in a bad economy who wins? Tax increaser or Tax decreaser?

C

Chapdog

Abreast of the situations
No links here. Nothing I have really investigated. But logically speaking who are people going to vote for when pennies are tight? Democrat that will almost certainly raise taxes or a republican who will stump that you will get another $500 check in the mail.
 
A good point and I suspect most of us would sell our future for an in hand $500 check.

That attitude is a large part of why we are currently screwed.
 
your already seeing the pubs like guliani talking about another tax cut. im telling you it will be central to the summer campaigning.
 
uscitizen said:
So you think people that went to public schools are slobs ?
Click to expand...

not all of them. i said the typical public educated slob. private educated can produce slobs as well. :p

point i was making is that they dont teach personal finance or economics in public k-12. the would rather teach you how to bend metal, play the trumpet, or sow with the spare classes.
 
Consider the mildly bad economy of the 30s, then consider FDR. If anyone raised taxes, it was he. He used it to build infrastructure, it raised employment, which got the economy back on track.
 
ib1yysguy said:
Consider the mildly bad economy of the 30s, then consider FDR. If anyone raised taxes, it was he. He used it to build infrastructure, it raised employment, which got the economy back on track.
Click to expand...

yeah we need a good leader, but alas I can see none around.
 
ib it's 2008
Pub school kids are shit, I went pub all the way through under grad. Only got private on the MBA. thus a fincance wizz who can't spell.
 
ib1yysguy said:
Consider the mildly bad economy of the 30s, then consider FDR. If anyone raised taxes, it was he. He used it to build infrastructure, it raised employment, which got the economy back on track.
Click to expand...
Unless you subscribe to more modern macroeconomic models that now present strong evidence that the New Deal extended the time we were in the Great Depression.

http://www.mises.org/freemarket_detail.aspx?control=515

The New Deal Debunked
Thomas J. DiLorenzo

Macroeconomic model builders have finally realized what Henry Hazlitt and John T. Flynn (among others) knew in the 1930s: FDR’s New Deal made the Great Depression longer and deeper. It is a myth that Franklin D. Roosevelt "got us out of the Depression" and "saved capitalism from itself," as generations of Americans have been taught by the state’s education establishment.

This realization on the part of macroeconomists comes in the form of an article in the August 2004 Journal of Political Economy entitled "New Deal Policies and the Persistence of the Great Depression: A General Equilibrium Analysis," by UCLA economists Harold L. Cole and Lee E. Ohanian. This is a big deal, since the JPE is arguably the top academic economics journal in the world.

"Real gross domestic product per adult, which was 39 percent below trend at the trough of the Depression in 1933, remained 27 percent below trend in 1939," the authors write. And, "Similarly, private hours worked were 27 percent below trend in 1933 and remained 21 percent below trend in 1939."

More at link above...
 
ib1yysguy said:
Consider the mildly bad economy of the 30s, then consider FDR. If anyone raised taxes, it was he. He used it to build infrastructure, it raised employment, which got the economy back on track.
Click to expand...

its one thing to raise taxes and invest it into the economy.. its another to raise taxes and throw it at larger government and shit programs for bottom of society that only take and never give back.
 
Damocles said:
Unless you subscribe to more modern macroeconomic models that now present strong evidence that the New Deal extended the time we were in the Great Depression.

http://www.mises.org/freemarket_detail.aspx?control=515

The New Deal Debunked
Thomas J. DiLorenzo

Macroeconomic model builders have finally realized what Henry Hazlitt and John T. Flynn (among others) knew in the 1930s: FDR’s New Deal made the Great Depression longer and deeper. It is a myth that Franklin D. Roosevelt "got us out of the Depression" and "saved capitalism from itself," as generations of Americans have been taught by the state’s education establishment.

This realization on the part of macroeconomists comes in the form of an article in the August 2004 Journal of Political Economy entitled "New Deal Policies and the Persistence of the Great Depression: A General Equilibrium Analysis," by UCLA economists Harold L. Cole and Lee E. Ohanian. This is a big deal, since the JPE is arguably the top academic economics journal in the world.

"Real gross domestic product per adult, which was 39 percent below trend at the trough of the Depression in 1933, remained 27 percent below trend in 1939," the authors write. And, "Similarly, private hours worked were 27 percent below trend in 1933 and remained 21 percent below trend in 1939."

More at link above...
Click to expand...


Don't act like this is the accepted view. There is a reason the Austrian School is not considered out of the mainstream.
 
Chapdog said:
its one thing to raise taxes and invest it into the economy.. its another to raise taxes and throw it at larger government and shit programs for bottom of society that only take and never give back.
Click to expand...


Yeah, all those folks at the bottom are just stuffing all that money they get from the government into their mattresses. Where the fuck do you think the money goes when the government spends it on social programs?
 
Dungheap said:
Yeah, all those folks at the bottom are just stuffing all that money they get from the government into their mattresses. Where the fuck do you think the money goes when the government spends it on social programs?
Click to expand...

FDR used it to build infrastructure. Instead of dishing out welfare checks in the mail to some bum in sweatpants eating hoho's all day, he gave them jobs that created bridges and dams.
 
Last edited:
Topspin said:
ib it's 2008
Pub school kids are shit, I went pub all the way through under grad. Only got private on the MBA. thus a fincance wizz who can't spell.
Click to expand...

I too am a product of public education (k-undergrad), and your comment is WAY too generalized. In this area the private schools are lacking and the graduates of these programs are, for the most part, far behind those in public environments. I see instances of it on a monthly basis...kids transferring in from a private school that can't keep up in the general ed class.
 
Yeah, yeah. Rewrite history. Whatever. I've posted a simple graph showing when the depression started and what shape the economy was in (I don't remember the metric) and the dow was crashing until the year a liberal -FDR- took office it began to rise immediately. The conservatives were out, liberals were in and immediately the tax increasers got the economy back on track.
 
TexasMeg said:
I too am a product of public education (k-undergrad), and your comment is WAY too generalized. In this area the private schools are lacking and the graduates of these programs are, for the most part, far behind those in public environments. I see instances of it on a monthly basis...kids transferring in from a private school that can't keep up in the general ed class.
Click to expand...

I don't think private outclass public in terms of teaching and content. I went to private high school and had nuns teaching me. Clearly not the better teachers. One thing i would say is private schools can weed the badseeds out. Generally speaking the worst kids in the private school are like middle or road at a public.

I do think however that schools need to make personal health and finance a far greater focus. These are basics people need to live. When you have kids coming out of school that don’t know the nutritional difference between a bigmac and a home cooked chicken dinner and who don’t know how to set up direct deposit or auto bill pays you have serious problems.
 
Chapdog said:
I don't think private outclass public in terms of teaching and content. I went to private high school and had nuns teaching me. Clearly not the better teachers. One thing i would say is private schools can weed the badseeds out. Generally speaking the worst kids in the private school are like middle or road at a public.

I do think however that schools need to make personal health and finance a far greater focus. These are basics people need to live. When you have kids coming out of school that don’t know the nutritional difference between a bigmac and a home cooked chicken dinner and who don’t know how to set up direct deposit or auto bill pays you have serious problems.
Click to expand...

I agree there are some things lacking in education (public and private), but curriculum has changed quite a bit from what you were exposed to. Also...dont you think that some of this is parental responsibility...ie bigmac vs. home-cooked chicken meal?

And back to the original question...I'd take that $500 check anyday.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top