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 06-22-2011, 01:44 PM
 
Location: Los Angeles
14,361 posts, read 9,795,791 times
Reputation: 6663

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by le roi View Post
nah, national politics do not affect me psychologically like they do some people. i use strong language but in reality i am very detached from it.
Yea, that wwas really mean't as light hearted sarcasm. I can imagin the extremists on both sides spending a great deal of time sloshed just to get through their days.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-22-2011, 02:29 PM
 
Location: Long Island, NY
19,792 posts, read 13,958,729 times
Reputation: 5661
Quote:
Originally Posted by steven_h View Post
Were you around during Carter and Reagan? I'd bet you weren't, or maybe a young child at the time.

According to your charts the Carter years look like a boom time. That's hardly the case. I was there and believe me, it sucked! I can also tell you that the Reagan years were some of the best years ever (happy days). You can throw all the charts up that make your arguments sound credible, but anyone who had to pay bills, buy gas and pay rent during those 12 years will tell you that Carter was a horrible President and it took Reagan his first four years to turn his fiasco around.
You are confusing the state of the economy with government revenues. What Reagan claimed was that by cutting taxes, economic activity would rise so much that the lower tax rates would yield more revenue. It didn't happen. There is no way you had intuitive feeling about government revenue.

It's also easy to see why lower tax rates don't yield more revenue. This example will show you. Let's say we have a $10 trillion GDP and federal revenues are $2.5 trillion with a 50% tax rate. Then, you decide to drop tax-rates to 35%. GDP would need to rise to over $14 trillion just to yield the same revenue.

What you remember from 30 years ago is biased. While you may remember Carters last really bad year, you may not remember the good years. Carter's GDP gains were equal to Reagan. That's not subject to opinion. GDP is measurable.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-22-2011, 02:38 PM
 
13,005 posts, read 18,919,106 times
Reputation: 9252
When you reduce the price of something the demand increases. When airline fares dropped after deregulation everyone wanted to fly. Computers have been dropping in price for years and many are not satisfied with just one. And when taxes, the price of government, went down, voters demanded more from government. Far from starving the beast, it makes it grow faster.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-22-2011, 02:40 PM
 
24,421 posts, read 23,084,509 times
Reputation: 15029
Top Ten Liberal plans to deal with the US debt:
10. Print more money and pay it off.
9. Borrow more money and pay it off.
8. Borrow more money and hope somebody else pays it off.
7. Don't worry about it, our grandkids and great grandkids can pay it off.
6. Just don't pay it off, good luck the debt collectors making you pay.
5. Sell a state off one by one until the debt is paid.
4. Just take all the money the rich people have.
3. Borrow more money and spend more until the debt is paid.
2. Tax water, air, walking, talking, sex, dancing, the list is endless.
1. Plant a money tree.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-22-2011, 02:50 PM
 
Location: Unperson Everyman Land
38,644 posts, read 26,398,078 times
Reputation: 12656
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost View Post
Even Ryan castigates it... considering he actually says that "there will be no change for those who are ten years away from enrolling into Medicare".

Now tell me, if it is such a great idea, why is it not being sold as the plan to implement within 3-4 years?


Because people have paid into the system for decades and have been made promises. That's why it is phased-in.

If LBJ's promises are so good, why can't we afford to honor them?

I want what was promised to me, but I'm unwilling to bankrupt a generation too young to stop us.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-22-2011, 02:58 PM
 
22,768 posts, read 30,748,463 times
Reputation: 14745
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey View Post
Because people have paid into the system for decades and have been made promises. That's why it is phased-in.
The people who are utilizing Medicare today paid a fraction of what they are taking out of the system.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-22-2011, 03:01 PM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,833,891 times
Reputation: 12341
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey View Post
Because people have paid into the system for decades and have been made promises. That's why it is phased-in.
And so have people who would not be "affected" (a key word used by Paul Ryan in a TV ad). So, why even try to sell the idea if the plan is a good thing going forward? Won't it be a great thing to fulfill the promises made to those who will qualify for (can I call it?) the lame system over next 10 years? Never mind that three people are paying for one Medicare recipient from the past.

Quote:
If LBJ's promises are so good, why can't we afford to honor them?

I want what was promised to me, but I'm unwilling to bankrupt a generation too young to stop us.
So does someone who is 11 years out. Are you saying Paul Ryan's plan is going to be worse than LBJ's plan?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-22-2011, 03:01 PM
 
8,633 posts, read 9,144,630 times
Reputation: 5991
Quote:
Originally Posted by le roi View Post
the people who are utilizing medicare today paid a fraction of what they are taking out of the system.
bs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-22-2011, 03:05 PM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,833,891 times
Reputation: 12341
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmking View Post
bs.
At least type it in proper case, if that is the best argument you can put forth.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-22-2011, 04:41 PM
 
8,633 posts, read 9,144,630 times
Reputation: 5991
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost View Post
At least type it in proper case, if that is the best argument you can put forth.
Redundant and tired.
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 02:05 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