Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
May 10, 2016 - 10:58am PT
|
Which makes no mathematical sense at all and I think actually improperly states the argument even a conservative economist would make. It boggles the mind how you could make that concept work. Putting more money into people's pockets puts more money into their pockets.
Sorry, HDDJ, but the conservative argument for tax cuts focuses exclusively on marginal rates, because the amount of those rates, not how much money people have to spend, determines the incentives for investment and work. The liberal "Keynesian" argument says all that matters is giving people money to spend, which is what you're rejoinder implicitly argues.
I put the term "Keynesian" in quotes because many economists have argued for decades that the purported Keynesians' theories differ from the economics espoused by John Maynard Keynes.
And thank you Wade Icey for your kind words. I did not interpret your post as an ad hominem attack or insult in any way, but rather as a respectful and refreshingly direct resposne. I add the same to HDDJ. The posts of you two - and those of several others of late - make OT reading on Super Topo still worthwhile.
John
John
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
May 10, 2016 - 11:21am PT
|
John Duffield, online polls are utter crap. Shame on NBC for promoting it.
They always have been crap, because the participants are not selected in a manner that represents the voting demographic. In this case, it is skewed to whoever happens to read the NBC news site, which is not representative of the overall electorate, and sometimes the participants are prodded by campaigns to participate.
|
|
Sparky
Trad climber
vagabond movin on
|
|
|
May 10, 2016 - 01:29pm PT
|
Yesterday...
|
|
apogee
climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
|
|
|
May 10, 2016 - 01:31pm PT
|
The chicks at Bernie rallies are much hotter than the ones at Trump rallies.
|
|
Cragar
climber
MSLA - MT
|
|
|
May 10, 2016 - 01:40pm PT
|
apogee...
He does have that going for him! He is in MSO tomorrow and we have a fair bit of gentrification going on here and it is primarily fueled by the lefty/progressive yuppies new to town in the last 10-15 years. It sucks hard for the older folks and those that make less but have lived here for generations.....I sure the F hope our ProggyYupps feel the Bern, I mean the one directed at them, not the one they think they are a part of! I doubt they will as they head over to their $uper$pendy eco-rigs with Sanders stickers on them after the 'rally'. They are kinda like a cross between the Berkley & Boulder holier-than-thou types. Humility is hard to come by these days.
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
May 11, 2016 - 07:18am PT
|
giving us for free your enlightened views of the world
And what you, or anybody else, are doing is different in just what manner?
I don't insult everybody with whom I don't agree, which is like most of the posters on this forum.
Not my fault you self-identified with that group.
You mean the group that doesn't agree with you?
|
|
Escopeta
Trad climber
Idaho
|
|
|
May 11, 2016 - 07:29am PT
|
Funny reply K-man. I like the same post hypocrisy. Well Played.
|
|
tuolumne_tradster
Trad climber
Leading Edge of North American Plate
|
|
|
May 11, 2016 - 09:34am PT
|
As you can see from those photos posted ^^^ and other similar photos from around the country, Bernie has already won the future :-)
|
|
HighDesertDJ
Trad climber
|
|
|
May 11, 2016 - 10:01am PT
|
John posted Sorry, HDDJ, but the conservative argument for tax cuts focuses exclusively on marginal rates, because the amount of those rates, not how much money people have to spend, determines the incentives for investment and work. The liberal "Keynesian" argument says all that matters is giving people money to spend, which is what you're rejoinder implicitly argues.
I'm sorry, John, but you're just incredibly mistaken about this. Lots of economists believe lowering marginal rates would be a good thing and that does not exclude Keynesian economics. I'm not an expert, but my understanding is that the Keynesian theory revolves around government intervention specifically in times of macroeconomic disequilibrium e.g. the Great Recession. It has little to do with easing economic inequality or arguing for/against the benefits of marginal rates vs. payroll tax reduction.
No small part of the Bush Tax Cut was about literally sending people tax rebates as "stimulus." Much of the time these cuts are not driven by economic theory but by people ideologically driven to "reduce the size of government" and are happy to use whatever fig leaf they need to accomplish it. That's why you kept seeing marginal rate reductions without any correlating elimination of tax deductions. Reducing payroll taxes affects everyone collecting a paycheck, not just those paying large amounts of income taxes. If you're looking to stimulate broad based spending then it helps to get that money into the hands of people who will actually spend it instead of people who will just save it and a payroll tax reduction is a smart way to do it.
|
|
Craig Fry
Trad climber
So Cal.
|
|
|
May 11, 2016 - 10:18am PT
|
Most of JE's ideas on economics have been tried and failed miserably
But just like the promoters of these tax plans (funded by the ultra rich) they will keep trying to fool the public that they work, and they will benefit everyone
It's a lie, they only benefit the rich and everyone else gets what they got now, lower wages, high unemployment, no job security
Bernie's tax plan (and Hillary's) will try and bring us back to normal when America was prosperous, the 50-70s, when we had the highest taxes ever, when the patriotic Americans were happy to pay more for a better life for all.
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
May 11, 2016 - 11:06am PT
|
Most of JE's ideas on economics have been tried and failed miserably
. . .
Bernie's tax plan (and Hillary's) will try and bring us back to normal when America was prosperous, the 50-70s, when we had the highest taxes ever, when the patriotic Americans were happy to pay more for a better life for all.
That's an interesting divergence from reality, Craig. Responding to every point takes more time than I have available today, so I'll just pick the lowest-hanging fruit. (I am, after all, considerably shorter than you).
1. The highest tax rates were during World War II, not in the 1950's, 60's and '70's:
2. I know you're old enough to remember those wonderful 1970's, which certainly were not as "prosperous" as you state. The "misery index" (inflation rate plus unemployment rate) at the end of the decade swept Ronald Reagan into office.
3. The percentage of GDP paid in taxes was lower in the 1950's - 1970's than it was after:
4. I'm not sure how you purport to measure which of my "economic ideas" have been tried, or how you measure their success or failure, but I'm not particularly concerned, because, to my knowledge, the only people who actually "tried" my "economic ideas" were my clients, and they like the results. The wealth of peer-reviewed economic literature supporting the stimulative effects of tax cuts, and the contractionary effects of tax increases, spans the political spectrum. The dearth of any contrary findings speaks for itself.
John
Edit: HDDJ, the difference between the liberals' theory that you state, i.e. stimulate the economy by giving people money to spend, and the conservatives' theory, i.e. stimulate the economy by lowering marginal tax rates, reflects different views of what drives the economy and employment. The liberal view sees the economy driven by consumption. The conservative view sees it driven by investment.
|
|
Craig Fry
Trad climber
So Cal.
|
|
|
May 11, 2016 - 11:29am PT
|
The wealth of peer-reviewed economic literature supporting the stimulative effects of tax cuts, and the contractionary effects of tax increases, spans the political spectrum.
yes, our economy speaks for itself
all peer reviewed stuff I found says the opposite
Please find some actual data that shows that tax cuts to the rich from Reagan on has stimulated the economy
and of course you can't use the huge deficit (over) spending of the Republicans during that time, since that would counter your argument, since it was Spending.
and boasts my contention, spending stimulates the economy
what about austerity, can anyone demonstrate that cutting spending will bring on prosperity?
it's just More of same, it does the opposite, and puts more money in the pocket of the rich while driving down the economy
It's all about spending.
|
|
HighDesertDJ
Trad climber
|
|
|
May 11, 2016 - 11:35am PT
|
John posted
Edit: HDDJ, the difference between the liberals' theory that you state, i.e. stimulate the economy by giving people money to spend, and the conservatives' theory, i.e. stimulate the economy by lowering marginal tax rates, reflects different views of what drives the economy and employment. The liberal view sees the economy driven by consumption. The conservative view sees it driven by investment.
You present a false and partisan dichotomy that fits a political narrative but not reality.
|
|
apogee
climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
|
|
|
May 13, 2016 - 01:49pm PT
|
"The liberal view sees the economy driven by consumption. The conservative view sees it driven by investment."
Oh, please. You can't be serious.
|
|
rbord
Boulder climber
atlanta
|
|
|
May 13, 2016 - 01:52pm PT
|
If Sanders has done as good a job at voterizing those crowds as he's done at monetizing them, it looks like he'll win California in a landslide, and he won't need to make that tricky argument to the superdelegates that they should overturn the people's vote because he's entitled to the superdelegates votes if the people voted for him. and so is Clinton (just not quite as entitled as he is).
|
|
Norton
Social climber
|
|
|
May 13, 2016 - 01:57pm PT
|
The wealth of peer-reviewed economic literature supporting the stimulative effects of tax cuts, and the contractionary effects of tax increases, spans the political spectrum.
Really?
Prove it
The facts contradict this "theory"
On the Federal level President Reagan cut taxes and the economy went into Recession
On the Federal level President George Bush cut taxes and four years later the economy went into the worst Recession since the Great Depression
On the state level, having learned nothing, the Republicans in Kansas cut taxes quite severely and now they are grabbling with record state deficits and having to cut public services including closing schools early
really the very core of Republican "economic policy" has been proven dead wrong
now just stop it
|
|
tuolumne_tradster
Trad climber
Leading Edge of North American Plate
|
|
|
May 17, 2016 - 03:27pm PT
|
Bernie's Northern California headquarters near Jenner, CA for the upcoming California primary...;-)
|
|
John Duffield
Mountain climber
New York
|
|
|
May 17, 2016 - 03:37pm PT
|
The fact is, he's an Independent. His materials even still say it now. He's not really a Democrat though he votes with them 95% of the time. They really owe him zero Superdelegates, who would tend to be loyal to the Party faithful.
But here's what a Sanders Presidency would look like. Can you imagine Hillary giving Big Pharm the works like this after all the money they shoveled her way?
[Click to View YouTube Video]
|
|
crankster
Trad climber
No. Tahoe
|
|
|
May 17, 2016 - 03:40pm PT
|
Hope his supporters don't riot when he loses.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!