Paleocon
Legend
We spent 50 Years fighting the USSR just to become a gay, retarded version of It.
Posts: 7,345
|
Post by Paleocon on Sept 10, 2024 13:31:13 GMT
America is spending more than it is producing in taxes, and both sides have strategies to deal with the problem. Neither are suggesting we spend less, so I'm not even going to discuss it here, even though, obviously, it should be done. On the Dems side, the consistent approach to acquiring more funds is to tax the rich and corporations, who they feel not only have the most money, but are the least held accountable for it. Donald has suggested we get more funds by taxing imports, and I'm just curious how people feel about that. For myself, it's pretty simple math. If imported goods are taxed, they will pass that cost onto the consumer, and everything that currently costs a lot, will cost us more. No thanks. And maybe some will argue that by doing so, it encourages spending on domestic products, instead of foreign, but to that I say the reason I don't buy domestic is because the quality of the product, and/or its features, are less than the foreign products. If domestic wants my business, they need to build better products. THAT is how we encourage domestic spending. Government should not be telling me what products I should buy, and what products I shouldn't. But I guess the Donald lovers think this is all ok, right? Freon It's interesting that your main concern is that the tariff costs will be passed on to consumers.
If the Democrats tax the corporations and the rich, won't those extra costs still be passed down to us? A corporation will certainly pass it down and the rich will curtail purchases, spending and investment to compensate for the government's greed.
The tariff strategy offers relief for domestic industries and encourages manufacturing in the U.S. The Democratic strategy encourages corporations to leave the U.S. to mitigate the higher taxes though lower labor and material costs. The rich spend less and make less effort to make personal gains when the government takes more from them.
You're not very good at understanding human nature, are you, Freon?
|
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Sept 10, 2024 13:54:09 GMT
It is not logical or accurate to assume that because you do not understand something, that everyone else doesn't either. I find you arrogant to assume that your ability to understand defines the baseline for others, but that you do, explains why you lack the understanding I've previously alluded to. Now, an intelligent person would recognize the gap between data and information, especially now that you've been made aware of the distinction, and seek to pursue context when interpreting data. But not you. You have basically said that you know best, that you are always right, and that there is nothing new for you to learn. And by far, THAT is the biggest difference between someone like you and someone like me. I'm having a great evening, and I appreciate the insincere well wishes. Freon The hundredth time you’ve combined saying “you don’t understand data and information” with “I will not demonstrate how I understand it, and make no real rebuttal to the data you presented.” Literal morons might be impressed with it. But saying “you don’t understand data and information so I win” is pathetic by definition. I hope this new day brings you joy and comfort. You continue to tell me that no one is impressed with what I'm saying, when I could care less if people are, or are not, impressed. That has absolutely zero significance to someone like me. But it's clearly important to someone like you. Which means that when you communicate, your goal is to impress others, not to have a meaningful conversation. And because this is obvious about you, my goal is almost never to engage you as if you are a serious conversant. People like you can only be swayed by convincing yourselves, so I would never even try doing so by linking or arguing with you. I am merely pointing out that your interpretation of that tax info is (very likely) erroneous, because it is raw data, and not contextual information. So if you choose to continue interpreting as you have, then you are also choosing to not only be inaccurate, but to look extremely uneducated and unaware of that fact. Freon |
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Sept 10, 2024 14:04:08 GMT
America is spending more than it is producing in taxes, and both sides have strategies to deal with the problem. Neither are suggesting we spend less, so I'm not even going to discuss it here, even though, obviously, it should be done. On the Dems side, the consistent approach to acquiring more funds is to tax the rich and corporations, who they feel not only have the most money, but are the least held accountable for it. Donald has suggested we get more funds by taxing imports, and I'm just curious how people feel about that. For myself, it's pretty simple math. If imported goods are taxed, they will pass that cost onto the consumer, and everything that currently costs a lot, will cost us more. No thanks. And maybe some will argue that by doing so, it encourages spending on domestic products, instead of foreign, but to that I say the reason I don't buy domestic is because the quality of the product, and/or its features, are less than the foreign products. If domestic wants my business, they need to build better products. THAT is how we encourage domestic spending. Government should not be telling me what products I should buy, and what products I shouldn't. But I guess the Donald lovers think this is all ok, right? Freon It's interesting that your main concern is that the tariff costs will be passed on to consumers.
If the Democrats tax the corporations and the rich, won't those extra costs still be passed down to us? A corporation will certainly pass it down and the rich will curtail purchases, spending and investment to compensate for the government's greed.
The tariff strategy offers relief for domestic industries and encourages manufacturing in the U.S. The Democratic strategy encourages corporations to leave the U.S. to mitigate the higher taxes though lower labor and material costs. The rich spend less and make less effort to make personal gains when the government takes more from them.
You're not very good at understanding human nature, are you, Freon?
Your first question is fair. Yes, corporations will pass it down, but no, the rich will not. The rich make up such a small part of the country, their spending habits do not impact the rest of us at all. But as to corporations, whether they do, or do not, they should not be able to dodge paying their full taxes. If they pay them, and it results in them increasing prices, then that was going to happen anyway, and I say, let's rip the band-aid off, deal this those consequences, instead of enabling bad behavior because its the status quo. I'm sure you would agree that our freedoms are important, and to me, freedom to buy the best product, and not simply the one with the Made in America logo, is part of that interpretation. I work in technology, and American products are very often inferior to those coming from Japan, for instance. Yet you are arguing that I suck it up, be a patriot, and buy domestic, purely so corporations don't have to pay their full taxes. And I say, if they want my business, build better products. So what we seem to have here is a fundamental difference in opinion about how humans behave, and how they should behave. So in answer to your other question, I would suggest you evaluate your own abilities in this area, before judging others. Freon |
|
|
|
Post by rabbitreborn on Sept 10, 2024 14:22:55 GMT
You continue to tell me that no one is impressed with what I'm saying, when I could care less if people are, or are not, impressed. That has absolutely zero significance to someone like me. I didn't say "no one is impressed". I said literal morons would be impressed by somebody's entire argument, repeated dozens of times, being "the data you provided is not information, you don't know the difference, and therefore you are wrong." Yet that's what you do. It's really no different from "your argument is wrong and I win." All stemming from your original assertion that: We are purely talking about paying taxes here, and the rich, and corporations, are the most capable of finding all the loopholes and exploiting them to pay as little as possible. I don't consider it fair that they pay less than the rest of us. ...which you refuse or are unable to defend. So instead you just say "YOU NOT KNOW DATA AND INFORMATION SO I WIN." And it won't be the last time. |
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Sept 10, 2024 14:33:19 GMT
You continue to tell me that no one is impressed with what I'm saying, when I could care less if people are, or are not, impressed. That has absolutely zero significance to someone like me. I didn't say "no one is impressed". I said literal morons would be impressed by somebody's entire argument, repeated dozens of times, being "the data you provided is not information, you don't know the difference, and therefore you are wrong." Yet that's what you do. It's really no different from "your argument is wrong and I win." All stemming from your original assertion that: We are purely talking about paying taxes here, and the rich, and corporations, are the most capable of finding all the loopholes and exploiting them to pay as little as possible. I don't consider it fair that they pay less than the rest of us. ...which you refuse or are unable to defend. So instead you just say "YOU NOT KNOW DATA AND INFORMATION SO I WIN." And it won't be the last time. They pay less than their full share of taxes. They exploit loopholes in the system, they lie about their assets, as Donald has now been caught doing. And all I want is for them to pay their FULL amount in taxes, just like I do. Which part of that are you not understanding? Freon |
|
Paleocon
Legend
We spent 50 Years fighting the USSR just to become a gay, retarded version of It.
Posts: 7,345
|
Post by Paleocon on Sept 10, 2024 15:13:33 GMT
It's interesting that your main concern is that the tariff costs will be passed on to consumers.
If the Democrats tax the corporations and the rich, won't those extra costs still be passed down to us? A corporation will certainly pass it down and the rich will curtail purchases, spending and investment to compensate for the government's greed.
The tariff strategy offers relief for domestic industries and encourages manufacturing in the U.S. The Democratic strategy encourages corporations to leave the U.S. to mitigate the higher taxes though lower labor and material costs. The rich spend less and make less effort to make personal gains when the government takes more from them.
You're not very good at understanding human nature, are you, Freon?
Your first question is fair. Yes, corporations will pass it down, but no, the rich will not. The rich make up such a small part of the country, their spending habits do not impact the rest of us at all. But as to corporations, whether they do, or do not, they should not be able to dodge paying their full taxes. If they pay them, and it results in them increasing prices, then that was going to happen anyway, and I say, let's rip the band-aid off, deal this those consequences, instead of enabling bad behavior because its the status quo. I'm sure you would agree that our freedoms are important, and to me, freedom to buy the best product, and not simply the one with the Made in America logo, is part of that interpretation. I work in technology, and American products are very often inferior to those coming from Japan, for instance. Yet you are arguing that I suck it up, be a patriot, and buy domestic, purely so corporations don't have to pay their full taxes. And I say, if they want my business, build better products. So what we seem to have here is a fundamental difference in opinion about how humans behave, and how they should behave. So in answer to your other question, I would suggest you evaluate your own abilities in this area, before judging others. Freon The rich are rich due to their ownership of those same corporations, so yes the additional taxes on the rich will be passed down to us.
And saying that corporations should pay their "full taxes" is saying that we should pay more, since we both know that the corporations pass the taxes down to us. It's not bad behavior to keep corporate taxes low so that those corporations will stay put and hire Americans, who then pay taxes on higher earnings into the federal coffers.
Tariffs don't deny you buying the best product, it just adds your fair share of taxes when you buy something that didn't create American jobs. Manufacturing is where real wealth is created by taking raw materials and combining them into more valuable items.
Higher taxes depress spending, investment and hiring. Why work hard when the government parasites get more and more of what your worked for and earned? Same reality works for corporations and the rich. Here's a fellow who knows what I'm talking about:
A tax cut means higher family income and higher business profits and a balanced federal budget....As the national income grows, the federal government will ultimately end up with more revenues. Prosperity is the real way to balance our budget. By lowering tax rates, by increasing jobs and income, we can expand tax revenues and finally bring our budget into balance.
I see no magic in tax dollars which are sent to Washington and then returned. I abhor the waste and incompetence of large-scale federal bureaucracies in this administration as well as in others. I do not favor state compulsion when voluntary individual effort can do the job and do it well.
When consumers purchase more goods, plants use more of their capacity, men are hired instead of laid off, investment increases, and profits are high. Corporate tax rates must also be cut to increase incentives and the availability of investment capital.
The final and best means of strengthening demand among consumers and business is to reduce the burden on private income and the deterrence to private initiative which are imposed by our present tax system, and this administration pledged itself last summer to an across-the-board, top-to-bottom cut in personal and corporate income taxes.
Who would say such terrible conservative things? A wild eyed nutjob? A Trump cultist? A rich corporate stooge?
Those are quotes from.....
John Fitzgerald Kennedy, Democrat and POTUS
|
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Sept 10, 2024 15:30:00 GMT
Your first question is fair. Yes, corporations will pass it down, but no, the rich will not. The rich make up such a small part of the country, their spending habits do not impact the rest of us at all. But as to corporations, whether they do, or do not, they should not be able to dodge paying their full taxes. If they pay them, and it results in them increasing prices, then that was going to happen anyway, and I say, let's rip the band-aid off, deal this those consequences, instead of enabling bad behavior because its the status quo. I'm sure you would agree that our freedoms are important, and to me, freedom to buy the best product, and not simply the one with the Made in America logo, is part of that interpretation. I work in technology, and American products are very often inferior to those coming from Japan, for instance. Yet you are arguing that I suck it up, be a patriot, and buy domestic, purely so corporations don't have to pay their full taxes. And I say, if they want my business, build better products. So what we seem to have here is a fundamental difference in opinion about how humans behave, and how they should behave. So in answer to your other question, I would suggest you evaluate your own abilities in this area, before judging others. Freon The rich are rich due to their ownership of those same corporations, so yes the additional taxes on the rich will be passed down to us.
And saying that corporations should pay their "full taxes" is saying that we should pay more, since we both know that the corporations pass the taxes down to us. It's not bad behavior to keep corporate taxes low so that those corporations will stay put and hire Americans, who then pay taxes on higher earnings into the federal coffers.
Tariffs don't deny you buying the best product, it just adds your fair share of taxes when you buy something that didn't create American jobs. Manufacturing is where real wealth is created by taking raw materials and combining them into more valuable items.
Higher taxes depress spending, investment and hiring. Why work hard when the government parasites get more and more of what your worked for and earned? Same reality works for corporations and the rich. Here's a fellow who knows what I'm talking about:
A tax cut means higher family income and higher business profits and a balanced federal budget....As the national income grows, the federal government will ultimately end up with more revenues. Prosperity is the real way to balance our budget. By lowering tax rates, by increasing jobs and income, we can expand tax revenues and finally bring our budget into balance.
I see no magic in tax dollars which are sent to Washington and then returned. I abhor the waste and incompetence of large-scale federal bureaucracies in this administration as well as in others. I do not favor state compulsion when voluntary individual effort can do the job and do it well.
When consumers purchase more goods, plants use more of their capacity, men are hired instead of laid off, investment increases, and profits are high. Corporate tax rates must also be cut to increase incentives and the availability of investment capital.
The final and best means of strengthening demand among consumers and business is to reduce the burden on private income and the deterrence to private initiative which are imposed by our present tax system, and this administration pledged itself last summer to an across-the-board, top-to-bottom cut in personal and corporate income taxes.
Who would say such terrible conservative things? A wild eyed nutjob? A Trump cultist? A rich corporate stooge?
Those are quotes from.....
John Fitzgerald Kennedy, Democrat and POTUS
You can look at the Republican economies going back to Reagan, and what I see are policies favoring the rich and corporations and decreasing the wealth of the middle class. JFK was wrong. History has shown it. Freon |
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,214
|
Post by demos on Sept 10, 2024 16:01:01 GMT
The tariff strategy offers relief for domestic industries and encourages manufacturing in the U.S. The Democratic strategy encourages corporations to leave the U.S. to mitigate the higher taxes though lower labor and material costs. The rich spend less and make less effort to make personal gains when the government takes more from them. Protectionist steel tariffs hurt U.S. domestic industry, particularly downstream:
|
|
Paleocon
Legend
We spent 50 Years fighting the USSR just to become a gay, retarded version of It.
Posts: 7,345
|
Post by Paleocon on Sept 10, 2024 19:14:44 GMT
The tariff strategy offers relief for domestic industries and encourages manufacturing in the U.S. The Democratic strategy encourages corporations to leave the U.S. to mitigate the higher taxes though lower labor and material costs. The rich spend less and make less effort to make personal gains when the government takes more from them. Protectionist steel tariffs hurt U.S. domestic industry, particularly downstream:
Did you think that the benefits of the tariffs would be instantaneous? We live in an instant gratification society. It took decades to build the dependency and addiction to foreign products and materials and the rehab and withdrawal will always be painful.
Continuing to be an addict is always more pleasant than kicking the habit.
|
|
Paleocon
Legend
We spent 50 Years fighting the USSR just to become a gay, retarded version of It.
Posts: 7,345
|
Post by Paleocon on Sept 10, 2024 19:19:14 GMT
The rich are rich due to their ownership of those same corporations, so yes the additional taxes on the rich will be passed down to us.
And saying that corporations should pay their "full taxes" is saying that we should pay more, since we both know that the corporations pass the taxes down to us. It's not bad behavior to keep corporate taxes low so that those corporations will stay put and hire Americans, who then pay taxes on higher earnings into the federal coffers.
Tariffs don't deny you buying the best product, it just adds your fair share of taxes when you buy something that didn't create American jobs. Manufacturing is where real wealth is created by taking raw materials and combining them into more valuable items.
Higher taxes depress spending, investment and hiring. Why work hard when the government parasites get more and more of what your worked for and earned? Same reality works for corporations and the rich. Here's a fellow who knows what I'm talking about:
A tax cut means higher family income and higher business profits and a balanced federal budget....As the national income grows, the federal government will ultimately end up with more revenues. Prosperity is the real way to balance our budget. By lowering tax rates, by increasing jobs and income, we can expand tax revenues and finally bring our budget into balance.
I see no magic in tax dollars which are sent to Washington and then returned. I abhor the waste and incompetence of large-scale federal bureaucracies in this administration as well as in others. I do not favor state compulsion when voluntary individual effort can do the job and do it well.
When consumers purchase more goods, plants use more of their capacity, men are hired instead of laid off, investment increases, and profits are high. Corporate tax rates must also be cut to increase incentives and the availability of investment capital.
The final and best means of strengthening demand among consumers and business is to reduce the burden on private income and the deterrence to private initiative which are imposed by our present tax system, and this administration pledged itself last summer to an across-the-board, top-to-bottom cut in personal and corporate income taxes.
Who would say such terrible conservative things? A wild eyed nutjob? A Trump cultist? A rich corporate stooge?
Those are quotes from.....
John Fitzgerald Kennedy, Democrat and POTUS
You can look at the Republican economies going back to Reagan, and what I see are policies favoring the rich and corporations and decreasing the wealth of the middle class. JFK was wrong. History has shown it. Freon Exactly wrong. Kennedy had it right. This is in the wake of Trump's tax cuts.....
Despite a pandemic, a recession and a slew of tax cuts, federal tax receipts are booming.
Revenues jumped 18 percent in the fiscal year that just ended, analysts say — the biggest one-year increase since 1977.
|
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Sept 10, 2024 19:27:15 GMT
You can look at the Republican economies going back to Reagan, and what I see are policies favoring the rich and corporations and decreasing the wealth of the middle class. JFK was wrong. History has shown it. Freon Exactly wrong. Kennedy had it right. This is in the wake of Trump's tax cuts.....
Despite a pandemic, a recession and a slew of tax cuts, federal tax receipts are booming.
Revenues jumped 18 percent in the fiscal year that just ended, analysts say — the biggest one-year increase since 1977.
I suppose if you only look at certain dimensions of an economy, you can make ANY economy look like it was great. During that same period massive amount of small businesses failed. Supply chains were destroyed. Shortages of products, from toilet paper to basic food stuffs were experienced. You are looking at a tiny sliver of information, and saying EVERYTHING was good. That's not just wrong, it's dishonest. Donald handed Biden a MESS, and he has done an excellent job fixing it. Freon |
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,214
|
Post by demos on Sept 10, 2024 19:51:21 GMT
Did you think that the benefits of the tariffs would be instantaneous? We live in an instant gratification society. It took decades to build the dependency and addiction to foreign products and materials and the rehab and withdrawal will always be painful.
Continuing to be an addict is always more pleasant than kicking the habit.
These tariffs were enacted in 2018 (and Biden's adding on). There has been no benefit. A net jobs loss as a result.
Some steel plants shut down because demand dropped.
Pretty much exactly your point when you said: "Higher taxes depress spending, investment and hiring."
How long are we supposed to wait? Until Nippon owns U.S. Steel?
|
|
|
|
Post by RinsePrius on Sept 10, 2024 19:54:42 GMT
If only there was a professional discipline that took a scientific look at these sorts of questions and could give us some advice...
|
|
thor
Legend
Posts: 20,534
|
Post by thor on Sept 10, 2024 20:08:33 GMT
Your first question is fair. Yes, corporations will pass it down, but no, the rich will not. The rich make up such a small part of the country, their spending habits do not impact the rest of us at all. But as to corporations, whether they do, or do not, they should not be able to dodge paying their full taxes. If they pay them, and it results in them increasing prices, then that was going to happen anyway, and I say, let's rip the band-aid off, deal this those consequences, instead of enabling bad behavior because its the status quo. I'm sure you would agree that our freedoms are important, and to me, freedom to buy the best product, and not simply the one with the Made in America logo, is part of that interpretation. I work in technology, and American products are very often inferior to those coming from Japan, for instance. Yet you are arguing that I suck it up, be a patriot, and buy domestic, purely so corporations don't have to pay their full taxes. And I say, if they want my business, build better products. So what we seem to have here is a fundamental difference in opinion about how humans behave, and how they should behave. So in answer to your other question, I would suggest you evaluate your own abilities in this area, before judging others. Freon The rich are rich due to their ownership of those same corporations, so yes the additional taxes on the rich will be passed down to us.
And saying that corporations should pay their "full taxes" is saying that we should pay more, since we both know that the corporations pass the taxes down to us. It's not bad behavior to keep corporate taxes low so that those corporations will stay put and hire Americans, who then pay taxes on higher earnings into the federal coffers.
Tariffs don't deny you buying the best product, it just adds your fair share of taxes when you buy something that didn't create American jobs. Manufacturing is where real wealth is created by taking raw materials and combining them into more valuable items.
Higher taxes depress spending, investment and hiring. Why work hard when the government parasites get more and more of what your worked for and earned? Same reality works for corporations and the rich. Here's a fellow who knows what I'm talking about:
A tax cut means higher family income and higher business profits and a balanced federal budget....As the national income grows, the federal government will ultimately end up with more revenues. Prosperity is the real way to balance our budget. By lowering tax rates, by increasing jobs and income, we can expand tax revenues and finally bring our budget into balance.
I see no magic in tax dollars which are sent to Washington and then returned. I abhor the waste and incompetence of large-scale federal bureaucracies in this administration as well as in others. I do not favor state compulsion when voluntary individual effort can do the job and do it well.
When consumers purchase more goods, plants use more of their capacity, men are hired instead of laid off, investment increases, and profits are high. Corporate tax rates must also be cut to increase incentives and the availability of investment capital.
The final and best means of strengthening demand among consumers and business is to reduce the burden on private income and the deterrence to private initiative which are imposed by our present tax system, and this administration pledged itself last summer to an across-the-board, top-to-bottom cut in personal and corporate income taxes.
Who would say such terrible conservative things? A wild eyed nutjob? A Trump cultist? A rich corporate stooge?
Those are quotes from.....
John Fitzgerald Kennedy, Democrat and POTUS
"The rich are rich due to their ownership of those same corporations, so yes the additional taxes on the rich will be passed down to us.: Paleo, giving another reason explaining why his idiot ancestors marched into the Federal guns... |
|
|
|
Post by Lomelis on Sept 11, 2024 7:30:36 GMT
No, that's not what you said you retarded liar. You said nothing of the sort. You said," I said your INTERPRETATION of the data is wrong." So what is the correct interpretation? Stop being a cowardly foreigner. Get your google translate working correctly and actually contribute more than bullshit for a change. You have a point, actually. I should have said, 'Your interpretation of the data MAY be accurate, but the data alone cannot reveal that'. Freon More gibberish. You made a claim, he countered based on available data, you said he's wrong, and then you run away because you can't defend your argument. It's fascinating that you don't realize we see right through your charade. |
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Sept 11, 2024 13:30:57 GMT
You have a point, actually. I should have said, 'Your interpretation of the data MAY be accurate, but the data alone cannot reveal that'. Freon More gibberish. You made a claim, he countered based on available data, you said he's wrong, and then you run away because you can't defend your argument. It's fascinating that you don't realize we see right through your charade. I'm not surprised you find your own conjecture, fascinating. I'm not sure whether to call it hallucination on your part, or masturbation, but it is self-gratifying, groundless, and of course, weird, either way. Freon |
|
