Trickle down voodoo-economics at work....

noise said:
i'm all for prioritization. But most locals can't do that..one can bring in business.
I'm in Orlando. I pay 0 state taxes. the roads are largely toll roads. I'm fine with it. let the tourists pay for it.
Other cities have HOV lanes, paid by tolls
Click to expand...

IIRC West Virginia is the only state the federal government allows to collect tolls on a federal highway for whatever reason.
 
rjhenn said:
Trump got tax cuts that slashed revenue, but now wants massive increases in spending???
Click to expand...

Their logic seems to be that the tax cuts will increase economic velocity which will increase state sales tax revenues which will give the states more revenue with which to pay a greater share of the cost of infrastructure improvements.
 
cawacko said:
What you are leaving out of these equations is spending. Contrary to popular belief that Regan slashed spending it grew at a large pace. Just as spending has pretty much since. Reagan's tax cuts ushered in an economic boom in the '80's that went for over a couple of decades.
Click to expand...

Oh please Wacko! How many times do you have to be disabused about Reagan? I lived through his Presidency and voted for him twice. Name one person in their right mind who believes he slashed spending? His reputation for spending while in office was that of a drunken sailor. Don’t forget that Reagan when he realized his spending could not be sustained raised taxes.

This notion that Reagan’s tax cuts created a two decade economic boom is just more Reagan fanboy mythology. There has never been any credible evidence that tax cuts create economic growth. It’s the major flaw of Supply Side Economics that earned it the moniker voodoo economics and why, like communism, it’s a failed economic system. The main thing Supply Side has done has created vast economic inequality and its corresponding political instability.

Do you want to see the real results of voodoo economics? Look at the rise of Trump and Bernie Sanders.
 
cawacko said:
Go look at the his proposed budget when he first took office. He tried to cut spending but the U.S. isn't a monarchy where the president can do what he wants and the democratic controlled said essentially told him to F off. But yeah, he's a hypocrite because he's not king. Makes sense
Click to expand...

Oh please Wacko! I listened to him brag about his spending. Particularly his military spending. Stop the fanboy mythologies.
 
cawacko said:
Budgets start in the House and Tip O'Neil was Speaker all eight years.
Click to expand...

And Reagan was able to actually compromise with him and vice versa, to get things done. Imagine that?

There is definitely plenty of blame to go around for debts and deficits but in large measure that debt has been driven by Republican belief that spending can be sustained cause tax cuts will stimulate the economy and generate more revenue, which they don’t and haven’t, then borrowing money instead of taking the political hit for either cutting spending or raising taxes. That is what is driving our national debt. That is Reagan’s main economic legacy.
 
Reagan started the war on inflation which is why we have seen the rich get richer since, not because of anything with tax policy.

As for the trickle down, Trump appears to be trickling down on local governments. Undoubtedly why there is suddenly a teacher pay crisis and a police pay crisis. They want to get theirs before anybody else does
 
countryboy said:
Lol, you idiots just plow ahead as if you knew what you were talking about. Tax cuts have ALWAYS resulted in increased revenue. That is irrefutable. If spending is not curbed, OF COURSE deficits will increase. When have leftist loons EVER promoted spending cuts?

Tax cuts don't have to "pay for themselves" dipshit. Not taking someone's money doesn't "cost" anything.

Once libs are married to a narrative, it cannot be pried from your cold, dead hands.
Click to expand...
Sorry but you’re wrong. Tax cuts without corresponding spending cuts have been the single largest drivers of deficits and our national debt. There is little evidence that tax cuts, particularly regressive tax cuts, create economic growth and thus generate the revenue needed to sustain spending. That has not been supported by the facts. Regressive tax cuts have always starved the government of revenue which has forced borrowing to sustain spending at times when we should be paying down debt and have exacerbated economic inequality by the regressive nature of the tax cuts.

Those are the facts of Supply Side economics and why it is a failed economic theory like communism.
 
Dems "we want more domestic spending then if you want to upgrade the military from sequestor"

Repubs: "but what about the debt? this is a budget buster!"

Both Parties: "HA HA HA! who cares? pork it over"
 
"Originally Posted by cawacko View Post
Budgets start in the House and Tip O'Neil was Speaker all eight years." #89
Click to expand...
And Tip & the Gipper famously worked together, spending hours together after 5:PM, finding common political ground, and acting on it.

How many hours has President Trump spent with Pelosi & or Schumer? Or more to the point, Ryan?

Republicans are highly skilled at placing blame elsewhere.
But the party of "NO!" has been put in charge. And partisan obstruction is not a viable political strategy for the party in power.

The electorate knows that; just one more reason for early indications of Democrat resurgence in 2018 & 2020.

And I will blame the Republicans for it if / when it happens. SURELY Republicans can do better than this! A $Trillion $Dollar $Deficit ?!?! o m g
 
cawacko said:
And help me out again with your background. Are you part Native American or is it family members of yours that are?
Click to expand...

I am 1/4 Choctaw and 3/4 European...100% American :D. If ancestry.com’s DNA test is accurate, most of that 3/4 is Great Britain.
 
Kacper said:
Not defending Trump's budgets, but if the democrats had won, we would still see huge deficits. It would just be for different reasons.
Click to expand...
The main reason is that neither party has the political will to curb spending on popular programs like defense and Medicare/Medicaid.
 
cawacko said:
The responses here are telling. With our progressive tax system the middle class pays very little in personal income tax thus they aren't going to get large tax cuts. But they get tax cuts and it's considered "not sh*t". It's too partisan of a mindset
Click to expand...

Agreed. For me the issue is that supply side tax cuts, without spending cuts, are the main drivers for debt and economic inequality.
 
leaningright said:
Look at this picture. Several years ago Lorax (Thing1 for the newbies) and I had a discussion where we both concluded that the political landscape was pitting urban folks agains rural folks and we didn’t like that direction. Sadly, it seems that is where we are. This picture is of a rural man, not an unintelligent looking fellow, with a firearm and pickup truck portrayed as a Republican president supporter voting against his own best interests and is too stupid to realize it.

Fact of the matter is that most rural voters couldn’t care less about taxes when it comes to president. Other issues trump (no pun intended) taxes. They know that the handouts would flow more freely under democrats but they choose independence and freedom instead and most of them see that in the more conservative candidate. These aren’t dumb people but people who are willing to sacrifice in one area to advance in the other.

The families who live here but the husbands work in the oilfield have already seen some benefit of the restructuring of the tax code, but of course they make more money than the norm.

I don’t like this pitting one group against another and try to curb it in my daily conversations with folks (students and friends...but definitely students) who bemoan those “city slickers”, but that is the political climate we live in.
Click to expand...
I know a fella who looks like him who is a farmer and multi millionaire in the poultry business.
 
Cypress said:
You know, there are people in this country who actually suffer from stereotypes and discrimination. Blacks, Hispanics, people of color, minority communities.

Your incessant whining about the grievances of the poor downtrodden rural white male just ain't cutting it chap.

As for the buck toothed redneck in Ken's cartoon - I have seen dudes like that in major metropolitan urban areas...Houston, Dallas, New Orleans, Baltimore. Yes, the barn is geographic context. But I guarantee you that rednecks live in and around cities too.
Click to expand...
Sorry Cypress. I know quite a few rural “Rednecks” who defy that stereotype. The farmer I just mentioned, he and his brother just recently made a $250,000 gift to the local EMT of his rural county. He also has an MBA from OSU's Fisher business school. A highly respected business school.
 
Last edited:
rjhenn said:
That is BS, left alone, revenue increases from year to year. What tax cuts have done is reduce revenue. Then, when normal revenue growth eventually resumes, at a slower rate than before the cuts, conservatives shout "Look!, the tax cuts increased revenue." Total BS. Tax cuts have always reduced both revenue and revenue growth.
Click to expand...
and prevented the paying down of debt during times of economic growth.
 
Kacper said:
Reagan started the war on inflation which is why we have seen the rich get richer since, not because of anything with tax policy.

As for the trickle down, Trump appears to be trickling down on local governments. Undoubtedly why there is suddenly a teacher pay crisis and a police pay crisis. They want to get theirs before anybody else does
Click to expand...
His war on inflation did more to improve the economy of the mid 80’s by far than tax cuts did.
 
rjhenn said:
Funny, we hear the same about Obama, who had to deal with a GOP-controlled Congress, for the most part.
Click to expand...

I always blame the GOP for their profligate spending. Being an adherent of the US Constitution, I put the blame for runaway spending where it belongs. The halls of Congress.

Of course people want to just point to the President because they have limited attention spans. Do you fall into that group?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top