Yes there are times when corps get so big that they create monopolies, or they get together and fix prices illegally. That's illegal of course so I'm not sure why you bring that up except to create a straw man and infer that I'm for monopolies.
This big Democrat lie is coming back to bite them in the ass
- Thread starter MAGA MAN
- Start date
Yes there are times when corps get so big that they create monopolies, or they get together and fix prices illegally. That's illegal of course so I'm not sure why you bring that up except to create a straw man and infer that I'm for monopolies.
Obviously you think so much of yourself that you can't be bothered with an opposing opinion.
There's an old saying that if everyone was jumping off a bridge into traffic is that a reason for one to consider it? Obviously, no, and such your argument has been destroyed.
Once more I';; ax you: explain to me how the progressive tax system is fair. What motive does the couple with lower income have to support efficient government programs?
How odd. I am not saying anything about your proclivities. I do not know what they are. I am merely showing you that that is where we have moved. Not monopoly, still oligopoly. If you define big as buying up competitors, then you are getting closer.
I know few are old enough to have actually seen what competition looks like.. When gas was under 20 cents a gallon, stations had price wars dropping them a penny to undercut, and then the other station would undercut them. They checked your oil, tire pressure and cleaned your windshield. They also pumped the gas. Some stations gave you green stamps that could be redeemed for prizes. Others gave you glasses or silverware when you spent 2 bucks. Think that has changed?
Department stores took back bad products. No squabbling, no send it back to manufacturers. They tried to keep the customer satisfied. Customers were treated with respect.
Now the oligopolies do what they want. Service is abysmal. Call your cable company, if you doubt that. Prices all high and all the same.
This is what Republican policies have fought for. Note what Pai is doing at the FCC.
You take yourself way to seriously. You suggesting what you think I mean is nonsense , Your lost this argument , you have been buried and you trying to reclaim some respect for your nonsense , you can't , You simply don't know the subject and it is obvious in your every comment. But continue, people need to know the make believe world you people live in. The last major anti trust laws where written in 1950. SO up until that time their was still people sitting down with their competitors and setting wages. And the health insurance companies weren't covered by the anti trust laws until Obama came into power. So they have been able to sit down with their competitors for all those years and set prices , This should make it clear to everyone that you have no clue just as I've been saying all along.
You get nothing until you answer my question. "why would this country even consider flat tax, when Every dime of new wealth in this country already goes to the top. It would be stupid to go with a flat tax . isn't all the new wealth enough for you .Answer or go away. Tell me why you should get more then all of the new wealth."
Republicans can't do math. A few dollars were given to most and big amounts to the rich paid for by $5 trillion less funding for healthcare and added to the debt.
Republicans think that makes the tiny stimulus free, that healthcare spending and borrowing are free. How about they get more to spend by not spending on food or housing? Free! But I guess it's not THEIR healthcare cut, it's the poor people. Screw 'em.
Republicans think that makes the tiny stimulus free, that healthcare spending and borrowing are free. How about they get more to spend by not spending on food or housing? Free! But I guess it's not THEIR healthcare cut, it's the poor people. Screw 'em.
How do you know? I'm not real sure how you can determine the result when the situation hasn't had a chance to show either way.
Plenty have already determined how much people they don't know will get and have indicated that it isn't enough to have supported the tax bill. I'm not real sure how someone that doesn't know a person's situation can make that type of determination on that person's behalf.
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
your article states that $1.1T of your $1.9T was being held overseas because of the tax consequences of bringing it home........that contradicts your argument that they weren't and won't invest it.......in fact, since the tax changes happened we are seeing a LOT of that money return to the US......
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
did you think our taxes aren't progressive?......
Two of the biggest tax cuts in history was Hoovers just before the great depression and Bush the baby killer , right before your parties almost total destruction of our economy and country. Try that on for size. You can't create demand from the supply side only from the demand side. So handing buckets of money to business does zip. I mean we just went that route when Bush and the right all but destroyed our economy and business sat on it. Why, well they said it was because there was no demand. gee I wonder why?
So you don't know. Why didn't you say so?
One of the greatest false claims by demand side supporters is that increased government spending as part of FDR's programs ended the Depression. Anyone with any intelligence knows that simply isn't true. Any fool that believes Keynesian economic theory is a born loser.
The U.S. has tried to end poverty by handing one group of people, the leeches, something that another group of people, the producers and valuable of society earned. $22 trillion wasted from the mindset that if you hand someone something at a level equal to or greater than they have the ability to earn it will motivate them to do for themselves.
Interesting how you call Bush a baby killer yet have no problem with Liberal Democrats support of killing babies with abortion. Gee, I wonder why?
To repeat myself two of this countries biggest tax cuts was from Bush the baby Killer right before he and his party all but destroyed our economy and country and Hoover before the great depression.
Tell us mr Economist what can supply side economics do to create demand to put business back on their feet, raise wages and supply more jobs in a recession. We will wait on your brilliant answer.
To repeat myself, so you don't know you're guessing.
Try reading up on Supply side. It's explains it for you. If you can't understand, perhaps that's why you believe the government giving someone something they didn't earn is a good idea when it's proven to have failed every time.
You are clueless about supply side or anything else. Laffler was the one who tried to justify it with his shitty curve. It is the same as trickle down which is bad theory and worse when applied. It is what Bush did. How did that work out? Trump is doing the same. It is actually justifying the plutocracy. That is where Trump is driving us. Unless you are incredibly rich, you will get hurt by this too. Republican economics is about rewarding the rich with your tax money while slashing theirs.
The claim jbander made was he knew it related to Trump. How can one know something about what has happened unless it has happened? He's speculating.
We've tried handing the money made by one group to those that won't get off their asses and do for themselves to the tune of $22 trillion in just over 50 years. It didn't work yet you want to continue the same thing. Why shouldn't those that make it get to keep it and let those that don't want to earn it but demand it be handed to them starve?
The health insurance industry, as well as the hospital industry, has long been overly regulated by the federal government and that's the main reason for the high prices.
The premise of your question is false, so it won't be entertained until you fix that.