Where the "deficits do not matter" mentality came. RR

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by WTF

The orginal topic is too difficult for Tiny to fathom. It means all these decades of believing in the Tooth Fairy are for naught!

Come on Tiny....I'll walk you through these troubling times. Tax cuts are the reason to these huge deficits. We have trained a nation of so called economic guru's into believing that tax cuts INCREASE revenue!

Wrong, wrong, wrong. Unless you've been brainwashed by Bernie Sanders. Federal government receipts as a % of GDP have been in a 15% to 18% band for most of the last 75 years:

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FYFRGDA188S

It's the federal spending that's gotten out of control, going from about 14% of GDP after World War II to 30% of GDP in 2021, thanks in no small part to the American Rescue Plan, which you and Bernie Sanders championed:

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FYONGDA188S

[WTF]

Originally Posted by Tiny

Wrong, wrong, wrong. Unless you've been brainwashed by Bernie Sanders. Federal government receipts as a % of GDP have been in a 15% to 18% band for most of the last 75 years:

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FYFRGDA188S

It's the federal spending that's gotten out of control, going from about 14% of GDP after World War II to 30% of GDP in 2021, thanks in no small part to the American Rescue Plan, which you and Bernie Sanders championed:

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FYONGDA188S

Poor poor Tiny does not understand the concept of actually having to pay for things you want will in fact curb the amount of things you buy.

So if instead to lowering taxes and buying more....which seems to be your and Ronnie's brilliant plan to stop spending....we should have increased taxes every single time we wanted to buy more , you know pay for what we bought, that way we may have reduced spending if in fact we had to pay fir it, instead of passing the buck onto your grandkids. Brilliant plan you and lustylad continue to defend!


Oh and this from your own source....it pinpoints when this Fairy tale nonsense of your and Ronnie's "Let's cut taxes and spend more" strategies took effect!


That horseshit pov have only taken public debt to gdp from 30% to over 120%


https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/GFDEGDQ188S


.

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by WTF

lustylad like all Reagan followers, is impossible to best. They've parroted the same obvious imperative for the last 40 years. Cut spending, Cut spending...and then blame Democrats for refusing!

And I always know when they've bested me because they want to correct my grammar afterwards.

Your best post thus far... keep it up!

[nevergaveitathought]

wtf has several fixations

one is ronald reagan

[reddog1951]

Not sure we need tax cuts per se. Do think we need to figure out how to get the upper level incomes pay their fair share..many examples can be commented about from right and left. My favorite though is Trumps paltry $750 income tax payment (I suspect more low paying years will come to light). I pay that per MONTH, and nowhere near a billionaire. All should pay their share to support the country....not saying illegal, am saying not RIGHT....not just Trump's tax breaks, but all the fat cats.

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by reddog1951

Not sure we need tax cuts per se. Do think we need to figure out how to get the upper level incomes pay their fair share..many examples can be commented about from right and left. My favorite though is Trumps paltry $750 income tax payment (I suspect more low paying years will come to light). I pay that per MONTH, and nowhere near a billionaire. All should pay their share to support the country....not saying illegal, am saying not RIGHT....not just Trump's tax breaks, but all the fat cats.

That's just not right Reddog, except that, yes, for something like the top .01% of the population, e.g. Donald Trump, the total tax paid as a percentage of income does fall off a bit. Otherwise we've got the most progressive tax system in the developed world.

I'm reading a book by Gabriel Zucman and Emanuel Saez, economic advisers to Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. Even they admit that, from the middle class upwards, the overall tax system, including sales taxes and the like, is progressive.

When you take into account all taxes, its the rich and the poor who get the shaft, in terms of paying the highest percentage of their income in tax. The middle class comes out well.

Texas Contrarian has linked to an enlightening graph, showing effective tax rates as a function of income, for the USA and France, which illustrates this. I'm too lazy to look it up though. Here's something that just shows the progressivity of the federal income tax system -- see Table 1:

https://taxfoundation.org/publicatio...come-tax-data/

[nevergaveitathought]

another thing that isnt true is the thinking that someone in business cant deduct net operating losses against future income

we arbitrarily assess tax on net income on a year by year basis

if you lose 1 billion in year one-

but in the next year make 1 million off the set up and struggle in year 1, you aren't supposed to be allowed a carryforward ?

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by reddog1951

Not sure we need tax cuts per se. Do think we need to figure out how to get the upper level incomes pay their fair share..many examples can be commented about from right and left. My favorite though is Trumps paltry $750 income tax payment (I suspect more low paying years will come to light). I pay that per MONTH, and nowhere near a billionaire. All should pay their share to support the country....not saying illegal, am saying not RIGHT....not just Trump's tax breaks, but all the fat cats.

I guess you must have missed the story about Trump paying $38 million of taxes in a single year, huh?

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-...ed-returns-say

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

another thing that isnt true is the thinking that someone in business cant deduct net operating losses against future income

we arbitrarily assess tax on net income on a year by year basis

if you lose 1 billion in year one-

but in the next year make 1 million off the set up and struggle in year 1, you aren't supposed to be allowed a carryforward ?

Of course you're allowed a carry-forward!

As a matter of basic fairness and EQUITY.

Don't dim-retards and progressives keep telling us they believe in EQUITY?

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by reddog1951

Do think we need to figure out how to get the upper level incomes pay their fair share...many examples can be commented about from right and left. My favorite though is Trumps paltry $750 income tax payment (I suspect more low paying years will come to light). I pay that per MONTH, and nowhere near a billionaire. All should pay their share to support the country....not saying illegal, am saying not RIGHT....not just Trump's tax breaks, but all the fat cats.

Hey reddog... here's my favorite example of how our steeply progressive federal income tax system works... hope you get it!

Originally Posted by lustylad

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for lunch and the bill for all ten comes to $100.

If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that's what they decided to do.

The ten men ate lunch in the restaurant every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve ball.

"Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily lunch by $20.00." So lunch for the ten men would now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still eat for free. But what about the other six men? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share?

They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to eat lunch.

So the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by a higher percentage the poorer he was, to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using, and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.

And so the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% off).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% off).
The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28% off).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% off).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% off).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% off).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to eat lunch for free. But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare the amount they got off.

The sixth man said, "I only got $1 off out of the $20 while the tenth man got $10 off!"

"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only got $1 off, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!"

"That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 off, when I got only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"

"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "we didn't get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!"

The nine men surrounded the tenth and told him they they were angry that he got so much off while they each got very little.

The next day the tenth man didn't show up for lunch, so the nine sat down and had their lunches without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money amongst all of them for even half of the bill!

And that is how our tax system works. The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the largest benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore.

For those who understand, no explanation is needed.

For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.

[nevergaveitathought]

Originally Posted by lustylad

Of course you're allowed a carry-forward!

As a basic matter of fairness and EQUITY.

Don't dim-retards and progressives keep telling us they believe in EQUITY?

i dont think by equity they exactly mean fairness

when you are sued, defenses to assert would be the law and another is that the outcome make sense or be equitable to you

so you, before the court, seek refuge in law and in equity

i think what they mean by equity, is that in their great wisdom,

any outcome,

be it giving black farmers money or passing out free covid money to black and minority restaurant owners first (which they did until all the money ran out)

be decided by skin color

not by any fairness related to each individual situation

and they surely dont buy into the american value of equality of treatment for each individual

[WTF]

Keep in mind: Hayek is speaking his disillusion with the GOP’s misapplication of his theories in 1985. To this day he remains a favored mask of budget-wreckers pretending to be fiscally conservative while pushing for more tax cuts. Those wreckers are at work in Congress today as they argue for an extension of the Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003, which were far larger than Reagan’s of 1981 and 1986 (in 1986, Reagan agreed to some tax increases, but mostly in the Social Security payroll tax, meaning on the middle and lower classes).

[WTF]

Originally Posted by lustylad

Hey reddog... here's my favorite example of how our steeply progressive federal income tax system works... hope you get it!

Stupid muthing fucking 10th man would not have any workers....is the part you forgot about.

You got any more right wing 8th grade material?

[WTF]

Originally Posted by lustylad

Your best post thus far... keep it up!

Keep your homoerotic dreams to yourself.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by lustylad

Of course you're allowed a carry-forward!

As a matter of basic fairness and EQUITY.

Don't dim-retards and progressives keep telling us they believe in EQUITY?

Focus Grasshopper....this thread is not about fairness, whatever that is, it is about how Reagan was the ignition point and grandfather of spending and deficits. His budget says as much.

The numbers align with that assertion.

Do you have any comments on that? Let me amend that...Do you have any rational comments about such. Ather than that 10 man circle jerk at lunch bs.