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.
Uh huh....and you believe our roads and bridges don't need repair?
Seriously? Are you unaware?
They definitely need repaired, but that means you repair them because they need repaired, not to stimulate the economy. Two completely different issues.
Again, conservatives now consider the EITC welfare, they say its full of fraud, they think of it as government spending, etc.
You can't say oh the Clinton economic boom was started by a capital gain tax decreased enacted in year 5 of his presidency as being responsible for his economic record. Especially considering that the economy started slowing down at the end of 2000.
And you can't credit the expansion of the EITC.
If the EITC results in someone getting more cash back than they paid it by definition is welfare.
You not wanting to call it that, really doesnt change reality.
It is government spending because oftentimes it refunds people more than they paid
You cant possibly not know this. I get EITC every year despite never paying a dime in taxes.
Around here I'm getting stopped all over where the road crews are fixing roads. I live on the Ohio River and traffic gets tied up on a regular basis with bridge inspections.
Ohio River, I own a house that overlooks the Ohio River in Pittsburgh.. haha, not far from all the bridges..
Exactly my point of how conservatives view the EITC program. It is welfare now. lol
So praising its expansion as part of the cause of the economic boom means..... conservatives are saying an expansion of a welfare program caused an economic boom. lol
no, your point was that tax cuts didnt stimulate, and then you cite the EITC as a large reason why the economy was stimulated, now claiming it wasnt a tax cut.
yes, its as stupid as it sounds, especially given the EITC can only stimulate by
A) Allowing people to keep their money, thus validating the conservative position that tax cuts stimulate
or
B) Giving people more money than they paid in taxes, which of course means A above is true, AND you now removed money from the economy in order to give it to someone else to spend
But under either scenario, the PUBLIC spending boosted the economy far more than government ever could which means
C) Government spending as a stimulus, FAILS every single time because its far better in the publics hands.
Which again means D) OBAMA STIMULUS FAILED..
and that again isnt because he's black, despite some left kooks believing otherwise.
If the EITC results in someone getting more cash back than they paid it by definition is welfare.
You not wanting to call it that, really doesnt change reality.
It is government spending because oftentimes it refunds people more than they paid
You cant possibly not know this. I get EITC every year despite never paying a dime in taxes.
I don't care what you call the EITC, but your whole point was that Bill Clinton's economic record was the result of the bill that was passed that included lower capital gains taxes and the expansion of the EITC, which are supposedly conservative policies.
The point I am making first off is that the lower capital gains taxes didn't take effect until 1998 Year 5 of the Clinton presidency, 4 years after the income tax increase enacted in 1994, which conservatives said should have destroyed the economy, and there was an economic slowdown at the end of the Clinton presidency in late 2000.
So basically you are saying the Clinton economic record of growth can be boiled down to a period between 1998 and the end of 2000, despite his economic record going from 1993-2001. This is a fantasy.
Also, the EITC is considered welfare by conservatives, so are conservatives now saying that expansion of welfare was a factor in economic growth? lol
no, your point was that tax cuts didnt stimulate, and then you cite the EITC as a large reason why the economy was stimulated, now claiming it wasnt a tax cut.
yes, its as stupid as it sounds, especially given the EITC can only stimulate by
A) Allowing people to keep their money, thus validating the conservative position that tax cuts stimulate
or
B) Giving people more money than they paid in taxes, which of course means A above is true, AND you now removed money from the economy in order to give it to someone else to spend
But under either scenario, the PUBLIC spending boosted the economy far more than government ever could which means
C) Government spending as a stimulus, FAILS every single time because its far better in the publics hands.
Which again means D) OBAMA STIMULUS FAILED..
and that again isnt because he's black, despite some left kooks believing otherwise.
This is called moving the goal posts.
I didn't write that tax cuts can never help the economy. I wrote that the capital gain tax cuts that you said caused economic growth occurred in year 5 of the Clinton presidency 4 years after an income tax increase and years of strong economic growth.
I didn't cite the EITC as a reason for economic growth, the article you linked did when it referenced the bill that was passed in late 1997. I was merely pointing out that conservatives now consider the EITC welfare spending, so that article which was crediting the EITC for economic growth means that conservatives are saying expanding welfare causes economic growth.
The EITC is government spending, tax cuts are also government spending.
But it isn't my position that public spending(I think you mean private, usually references to public spending means government spending) is worse for the economy than government spending, so that point is irrelevant.
You are wrong about the stimulus. The vast majority of economists think it reduced unemployment.
Let’s start with Obama’s stimulus. The standard Republican talking point is that it failed, meaning it didn’t reduce unemployment. Yet in a survey of leading economists conducted by the University of Chicago’s Booth School of Business, 92 percent agreed that the stimulus succeeded in reducing the jobless rate. On the harder question of whether the benefit exceeded the cost, more than half thought it did, one in three was uncertain, and fewer than one in six disagreed.
Oh so this is the fairytale that conservatives are lying to themselves about bill Clinton's record, pathetic.
.
Yawn. Another Bill Clinton fairy tale. And Bill is laughing all the way to the bank. He made 102 million last year and you lemmings just keep on worshiping at his feet. You guys are pathetic.
I will note......despite saying they are anti-war the "left" can't bring themselves to condemn the spending Obama has wasted on the wars either.
The left is not anti-war and never has been. Obama is a war monger. He loves wars. He loves spending hundreds of billions of dollars every year on wars.
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.
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.
