Why so quiet about the economy everyone?
Why so quiet about the economy?
- Thread starter Joeychgo
- Start date
MonsterMark
Dedicated LVC Member
Here, educate yourself on what is coming should we elect Obama.
You think there is pain now? What till the people that have the money choose to go and play elsewhere.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Obama plan: tax cuts or Demogrants?posted at 9:00 am on October 13, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Given Barack Obama’s relentless populism this cycle, the Wall Street Journal analysis of his tax cuts should surprise no one. They find that Obama relies less on actual cuts in tax rates and more in specific “refundables”, grants that filers receive whether they have a tax liability or not. Instead of reducing taxes, Obama makes his redistributionism explicit:
One of Barack Obama’s most potent campaign claims is that he’ll cut taxes for no less than 95% of “working families.” He’s even promising to cut taxes enough that the government’s tax share of GDP will be no more than 18.2% — which is lower than it is today.
It’s a clever pitch, because it lets him pose as a middle-class tax cutter while disguising that he’s also proposing one of the largest tax increases ever on the other 5%. But how does he conjure this miracle, especially since more than a third of all Americans already pay no income taxes at all? There are several sleights of hand, but the most creative is to redefine the meaning of “tax cut.”
For the Obama Democrats, a tax cut is no longer letting you keep more of what you earn. In their lexicon, a tax cut includes tens of billions of dollars in government handouts that are disguised by the phrase “tax credit.” Mr. Obama is proposing to create or expand no fewer than seven such credits for individuals[.]
Six of the seven listed in the Obama plan are these “refundables”, money people get from the federal government even if they pay no taxes at all. These are not “tax cuts” but instead welfare grants based on specific social policy. It’s blatant redistributionism, as the money comes from tax increases on the wealthy.
Real tax cutters use that policy as a way to restrain growth in federal government, although the Republicans certainly forgot the other part of that equation for six years — cut spending. Obama’s plan actually makes people more dependent on federal government, and expands it significantly. It adds to the entitlement mentality while doing nothing about rewarding risk. This plan will penalize risk and encourage the wealthy to find even more shelters for their income and capital, more likely outside the US, which will mean fewer jobs and fewer opportunities.
The last thing this economy needs is a flight of capital. We need that money invested in America to create jobs, not hidden away from an aggressively redistributionist federal government. We should be reducing taxes, but not giving more money to people who don’t pay any at all.
You think there is pain now? What till the people that have the money choose to go and play elsewhere.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Obama plan: tax cuts or Demogrants?posted at 9:00 am on October 13, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Given Barack Obama’s relentless populism this cycle, the Wall Street Journal analysis of his tax cuts should surprise no one. They find that Obama relies less on actual cuts in tax rates and more in specific “refundables”, grants that filers receive whether they have a tax liability or not. Instead of reducing taxes, Obama makes his redistributionism explicit:
One of Barack Obama’s most potent campaign claims is that he’ll cut taxes for no less than 95% of “working families.” He’s even promising to cut taxes enough that the government’s tax share of GDP will be no more than 18.2% — which is lower than it is today.
It’s a clever pitch, because it lets him pose as a middle-class tax cutter while disguising that he’s also proposing one of the largest tax increases ever on the other 5%. But how does he conjure this miracle, especially since more than a third of all Americans already pay no income taxes at all? There are several sleights of hand, but the most creative is to redefine the meaning of “tax cut.”
For the Obama Democrats, a tax cut is no longer letting you keep more of what you earn. In their lexicon, a tax cut includes tens of billions of dollars in government handouts that are disguised by the phrase “tax credit.” Mr. Obama is proposing to create or expand no fewer than seven such credits for individuals[.]
Six of the seven listed in the Obama plan are these “refundables”, money people get from the federal government even if they pay no taxes at all. These are not “tax cuts” but instead welfare grants based on specific social policy. It’s blatant redistributionism, as the money comes from tax increases on the wealthy.
Real tax cutters use that policy as a way to restrain growth in federal government, although the Republicans certainly forgot the other part of that equation for six years — cut spending. Obama’s plan actually makes people more dependent on federal government, and expands it significantly. It adds to the entitlement mentality while doing nothing about rewarding risk. This plan will penalize risk and encourage the wealthy to find even more shelters for their income and capital, more likely outside the US, which will mean fewer jobs and fewer opportunities.
The last thing this economy needs is a flight of capital. We need that money invested in America to create jobs, not hidden away from an aggressively redistributionist federal government. We should be reducing taxes, but not giving more money to people who don’t pay any at all.
How about you try to talk about the economy without mentioning Obama.... Dude, your so blinded with hatred that it invades everything you say.
And if you think either of these guys will be able to cut taxes, your nuts.
And if you think either of these guys will be able to cut taxes, your nuts.
taylor414ce2003
Dedicated LVC Member
Ya McCains plan is much better, tax my health care bennys whooohoooo a smaller paycheck .No matter who gets in , tax will go up in one way or another thanks to GW and the trillons he has pissed away on his war
n8bachelor
Dedicated LVC Member
Don't forget the $700B that was just passed to bail out business with poor business practices.... we'll be paying for that as well.
Neither candidate has a way to reduce the pork spending that continues to infect the current policy.
I am glad to see the price of gas going down.... but unfortunately so is my 401k.
Neither candidate has a way to reduce the pork spending that continues to infect the current policy.
I am glad to see the price of gas going down.... but unfortunately so is my 401k.
MonsterMark
Dedicated LVC Member
What about the economy? Shopping center lots are still full. Restaurants are packed every night.
People lost a lot of money in the market the past few months. You tell me who is to blame.
As are you with your support for Obama because you think he is gonna give you a handout. I got news for you. Democrat policies always cost everyone more money. Point out where a Dem policy has actually fixed a problem or saved you money.
And Yes, I can't stand Obama. He managed to exclipse my disdain for Kerry by a huge margin. I can't find a shred of honesty or morality in Obama. Not a shred.
Btw, you know it was Obama and the rest of the Dems in Congress that brought down the house of cards with their Community Reinvestment Act. Just accept the fact that the Dems are to blame. For once. Of course, turn your blind eye to Obama so you won't see his hand in this with ACORN.
I don't think either one will cut taxes because they are both liberals. However, one wants to "REDISTRIBUTE" wealth, ie: give handouts, while the other one will be bent over trying to 'cross the aisle'. Either way, we are screwed. I would just prefer not to go the redistribution route.
Here is your Messiah in action.
http://www.breitbart.tv/html/195153.html
MonsterMark
Dedicated LVC Member
Can you show me the 'trillions'. Don't need it line by line. Just a summary would be nice.
How about the 'trillions' we have saved because there hasn't been another attack on U.S. soil in 7 years? Not even a fart in the wind.
No, they are NOT packed every night. Restaurants are hurting BAD right now. I know this to be a fact. But since you probably wont take my word for it, here is a time magazine article:
MonsterMark
Dedicated LVC Member
You know I produce goods here domestically as well as overseas. I can tell you that it is government policy and oversight that is forcing all of our domestic manufacturing overseas. I am told daily to pull some of my products and have them done overseas where the cost of doing business is less.
Hell, I bid on some government work recently. Objective was to privatize and take over the parts distribution portion of a county vehicle repair facility.
The guys behind the parts counter were making $26/hr. The 'fringes' brought in another $23/hr. These guys are making almost $100 grand a year behind a parts counter.
It obviously pays to work for the government. After showing the local government officials that it could be done for less than half of their current costs, (even using a couple of local Chicago municipalities as examples that went the private route), the bid was summarily dismissed when the county reps got involved and decided to 'protect' these "good" jobs.
jhargarage
Well-Known LVC Member
There has only been one attack cause that is all they needed to start their (GW) campaign to finish what his daddy didn't. It is amazing what they will do.
MonsterMark
Dedicated LVC Member
Sometimes it helps to read the whole article.
I will admit there has been a downturn the last month or so, but the real decline lies elsewhere as revealed in the article.
Restaurants are struggling to find banks' support to cope with short-term cash crunches caused by double-digit price increases for commodities ranging from wheat and flour to rice and corn. Way to go Ethanol Mandate.
The growing success of the waiter-free fast-casual brands, such as Panera Bread, comes at the expense of higher-cost casual chains, from which cash- and credit-strapped consumers are trading down.
53% of restaurant owners cited either the faltering economy or rising food costs as their primary concern. Of course they wouldn't consider the quality or value of their product.
Telsey Advisory Group, an independent research firm, notes that in recent years the abundance of restaurants in the U.S. has grown more rapidly than Americans' appetites for eating out
Personally, I would venture the cost of gas has had more to do with the downturn, in conjunction with the cost of the raw materials as the chief culprits.
The major chains I have dined in this past year have left me majorly disappointed, so it doesn't shock me people refuse to overpay for crappy quality and waning service.
MonsterMark
Dedicated LVC Member
Yes, it would be wise to ignore all the attacks during the Clinton years as not having occurred.
MonsterMark
Dedicated LVC Member
rubberducky700
Well-Known LVC Member
Need to say nothing, Except> Thanks Monster Mark.. For saying it true so I dont have too.
NYC LS8
Dedicated LVC Member
How about this:
The Dow Jones is up 872 points right now.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a_PQZgyAnAv8&refer=worldwide
And in the past two weeks gas has dropped over 35 cents a gallon.
The Dow Jones is up 872 points right now.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a_PQZgyAnAv8&refer=worldwide
And in the past two weeks gas has dropped over 35 cents a gallon.
fossten
Dedicated LVC Member
Well, Joey, gas prices are down 25% in the last month or so.
Does that count?
Does that count?
MonsterMark
Dedicated LVC Member
Only bad news counts.
fossten
Dedicated LVC Member
You forget, I spent many years in the restaurant business and know MANY people in the business still.
It has been alot more then the last month. Average casual dine restaurant is down 30% in sales in the last year. Food costs have increased 20% or more. Utility costs have soard as well.
You were dissappointed because food chains are buying cheaper products and reducing staff to keep the menu prices down.
The article is right. People are not dining at red lobster, and instead are going to panera bread. Reason? Menu price. Why? People are scared of the economy and broke.
...since people are eating out less, lets raise taxes and redistribute wealth! That plan always works, right? /sarcasm
Or, reduce taxes, reduce federal spending which will also free up available money to lend. Increase energy production, which will reduce the cost of food. Stop putting wasteful ethanol in our gas tanks, further reducing the price of food.
I don't go to any of those chain restaurants, not for fear of the economy, but because the food tends to stink. And the ones that don't stink are over priced. I'm saying that despite having family members who are proprietors of one of the national steak house chains.
Or, reduce taxes, reduce federal spending which will also free up available money to lend. Increase energy production, which will reduce the cost of food. Stop putting wasteful ethanol in our gas tanks, further reducing the price of food.
I don't go to any of those chain restaurants, not for fear of the economy, but because the food tends to stink. And the ones that don't stink are over priced. I'm saying that despite having family members who are proprietors of one of the national steak house chains.
StincolnLincoln
Dedicated LVC Member
this is 2 funny trying to blame Democrats for the economy when there is a Republican in office. Nuffffff said...
You're really quite ignorant on this subject, aren't you?
The President is a Republican, but the Congress is in the firm control of the Democrats.
Can you can tell me which domestic spending policies that Bush pursued, without the support of the Democrats, that have hurt the economy? Or do you think high spending, high taxes, corrupt federalized institutions, redistribution of wealth, over regulation, policies that limit energy independence and protectionist policies help the economy?
Nuffffffff said...
StincolnLincoln
Dedicated LVC Member
I really can care less what you think of me. Most, if not all of this mess stems from greedy ass republicans. if you so smart why dont you stand up on a podium and blast all your knowledge instead of on here.
Rest assured, I don't care about you.
But why don't you elaborate. Explain what "greedy ass republicans" did and how it affected the economy. You don't need sources, just give us the literate, cliff note version of events. You're regurgitated outburts are difficult to debate because they lack substance. "You're Wrong" is the only appropriate response, yet I'd like to engage you more fully and exam your gross misunderstanding of current events.