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.
Please explain how keeping money in the hands of the people to spend, crashes economies.
That's a good point. We always hear (from the left) how increasing taxes on the so-called "rich" and giving it to people with low incomes will stimulate the economy via spending. So how come letting the "rich" keep more of their income won't do the same? To clarify, I'm not talking about Warren Buffet but a married couple who live in a high COL area and are 250k earners. Oh wait, I forgot. It has nothing to do with stimulating the economy and everything to do with pandering to the base.
President obama is the worst thing to happen to America in 100 years. Anyone who supports him and believes he is a good man who is trying to help America, is a fool.
Worse than Hoover?
I really like to know what forms your opinion, Grumpy.
More great news about a benefit to this country from President Obama's presidency.
Remember, Republican Bush was given a SURPLUS by Democrat Clinton and turned it into a RECORD DEFICIT. Had our great President Obama not been obstructed by Republicans in Congress, we likely would be enjoying another surplus.
That's a good point. We always hear (from the left) how increasing taxes on the so-called "rich" and giving it to people with low incomes will stimulate the economy via spending. So how come letting the "rich" keep more of their income won't do the same? To clarify, I'm not talking about Warren Buffet but a married couple who live in a high COL area and are 250k earners. Oh wait, I forgot. It has nothing to do with stimulating the economy and everything to do with pandering to the base.
Why? Because the rich don't have the same marginal propensity to consume. According to A review of the economic research on the effects of raising ordinary income tax rates"the economic literature widely finds no discernible effect of top tax rate changes on the primary factors driving economic growth, it is somewhat reassuring that a deep body of research, such as that by Gravelle and Marples (2011) and Hungerford (2012), finds changes in the top U.S. marginal tax rates have had no statistically significant impact on real GDP growth itself.
...
Generally, the evidence indicates that low- and moderate-income households will spend a larger share of any tax cut (as they have lower overall savings rates than higher-income households, and are more likely to be liquidity constrained). By definition, then, lowering top marginal tax rates means that such changes will be least targeted toward lower- and middle-income households, and thus yield relatively low fiscal multipliers."
It also has to do with the multiplier effect. The stimulative multiplier effect for tax-cuts -- especially on upper income tax-cuts, is about 50% less than government spending.
One can therefore say, that politicians who argue for tax-cuts for the rich are the ones doing the pandering -- hoping to satisfy their contributors with a policy that has no economic benefits except to have the rich get richer.
the foreign companies receiving your tax money from the ever growing Obama Stimulus. Let your friends know the BILLIONS intended to stimulate the American economy, stimulated the rest of the world, and in the tsunami that resulted, thousands of Americans lost their jobs: A record of a President’s stimulus failure goes round the world:
...
the foreign companies receiving your tax money from the ever growing Obama Stimulus. Let your friends know the BILLIONS intended to stimulate the American economy, stimulated the rest of the world, and in the tsunami that resulted, thousands of Americans lost their jobs: A record of a President’s stimulus failure goes round the world:
First, the stimulus ended years ago.
Second, Politifact ruled that what you said about the stimulus is
More great news about a benefit to this country from President Obama's presidency.
Remember, Republican Bush was given a SURPLUS by Democrat Clinton and turned it into a RECORD DEFICIT. Had our great President Obama not been obstructed by Republicans in Congress, we likely would be enjoying another surplus.
Well the Banks and most of the car makers paid back Tarp that the Democrats pushed thru congress to support a failing Housing market that the Dem' lied to the American People.
Freddy Mac and Mae? The Era of Free money was brought to a destructive end!
Besides Congress has a lot to do with this mix too. The GOP has been pushing cut backs while the President wants to spend his way out. President Obama can not even get a budget passed.
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.
Had our great President Obama not been obstructed by Republicans in Congress, we likely would be enjoying another surplus.
