is how a "stimulus package" works.

This also illustrates why things aren't getting better. All of the money just piles up in the rich mans coffers. Why do the bakers, butchers, and hotel owners all need to buy their necessary things on credit? They have jobs, but all the money is going to the guy at the top.

Just look at the Chick-fil-a numbers I crunched in the other topic. The operator takes $190,000 home leaving 4.35 of his workers in poverty, whereas he could take $155,000 home and have none of them in poverty.

The stimulus goes out so these workers can buy food and such and stimulate the businesses in the area. So they do, and the operator takes his 190k again leaving them in poverty again and nothings changed! The operator says to blame the stimulus, but the real issue is that full time workers making him a handsome salary are still in poverty when he could easily pay them enough not to be.

The idea of "investment" is to get a business thriving, but it's come to be used as a means to get the owner thriving and the rest still struggling.