Become a part of one of the fastest growing adult communities online. We have something for you, whether you’re a male member seeking out new friends or a new lady on the scene looking to take advantage of our many opportunities to network, make new friends, or connect with people. Join today & take part in lively discussions, take advantage of all the great features that attract hundreds of new daily members!
A lot more flowed to individuals than corporations.
Ask that smart friend of yours and have him explain to you that all the money makes it way to the market in some form or fashion, even upon death...unless you're still banking out of your mattress!
Ask that smart friend of yours and have him explain to you that all the money makes it way to the market in some form or fashion, even upon death...unless you're still banking out of your mattress!
Please explain why you believe COVID stimulus money increased corporate taxes proportionately more than it increased output of goods and services.
I was discussing your post with a friend who knows as much about finance and economics as anyone on here. He tells me Dean Baker is an Elizabeth Warren fluff boy. Then there was the post where you wanted to do away with the billionaires. I fear you’ve gone full fledged Bernie Sanders on us. I will pray for you WTF.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiny
Please explain why you believe COVID stimulus money increased corporate taxes proportionately more than it increased output of goods and services.
How about you and your friend counter Dean Bakers points instead of attacking the messenger. That is always a bad sign...
How about you and your friend counter Dean Bakers points instead of attacking the messenger. That is always a bad sign...
I'll post it again for you.
Why? LustyLad and Texas Contrarian already countered Dean Baker's points, before you posted them. Still waiting for you to explain why you believe COVID stimulus money increased corporate taxes proportionately more than it increased output of goods and services.
Why? LustyLad and Texas Contrarian already countered Dean Baker's points, before you posted them. Still waiting for you to explain why you believe COVID stimulus money increased corporate taxes proportionately more than it increased output of goods and services.
No they did not. Lustylad posted a distorted version of "Let us rewrite history"
And another thing....were gas prices not in a once in a lifetime vortex....Trump's numbers would have looked even worse than 2018 and 2019. Folks give Trump credit for low gas prices that were actually started during the Bush and Obama administration.
We had a build up of nlg's in this country that gave consumers distorted energy prices.
Some on here saw the writing on the wall and realized certain if not all mid streams would benefit from shipping terminals being built for export. This export caused a spike in home energy costs because we no longer had a huge domestic oversupply of gas.None of this had anything to do with who was President but it has a lot to do with where to shift one's money and not get caught up in Presidential politics....other than how it will effect your portfolio.
And yes that sounds like "fuck those not in the market" but that is ( your favorite word) Realpolitik of it.
It's hilarious to see someone describe one of my posts as "long-winded," and then try to rebut it with the copy & paste of an even longer-winded screed written by a far left-wing IYI economist! (Dean Baker)
Baker is essentially a junior varsity version of Paul Krugman -- not as well known as Paul, but equally prolific in the art of proposing bad economic policy and investment-disincentivizing, economic growth-impeding tax proposals.
First, Baker was one of the loudest cheerleaders in 2021 for the idea of raising the capital gains tax rate to the Biden administration's 43.8% goal. Apparently he's completely ignorant of how badly the push to a 40% rate backfired in the 1970s.
Second, his proposal for corporate taxation is, if anything, even worse:
Got that? This is nothing more than a tax on unrealized gains (as well as yet another tax on dividends), although the author insinuates that the company, rather than the stockholder, would actually pay the tax. (Although at the end of the day, shareholders, employees, and consumers will pay the tax, no matter how it's designed -- just as they do now.) And we've already discussed in detail what a terrible idea taxing unrealized capital gains is.
Despite Baker's statement to the contrary, this plan would encourage private companies to stay private, not go public.
Yet ridiculously bad ideas such as these typify what passes for reasoned debate in today's progressive world.
Some Posters Here Have a Soft... Er... Spot for a Good Fluff Boy!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiny
I was discussing your post with a friend who knows as much about finance and economics as anyone on here. He tells me Dean Baker is an Elizabeth Warren fluff boy...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Texas Contrarian
Baker is essentially a junior varsity version of Paul Krugman...
Got that? This is nothing more than a tax on unrealized gains (as well as yet another tax on dividends), although the author insinuates that the company, rather than the stockholder, would actually pay the tax.
Fucking hilarious! This guy has no appreciation for how the stock market operates, and no idea of how volatile share prices are. It would be interesting to see how any company that meets Chung Tran's definition of "growth stock" could survive, given the taxes it would have to pay. This is a great way to make sure that America will no longer be home to innovative, publicly-listed tech companies.
If you want to rid America of billionaires, like Bernie Sanders and WTF want, then just implement Baker's tax. I don't how Amazon, Tesla, and similar companies could have paid their taxes when they were rapidly growing if this had been in place.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WTF
How about you and your friend counter Dean Bakers points instead of attacking the messenger. That is always a bad sign...
Sorry WTF, the messenger (Dean Baker) has just been shot and he's dead as a doornail.
I thought at the time of the passage of the 2017 Tax Reform that the decrease from 35% to 21% was too much and would have preferred a cut to about 25%. But I definitely supported the tax plan overall, although I think it favored those on the higher end of the income scale. To be honest, this was the single important legislative achievement by Trump in his 4 years in office.
That the Political Forum IS NOT Exempt from the Eccie Guidelines
Quote:
#1 - Avoid cases of unprovoked rudeness to others. No place for it here. Yes, with the dynamic nature of the threads and topics, tempers will flare and things will become heated from time to time. You may often encounter individuals who become passionate or emotional when expressing one's opinion or point of view. That's all understood and perfectly acceptable within reason…….but, start slamming or bashing another member and be met with consequences.
#4 - Blatant insults or hostility toward another member will be met with staff intervention. This applies to using our coed forums for name calling, personal attacks, or vulgar slang terms to describe fellow members. If you have legitimate concerns about another member here, share them tactfully in the appropriate private forums or with staff.
#27 - Often times in online communities, members may display a tendency towards bringing their conflicts with other members to the board. This will be strongly discouraged and swift effort will be made to put it to rest. Additionally, staff will make every effort to stay uninvolved in conflicts and disputes between members off the board except in such cases where the board becomes directly affected.
It's hilarious to see someone describe one of my posts as "long-winded," and then try to rebut it with the copy & paste of an even longer-winded screed written by a far left-wing IYI economist! (Dean Baker)
Baker is essentially a junior varsity version of Paul Krugman -- not as well known as Paul, but equally prolific in the art of proposing bad economic policy and investment-disincentivizing, economic growth-impeding tax proposals.
First, Baker was one of the loudest cheerleaders in 2021 for the idea of raising the capital gains tax rate to the Biden administration's 43.8% goal. Apparently he's completely ignorant of how badly the push to a 40% rate backfired in the 1970s.
Second, his proposal for corporate taxation is, if anything, even worse:
Got that? This is nothing more than a tax on unrealized gains (as well as yet another tax on dividends), although the author insinuates that the company, rather than the stockholder, would actually pay the tax. (Although at the end of the day, shareholders, employees, and consumers will pay the tax, no matter how it's designed -- just as they do now.) And we've already discussed in detail what a terrible idea taxing unrealized capital gains is.
Despite Baker's statement to the contrary, this plan would encourage private companies to stay private, not go public.
Yet ridiculously bad ideas such as these typify what passes for reasoned debate in today's progressive world.
two long winded cut n pastes. Why is yours better than mine?
Again, you haven't addressed what was posted but have pivoted to other articles he has written.
Quote from the article I posted and then dispute those points.
