Tax Cuts During Deficits: A Form of Socialism?

[mysticaltyger]

Originally Posted by Hoonose

What more?

Here's a starting point:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3r3KqZJVRYM

[Hoonose]

Originally Posted by mysticaltyger

Here's a starting point:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3r3KqZJVRYM

Do you have a bit of a cliff note?

[jasperhobbs]

One thing I wonder is this. If the tax cuts take effect and businesses have more money to work with and expand, where will they get the workers?

Around here and I am betting it is nationwide, lots of help wanted signs and not enough workers that want to fill the positions. However, if companies up the wages, that would help.

[Elliott_CA]

Originally Posted by jasperhobbs

One thing I wonder is this. If the tax cuts take effect and businesses have more money to work with and expand, where will they get the workers?

There's no evidence that expansion is being held back by lack of money. The opposite is true; major corporations and institutions have a record amount of cash on hand. They aren't putting that money to work because they see no market for additional production. Therefore giving them a supply side tax cut now will just make the savings glut larger.

You're right about wages. That's what holding the economy back. Wages have been more or less flat over the last 15 years (except for minimum wages in some states). Low wages suppress demand because workers lack discretionary income. Raise wages, the workers start buying goods (demand goes up) and those companies will start investing cash in capital expansion. We need demand-side stimulus, not supply side.

[jetgraphics]

Originally Posted by Led Zeppelin

The Scandinavian countries aren't socialist.[Incorrect] Some of them have higher economic freedom indexes than the US does... but they're all in the same ballpark. "Socialist mechanisms" I suspect you're referring to are entitlements and safety nets; and these are NOT "socialist mechanisms" especially given the fact that they exist LEAST in countries that are socialist. No surprise there. Socialism is more about ownership issues than taxation and revenue allocation. [INCORRECT]

You just don't like what I said (I suspect you read it too hastily) and so you want to say I'm being "too political". It's laughable what people consider, but people do. It sounds like you don't like me pointing out other people besides rightist Americans comport to conspiracy theories. But EVERYBODY is a conspiracy theorist.... Ro2113.... at one time or another. So, why not just NOT respond to this response, and the whole thing will die a quick death.

COMMUNISM - the ownership of property, or means of production, distribution and supply, by the whole of a classless society, with wealth shared on the principle of 'to each according to his need', each yielding fully 'according to his ability'.
- - - Webster's Dictionary.

SOCIALISM - A political and economic theory advocating collective ownership of the means of production and control of distribution. It is based upon the belief that all, while contributing to the good of the community, are equally entitled to the care and protection which the community can provide.
- - - Webster's dictionary
.......................

Socialism and communism = COLLECTIVE ownership.

That ownership can be direct - or indirect, via extensive regulation and taxation, making the government paramount.

And "entitlements" are public charity under threat, duress, or coercion - theft by government.

SOCIALISM: A system of compulsory charity, expropriation of property for the benefit of another, administered by the morally bankrupt “benevolent” totalitarian police state which takes a cut for their magnanimous sagacity, while penalizing the productive, rewarding the non-productive, facilitating genocide, depopulation and the destruction of families. Furthermore, it splinters a united nation into factions : recipients versus donors. Other than that, Socialist slavery is fine.
[/sarcasm]

If you need permission and or pay a tax to live, work, travel, buy, sell, own, build a house, and exercise civil and political liberty, you’re not free nor at liberty.

[jasperhobbs]

Originally Posted by Elliott_CA

There's no evidence that expansion is being held back by lack of money. The opposite is true; major corporations and institutions have a record amount of cash on hand. They aren't putting that money to work because they see no market for additional production. Therefore giving them a supply side tax cut now will just make the savings glut larger.

You're right about wages. That's what holding the economy back. Wages have been more or less flat over the last 15 years (except for minimum wages in some states). Low wages suppress demand because workers lack discretionary income. Raise wages, the workers start buying goods (demand goes up) and those companies will start investing cash in capital expansion. We need demand-side stimulus, not supply side.

Great post. Companies do seem to have a lot of cash on hand.