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 02-20-2014, 09:26 AM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,108,083 times
Reputation: 9383

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by lorrysda View Post
You could not be more wrong if your statement "spending to get out of a depression is good fiscal policy" refers to "Federal Government spending!" No, the way out of depression is getting the Feds out of the way by lowering taxes and getting rid of regulations that inhibit private enterprise to start with. The expansion of private enterprise which expands the work force which expands the "tax BASE" for all government entities for starters is what stops any depression. History proves that and why in the world government continues to thwart the proof of history is ridiculous unless you realize most of this mess is caused to create a "dependency" on government to influence votes to the party that continually "gives" free $'s to those who don't take responsibility for themselves and think others (tax payers) should support them.
I'll never understand why kooks believe government, which accounts for about 20% of the nations spending, can jump start an economy more than the 80% of the nations spending, which is the citizen..

Their theories sound something like

"Lets take 3% of the nations spending, out of the economy, then give it to the government to spend 3%, and the economy will explode"

Yes people, they are that stupid..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-20-2014, 09:35 AM
 
Location: South Bay
1,404 posts, read 1,031,929 times
Reputation: 525
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrWillys View Post
No sheeple political baiting. What do you think changed that cause a surge in deficit spending that occurred in the 1980's? I think Nixon breaking Bretton Woods allowed it to occur, and the beginning of outsourcing industrial jobs, and Reagan tax cuts along with 80's spending.
AHA, there it is! Nothing but another bash the Republicans thread.

You prefer the 91% tax rates on the wealthy (which they never paid anyway) and believe that it's tax cuts which have caused our deficits. Uncontrolled spending is (swept under the rug) conveniently absent.

Quote:
Originally Posted by OICU812 View Post
You are starting with a distorted assumption, there never was an actual 91% tax rate, so why discuss it as if there was?
I'm not sure he hears us.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2014, 09:35 AM
 
14,292 posts, read 9,678,440 times
Reputation: 4254
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrWillys View Post
This is correct, and the highest tax rate in 1945 was 91% and it fell in the following 30 years. Why, and what changed to increase it again?
National debt of the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
You are starting with a distorted assumption, there never was an actual 91% tax rate, so why discuss it as if there was?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2014, 09:39 AM
 
14,292 posts, read 9,678,440 times
Reputation: 4254
Quote:
Originally Posted by surfman View Post
AHA, there it is! Nothing but another bash the Republicans thread.

You prefer the 91% tax rates on the wealthy (which they never paid anyway) and believe that it's tax cuts which have caused our deficits. Uncontrolled spending is (swept under the rug) conveniently absent.
Agreed. This crap must be getting taught in college or high school, and every freaking year the kids who are fed this crap go out on the internet and repeat it, making them look like fools.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2014, 09:39 AM
 
Location: Cold Springs, NV
4,625 posts, read 12,295,255 times
Reputation: 5233
Quote:
Originally Posted by OICU812 View Post
You are starting with a distorted assumption, there never was an actual 91% tax rate, so why discuss it as if there was?

You're kidding right?

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/02inpetr.pdf
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2014, 09:39 AM
 
Location: Long Island
32,816 posts, read 19,483,709 times
Reputation: 9618
Quote:
Originally Posted by middle-aged mom View Post
If only.......

There was as limited global competition as there was when Truman was at the helm

Technology had not come along and permanently eliminated tens of millions of jobs

Shareholder activists had not realized they could make a corporation more profitable by outsourcing, embracing technology and cutting jobs

The 65 and older population was not growing faster than the total population
what does your last sentence mean????

number of americans turning 65 on a DAILY BASIS....10,000
number of americans turning 18 on a DAILY BASIS....13,000
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2014, 09:43 AM
 
Location: Cold Springs, NV
4,625 posts, read 12,295,255 times
Reputation: 5233
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
Technology is a subjective term. People who lived during that period of time probably believed things like the assembly line was "technology", along with vehicles.

50 years from now people will be complaining about technology, claiming we didnt have any and lived in the stone age.
I think her point was more that it wasn't a global economy yet like today. shoes were made by a blind and deaf 5 year old that works for a penny a day (this is a joke people).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2014, 09:46 AM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,108,083 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrWillys View Post
I think her point was more that it wasn't a global economy yet like today. shoes were made by a blind and deaf 5 year old that works for a penny a day (this is a joke people).
There absolutley was a global economy. Going back to the founding days of our nation we were importing and exporting things all around the world. In fact going back 100% of the nations tax revenues came from taxes on products that we imported.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrWillys View Post
Do you understand the difference between marginal, and effective tax rates?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2014, 09:50 AM
 
Location: Barrington
63,919 posts, read 46,738,058 times
Reputation: 20674
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
Technology is a subjective term. People who lived during that period of time probably believed things like the assembly line was "technology", along with vehicles.

50 years from now people will be complaining about technology, claiming we didnt have any and lived in the stone age.
Rule based, former U.S. middle class jobs, were/are the brunt of eliminated jobs.

Productivity and total employment tracked each other in the 50's and began to diverge in the 80's. Around 2000, productivity continued to rise but employment began to significantly wilt. There is now a huge gap between economic growth and employment. The people blame their leaders and the other party and the leaders blame the other party. This is not unique to the U.S.

People without answers have a tendency to blame.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2014, 09:52 AM
 
Location: South Bay
1,404 posts, read 1,031,929 times
Reputation: 525
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrWillys View Post
I think her point was more that it wasn't a global economy yet like today. shoes were made by a blind and deaf 5 year old that works for a penny a day (this is a joke people).
So is this thread
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.

© 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