Alan Greenspan is probably the slimiest dbag you can imagine but he summarized it (more recently) well: "I am all for tax cuts but not with borrowed money". Republicans are not responsible. They want to cut social services, "entitlements" everything under the sun except defense and cut taxes while doing so. Massive deficits result. We got downgraded for political reasons by S&P.
Can Democrats Learn From France?
- Thread starter pspr
- Start date
Alan Greenspan is probably the slimiest dbag you can imagine but he summarized it (more recently) well: "I am all for tax cuts but not with borrowed money". Republicans are not responsible. They want to cut social services, "entitlements" everything under the sun except defense and cut taxes while doing so. Massive deficits result. We got downgraded for political reasons by S&P.
That's a foolish statement if you are comparing Democrats and Republicans. The Democraps want to spend us into the poor house and cut nothing. The Democratic strategy is to tax the hell out of the people and grow the government forever. It's already unsustainable. There isn't enough money to pay for what the stupid democraps are doing now.
Can you spell C-O-L-L-A-P-S-E?
So, stop being a childish moron and face some real facts, bubba.
Collapse is what i would call the impact of the bush administration. We, as a nation, wasted trillions of dollars of borrowed money on worthless wars, thousands of US soldiers dead and the greatest financial collapse since the great depression. After W there is no reason to ever trust republicans on anything. We would be a lot better off if bush tax cuts never happened.
JFC, obviously that one has you stumped
Okay dipshit takes notes again ,you are pretending the tax cuts caused"worthless wars...and the greatest financial collapse since the great depression".
Wars Democaps voted for and supported. Unlike Obama who gets involved in wars without Congressional approval. And, who has trillion dollar plus budget deficits so he can pay off his donors.
Revenues went up after the Bush tax cuts. Sorry to pop your bubble.
And, Democraps caused the collapse with their loose mortgage policies forced on banks and other lenders that came right out of the Reid/Pelosi Congress despite warnings by Bush and Greenspan that trouble was coming.
You are so naive. Open your eyes little puppy dog.
Many people may remember Christina Romer, who was the chair of President Obamaâs Council of Economic Advisors from January 2009 to September 2010. She is currently an economics professor at University of California Berkeley.
Approximately three months before she left the Council of Economic Advisors, the American Economic Reviewâ a journal which many people consider the most prestigious peer-reviewed journal in economics â published an article that she co-wrote with her husband David Romer, also an economics professor at UC Berkeley. The article, âThe Macroeconomic Effects of Tax Changes: Estimates Based on a New Measure of Fiscal Shocks,â is in my view one of the most important economic articles of the last several years.
The Romers examined the effects of tax policy on GDP. They found that the effects are very large. Specifically, they found that for every 1% that taxes rise (as a percent of GDP), this causes GDP to fall about 3%. The authors employed some clever methods to try to find what economists call âexogenousâ changes in tax rates. When they employed their methods, they found much higher effects than economists had previously found.
http://ricochet.com/main-feed/The-Laffer-Curve-and-New-Evidence-that-Taxes-Stifle-Economic-Output
first the progressives tell us that income taxes will never go over 2 percent.
then they lie about spending cuts for decodes.
Then taxes get above 50%.
Then taxes get lowered... we have a boom.
Now they want to raise taxes and tell us our leftists are not like france's leftists... we want go over 75%.
The whole fricken time the presidents economic advisor... Romer is telling him raising taxes will hurt gdp.
So why the hell are we raising taxes. If you know there is no good reason to do it... no tax level is safe.
Who the hell would believe a leftist would not raise taxes to 100 percent if he could.
publix has the credibility of a politician.
Approximately three months before she left the Council of Economic Advisors, the American Economic Reviewâ a journal which many people consider the most prestigious peer-reviewed journal in economics â published an article that she co-wrote with her husband David Romer, also an economics professor at UC Berkeley. The article, âThe Macroeconomic Effects of Tax Changes: Estimates Based on a New Measure of Fiscal Shocks,â is in my view one of the most important economic articles of the last several years.
The Romers examined the effects of tax policy on GDP. They found that the effects are very large. Specifically, they found that for every 1% that taxes rise (as a percent of GDP), this causes GDP to fall about 3%. The authors employed some clever methods to try to find what economists call âexogenousâ changes in tax rates. When they employed their methods, they found much higher effects than economists had previously found.
http://ricochet.com/main-feed/The-Laffer-Curve-and-New-Evidence-that-Taxes-Stifle-Economic-Output
first the progressives tell us that income taxes will never go over 2 percent.
then they lie about spending cuts for decodes.
Then taxes get above 50%.
Then taxes get lowered... we have a boom.
Now they want to raise taxes and tell us our leftists are not like france's leftists... we want go over 75%.
The whole fricken time the presidents economic advisor... Romer is telling him raising taxes will hurt gdp.
So why the hell are we raising taxes. If you know there is no good reason to do it... no tax level is safe.
Who the hell would believe a leftist would not raise taxes to 100 percent if he could.
publix has the credibility of a politician.