Are you under the impression that being nudged into the next higher tax
bracket means that you now have less money?

Bill McKee wrote:
... yes bracket creep will leave you with less spendable
money.

Welcome to the Nitwits Who Can't Do Math Club for wanna-be economists.


.. Example (ignore real tax rates).

Yes, you'd do far better to ignore reality when you're doing pretend math.

In the real world the brackets are far enough apart that you are *much*
better off in the higher income bracket.

As for the rest of the "economics" bull**** you and the other angry dumb
white men are espousing, inflation and wages are linked but seperate.
That is why economists often talk of trends where incomes rise faster
than inflation, for example this was the case thru most of the 1990s.
Then there are times when income stagnates for the majority and
inflation keeps going, like the period we seem to be in now.

I guess it makes you feel better to try and prove that "it *has* to be
this way" so you don't have to blame your Noble Leader for screwing
everything up.

DSK

"DSK" wrote in message
...
Are you under the impression that being nudged into the next higher tax
bracket means that you now have less money?

Bill McKee wrote:
... yes bracket creep will leave you with less spendable
money.

Welcome to the Nitwits Who Can't Do Math Club for wanna-be economists.


.. Example (ignore real tax rates).

Yes, you'd do far better to ignore reality when you're doing pretend math.


Not like you who ignores reality when proposing everybody get a 25% boost in
pay.

In the real world the brackets are far enough apart that you are *much*
better off in the higher income bracket.


Only if you make more money relative to the population. If everybody gets
the 25% increase with no change in productivity. Classic inflation. And
inflation has always benefited the governments via vracket creep.

As for the rest of the "economics" bull**** you and the other angry dumb
white men are espousing, inflation and wages are linked but seperate. That
is why economists often talk of trends where incomes rise faster than
inflation, for example this was the case thru most of the 1990s. Then
there are times when income stagnates for the majority and inflation keeps
going, like the period we seem to be in now.


Productivity.

I guess it makes you feel better to try and prove that "it *has* to be
this way" so you don't have to blame your Noble Leader for screwing
everything up.

DSK


I blame my noble Congress for passing extreme amounts of spending bills.
Really larded up spending bills. I blame Bush vor not vetoing a bunch of
the spending bills, and sending them back to be de-porked. Either put the
blame where it belongs, on the only branch of government who can impose
spending, or give the POTUS line item veto.

Bill McKee wrote:
Not like you who ignores reality when proposing everybody get a 25% boost in
pay.


sigh

I never proposed any such thing. Why can't you right-wing whackoes pay
attention? Are you all on some kind of medication that shuts your brain
off for 23 hours a day?

What I said was that the stated ideas about the effects of increasing
wages were wrong.

So far, none of you no-math right wing nitwits has managed to answer
what I've said, and proven that you do not have so much as a freshman
level understanding of basic economics.

I have limited time to waste here, and clearly you're not getting any
better.



I blame my noble Congress for passing extreme amounts of spending bills.
Really larded up spending bills. I blame Bush vor not vetoing a bunch of
the spending bills, and sending them back to be de-porked. Either put the
blame where it belongs, on the only branch of government who can impose
spending, or give the POTUS line item veto.


Sounds to me like you are beginning to get the picture, that your
beloved angry white man Congress & President have sold you down the
river. Unfortunately the rest of us, who knew better all along, have to
ride along.

DSK

On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 06:33:46 -0400, DSK wrote:

Bill McKee wrote:
Not like you who ignores reality when proposing everybody get a 25% boost in
pay.


sigh

I never proposed any such thing. Why can't you right-wing whackoes pay
attention? Are you all on some kind of medication that shuts your brain
off for 23 hours a day?

What I said was that the stated ideas about the effects of increasing
wages were wrong.

So far, none of you no-math right wing nitwits has managed to answer
what I've said, and proven that you do not have so much as a freshman
level understanding of basic economics.
DSK

Doug. Seriously now. Are you purposely trying to imitate Kevin?
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

PocoLoco wrote:
Doug. Seriously now. Are you purposely trying to imitate Kevin?

JohnH. Seriously- does this mean you have an answer on the economics
situation under discussion?

Or is this just an attempt at name calling because you actually don't
have a clue?

DSK

On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 10:50:34 -0400, DSK wrote:

PocoLoco wrote:
Doug. Seriously now. Are you purposely trying to imitate Kevin?

JohnH. Seriously- does this mean you have an answer on the economics
situation under discussion?

Or is this just an attempt at name calling because you actually don't
have a clue?

DSK

My post was prompted by *your* name calling, which you conveniently snipped.

Did I call you a name?
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

PocoLoco wrote:
My post was prompted by *your* name calling

Really? What name did I call you?

Did you claim to know the answer to an economics question, and then bug
out showing your ignorance?

If I call an ignoramus an ignoramus, is that an insult or the truth?

DSK

"PocoLoco" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 06:33:46 -0400, DSK wrote:

Bill McKee wrote:
Not like you who ignores reality when proposing everybody get a 25%
boost in
pay.


sigh

I never proposed any such thing. Why can't you right-wing whackoes pay
attention? Are you all on some kind of medication that shuts your brain
off for 23 hours a day?

What I said was that the stated ideas about the effects of increasing
wages were wrong.

So far, none of you no-math right wing nitwits has managed to answer
what I've said, and proven that you do not have so much as a freshman
level understanding of basic economics.
DSK

Doug. Seriously now. Are you purposely trying to imitate Kevin?

He is certainly showing how clueless he is WRT economics.

--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

P Fritz wrote:
He is certainly showing how clueless he is WRT economics.



Okay, we have a new contestant- let's play 'Do You Know Diddley Squat
About Economics'

For one point, and the right to not be considered a dumb ass whacko:

What is the definition of "short term" versus "long term"?

Meanwhile, calling names is not considered an answer.
tick tock tick tock tick tock

Maybe you should ask Nobby, he seems to have not slept thru most of his
schooling.

DSK

"DSK" wrote in message
news
Bill McKee wrote:
Not like you who ignores reality when proposing everybody get a 25% boost
in pay.


sigh

I never proposed any such thing. Why can't you right-wing whackoes pay
attention? Are you all on some kind of medication that shuts your brain
off for 23 hours a day?

What I said was that the stated ideas about the effects of increasing
wages were wrong.

So far, none of you no-math right wing nitwits has managed to answer what
I've said, and proven that you do not have so much as a freshman level
understanding of basic economics.

I have limited time to waste here, and clearly you're not getting any
better.



I blame my noble Congress for passing extreme amounts of spending bills.
Really larded up spending bills. I blame Bush vor not vetoing a bunch of
the spending bills, and sending them back to be de-porked. Either put
the blame where it belongs, on the only branch of government who can
impose spending, or give the POTUS line item veto.

Sounds to me like you are beginning to get the picture, that your beloved
angry white man Congress & President have sold you down the river.
Unfortunately the rest of us, who knew better all along, have to ride
along.

DSK


I have always been a fiscal conservative and a social liberal. You probably
have just always been stupid.