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 09-18-2012, 11:34 PM
 
Location: Littleton, CO
20,893 posts, read 16,049,604 times
Reputation: 3954

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by wnewberry22 View Post
How did the GOP cause the RECESSION? Attempt to be thorough...
You think the recession is the problem? It's not. Recessions come and go. The problem is that we have so little latitude for getting out of this one because Republicans squandered the budget surplus inherited from the Clinton administration on tax cuts for the wealthy, two foreign wars, and a new Medicare drug benefit that was never paid for.

The Bush tax cuts remain the single greatest component of the structural deficit.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-18-2012, 11:51 PM
 
Location: Lincoln, NE (via SW Virginia)
1,644 posts, read 2,166,486 times
Reputation: 1071
They are a contributor to the debt but do they dampen growth? In late July 2010, analysts at Deutsche Bank said letting the Bush tax cuts expire for those earning more than $250,000 would greatly slow economic recovery. Also claiming they are the single greatest contributor to our deficit is a little inaccurate...over 10 years it has added 1.7 trillion Would more investment friendly tax policies generate foreign investment? Maybe decreasing the corporate tax rate to 20 or 25 from am effective rate of 39.6...Which I believe makes is 2nd highest in the OECD behind Japan.

The budget request was 2.6 trillion and Obama's requested outlays were 3.7 trillion...

And Clinton doesn't deserve all the credit for being the benefactor of what equated to the invention of the Internet on his watch.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-19-2012, 12:00 AM
 
Location: Littleton, CO
20,893 posts, read 16,049,604 times
Reputation: 3954
Quote:
Originally Posted by wnewberry22 View Post
They are a contributor to the debt but do they dampen growth?
Yes.

But worse, they drastically limit our options for responding to slow growth.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wnewberry22
In late July 2010, analysts at Deutsche Bank said letting the Bush tax cuts expire for those earning more than $250,000 would greatly slow economic recovery.
And their predictions have been so good this far?

Nonpartisan congressional study: Tax breaks for rich don't grow jobs | The Connecticut Mirror

Quote:
Originally Posted by wnewberry22
Also claiming they are the single greatest contributor to our deficit is a little inaccurate.
Then it's a good thing I didn't say that. I said it was the single greatest component of our structural deficit. The recession and the stimulus were not structural.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wnewberry22
And Clinton doesn't deserve all the credit for being the benefactor of what equated to the invention of the Internet on his watch.
Who gives a ****? It doesn't matter who gets credit for the surplus.

We still know who squandered it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-19-2012, 03:08 AM
 
24,370 posts, read 22,982,365 times
Reputation: 14945
I went to a local mall today to hunt down a pair of shoes (got them at Kohl's ) and was amazed by just how many empty stores there were and how dead the mall was. A closer mall has been hurting but this mall was much worse. A third mall is also really bad. Major suburban shopping areas are barely hanging on. There are closed up restaurants, too.
What recovery is there? Its as bad as it was a few years ago, worse probably.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-19-2012, 06:56 AM
 
Location: Lincoln, NE (via SW Virginia)
1,644 posts, read 2,166,486 times
Reputation: 1071
Ok...now let me tell you where you're wrong.

Budget deficits are a problem but no economic data shows it is the source directly of limited growth. The real problem is tax structure uncertainty and monetary policy that doesn't favor investment. Why would a company want to invest sizable sums into a nation with a risk of paying the second highest marginal tax rate in the post industrial world when tons of cheaper options exist? That is one of the chief reasons our jobs are leaving. And I think the word your looking for is cyclical instead of structural...structural implies our economy is operating fully functional. If that were the case our revenues would be higher to compensate for unemployment. Unless of course you consider 8% unemployment functional...

Further...its fun reading your lib talking points but most of them are either categorically false of created by "objective" studies that can be conjured up from any website espousing your point of view. I can also cite a ton of studies and international examples of a low tax structure and tax cuts as growth stimulators. And whether bush "squandered" our money is subject to debate. The way I see it is that he returned money to the pocket of those who gave it....do you believe it is the governments money. If we REALLY want to tackle our budget problems the two biggest areas of opportunity are entitlements and defense. We've created a Scandinavian style entitlement structure where a lot of people think that SS is a 401k. Do you remember that social security at its inception was supposed to be temporary? THATmis our problem. We HAVE the tax revenue to pay for our essential functions....but as with any business it has to accommodate smaller revenues to stay afloat and we refuse to do it. The USA is the next Greece. The Greek entitlement and public sector union legacy costs are thr cause of their downfall and you liberals are so in love with the idiot trying his best to replicate their policy.

Last edited by wnewberry22; 09-19-2012 at 07:22 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-19-2012, 07:07 AM
 
5,756 posts, read 3,988,985 times
Reputation: 2308
Quote:
Originally Posted by HistorianDude View Post
It will be Obama's economy when the Republican Congress stops actively sabotaging it.
Here we go again Obama had the Super majority for HC other legislations and ignored the economy for his pet peave against those evil insurance companies.All the while he bailout the Unions spending our money to stimulate the economy which was a ruse to take over key industries,finacial institutions that was screwed up by Congress in the first place.

Guess the Repubs have kept Obama and Dirty Harry Reid from a yearly budget too....

After four years yes he is just Jimmy Carter FDR warmed over...a vessel with no substance....hollow with feet of clay....in his own words INCOMPLETE.....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-19-2012, 08:36 AM
 
3,345 posts, read 3,069,171 times
Reputation: 1725
Quote:
Originally Posted by HistorianDude View Post
It will be Obama's economy when the Republican Congress stops actively sabotaging it.
Stop turning down job bills because of rigid bat **** crazy Dem ideology (like abortion language) and the country would have had improvement

It is the Dems fault here....no matter how badly you fail to see with blinders on
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-19-2012, 08:37 AM
 
Location: Norman, OK
3,478 posts, read 7,241,508 times
Reputation: 1201
Nope. If Obama is elected, in 2016, when the UE is 8.5% and inflation is rampant, the Democrats will blame George Bush.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-19-2012, 08:50 AM
 
Location: Littleton, CO
20,893 posts, read 16,049,604 times
Reputation: 3954
Quote:
Originally Posted by wnewberry22 View Post
How closely do you believe Obama considered Ryan's budget?
Certainly no closer than it deserved. It is a second great depression waiting to be born.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wnewberry22
Let me pose this question...

What do you believe caused the recession? Was it Bush? What specifically caused the recession IYO?
I believe that the economic cycle caused the recession... initiated by a real estate bubble. I further believe that it was exacerbated by Bush's squandering of the inherited budget surplus, and has been deliberately prolonged by a Republican congress intent on denying this president a second term.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-19-2012, 08:52 AM
 
Location: Lincoln, NE (via SW Virginia)
1,644 posts, read 2,166,486 times
Reputation: 1071
Quote:
Originally Posted by HistorianDude View Post
Yes.

But worse, they drastically limit our options for responding to slow growth.


And their predictions have been so good this far?

Nonpartisan congressional study: Tax breaks for rich don't grow jobs | The Connecticut Mirror


Then it's a good thing I didn't say that. I said it was the single greatest component of our structural deficit. The recession and the stimulus were not structural.


Who gives a ****? It doesn't matter who gets credit for the surplus.

We still know who squandered it.

Again...you'll have to forgive me, I didn't read your post all the way through. I'm an economist by education and a budget analyst by trade but I'm having trouble figuring out how lower tax revenue mitigates our ability to respond to slow growth. Please offer your explanation as to how this occurs being as thorough as possible. Would you think that QE3 will assist? Perhaps expanding the monetary supply? What will that do for consumer credit? Afterall people need loans to create business typically.

I'll await your response on that one.

Another quick question I have for you, sir...

What does Obama plan to do differently? Does he plan on instituting another simulus? How about following suit with France and working to raise the tax limit to over half on the "wealthy." Lets keep in the mind that the 2011 tax receipts have shown that the wealthiest 10% (AGI of 112k and above) pay 70 cents of every federal dollar while the bottom 50% (AGI of 33k roughly and below) pay less than 2 cents. And this isn't counting the percentage that literally has no federal tax liability. Should the 10% pay more than 70%? What will Obama do with his four more years?

Again, be as thorough as you can.
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 02:30 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