More taxes coming

[Lucky... 0]

I've asked before, let's use history, show me a major fedral tax cut that has led to increased revenues and a better overall fisccal picture. Show me major fed tax cuts that led to disaster. Perhaps an example of a good tax cut would be in teh early 1960's when JFK/LBJ cut the top brkt from 91% to 70 something. 91% in peacetime is too high, even tho we were in VN, I agree with brinbging them out of the 90's/80's, but that was a leftover WWII tax brkt that had to come down.

Show me where major cuts work. Let's use history over theory.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

As for poverty increasing.... that is not for me to decide or the govt. and poverty does not decrease by giving them tax payers money.

but it does by increasing the minimum wage
(which is not money for nothing)

No it doesn't it makes goods more expensive and hikes inflation.

no it doesn't - it reduces poverty through work rather than welfare

Only in alternate-reality.net - in the real world it's exactly as rstanley said.

in your opinion

Only in alternate-reality.net

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[dreamdancer 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

As for poverty increasing.... that is not for me to decide or the govt. and poverty does not decrease by giving them tax payers money.

but it does by increasing the minimum wage
(which is not money for nothing)

No it doesn't it makes goods more expensive and hikes inflation.

no it doesn't - it reduces poverty through work rather than welfare

Only in alternate-reality.net - in the real world it's exactly as rstanley said.

in your opinion

Only in alternate-reality.net

meanwhile back in the real world it's either raise the minimum wage or raise taxes
(your choice)

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

As for poverty increasing.... that is not for me to decide or the govt. and poverty does not decrease by giving them tax payers money.

but it does by increasing the minimum wage
(which is not money for nothing)

No it doesn't it makes goods more expensive and hikes inflation.

no it doesn't - it reduces poverty through work rather than welfare

Only in alternate-reality.net - in the real world it's exactly as rstanley said.

in your opinion

Only in alternate-reality.net

meanwhile back in the real world it's either raise the minimum wage or raise taxes
(your choice)

Both solutions resulting in higher costs of goods/services and lowering the buying power of the poor you claim to want to help.

Brilliant.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[dreamdancer 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

As for poverty increasing.... that is not for me to decide or the govt. and poverty does not decrease by giving them tax payers money.

but it does by increasing the minimum wage
(which is not money for nothing)

No it doesn't it makes goods more expensive and hikes inflation.

no it doesn't - it reduces poverty through work rather than welfare

Only in alternate-reality.net - in the real world it's exactly as rstanley said.

in your opinion

Only in alternate-reality.net

meanwhile back in the real world it's either raise the minimum wage or raise taxes
(your choice)

Both solutions resulting in higher costs of goods/services and lowering the buying power of the poor you claim to want to help.

Brilliant.

increasing wages gives greater buying power for the poor - not less.

(meanwhile, by default, you're choosing higher taxes)

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

increasing wages gives greater buying power for the poor - not less.

Prove it, for once. Show where increasing minimum wages have had no affect on prices of goods and services.

Quote

(meanwhile, by default, you're choosing higher taxes)

I refute both of your inane choices, so no, I'm not choosing anything 'by default'. Your argument has NO basis in reality.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[futuredivot 0]

Quote

increasing wages gives greater buying power for the poor - not less.

No it doesn't. If it costs me more to make a product due to higher labor rates I am going to raise prices at least that same amount and probably round UP to the next percentage point.

You are only as strong as the prey you devour

[dreamdancer 0]

Quote

Quote

increasing wages gives greater buying power for the poor - not less.

No it doesn't. If it costs me more to make a product due to higher labor rates I am going to raise prices at least that same amount and probably round UP to the next percentage point.

or become more efficient
(meanwhile it still gives greater buying power to the poor)

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[futuredivot 0]

What in the hell do you do for a living? It's not manufacturing.

You are only as strong as the prey you devour

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

What in the hell do you do for a living? It's not manufacturing.

Not economics, either.

link

Quote

Aaronson (2001) finds that minimum wage increases tend to raise prices. The magnitude and timing of these price increases is striking. Within three months of a wage hike, Aaronson finds that a 10 percent increase in the minimum wage resulted in a 0.4–0.7 percent increase in restaurant prices. Much of the increase occurred within the first month of the wage hike. In the fast food sector, prices rise 1.5 percent in response to a 10 percent increase.

- and -

Quote

Aaronson and French (2003) construct a formal model to indirectly pin down the employment response to a minimum wage increase. In a perfectly competitive labor market, the authors find that a 10 percent increase in the minimum wage will result in a 2.5 to 3.5 percent decrease in employment.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[pirana 0]

Quote

I take it u are a t totaleer or at tea bagger or something like that

Not to sound stupid; but I'm not perfectly certain what the whole teabag thing is. I take it from catching it in passing that it is a general putdown of conservatives and/or Republicans.

Fiscally I am definitely a conservative; and what I call a Responsibilitist. For any entity (state, individual, organization, whatever) to spend so much more than they have is simply irresponsible. It just delays the inevitable (which is the real work it will take to actually fix things) and punishes later payors.

I believe the most valuable approach to improving the human condition is having a foundation built on freedom, liberty, and individual responsibility. Temper that with just enough codified law to keep those without principles from running amok. Easier said than done, but we should not throw in the towel and move to the nanny state form of government.

And for the record, it occurs to me that both of our political parties have run amok. They have both strayed so far from the middle; hell bent for leather on taking us to one extreme or the other, and have placed our liberties and freedoms in the back seat behind their extremeist agendas. I do not think we should be forcing our system down the world's throat in order to further financial interests, and I also do not think we should be coddling our citizenry like the helpless toddlers so many of them have become.

What the hell ever happened to a reasonable middle ground and individual freedoms? When that is suggested, one side responds that I am a heartless Nazi neo-con; and the other side responds with 'You pinko-commie lazy meddler.'

We have become Peter O'Rourke's Parliament of Whores.

" . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

[pirana 0]

Quote

After 30 years of TAX CUTS and VOO DOO DOO economics... SOMEONE has to pay all the bills that have been wrung up in the name of mollifying dumbasses who do the same thing with their personal finances...

FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY MY ASS

Too bad this admin. is not they are just throwing more debt on it.

After seeing how the last 3 rePUBLIClown administrations have run it up.... I am willing to see something different. All of you expecting miracles overnight and thinking someone else was going to pay for you are what got us to where we are now.

No one else has had to pay for what I have. Paid my way, and then some, my entire life. I consider it my duty to myself, my family, my country. Too bad we have now moved to a point where it is entirely acceptable to shun that approach.

" . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

[dreamdancer 0]

Quote

Quote

What in the hell do you do for a living? It's not manufacturing.

Not economics, either.

link

Quote

Aaronson (2001) finds that minimum wage increases tend to raise prices. The magnitude and timing of these price increases is striking. Within three months of a wage hike, Aaronson finds that a 10 percent increase in the minimum wage resulted in a 0.4–0.7 percent increase in restaurant prices. Much of the increase occurred within the first month of the wage hike. In the fast food sector, prices rise 1.5 percent in response to a 10 percent increase.

so, using your own figures, the poor get a price rise of a couple of percent, at the very most. in return they get a ten percent wage increase so their poverty has been reduced

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

What in the hell do you do for a living? It's not manufacturing.

Not economics, either.

link

Quote

Aaronson (2001) finds that minimum wage increases tend to raise prices. The magnitude and timing of these price increases is striking. Within three months of a wage hike, Aaronson finds that a 10 percent increase in the minimum wage resulted in a 0.4–0.7 percent increase in restaurant prices. Much of the increase occurred within the first month of the wage hike. In the fast food sector, prices rise 1.5 percent in response to a 10 percent increase.

so, using your own figures, the poor get a price rise of a couple of percent, at the very most. in return they get a ten percent wage increase so their poverty has been reduced

Do you deliberately PRACTICE to miss the point so much? Do you think that restaurants and fast food places are the ONLY places the price goes up?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[dreamdancer 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

What in the hell do you do for a living? It's not manufacturing.

Not economics, either.

link

Quote

Aaronson (2001) finds that minimum wage increases tend to raise prices. The magnitude and timing of these price increases is striking. Within three months of a wage hike, Aaronson finds that a 10 percent increase in the minimum wage resulted in a 0.4–0.7 percent increase in restaurant prices. Much of the increase occurred within the first month of the wage hike. In the fast food sector, prices rise 1.5 percent in response to a 10 percent increase.

so, using your own figures, the poor get a price rise of a couple of percent, at the very most. in return they get a ten percent wage increase so their poverty has been reduced

Do you deliberately PRACTICE to miss the point so much? Do you think that restaurants and fast food places are the ONLY places the price goes up?

if everything goes up two percent then the inflation rate is two percent. meanwhile the poor have ten percent extra to spend
(so the poor are in profit by eight percent)

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[Rstanley0312 1]

Quote

Quote

I take it u are a t totaleer or at tea bagger or something like that

Not to sound stupid; but I'm not perfectly certain what the whole teabag thing is. I take it from catching it in passing that it is a general putdown of conservatives and/or Republicans.

Fiscally I am definitely a conservative; and what I call a Responsibilitist. For any entity (state, individual, organization, whatever) to spend so much more than they have is simply irresponsible. It just delays the inevitable (which is the real work it will take to actually fix things) and punishes later payors.

I believe the most valuable approach to improving the human condition is having a foundation built on freedom, liberty, and individual responsibility. Temper that with just enough codified law to keep those without principles from running amok. Easier said than done, but we should not throw in the towel and move to the nanny state form of government.

And for the record, it occurs to me that both of our political parties have run amok. They have both strayed so far from the middle; hell bent for leather on taking us to one extreme or the other, and have placed our liberties and freedoms in the back seat behind their extremeist agendas. I do not think we should be forcing our system down the world's throat in order to further financial interests, and I also do not think we should be coddling our citizenry like the helpless toddlers so many of them have become.

What the hell ever happened to a reasonable middle ground and individual freedoms? When that is suggested, one side responds that I am a heartless Nazi neo-con; and the other side responds with 'You pinko-commie lazy meddler.'

We have become Peter O'Rourke's Parliament of Whores.

Great post! I'm right there with you!

Life is all about ass....either you're kicking it, kissing it, working it off, or trying to get a piece of it.
Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000
www.fundraiseadventure.com

[Rstanley0312 1]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

What in the hell do you do for a living? It's not manufacturing.

Not economics, either.

link

Quote

Aaronson (2001) finds that minimum wage increases tend to raise prices. The magnitude and timing of these price increases is striking. Within three months of a wage hike, Aaronson finds that a 10 percent increase in the minimum wage resulted in a 0.4–0.7 percent increase in restaurant prices. Much of the increase occurred within the first month of the wage hike. In the fast food sector, prices rise 1.5 percent in response to a 10 percent increase.

so, using your own figures, the poor get a price rise of a couple of percent, at the very most. in return they get a ten percent wage increase so their poverty has been reduced

Do you deliberately PRACTICE to miss the point so much? Do you think that restaurants and fast food places are the ONLY places the price goes up?

if everything goes up two percent then the inflation rate is two percent. meanwhile the poor have ten percent extra to spend
(so the poor are in profit by eight percent)

Bc you will not answer a question I have asked 3-4 times now I'm going to assume you are not a US citizen. So, in your country how is the economy? Where is the minimum wage?

Life is all about ass....either you're kicking it, kissing it, working it off, or trying to get a piece of it.
Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000
www.fundraiseadventure.com

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Do you deliberately PRACTICE to miss the point so much? Do you think that restaurants and fast food places are the ONLY places the price goes up?

if everything goes up two percent then the inflation rate is two percent. meanwhile the poor have ten percent extra to spend
(so the poor are in profit by eight percent)

Ok, so you DO practice deliberately missing the point.

It's not just fast food/restaurants that would raise prices, so that 10% and more is long gone.

That's *IF* you're not part of the 2.5-3.5% that get laid off, of course.

(I noticed you'd forgotten to address that and didn't want you to forget about it)

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[dreamdancer 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Do you deliberately PRACTICE to miss the point so much? Do you think that restaurants and fast food places are the ONLY places the price goes up?

if everything goes up two percent then the inflation rate is two percent. meanwhile the poor have ten percent extra to spend
(so the poor are in profit by eight percent)

Ok, so you DO practice deliberately missing the point.

It's not just fast food/restaurants that would raise prices, so that 10% and more is long gone.

That's *IF* you're not part of the 2.5-3.5% that get laid off, of course.

(I noticed you'd forgotten to address that and didn't want you to forget about it)

i'll get back to the employment point once i'm sure you understand the concept of inflation

(it may take some time)

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

i'll get back to the employment point once i'm sure you understand the concept of inflation

You'd best start studying, then.

Quote

(it may take some time)

I'm sure it'll come to you with sufficient study.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[pirana 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

I take it u are a t totaleer or at tea bagger or something like that

Not to sound stupid; but I'm not perfectly certain what the whole teabag thing is. I take it from catching it in passing that it is a general putdown of conservatives and/or Republicans.

Fiscally I am definitely a conservative; and what I call a Responsibilitist. For any entity (state, individual, organization, whatever) to spend so much more than they have is simply irresponsible. It just delays the inevitable (which is the real work it will take to actually fix things) and punishes later payors.

I believe the most valuable approach to improving the human condition is having a foundation built on freedom, liberty, and individual responsibility. Temper that with just enough codified law to keep those without principles from running amok. Easier said than done, but we should not throw in the towel and move to the nanny state form of government.

And for the record, it occurs to me that both of our political parties have run amok. They have both strayed so far from the middle; hell bent for leather on taking us to one extreme or the other, and have placed our liberties and freedoms in the back seat behind their extremeist agendas. I do not think we should be forcing our system down the world's throat in order to further financial interests, and I also do not think we should be coddling our citizenry like the helpless toddlers so many of them have become.

What the hell ever happened to a reasonable middle ground and individual freedoms? When that is suggested, one side responds that I am a heartless Nazi neo-con; and the other side responds with 'You pinko-commie lazy meddler.'

We have become Peter O'Rourke's Parliament of Whores.

Great post! I'm right there with you!

I think there are a lot of us; so the question is - Why do our opinions get such short shrift? Is it that most politicians are scared shitless of occupyig the middle ground?

" . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

[pirana 0]

Quote

Quote

Of course they will have to raise taxes; institute a trillion dollar social program while the economy is down and the money has to come from somewhere. The line that sums it up best is the analogy of the alcoholic. Our government will never raise enough taxes to voluntarily stop asking for more because they appear to be convinced one more drink won't hurt that much. The problems we have are process and priority - not shortages.

Ask a school district official how much they need and it will always be more than they get. Don't care how much they get, don't care how much my property taxes go up each year; the answer is always at least a little more.

They are drunk on tax and spend authority. If this gains traction and gets to the point of serious consideration of mechanics and logistics; watch for all the drunks to line up to explain their reasons for exempting their particular pet products, people, programs, etc.

"My name is Senator X, and I have a problem; but here is why my special need should be left alone."

I think you need to examine how much American tax revenue is spent pouring people and materiel into, and American blood onto the sands of, Iraq and Afghanistan. How much is being spent on the latest fighter jets; how much on the latest aircraft carriers; how much on defense contractors; how much on maintaining an actual or de facto military presence virtually everywhere around the globe.

Or... How much on providing the lion's share of the security umbrella for Canada and Western Europe and South Korea and Japan, so that they, not proportionally reciprocating, can provide universal health coverage to their citizens, while self-employed and under-employed and unemployed Americans who don't have employer-based health isurance can either go to the emergency room or go fuck themselves.

Anyone who doesn't recognize that as pouring drinks endlessly down the alcoholic's gullet is naive.

Let's say the US pulled out of Afghanistan and Iraq entirely and reduced its military budget by a modest 30%. Know how much universal health coverage that would pay for Americans without raising a single extra tax dollar? Do you really think that the result of doing that is that suddenly Americans will have to worry about the invading hordes wanting to rape our daughters and steal our American way of life?

You want to cut off the REAL alcoholic without raising taxes? This is how to do it.

I do not disagree with that; spending is out of control on many fronts. The missing ingredient is not more money, it is accountability.

Imagine if the government had to actually follow a process or model that included measuring for results and justifying additional spending before getting more money; and (perish the thought) actually closing down programs that were not effective.

" . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

; and (perish the thought) actually closing down programs that were not effective.

here's your problem -

"effective" does NOT mean benefit to the people or fixes a problem or generates income

"effective" only means it's a good PR clip that makes people feel (good/validated/vengeful/etc) enough to create votes for Congresscritters

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[Rstanley0312 1]

Quote

Quote

; and (perish the thought) actually closing down programs that were not effective.

here's your problem -

"effective" does NOT mean benefit to the people or fixes a problem or generates income

"effective" only means it's a good PR clip that makes people feel (good/validated/vengeful/etc) enough to create votes for Congresscritters

So true.... and sad

Life is all about ass....either you're kicking it, kissing it, working it off, or trying to get a piece of it.
Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000
www.fundraiseadventure.com

[pirana 0]

Quote

Real basic.... if you cannot afford it don't spend the money. Do you understand?

That line kind of says it all; but based on the level of consumer debt out there, I'd say the concept does not register with at least the simple majority of citizens. Extending that thought, if some critical mass of people as individuals no longer value or practice fiscal responsibility, why would we expect them to demand it of those administering our government spending.

Kind of becomes a chicken and egg thing. Did the public become drunken spenders because, what the heck, that is what the government does? Or did the government become a drunken spender because, what the heck, that is how people behave?

" . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley