[stoney]

http://www.dpcc.senate.gov/files/documents/CRSTaxesandtheEconomy Top Rates.pdf

Analysis regarding tax cuts vs. economic growth. Goes into how they are not hand-in-hand, but more so an inverse. I'm printing out copies for some of my frother colleagues to read.

 

[Pesqueeb]

http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2012/11/01/14859366-this-has-hues-of-a-banana-republic?lite

 

[eric strt6]

Thanks for the link. I posted it to some conservative message boards and they are not really pleased with me right now

 

[stoney]

Thanks for the link. I posted it to some conservative message boards and they are not really pleased with me right now

Facts. They're a bitch.

 

[Pesqueeb]

Facts. They're a bitch.

If you believe in that sort of thing.

 

[Westy]

Facts. They're a bitch.

The only people who make those reports are elite liberal academics that are part of a grand socialist conspiracy. Any high-school dropout can tell you trickle down works great!

 

[Jm_]

The part that really ticks me off is what's not addressed. The point of business is to make money, that is a given. When it's a corporation, it's no longer to benefit the company, but to benefit the shareholders. That starts to get a little grey, but whatever. What really gets me is that if you invent a better process, figure out how to streamline your business, a new machine is invented, or invest in automation, you can get rid of people. Now there's an excess of people. So if every business is doing this, WHAT DO WE DO WITH ALL THE PEOPLE!!?? Tax incentives and lax regulation really further this, and I'd be the first to admit that if I owned a business and a machine came along that could do the work of 20 people for what i'd cost to pay 5 of them for 5 years, it'd be a no brainer. I'd be reaping the benefits. Sooo again, what do we do with all those people if every business has the same idea? Can we really sustain? This right here proves my point about "trickle down" IMO. There's no direct correlation.

 

[kidwoo]

Duh.


Eat them.

 

[Jm_]

Except most people here don't really need to eat more.

 

[AngryMetalsmith]

Duh.


Eat them.

Oh great, now you're endorsing a diet high in fat ?

 

[?????]

The part that really ticks me off is what's not addressed. The point of business is to make money, that is a given. When it's a corporation, it's no longer to benefit the company, but to benefit the shareholders. That starts to get a little grey, but whatever. What really gets me is that if you invent a better process, figure out how to streamline your business, a new machine is invented, or invest in automation, you can get rid of people. Now there's an excess of people. So if every business is doing this, WHAT DO WE DO WITH ALL THE PEOPLE!!?? Tax incentives and lax regulation really further this, and I'd be the first to admit that if I owned a business and a machine came along that could do the work of 20 people for what i'd cost to pay 5 of them for 5 years, it'd be a no brainer. I'd be reaping the benefits. Sooo again, what do we do with all those people if every business has the same idea? Can we really sustain? This right here proves my point about "trickle down" IMO. There's no direct correlation.

The less productive people must become productive at other things. Everyone is doing more so everyone has more.

 

[DaveW]

Oh great, now you're endorsing a diet high in fat ?

Yeah it's a win/win thing...... Food plus knocking of a few more of them with obesity related deaths.
great way to get those numbers down AND profit off of the cattle classes/sheeple.

 

[Andyman_1970]

WOW......I'm saving that little nugget to share with some of my "friends".......

 

[jimmydean]

The only people who make those reports are elite liberal academics that are part of a grand socialist conspiracy. Any high-school dropout can tell you trickle down works great!

Oh, I so owe you rep for that. Me and my other high school drop outs agree (dropped out in 1988).

 

[stoney]

Heads were blown. The argument immeidately went to "...and just how partisan is it?" Trying to explain that it is Congress' internal research group is effectively non-partisan fell on deaf ears. Watching them try to respond to it was more than amusing. You could hear the gears grinding when trying to find an argument as to why that doesn't make sense.

I followed it up quickly with "which president in the last 40 years increased taxes the most?" Answer: Regan. Stack "how did the economy do after Regan took over in 1980 and raised taxes?" Answer: Recovered from Carter and grew extremely fast.

It's just too much fun sometimes.

 

[Toshi]

In defense of the low tax people, from what I've read it's more the relaxation of Volcker's anti-inflation high interest rates than the higher taxes that spurred the economy then.

Now, with interest rates at the zero bound for years on end, it's not the same situation at all, of course.

 

[Westy]

In defense of the low tax people, from what I've read it's more the relaxation of Volcker's anti-inflation high interest rates than the higher taxes that spurred the economy then.

Now, with interest rates at the zero bound for years on end, it's not the same situation at all, of course.

I think a better comparison would be the Clinton tax increases failingto destroy the economy and succeeded in balancing the budget.

 

[eric strt6]

Hey Stoney, you will be happy to know that because of your post this report is starting to make the rounds of the CPA World.

 

[kidwoo]

Hey Stoney, you will be happy to know that because of your post this report is starting to make the rounds of the CPA World.

And that's how you know this country is full of morons:The fact that this would ever be new information to a CPA.

 

[eric strt6]

And that's how you know this country is full of morons:The fact that this would ever be new information to a CPA.

the information or the concepts as news no....this particular report yes

 

[stoney]

Sweet.