How would raising taxes affect you and our economy?

[UncleBuck]

I am at work, anything else to prove your a fucking idiot?

i think i see the problem here, you missed a decimal point. that would explain everything pretty well, you have an 11.2 hour work week at taco bell to save up for that awesome micro grow you've been planning to hide from mommy and daddy.

 

[Mr Neutron]

The question struck me as deliberately obtuse. Seriously, the point is graphically illustrated. What do you require of me before you'll discuss the basic premise?

What question? Do you mean my statement "I can't read that."? That is obtuse?
It may be clear to you but I can't see it, excuse me for asking for a graphic that I can read and understand. If your argument was as valid as you say, I would think you would be willing to make it clear.
I will not ask anything more of you as you are clearly getting upset.

 

[Mr Neutron]

normally its some sort of mistake in your post that he cann deflect the issue to.

i think your problem is too much care in your work

Thanks, but I just want to understand what he posted. After all, he posted that first graph as a comparison of something that the graph did not display. So, I want to see what the second graph showed but I think I hurt his feelings.

 

[cannabineer]

What question? Do you mean my statement "I can't read that."? That is obtuse?
It may be clear to you but I can't see it, excuse me for asking for a graphic that I can read and understand. If your argument was as valid as you say, I would think you would be willing to make it clear.
I will not ask anything more of you as you are clearly getting upset.

I thought I was speaking to the question "do trickle-down economics work?" The graphs are my way of saying No. The text in the graph is incidental, not central imo.
That's the basic premise as I understand it.
I'm curious if you agree or disagree. I hope this explains my iron in this fire. cn

 

[cannabineer]

Thanks, but I just want to understand what he posted. After all, he posted that first graph as a comparison of something that the graph did not display. So, I want to see what the second graph showed but I think I hurt his feelings.

My feelings aren't in this. If I came across too snarkily, i apologize. I don't mean to deflect but to discuss. cn

 

[beenthere]

Good catch. I selected the graph because it was clear; i missed that part.
If I use a graph that shows "all income", the disparity (and more importantly, its trend) actually is worse, once you look past the noisiness of the data. So while I appreciate the correction, my basic premise still stands.

To claim that trickle-down works, the curves would have to move in lockstep or nearly so. cn

LMAO, So in your mind, supply side economics should make the middle class and poor rich, and the income of the wealthy should go down?

Let's see!

Take two typical middle class carpenters in California who make $65,000 per year.
Carpenter #1 does side jobs on the weekend, saves his money and starts investing it in the stock market and real estate.
Carpenter #2 doesn't want to spend his weekends or after work hours working anymore, he wants to go water skiing, attend concerts, camping and spends his little bit of extra money on dirt bikes, a ski boat, or a new Harley.

15 years go by and carpenter #1 now owns income property and makes an extra $ $60,000 a year on his rental properties, He flipped a few of his properties and made a few hundred thousand in the process, now, between his stock investments and rental income, carpenter #1 has an annual income over $200k and is ready for an early retirement.

Carpenter #2 is still working his 40hr week but 15yrs later he's up to $80,000, all throughout that 15 yrs he spent his money unwisely, him and his family bought a house they couldn't afford, they borrowed too much money against it, all the while hoping the market would continue to go up.
Carpenter #2 is now loosing his house, he blames the lenders for talking him into a loan he couldn't afford, it doesn't matter that he used that money to buy a new ski boat, it's all trickle down economics and the capitalists fault for the dire straits he finds himself in.

Income disparity charts are for the fools who find themselves on the bottom of that chart!

 

[UncleBuck]

LMAO, So in your mind, supply side economics should make the middle class and poor rich, and the income of the wealthy should go down?

Let's see!

Take two typical middle class carpenters in California who make $65,000 per year.
Carpenter #1 does side jobs on the weekend, saves his money and starts investing it in the stock market and real estate.
Carpenter #2 doesn't want to spend his weekends or after work hours working anymore, he wants to go water skiing, attend concerts, camping and spends his little bit of extra money on dirt bikes, a ski boat, or a new Harley.

15 years go by and carpenter #1 now owns income property and makes an extra $ $60,000 a year on his rental properties, He flipped a few of his properties and made a few hundred thousand in the process, now, between his stock investments and rental income, carpenter #1 has an annual income over $200k and is ready for an early retirement.

Carpenter #2 is still working his 40hr week but 15yrs later he's up to $80,000, all throughout that 15 yrs he spent his money unwisely, him and his family bought a house they couldn't afford, they borrowed too much money against it, all the while hoping the market would continue to go up.
Carpenter #2 is now loosing his house, he blames the lenders for talking him into a loan he couldn't afford, it doesn't matter that he used that money to buy a new ski boat, it's all trickle down economics and the capitalists fault for the dire straits he finds himself in.

Income disparity charts are for the fools who find themselves on the bottom of that chart!

*losing

nice strawboys though.

 

[abandonconflict]

LMAO, So in your mind, supply side economics should make the middle class and poor rich, and the income of the wealthy should go down?

Let's see!

Take two typical middle class carpenters in California who make $65,000 per year.
Carpenter #1 does side jobs on the weekend, saves his money and starts investing it in the stock market and real estate.
Carpenter #2 doesn't want to spend his weekends or after work hours working anymore, he wants to go water skiing, attend concerts, camping and spends his little bit of extra money on dirt bikes, a ski boat, or a new Harley.

15 years go by and carpenter #1 now owns income property and makes an extra $ $60,000 a year on his rental properties, He flipped a few of his properties and made a few hundred thousand in the process, now, between his stock investments and rental income, carpenter #1 has an annual income over $200k and is ready for an early retirement.

Carpenter #2 is still working his 40hr week but 15yrs later he's up to $80,000, all throughout that 15 yrs he spent his money unwisely, him and his family bought a house they couldn't afford, they borrowed too much money against it, all the while hoping the market would continue to go up.
Carpenter #2 is now loosing his house, he blames the lenders for talking him into a loan he couldn't afford, it doesn't matter that he used that money to buy a new ski boat, it's all trickle down economics and the capitalists fault for the dire straits he finds himself in.

Income disparity charts are for the fools who find themselves on the bottom of that chart!

Survival of the fittest is not natural law, it is a right wing meme. It does not accurately convey the correct meaning of natural selection. It was not a phrase coined by Darwin, but by Herbert Spencer, a right wing British economist from the colonial period. You are describing "Social Darwinism" which is another fallacious phrase, as it also assumes that Darwin coined the phrase "survival of the fittest" as natural law. The right wing wishes to outlaw cooperation it seems. Cooperation is a trait that evolution has favored, even noted in very primitive species.

 

[cannabineer]

LMAO, So in your mind, supply side economics should make the middle class and poor rich, and the income of the wealthy should go down?

Let's see!

Take two typical middle class carpenters in California who make $65,000 per year.
Carpenter #1 does side jobs on the weekend, saves his money and starts investing it in the stock market and real estate.
Carpenter #2 doesn't want to spend his weekends or after work hours working anymore, he wants to go water skiing, attend concerts, camping and spends his little bit of extra money on dirt bikes, a ski boat, or a new Harley.

15 years go by and carpenter #1 now owns income property and makes an extra $ $60,000 a year on his rental properties, He flipped a few of his properties and made a few hundred thousand in the process, now, between his stock investments and rental income, carpenter #1 has an annual income over $200k and is ready for an early retirement.

Carpenter #2 is still working his 40hr week but 15yrs later he's up to $80,000, all throughout that 15 yrs he spent his money unwisely, him and his family bought a house they couldn't afford, they borrowed too much money against it, all the while hoping the market would continue to go up.
Carpenter #2 is now loosing his house, he blames the lenders for talking him into a loan he couldn't afford, it doesn't matter that he used that money to buy a new ski boat, it's all trickle down economics and the capitalists fault for the dire straits he finds himself in.

Income disparity charts are for the fools who find themselves on the bottom of that chart!

No. I'm not talking about absolute wealth but disparity - more specifically the trend in disparity, the first derivative. The total wealth andor GDP is variable and incidental.
I don't have an issue with there being a disparity. There are rich and there are poor. this does not offend me. What i am noticing to give me pause is that the disparity is increasing at just that time when "trickle down" is being invoked and championed as a general economic driver.
If trickle-down works, the relative wealth of the various socioeconomic brackets should stay fairly even.
Now, if trickle-down is a whitewash job for concentrating the wealth into a de facto aristocrat class, the graphs would look like ... what I posted.
So it's my opinion at this time that "trickle down" is a colossal snow job.

I am interested though in seeing if someone can gun this line of thought down using reason, not ideology. cn

 

[beenthere]

Survival of the fittest is not natural law, it is a right wing meme. It does not accurately convey the correct meaning of natural selection. It was not a phrase coined by Darwin, but by Herbert Spencer, a right wing British economist from the colonial period. You are describing "Social Darwinism" which is another fallacious phrase, as it also assumes that Darwin coined the phrase "survival of the fittest" as natural law. The right wing wishes to outlaw cooperation it seems. Cooperation is a trait that evolution has favored, even noted in very primitive species.

Who the fuck mentioned Darwin? ROTFLMAO
You and Bucky have to be some of the most in uninformed immature losers there is, "strawboys" and "Darwin"? LOL

Neither one of you can be called contributors, but I'll bet both of you think you're saving the world with mere lip service, one key stroke at a time!

 

[beenthere]

No. I'm not talking about absolute wealth but disparity. The total wealth andor GDP is variable and incidental. If trickle-down works, the relative wealth of the various socioeconomic brackets should stay fairly even.
Now, if trickle-down is a whitewash job for concentrating the wealth into a de facto aristocrat class, the graphs would look like ... what I posted.
So it's my opinion at this time that "trickle down" is a colossal snow job.

I am interested though in seeing if someone can gun this line of thought down using reason, not ideology. cn

The trickle down theory is a vehicle bro, it's not going to help the lazy and the foolish, nothing will, but you don't get it.

 

[abandonconflict]

Who the fuck mentioned Darwin? ROTFLMAO
You and Bucky have to be some of the most in uninformed immature losers there is, "strawboys" and "Darwin"? LOL

Neither one of you can be called contributors, but I'll bet both of you think you're saving the world with mere lip service, one key stroke at a time!

So you don't even realize that the basic premise of everything you have been arguing is "Social Darwinism"?

You're fuckin dumb bro. I'm done with you...UB...finish him.

 

[cannabineer]

The trickle down theory is a vehicle bro, it's not going to help the lazy and the foolish, nothing will, but you don't get it.

Okay; let's talk about the non-lazy, non-foolish majority. The sort of people whose path to wealth was broken by the double whammy of the jobs crisis and the mortgage crisis. To dismiss them as having failed an ideological purity test is ... facile. cn

 

[beenthere]

If you guys are so concerned about the poor, what are you doing on an internet forum, get out an volunteer you money and time to the cause.

 

[cannabineer]

If you guys are so concerned about the poor, what are you doing on an internet forum, get out an volunteer you money and time to the cause.

My question is narrower: "trickle down" - fact or fraud? cn

 

[UncleBuck]

Neither one of you can be called contributors

i've posted my taxes and you haven't, so i'm safe to call you a welfare bum with nothing to disprove me.

 

[abandonconflict]

If you guys are so concerned about the poor, what are you doing on an internet forum, get out an volunteer you money and time to the cause.

This is spreading information to voters, and it bothers you, both noble causes.

 

[UncleBuck]

If you guys are so concerned about the poor, what are you doing on an internet forum, get out an volunteer you money and time to the cause.

it's less about the poor, it's more about watching you continue to defend a policy that doesn't work.

you ever going to tell us about the successes of trickle down?

 

[Scrotie Mcboogerballs]

LMAO, So in your mind, supply side economics should make the middle class and poor rich, and the income of the wealthy should go down?

Let's see!

Take two typical middle class carpenters in California who make $65,000 per year.
Carpenter #1 does side jobs on the weekend, saves his money and starts investing it in the stock market and real estate.
Carpenter #2 doesn't want to spend his weekends or after work hours working anymore, he wants to go water skiing, attend concerts, camping and spends his little bit of extra money on dirt bikes, a ski boat, or a new Harley.

15 years go by and carpenter #1 now owns income property and makes an extra $ $60,000 a year on his rental properties, He flipped a few of his properties and made a few hundred thousand in the process, now, between his stock investments and rental income, carpenter #1 has an annual income over $200k and is ready for an early retirement.

Carpenter #2 is still working his 40hr week but 15yrs later he's up to $80,000, all throughout that 15 yrs he spent his money unwisely, him and his family bought a house they couldn't afford, they borrowed too much money against it, all the while hoping the market would continue to go up.
Carpenter #2 is now loosing his house, he blames the lenders for talking him into a loan he couldn't afford, it doesn't matter that he used that money to buy a new ski boat, it's all trickle down economics and the capitalists fault for the dire straits he finds himself in.

Income disparity charts are for the fools who find themselves on the bottom of that chart!

This is actually a really good example. Either way both carpenters lose due to an economic collapse. The investor lost all his money in the stock market and neither of them have any work because nobodies building anymore. lol

 

[canndo]

LMAO, So in your mind, supply side economics should make the middle class and poor rich, and the income of the wealthy should go down?

Let's see!

Take two typical middle class carpenters in California who make $65,000 per year.
Carpenter #1 does side jobs on the weekend, saves his money and starts investing it in the stock market and real estate.
Carpenter #2 doesn't want to spend his weekends or after work hours working anymore, he wants to go water skiing, attend concerts, camping and spends his little bit of extra money on dirt bikes, a ski boat, or a new Harley.

15 years go by and carpenter #1 now owns income property and makes an extra $ $60,000 a year on his rental properties, He flipped a few of his properties and made a few hundred thousand in the process, now, between his stock investments and rental income, carpenter #1 has an annual income over $200k and is ready for an early retirement.

Carpenter #2 is still working his 40hr week but 15yrs later he's up to $80,000, all throughout that 15 yrs he spent his money unwisely, him and his family bought a house they couldn't afford, they borrowed too much money against it, all the while hoping the market would continue to go up.
Carpenter #2 is now loosing his house, he blames the lenders for talking him into a loan he couldn't afford, it doesn't matter that he used that money to buy a new ski boat, it's all trickle down economics and the capitalists fault for the dire straits he finds himself in.

Income disparity charts are for the fools who find themselves on the bottom of that chart!

I love these ant/grass hopper rightist stories.

Carpenter 1 worked hard, made the right choices and was caught in the great recession same as carpenter 2. Carpenter 1 found that his carpenter business was sunk by the building bust and his property was worth little. Carpenter 1 finds that his wife, who had cancer years ago and was unable to be insured, has cancer again and his savings and investments were drained by this turn of events.

Carpenter 2 died when he was 54. He died broke, just as carpenter 1 is broke but he spent time with his wife and children on his weekends and doesn't regret a thing on his death bed.

You folks are so certain that you made all the right decisions and that you are prepared for any eventuality and you are just as sure that the guy down the street only has himself to blame for his bad situation. Life happens and lots of times that life happens badly regardless of your high sounding commitments to yourself.