Originally posted by generalissimoYou think I'm partisan? Boehner and company who continue to allow debt to spiral out of control are no better than the rest of the Dems who swear by it. In fact, I would view Boehner and company as worse. Their is nothing worse than pretending what you are not.
[b]Ok you partisan hacks, go do your job and start the finger pointing.
To your trenches!!! ðŸ˜
Such an ironic statement, after a multitude of barely disguised partisan talking points you dumped in other threads, that Im guessing soon you'll need to be rescued from drowning in your own clichés.[/b]
Originally posted by Hugh GlassI was talking about neocon governance, genius, of which Texas is a shining example.
Yes, I do thank God for many things,,,, and one of those is not being in debt up around my ears, and having a religious family that taught financial responsibility right out of the blocks.....
Originally posted by whodeyYes, you are absolutely a right-wing partisan hack and on the extreme right on every issue.
You think I'm partisan? Boehner and company who continue to allow debt to spiral out of control are no better than the rest of the Dems who swear by it. In fact, I would view Boehner and company as worse. Their is nothing worse than pretending what you are not.
Every once in a blue moon throwing "the Republicans are bad too" into your rhetoric does a poor job of masking it.
Originally posted by Metal Brain"This was just a big dog and pony show to convince my fellow Americans that we live in a democracy. We don't, it is all theater."
We didn't get any spending cuts out of the legislation. All there are is the hope of spending cuts in the future, but none of that is binding.
There may not be any military cuts in spending at all because the loophole was built in. They left in an opening for tax increases. Then they had the nerve to call it a compromise.
This was clearly just an ex ...[text shortened]... show to convince my fellow Americans that we live in a democracy. We don't, it is all theater.
Unfortunately, we do live in a Democracy, and this is what we get when democracy is too pure and unfettered by the pricipled law of a Republic. The reason it is all theater is that they are all running for reelection, and nobody is concerned with the nation or the Constitution.
Originally posted by no1marauderDo you have actual data that shows the reduced revenues from the Texas tax changes?
I realize Republicans like you can't grasp this point, but continual tax cuts cause deficits just as quickly as spending increases. Texas is last in per capita spending of any State, but still managed to run up a $27 billion deficit.
Generally speaking reduced rates do produce increased revenue, just as increased rates always fail to produce increases in revenue commeasurate with the percentage of increase. See the Laffer curve.
Originally posted by normbenign🙄🙄
Do you have actual data that shows the reduced revenues from the Texas tax changes?
Generally speaking reduced rates do produce increased revenue, just as increased rates always fail to produce increases in revenue commeasurate with the percentage of increase. See the Laffer curve.
Originally posted by normbenignThey are mostly bought and paid for. This is not a democracy at all. None of what they are doing is helping their image. Public opinion of congress is at an all time low.
"This was just a big dog and pony show to convince my fellow Americans that we live in a democracy. We don't, it is all theater."
Unfortunately, we do live in a Democracy, and this is what we get when democracy is too pure and unfettered by the pricipled law of a Republic. The reason it is all theater is that they are all running for reelection, and nobody is concerned with the nation or the Constitution.
Money is what gets them re-elected. TV political ads get them votes from the dumbed down public. TV ads cost money.
They work for the elites, not for us.
Originally posted by normbenignGenerally speaking reduced rates do produce increased revenue, just as increased rates always fail to produce increases in revenue commeasurate with the percentage of increase. See the Laffer curve.
Do you have actual data that shows the reduced revenues from the Texas tax changes?
Generally speaking reduced rates do produce increased revenue, just as increased rates always fail to produce increases in revenue commeasurate with the percentage of increase. See the Laffer curve.
The Laffer curve is based on a tautology, and there is no “generally speaking” about it. The level at which the “backward bend” occurs is strictly an empirical question—and I am aware of no economist who can venture an answer, except that (EDIT: the consensus seems to be) we don’t seem to be near it at current rates. If you have some empirical data to the contrary, then I am willing to stand corrected on that. But , again, no one who understands the basis of the Laffer curve (regardless of their economic viewpoint otherwise) would ever agree to your “generally speaking”.
An interesting question to me—from a broader perspective—is how much this reaffirms that, to globalized capital, nation states are just another kind of economic institution, like business firms, that carry no especial weight within the global capitalist enterprise. Nation states can be upgraded or downgraded, their currencies freely traded; capital is more mobile than labor and can relocate across borders fairly readily; large portions of international trade balances are actually intra-firm transfers across borders; governments can be contracted with (and supplanted by new contractors) not so much differently from a large firm contracting with various suppliers—speaking of large global firms here, not smaller, strictly domestic ones.
From the point of view of capital that is truly global, and de facto non-national,* S&P’s downgrading any nation seems a relatively trivial matter. It may cause dislocations in the US markets (e.g., as pension funds have to dump Treasuries because their charter only allows them to invest in AAA debt), but global capitalism is not about US markets—or any other nation state’s. And I suspect that ratings agencies such as S&P, Moody’s and Fitch (and their counterparts based elsewhere) are more interested in their place in globalized capitalism than vis-à-vis any nation state.
I am raising this as a factual question, setting aside any ideological judgments, positive or negative.
__________________________________________________
*Where a corporation is originally incorporated, or maintains its headquarters, seems irrelevant. Halliburton is incorporated in Delaware, maintains a quasi-headquarters in Houston, Texas, but has its de facto headquarters in Dubai. Does it really make any more sense to call Halliburton an “American” corporation than a Delaware corporation, or a Texas corporation, or a Dubai corporation?
Originally posted by normbenignActually, the Laffer curve says that reduced rates do not, in general, increase revenue. Instead, the Laffer curve says that when rates are above some unspecified point, reducing rates can increase revenue. Considering many areas in the world (pretty much all rich Western countries) have higher taxes than the US [state of Texas] and these areas do in fact raise more revenue as a percentage of GDP, it is highly unlikely that the US [state of Texas] is beyond this hypothetical rate.
Do you have actual data that shows the reduced revenues from the Texas tax changes?
Generally speaking reduced rates do produce increased revenue, just as increased rates always fail to produce increases in revenue commeasurate with the percentage of increase. See the Laffer curve.
Originally posted by KazetNagorraActually, the laaffer curve says that if you beat your donkey hard enough it will cease to be productive and you may even kill it, and if you don't beat your donkey at all it might not do any work. An apt analogy for the laffer curve and gummint taxation, except people aren't donkeys.
Actually, the Laffer curve says that reduced rates do not, in general, increase revenue. Instead, the Laffer curve says that when rates are above some unspecified point, reducing rates can increase revenue. Considering many areas in the world (pretty much all rich Western countries) have higher taxes than the US [state of Texas] and these areas do in fa ...[text shortened]... age of GDP, it is highly unlikely that the US [state of Texas] is beyond this hypothetical rate.
Edit: And different donkeys are more conducive to being beaten before they lay down and die or start kicking back.