Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-06-2011, 03:22 PM
 
Location: Hoboken
19,890 posts, read 18,752,619 times
Reputation: 3146

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost View Post
Would you be happier if unemployment rate were lower but the jobs were being lost, as was the case during first 32 months of Bush Presidency? Yes? Given your love for the number, it sure sounds like it.

People working is the key, as Obama will find out in 2012.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-06-2011, 03:25 PM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,818,277 times
Reputation: 12341
Quote:
Originally Posted by shorebaby View Post
People working is the key, as Obama will find out in 2012.
Probably, and I'm sure you're hoping that they do... in other words, you're surely hoping that the economy stays a disaster and job growth pathetic. Its the kind of patriotism I fully expect.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-06-2011, 03:28 PM
 
Location: Hoboken
19,890 posts, read 18,752,619 times
Reputation: 3146
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost View Post
Probably, and I'm sure you're hoping that they do... in other words, you're surely hoping that the economy stays a disaster and job growth pathetic. Its the kind of patriotism I fully expect.

Quite the opposite, however Obama's policies make continued disaster inevitable. Insanity is doing the same thing and expecting a different result......
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-06-2011, 03:29 PM
 
Location: Unperson Everyman Land
38,642 posts, read 26,378,527 times
Reputation: 12648
Quote:
Originally Posted by ovcatto View Post
States may not be able to print money, but consistently cutting revenues isn't exactly the brightest way to pay one's bills.

How do you cut revenues?

Are taxes refunded once a certian dollar amount is collected?

Oh, I get it...you meant tax rates.

Yes, tax rates may be cut and in most cases revenue increases due to increased economic activity following the cuts.

That's what Reagan did and revenue doubled during the 1980s because the economy grew.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-06-2011, 03:30 PM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,818,277 times
Reputation: 12341
Quote:
Originally Posted by shorebaby View Post
Quite the opposite, however Obama's policies make continued disaster inevitable. Insanity is doing the same thing and expecting a different result......
I can sense your excitement... I'm sure you can't wait!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-06-2011, 03:33 PM
 
Location: Hoboken
19,890 posts, read 18,752,619 times
Reputation: 3146
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost View Post
I can sense your excitement... I'm sure you can't wait!

Alas, it saddnes me the left is reduced to calling folks unpatriotic for predicting the outcomes of faulty policies. Oh well, there are some pathologies I can't help.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-06-2011, 03:36 PM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,818,277 times
Reputation: 12341
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey View Post
How do you cut revenues?

Are taxes refunded once a certian dollar amount is collected?

Oh, I get it...you meant tax rates.

Yes, tax rates may be cut and in most cases revenue increases due to increased economic activity following the cuts.

That's what Reagan did and revenue doubled during the 1980s because the economy grew.
Reagan and Volker manufactured a recession, and took full advantage of an economy that had been stagnant for couple of years. Tax revenues fell behind by four years, however (1982, 1983, 1984 and 1985 tax revenues were lower than that in 1981). Spending did not, and increased the debt, a reason 1986 tax reform was undertaken to address that effect. There was a negative growth in tax receipts after Reagan's first term. Over two terms, revenue grew by 19%. Compared that to 52% under Clinton's two terms.
1981: $1.251 Trillion
1985: $1.251 Trillion (after lower receipts in 1982, 1983 and 1984 than in 1981).
1989: $1.494 Trillion

1992: $1.468 Trillion
2000: $2.310 Trillion

Quote:
Originally Posted by shorebaby View Post
Alas, it saddnes me the left is reduced to calling folks unpatriotic for predicting the outcomes of faulty policies. Oh well, there are some pathologies i can't help.
To the contrary, I called you a patriot. But I don't want to put a damper on your excitement. Perhaps we can talk about something more meaningful?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-06-2011, 03:48 PM
 
31,387 posts, read 37,048,770 times
Reputation: 15038
Quote:
Originally Posted by VTHokieFan View Post
This downturn wasn't caused by a lack of demand.
Perhaps you would care to point to a quote where I made such a claim?

Quote:
Quoting your Keynesian textbook isn't impressive nor convincing.
Considering the audience, I'm not surprised. So is it your argument that producers are producing at maximum capacity? That the only reason they have been laying off workers is because they cannot keep up with the demand for their products?

Quote:
All that QE2 money is in the stock market,
And investments in stocks is not for the purpose of capitalization? Am I to suppose that the purpose of issuing stocks is to that investors can have pretty framed hanging from their walls, sort of a Franklin Mint collector's item???

Quote:
Keynes said that the multiplier effect should mean that the economy would be expanding right now
Is it your argument that the economy contracted during the period of applied economic stimulus? Of course the Keynesians argued rather forcefully that stimulus was woefully inadequate which has been borne out by the growth and decline of GDP before and after the stimulus as clearly demonstrated and confirmed by neo-classical economist such as Mark Zandi, Alan Binder, Kenneth Rogoff, Sung Won Sohn and others.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:14 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top