|
the success of the bush tax cuts
On 14/06/2011 4:09 AM, wf3h wrote:
On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 23:33:29 -0700, wrote: On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 01:02:05 -0400, wrote: spend out of it. In 1933 they realized after the 1932 crash that fleabagger debt spend does not work. Took 6 years of restraint to cover the debts and recovery was slow. really? uh...why did the depression end in 39? did something happen in 39? uh yeah...the US started to spend for ww2 canuck's moronic view of economics is exceeded only by his ignorance of history It was something called lend lease that got the factories moving again. That was when the rest of the world was borrowing from us. Bob, do you see the difference? Greg, do you see that the US gov't was injecting money into the economy? Do you see why it doesn't make much difference how it does it and that via a war isn't exactly the best way to do that... unless you don't mind killing a lot of people in the name of profit of course. Never mind. You're hiding. I forgot. yep, the right keeps confirming that LIBERALS have the right ideas. LIBERAL KEYNESIAN economcs, not right wing bull****, makes an economy grow. yet the right wants to continue its bizarre faith based economics. Keynes was an unemployed liberal economist looking for a job, so he told politicians what they wanted to here. 3 years of Keynes and just a load of debt to show for it. No results, just more bu11sh1t. I do actually think Keynews could work if enhanced to include the concept of a reserve fund. During fat times, no debt, governments hoards cash to have a solid reserve and avoid greed. Even cut government in good times. But the lack of a reserve is why Keynes is full of sh1t. You can't debt-spend your way out of a debt problem. Keynes does not properly even apply. Fact is, your not paying your bills with real money. Just paying with BS and a prayer, and sooner or later that bubble will pop. -- Government isn't the solution to the bad economy, it is the problem. |
the success of the bush tax cuts
On 14/06/2011 11:16 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 11:50:19 -0400, wrote: On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 07:14:57 -0400, wrote: On 6/14/2011 2:33 AM, wrote: On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 01:02:05 -0400, wrote: spend out of it. In 1933 they realized after the 1932 crash that fleabagger debt spend does not work. Took 6 years of restraint to cover the debts and recovery was slow. really? uh...why did the depression end in 39? did something happen in 39? uh yeah...the US started to spend for ww2 canuck's moronic view of economics is exceeded only by his ignorance of history It was something called lend lease that got the factories moving again. That was when the rest of the world was borrowing from us. Bob, do you see the difference? Greg, do you see that the US gov't was injecting money into the economy? Do you see why it doesn't make much difference how it does it and that via a war isn't exactly the best way to do that... unless you don't mind killing a lot of people in the name of profit of course. Never mind. You're hiding. I forgot. Greg isn't hiding.I see all of his posts. Check your filters. I am just not engaging Plume. I got tired of every debate ending up in an insult when she ran out of things to say You got tired of have no facts. You started the insults, but you're not going to admit it. Did I call you a moron or an asshole? Did I claim you have a small ding dong? No. What was this terrible insult? Oh, I think it was "you're delusional if you think...." How terrible. You must have a very thin skin. I apologize. If you did two things people would respect you more. 1) No whine and fleabagger chirp towards others. 2) If you don't know anything, shut up an listen. So how is our welfare mama doing today? Give us a laugh at least. -- Government isn't the solution to the bad economy, it is the problem. |
the success of the bush tax cuts
On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 15:36:06 -0400, wrote:
On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 11:32:43 -0400, I_am_Tosk wrote: In article , says... On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 23:56:30 -0600, Canuck57 wrote: On 13/06/2011 5:33 PM, wrote: I did hear one idea on capital gains that sounded interesting. Tie the tax discount more closely to how long the investment was held. They already do in the USA for cash accounts. 40k/IRA get the full hit on withdrawal. Explain the "cash account" thing? I agree 401ks are a time bomb and I think we ain't seen nothin yet on those taxes. You wouldn't get the full tax break until it was held 5 years and make it a higher percentage ending at the regular income rate at 1 or 2 years. Fast way to scare off investment. In todays market, 5 years is not even calculated. Too many changes coming for a commitment that long without some guarantees no one will or can make. A huge part of our problem is that businesses work in 90 day windows while out competition in China looks at decades at a time. For example, if you give me a 20 year tax rate guarantee for property and income tax that I like, I would buy a Florida property tomorrow morning. But with the debts out of control, I will hold off and decline thank you. No sense in moving to the taxed poor districts of USA. And Florida is one of the better places. There is no income tax in Florida and we have SOH limits on property taxes. That may actually be a bad thing because if we get a round of massive inflation, the local communities may go broke. They were certainly fat during the housing boom because the property taxes were pegged to the sale prices and they were fantasy. The smart communities like mine banked that excess money. although we did let the school board get out of control ($20k per student kind of out of control) I was wondering why the democrat pundit was pushing 401's as the "safest" way to go right now... "FREE MONEY" he said, "from your employer". I guess it makes sense now, then they can tax the crap out of you and your employer... :( The employer is not going to be taxed but I bet those people taking their 401k money out in the future will get their ass kicked on it. Right now a worker would be paying a very minimal tax on this money but I bet those numbers will go up sharply as we try to dig our way out of crushing debt. 401Ks are taxed as regular income if you're over the line. Is this new? No. Taxes will go up. Some should consider converting to Roths. |
the success of the bush tax cuts
|
the success of the bush tax cuts
On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 14:05:35 -0600, Canuck57
wrote: On 14/06/2011 9:09 AM, wrote: On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 23:56:30 -0600, wrote: On 13/06/2011 5:33 PM, wrote: I did hear one idea on capital gains that sounded interesting. Tie the tax discount more closely to how long the investment was held. They already do in the USA for cash accounts. 40k/IRA get the full hit on withdrawal. Explain the "cash account" thing? I agree 401ks are a time bomb and I think we ain't seen nothin yet on those taxes. You wouldn't get the full tax break until it was held 5 years and make it a higher percentage ending at the regular income rate at 1 or 2 years. Fast way to scare off investment. In todays market, 5 years is not even calculated. Too many changes coming for a commitment that long without some guarantees no one will or can make. A huge part of our problem is that businesses work in 90 day windows while out competition in China looks at decades at a time. For example, if you give me a 20 year tax rate guarantee for property and income tax that I like, I would buy a Florida property tomorrow morning. But with the debts out of control, I will hold off and decline thank you. No sense in moving to the taxed poor districts of USA. And Florida is one of the better places. There is no income tax in Florida and we have SOH limits on property taxes. That may actually be a bad thing because if we get a round of massive inflation, the local communities may go broke. They were certainly fat during the housing boom because the property taxes were pegged to the sale prices and they were fantasy. The smart communities like mine banked that excess money. although we did let the school board get out of control ($20k per student kind of out of control) Not really. Limiting government taxes is good. Can't keep raising taxes into perpetuity or you quickly become state debt-tax slaves. What is missing though is the removal of governments saddling debt into the system. That is, funding the excess with a credit card. That bypasses the intent of the limiting taxes and thus is fraud on the intent for people to maintain some economic freedom. The reality is, government is living beyond its means using debt fraud to fund it. Bottom line, they have to cut spending and start paying those debts. If that means tossing some politicially sacred cows and union ass to the pavement, start throwing. No reason why everybody has to suffer but for government. Do the socialist thing, share the pain not just the gain. Good grief... your stupid statements cannot be attributed to your eyesight problems. |
the success of the bush tax cuts
On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 14:26:07 -0600, Canuck57
wrote: On 14/06/2011 11:14 AM, wrote: On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 08:21:23 -0400, wrote: In , says... On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 20:01:07 -0400, wrote: In , says... On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 17:22:54 -0600, wrote: On 11/06/2011 6:31 PM, wf3h wrote: On Sat, 11 Jun 2011 11:40:36 -0600, wrote: meaningless. and, of course, your method was tried it was called the depression of 29 ever hear of it?? Actually, you dumbsh1t fleabaggers says the right winger with a reader's digest view of economics should read. In 1929 they tried to spend out of it. In 1933 they realized after the 1932 crash that fleabagger debt spend does not work. Took 6 years of restraint to cover the debts and recovery was slow. really? uh...why did the depression end in 39? did something happen in 39? uh yeah...the US started to spend for ww2 canuck's moronic view of economics is exceeded only by his ignorance of history It was something called lend lease that got the factories moving again. So, money was spent by the US gov't. This stabilized the economy. Thanks for the confirmation. It was just like any other business deal. The corporations were told that if they made and sold the items now they would get some money down the road. This loaded up the companies billables and they could use that to borrow against. Which is exactly what happens when the gov't pumps money into the economy for things like the STIM. Jobs are created and people pay taxes. Same with the GM/Chrysler bailouts. All those people are still employed and paying taxes. The best bang for your buck (other than a war) are things like food stamps. That money returns to the economy immediately, and is a net positive, esp. in the short term. Look up the fine print of lend lease. First, it was less than a trillion dollars to end a decade long depression. Very, very cheap and efficient compared to Obamanomics. And no government debt for it. It was also precipitated by the ned for war munitions and goods for the world. No such needs to that level are needed today. But could be why Obama is war hungry. A bad mad debtor. Third element, it didn't have a debt battered business base. Debt of government, business and people were relatively low compared to today. Some economists say the end of the depression may have occured anyways and in fact had already started before WW II. The US gov't was going broke during WWII. That's what the bond push was all about. For God's sake, look things up before you quack. |
the success of the bush tax cuts
In article ,
says... In article , says... The employer is not going to be taxed but I bet those people taking their 401k money out in the future will get their ass kicked on it. Tax-sheltered retirement income is taxed as ordinary income when distributed. Always was, is, always will be. It's expected that your income will be less when you retire. You might be able to use Roth IRA's to some extent if you think working vs. retirement yaxes will flip on you. Normally it doesn't work that way. Basically you've said if you're outside when it rains you'll get wet. Right now a worker would be paying a very minimal tax on this money but I bet those numbers will go up sharply as we try to dig our way out of crushing debt. Depends on income, but you have a point there. Low income workers could lose by saving. Here's the bright side. Low income worker don't have any ****ing money to save. What if everyone thinks the current tax on 401's is ok, tolerable so they pump them up, and then "somebody" decides to say, triple the tax on the 401's???? -- Team Rowdy Mouse, Banned from the Mall for life! |
the success of the bush tax cuts
On 14/06/2011 11:17 AM, wrote:
On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 08:22:44 -0400, wrote: In , says... On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 01:02:05 -0400, wrote: spend out of it. In 1933 they realized after the 1932 crash that fleabagger debt spend does not work. Took 6 years of restraint to cover the debts and recovery was slow. really? uh...why did the depression end in 39? did something happen in 39? uh yeah...the US started to spend for ww2 canuck's moronic view of economics is exceeded only by his ignorance of history It was something called lend lease that got the factories moving again. That was when the rest of the world was borrowing from us. Bob, do you see the difference? Greg, do you see that the US gov't was injecting money into the economy? Do you see why it doesn't make much difference how it does it and that via a war isn't exactly the best way to do that... unless you don't mind killing a lot of people in the name of profit of course. Never mind. You're hiding. I forgot. It is funny that when some try to tell us that the only way to make money is to spend money. Yet it just never seems to work with governments. They more the spend the more debt they create for everyone. It's funny that you don't know anything about how an economy works. Knows more than you. You don't have much money. -- Government isn't the solution to the bad economy, it is the problem. |
the success of the bush tax cuts
On 14/06/2011 4:08 AM, wf3h wrote:
On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 01:02:05 -0400, wrote: spend out of it. In 1933 they realized after the 1932 crash that fleabagger debt spend does not work. Took 6 years of restraint to cover the debts and recovery was slow. really? uh...why did the depression end in 39? did something happen in 39? uh yeah...the US started to spend for ww2 canuck's moronic view of economics is exceeded only by his ignorance of history It was something called lend lease that got the factories moving again. That was when the rest of the world was borrowing from us. Bob, do you see the difference? yep. typical LIBERAL KEYNESIAN economcis -borrow and spend in bad times -pay back in good thanks. i already knew that Well what is really happenign is: -borrow and spend in good times -borrow more and spend in bad times Even a brain fart knows that isn't sustainable. -- Government isn't the solution to the bad economy, it is the problem. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:24 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com