goemaw.com
General Discussion => The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit => Topic started by: Sugar Dick on December 07, 2010, 09:18:15 AM
-
Developments in Washington help fill the void in the economic calendar
Treasuries are lower as the equity markets are higher in early action as traders cheer the announcement that President Barack Obama has reached a preliminary agreement on extending the tax cuts for all Americans that were enacted under President George W. Bush.
How could these idiot jerks think that tax cuts will help the grow American business and consequently the economy??? It makes no sense I tell you, there's no proof that does anything!!!!!!!
-
wut
-
not sure why the quote didn't work the first time, probably this crapty website
-
not sure why the quote didn't work the first time, probably this crapty website
lol at you using the picture instead of the quote function and your mental midget remark blowing up in your face :lol:
-
What a huge win for fiscal conservatives.
-
Now the deficits can continue to grow!!! :party: :woot: :cheers: :pbj: :weirdrobert: :fistpump: :emawkid:
-
not sure why the quote didn't work the first time, probably this crapty website
lol at you using the picture instead of the quote function and your mental midget remark blowing up in your face :lol:
:surprised:
Is this an abuse of the Admin function??? Fireable offense???
-
not sure why the quote didn't work the first time, probably this crapty website
lol at you using the picture instead of the quote function and your mental midget remark blowing up in your face :lol:
:surprised:
Is this an abuse of the Admin function??? Fireable offense???
I BACKTRACED IT!
-
not sure why the quote didn't work the first time, probably this crapty website
lol at you using the picture instead of the quote function and your mental midget remark blowing up in your face :lol:
:surprised:
Is this an abuse of the Admin function??? Fireable offense???
I BACKTRACED IT!
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.untoldentertainment.com%2Fblog%2Fimg%2F2009_09_24%2Fnerd.jpg&hash=fcac29b9fca8c92e97e082959d4851ea3b1d5f06) <-- notice use of picture function
-
Now the deficits can continue to grow!!! :party: :woot: :cheers: :pbj: :weirdrobert: :fistpump: :emawkid:
Larger economy causes lower tax revenues??? :runaway: :runaway: :runaway:
:facepalm:
-
Meh. So they've decided not to push the economy completely over a cliff for two more years. So what? A temporary reprieve from impending doom with full a priori knowledge that said doom will come crashing down in the near future isn't going to have a significant long-term positive impact on business, investment, jobs or the economy. Might as well take the hit now to ensure that everyone wil be able to see, once and for all, the devastating economic impact of Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) lefty economic theories.
-
Developments in Washington help fill the void in the economic calendar
Treasuries are lower as the equity markets are higher in early action as traders cheer the announcement that President Barack Obama has reached a preliminary agreement on extending the tax cuts for all Americans that were enacted under President George W. Bush.
How could these idiot jerks think that tax cuts will help the grow American business and consequently the economy??? It makes no sense I tell you, there's no proof that does anything!!!!!!!
Dow 11,359.16 -3.03 -0.03%
:users:
-
Developments in Washington help fill the void in the economic calendar
Treasuries are lower as the equity markets are higher in early action as traders cheer the announcement that President Barack Obama has reached a preliminary agreement on extending the tax cuts for all Americans that were enacted under President George W. Bush.
How could these idiot jerks think that tax cuts will help the grow American business and consequently the economy??? It makes no sense I tell you, there's no proof that does anything!!!!!!!
Dow 11,359.16 -3.03 -0.03%
:users:
Obama giveth and Obama taketh away:
Obama’s petulance sank stocks.
Stocks were euphorically higher most of today, thanks to the unexpectedly broad tax deal the administration hammered out with the Republicans. But during his press conference, Obama’s clear anger and call to unwind the deal in 2 years opened a trap door under prices, sending them to a negative finish. We had hope, and then it changed.
-
:lol: You're starting to sound like one of the people who believe Bush was an evil Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) genius.
-
:lol: You're starting to sound like one of the people who believe Bush was an evil Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)ed genius.
FYP :users:
(But not for the reasons you'll immediately believe).
-
:lol: You're starting to sound like one of the people who believe Bush was an evil Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)ed genius.
FYP :users:
(But not for the reasons you'll immediately believe).
Do you think he was born 'tarded, or was it the drugs?
-
:lol: You're starting to sound like one of the people who believe Bush was an evil Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)ed genius.
FYP :users:
(But not for the reasons you'll immediately believe).
Do you think he was born 'tarded, or was it the drugs?
Obviously something in the water in DC. Duh. :users:
-
Just so we're clear, we're back to "deficits don't matter" right?
-
Just so we're clear, we're back to "deficits don't matter" right?
No, still stuck on mindless class warfare. FYI, extending tax cuts to "all but the wealthy" is a $2-3 trillion hit to the budget.
Taxes = equal smaller economy = lower tax revenue contra tax cuts = larger economy = more tax revenue
Why is this so hard to understand???
-
Just so we're clear, we're back to "deficits don't matter" right?
No, still stuck on mindless class warfare. FYI, extending tax cuts to "all but the wealthy" is a $2-3 trillion hit to the budget.
Taxes = equal smaller economy = lower tax revenue contra tax cuts = larger economy = more tax revenue
Why is this so hard to understand???
Give 'em a break. I don't even think they know that they're Marxists. :users:
-
Just so we're clear, we're back to "deficits don't matter" right?
No, still stuck on mindless class warfare. FYI, extending tax cuts to "all but the wealthy" is a $2-3 trillion hit to the budget.
Taxes = equal smaller economy = lower tax revenue contra tax cuts = larger economy = more tax revenue
Why is this so hard to understand???
It's logical that high taxes can depress an economy, just as it's logical that low taxes can actually lower government receipts. Bell curves how the eff do they work.
http://www.factcheck.org/taxes/supply-side_spin.html (http://www.factcheck.org/taxes/supply-side_spin.html)
“Federal revenue is lower today than it would have been without the tax cuts,” Alan D. Viard of the conservative American Enterprise Institute told the Washington Post last October. Viard, who worked in the Treasury Department’s Office of Tax Analysis and the White House’s Council of Economic Advisers under President Bush, told FactCheck.org that “nobody can absolutely prove that.” Proof would require time travel and a reversal of tax policy. “But among economists, there’s no dispute.”
-
Just so we're clear, we're back to "deficits don't matter" right?
No, still stuck on mindless class warfare. FYI, extending tax cuts to "all but the wealthy" is a $2-3 trillion hit to the budget.
Taxes = equal smaller economy = lower tax revenue contra tax cuts = larger economy = more tax revenue
Why is this so hard to understand???
It's logical that high taxes can depress an economy, just as it's logical that low taxes can actually lower government receipts. Bell curves how the eff do they work.
http://www.factcheck.org/taxes/supply-side_spin.html (http://www.factcheck.org/taxes/supply-side_spin.html)
“Federal revenue is lower today than it would have been without the tax cuts,” Alan D. Viard of the conservative American Enterprise Institute told the Washington Post last October. Viard, who worked in the Treasury Department’s Office of Tax Analysis and the White House’s Council of Economic Advisers under President Bush, told FactCheck.org that “nobody can absolutely prove that.” Proof would require time travel and a reversal of tax policy. “But among economists, there’s no dispute.”
You are such a Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!). (http://www.taxfoundation.org/blog/show/1943.html)
-
Just so we're clear, we're back to "deficits don't matter" right?
No, still stuck on mindless class warfare. FYI, extending tax cuts to "all but the wealthy" is a $2-3 trillion hit to the budget.
Taxes = equal smaller economy = lower tax revenue contra tax cuts = larger economy = more tax revenue
Why is this so hard to understand???
It's logical that high taxes can depress an economy, just as it's logical that low taxes can actually lower government receipts. Bell curves how the eff do they work.
http://www.factcheck.org/taxes/supply-side_spin.html (http://www.factcheck.org/taxes/supply-side_spin.html)
“Federal revenue is lower today than it would have been without the tax cuts,” Alan D. Viard of the conservative American Enterprise Institute told the Washington Post last October. Viard, who worked in the Treasury Department’s Office of Tax Analysis and the White House’s Council of Economic Advisers under President Bush, told FactCheck.org that “nobody can absolutely prove that.” Proof would require time travel and a reversal of tax policy. “But among economists, there’s no dispute.”
You are such a Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!). (http://www.taxfoundation.org/blog/show/1943.html)
LOL... Yes, Vicard's point about economists agreeing that tax revenue would have been higher from 2003-present than it currently is under Clinton's tax policy is a fallacy of correlation.
He definitely wasn't referring to this:
TaxFoundation.org article:
Cutting marginal tax rates on labor would have a larger feedback effect in terms of additional economic activity being generated than these credits/rebates, especially because of the progressivity of the federal income tax code which means we rely on the more pro-cylical income of high-income individuals, but labor is still fairly inelastic nationwide, meaning the tax cuts on ordinary income at their given rates would still cost the Treasury revenue.
Yes, taxes derived from capital gains did skyrocket during this same period to cover up or offset some of the losses from decreased income taxes. But that raises a whole different set of issues.
-
When cut and paste goes awry
-
Obama has apparently found some new economists: (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/wire/sc-dc-1208-democrats-taxcuts-20101207,0,7476688.story)
Economists said the overall package would stimulate the economy not by pumping in new money, as did the Recovery Act, but by ensuring money already going to Americans via the Bush tax cuts and the earlier stimulus spending is not cut off. White House economic experts told lawmakers that the gross domestic product could rise by at least 1 percentage point and unemployment could improve with up to 2 million new jobs. Without the package, senators were told, the economy could contract.
So ... Bush does it and economists uniformly agree that it has no positive impact on the economy. Obama extends it and, amazingly, economists now note that it has a massive positive impact on the economy. Politics as usual, carry on.
:users:
-
TaxFoundation.org article:
Cutting marginal tax rates on labor would have a larger feedback effect in terms of additional economic activity being generated than these credits/rebates, especially because of the progressivity of the federal income tax code which means we rely on the more pro-cylical income of high-income individuals, but labor is still fairly inelastic nationwide, meaning the tax cuts on ordinary income at their given rates would still cost the Treasury revenue.
Yes, taxes derived from capital gains did skyrocket during this same period to cover up or offset some of the losses from decreased income taxes. But that raises a whole different set of issues.
Curious, when this was published? If back in 2003, obviously this belief no longer applies.
-
Obama has apparently found some new economists: (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/wire/sc-dc-1208-democrats-taxcuts-20101207,0,7476688.story)
Economists said the overall package would stimulate the economy not by pumping in new money, as did the Recovery Act, but by ensuring money already going to Americans via the Bush tax cuts and the earlier stimulus spending is not cut off. White House economic experts told lawmakers that the gross domestic product could rise by at least 1 percentage point and unemployment could improve with up to 2 million new jobs. Without the package, senators were told, the economy could contract.
So ... Bush does it and economists uniformly agree that it has no positive impact on the economy. Obama extends it and, amazingly, economists now note that it has a massive positive impact on the economy. Politics as usual, carry on.
:users:
LOL, the income tax extension isn't what they're referring to as the stimulative effect. Passing it for all but the top income bracket would slow growth by about .2 to .3 percent. The other .7 to .8 percent growth is from measures targeted mainly to the middle and lower class. JPMorgan had figured a growth rate of 3 percent for 2011 upon all of Bush's income taxes being renewed. That was revised to 4.5 percent when the deal came out mainly on the extension of unemployment benefits for the entire year and about $120 billion in payroll tax relief.
I never said the Bush tax cuts had no positive effect on the economy either, rather they reduced revenue that treasury would have gotten under Clinton's tax rates.
-
Obama has apparently found some new economists: (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/wire/sc-dc-1208-democrats-taxcuts-20101207,0,7476688.story)
Economists said the overall package would stimulate the economy not by pumping in new money, as did the Recovery Act, but by ensuring money already going to Americans via the Bush tax cuts and the earlier stimulus spending is not cut off. White House economic experts told lawmakers that the gross domestic product could rise by at least 1 percentage point and unemployment could improve with up to 2 million new jobs. Without the package, senators were told, the economy could contract.
So ... Bush does it and economists uniformly agree that it has no positive impact on the economy. Obama extends it and, amazingly, economists now note that it has a massive positive impact on the economy. Politics as usual, carry on.
:users:
LOL, the income tax extension isn't what they're referring to as the stimulative effect. Passing it for all but the top income bracket would slow growth by about .2 to .3 percent. The other .7 to .8 percent growth is from measures targeted mainly to the middle and lower class. JPMorgan had figured a growth rate of 3 percent for 2011 upon all of Bush's income taxes being renewed. That was revised to 4.5 percent when the deal came out mainly on the extension of unemployment benefits for the entire year and about $120 billion in payroll tax relief.
I never said the Bush tax cuts had no positive effect on the economy either, rather they reduced revenue that treasury would have gotten under Clinton's tax rates.
bullshit. Prolly had to say that as part of tarp (jk). Anyways, I thought they didn't get the payroll tax stuff in there, just 15 more weeks of UE Benefits???
-
:facepalm:
Nothing has been passed, but the deal calls for an extension of UE benefits for all of next year (picking up at 26 weeks of state UEBs and ending at 99 weeks), along with a 2 percent reduction of SS taxes paid by workers (lowering it to 4.2 or 10.4 percent, however you want to look at it).
-
We need a thunder dome match between Sugar Dick and 06Wildcat. My money would be on 06
-
:facepalm:
Nothing has been passed, but the deal calls for an extension of UE benefits for all of next year (picking up at 26 weeks of state UEBs and ending at 99 weeks), along with a 2 percent reduction of SS taxes paid by workers (lowering it to 4.2 or 10.4 percent, however you want to look at it).
Whatever the deal is, is going to pass. Dems aren't going to risk losing this in the waning weeks of their power.
I'd need to see a link to that horseshit your peddling with Chase (a lol, in and of itself). Reeks of "cut and paste gone awry". Your quotes are all over the place.
-
Some stuff that shows 06 is full of cac (ahhh, the wonders of google)
The Economist
Goldman Sachs now thinks the economy will grow 0.5 to 1 percentage points faster next year than its current forecast of 2.7%, which was bumped up from 2% only a week ago. JPMorgan has raised its 2011 forecast (fourth quarter compared to a year earlier) to 3.5% from 3%.
Says nothing about it being solely from payroll and UEB, just overall compromise
Also, the $120B has a .7 to .8 effect on GDP if EVERY SINGLE CENT is spent. Pretty dumbass assumption 06
-
Some stuff that shows 06 is full of cac (ahhh, the wonders of google)
The Economist
Goldman Sachs now thinks the economy will grow 0.5 to 1 percentage points faster next year than its current forecast of 2.7%, which was bumped up from 2% only a week ago. JPMorgan has raised its 2011 forecast (fourth quarter compared to a year earlier) to 3.5% from 3%.
Says nothing about it being solely from payroll and UEB, just overall compromise
Also, the $120B has a .7 to .8 effect on GDP if EVERY SINGLE CENT is spent. Pretty dumbass assumption 06
Congrats you got my in a typo (3 is right next to 4, who knew?). Also the $120 billion is only payroll tax relief, it in no way accounts for .7 to .8 percent growth. It plus the extension of UE benefits, plus business being able to depreciate capital expenses in 1 year and the estate tax compromise and a few other things all added together account for those numbers. Reading comprehension is hard stuff. Might want to google that too.
Don't worry, Republicans blocked a 1-time Social Security payment of $250 to all seniors tonight preventing the expenditure of $14 billion. They're well on their way to paying for $700-800 billion that will need to be borrowed for this "deal".
-
Some stuff that shows 06 is full of cac (ahhh, the wonders of google)
The Economist
Goldman Sachs now thinks the economy will grow 0.5 to 1 percentage points faster next year than its current forecast of 2.7%, which was bumped up from 2% only a week ago. JPMorgan has raised its 2011 forecast (fourth quarter compared to a year earlier) to 3.5% from 3%.
Says nothing about it being solely from payroll and UEB, just overall compromise
Also, the $120B has a .7 to .8 effect on GDP if EVERY SINGLE CENT is spent. Pretty dumbass assumption 06
Congrats you got my in a typo (3 is right next to 4, who knew?). Also the $120 billion is only payroll tax relief, it in no way accounts for .7 to .8 percent growth. It plus the extension of UE benefits, plus business being able to depreciate capital expenses in 1 year and the estate tax compromise and a few other things all added together account for those numbers. Reading comprehension is hard stuff. Might want to google that too.
Don't worry, Republicans blocked a 1-time Social Security payment of $250 to all seniors tonight preventing the expenditure of $14 billion. They're well on their way to paying for $700-800 billion that will need to be borrowed for this "deal".
:lol: Pretty huge typo bro
Anyways, glad to see the Dems are finally implementing some Pro Business ideas. More Section 179 expense, lower payroll taxes are all good ideas (which Repubs have been asking for for two years). UEB is a joke, but gotta compromise to keep the Dem welfare state limping along.