Hi -- New here.

[evince]

I do not claim not to be a lefty. I claim NOT to be a Democrat...and NOT to be a liberal.

I do claim to favor a progressive agenda (anyone with a functioning brain should)...but I am closer to some conservative issues than lefties...just as I am closer to some liberal issues than righties.

Your problem is not with Oneiuli's "brevity" or lack of it...your problem is that she is kicking your ass major league.






Not yet, Grump. Too busy with real golf.

I will give it a try at some point. Thanks.

what do you see as the difference between progressives and liberals?

 

[PoliTalker]

Hello Oneuli,

By my calculations, it would take more than just raising the top bracket. There'd need to be some increases below that, too. Here's a terrific resource for doing that math:

https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/cps/tables/hinc-06/2017/hinc06.xls

That makes it possible to do a rough calculation of the impact of a given change to individual income tax rates. Say, for example, the only change you make is to raise the tax on the top bracket from 37% to 50% and lower the threshold for that from $500k/$600k to just $250k. Right now there are 4.926 million households that earn over $250k, which earn an average of $413,853. So, they earn an average of $163,853 in the top bracket. Multiply by 4.926 million and you get around $807 billion in extra revenues.

Obviously, if we just raised that top bracket without lowering the threshold, the revenue boost would be a lot smaller than that. Only about 0.5% of households earn over $600k:

https://dqydj.com/household-income-percentile-calculator-2016/

So that top bracket only captures 631,120 households or so. We're not going to reach balance, from a starting point of a planned trillion dollar deficit, merely by raising the top bracket. Restoring corporate effective tax rates to reasonable levels would help, but I think it'll take more than that.

Oh, of course. All the rates would need to be tweaked upwards in accordance. And the corporate rate put back where it was, or even above where it was. But the bottom line is that our economy is generating enough activity for us to be paying down the debt right now, and taxes on the middle would not have to be raised much at all to do it.

If we can't pay the debt down now we will never be able to do it during a recession.

And thanks for the links.

 

[Oneuli]

Intelligence has nothing to do with anything in fact I put it to you that the smarter people don't need long drawn out details to understand the subject. The only exception is something extremely technical such as a medical procedure.

My experience has been that smarter people generally have more patience for detail. I think that includes extremely technical questions such as policy changes. For example, I think there's a reason that notorious dummies like GW Bush and Trump insisted on their briefing being boiled down to a few vague bullet points, while a Rhodes Scholar like Clinton was famously willing to dive into the details to the point of micromanagement.

 

[Oneuli]

Hello Oneuli,



Oh, of course. All the rates would need to be tweaked upwards in accordance. And the corporate rate put back where it was, or even above where it was. But the bottom line is that our economy is generating enough activity for us to be paying down the debt right now, and taxes on the middle would not have to be raised much at all to do it.

If we can't pay the debt down now we will never be able to do it during a recession.

And thanks for the links.

Regarding the corporate rate, my understanding is that the effective corporate tax rate in the US was only slightly below the trade-weighted average effective corporate tax rate for the OECD as a whole, so there's probably not much we could hike that rate, relative to the pre-Trump level, before there'd be negative repercussions. But, as I think you agree, a combination of higher upper-class taxes and little tweaks across the system would be enough to reach balance.

 

[Legion]

Yet you are wrong. Funny, that.

So you say, sock.

 

[Eagle_Eye]

My experience has been that smarter people generally have more patience for detail. I think that includes extremely technical questions such as policy changes. For example, I think there's a reason that notorious dummies like GW Bush and Trump insisted on their briefing being boiled down to a few vague bullet points, while a Rhodes Scholar like Clinton was famously willing to dive into the details to the point of micromanagement.

You may see that in the mecca of NYC but my experience and I'm quite a bit older with an advanced degree plus working with very intelligent people says you are incorrect. But think what you wish.

 

[Legion]

My experience has been that smarter people generally have more patience for detail. I think that includes extremely technical questions such as policy changes. For example, I think there's a reason that notorious dummies like GW Bush and Trump insisted on their briefing being boiled down to a few vague bullet points, while a Rhodes Scholar like Clinton was famously willing to dive into the details to the point of micromanagement.

What else did Blowjob Bill dive into, sock?

Eileen Wellstone was her name, wasn't it, sock?

BJ Clinton never completed his B Phil course in politics, and took no degree, BTW, sock.

I seem to recall that he reportedly dove into sexual assault while he infested the city of dreaming spires, sock.

Wasn't he the protégé of the notorious racist and segergationist J. William Fulbright, who sponsored the Gulf of Tonkin resolution, sock?

Strange heroes you seem to have, sock.




https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/the-bill-clinton-we-knew-at-oxford-apart-from-smoking-dope-and-not-inhaling-what-else-did-he-learn-1556769.html

https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2017/11/reckoning-with-bill-clintons-sex-crimes/545729/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._William_Fulbright

 

[Legion]

You may see that in the mecca of NYC but my experience and I'm quite a bit older with an advanced degree plus working with very intelligent people says you are incorrect. But think what you wish.

You believe the sock infests the five boroughs, Grumps? I don't.

BTW, your age, purported "advanced degree" and claim to work "with very intelligent people" are all anecdotal.

 

[Legion]

what do you see as the difference between progressives and liberals?

I see none in their mutual willingness to turn a blind eye to your racist comments, racist.

I spit in the face of the black guy.

Obama was nothing more than another black failure in a government job and another black family in government housing. Stupid nigger.

If you're black and you vote democrat, then you're a "nigger". If you're white and you vote democrat, then you're "white trash". If you're Asian and you vote democrat, then you're a "zipper head". If you're Hispanic and you vote democrat, then you're a "wetback".

 

[Legion]

If people weren't afraid to go to the doctors when issues arise due to the cost of health care then overall society would be healthier and costing less in the long run. The fact that many deny themselves routine health checks and dental work etc means down the road they are going to possibly have health issues and costs that are far greater than they need be. Having said that, imagine how much money would be saved on health care if our actual health care costs weren't so goddamn high?

Is there a paradise on earth where free, excellent healthcare is provided to one and all (at the expense of someone else)?

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

Between "projects"...it's such a blessing....Looking forward to more of "her" replies....

I just love that you've found a new focus for your obsession with, envy of, and loathing for intelligent, educated, articulate, humorous, attractive, and all-around awesome leftie women. Do you think that at some point you'll get over your fearfulness and actually respond to one of her posts? Or is lurking behind Grumps and Legion flinging spitballs now and then going to be all we can expect?

 

[Eagle_Eye]

You believe the sock infests the five boroughs, Grumps? I don't.

BTW, your age, purported "advanced degree" and claim to work "with very intelligent people" are all anecdotal.

I'm not so sure she is a sock. She is too articulate for any of the lefties here. But I've been wrong before. Plus who in their right mind would have a sock that says they lived and worked in Gomorrah by the sea?

 

[Legion]

I'm not so sure she is a sock. She is too articulate for any of the lefties here. But I've been wrong before. Plus who in their right mind would admit they lived and worked in Gomorrah by the sea?

Millions of people live and work in the NYC MSA, Grumps, which is not really "by the sea". The sock isn't one of them, by "her" own admission.

 

[Legion]

I just love that you've found a new focus for your obsession with, envy of, and loathing for intelligent, educated, articulate, humorous, attractive, and all-around awesome leftie women. Do you think that at some point you'll get over your fearfulness and actually respond to one of her posts? Or is lurking behind Grumps and Legion flinging spitballs now and then going to be all we can expect?

I haven't encountered any demonstrably "intelligent, educated, articulate, humorous, attractive, and all-around awesome leftie women" on this forum, fuck face.

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

I've had some offers to move to FTE positions, but they were less interesting and lucrative than what I'm doing now, so I'm putting that off. At some point I'll probably want to have kids, and then I'll be more interested in stability and benefits (better health insurance, paid maternity leave and sick time, etc.) than just raw pay. But in the meantime, what I'm doing is bringing in a pretty good income and building my resume nicely, so it works for me.

You sound very content with things, for now. Wonderful!

 

[TOP]

I'm just glad she is between projects so that*she can post here.

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

When the topic is something like universal health insurance, the minimum needed to cover the topic decently would be a few hundred pages of treatise. Attempting to outline the basics in just a few short paragraphs, like I did, ends up over-simplifying to the point of absurdity. But since that's what this format demands, I'm happy to comply. I'm also happy to go with even shorter bullet points, if a few paragraphs would over-tax your attention span. But, as I mentioned, the natural outcome of that is that what I write will be dismissed not for being too long, but for lacking specifics. It's the Conservative Catch 22 at work.

What an outstandingly civil demolition. <scoots chair closer and gets out pen and notebook> You don't mind if I take notes, do you? lol

 

[Gotcha68]

Grumpy just wants points so that he can complain about a lack of specificity...and ask lots of pointless questions to deflect from the defeat he is suffering.

And like Donald Trump, his Dear Leader...he wants no more than 3 bullet points.

Sounds like Legion. Zeros in on one thing, which generally has nothing to do with the topic, and expects an answer to his satisfaction or "you're" a liar or FOS. Does it every time except to those he agrees with.

 

[Gotcha68]

what is it with you lefties (yes I know you claim not to be a leftie) that you think long wordy posts make you look smarter or your material better? If you haven't grasped the concept of brevity you never will.

Did you try WGT?

She isn't writing just for you nor are you the only one reading these so your opinion as to how she should write is just your opinion. Skip on by if it's too much for you to handle.

 

[Legion]

I've had some offers to move to FTE positions, but they were less interesting and lucrative than what I'm doing now, so I'm putting that off. At some point I'll probably want to have kids, and then I'll be more interested in stability and benefits (better health insurance, paid maternity leave and sick time, etc.) than just raw pay. But in the meantime, what I'm doing is bringing in a pretty good income and building my resume nicely, so it works for me.

Cool story, "sis."