GDP Goes Negative In Fourth Quarter

You mean to say you just started believing in those things a few months ago. Before that you were a "libertarian".

 

I don't know about the rest of you...but it seems silly or stupid for people to believe that the GDP will ALWAYS increase. It is nice to believe GDP over the longer term will show growth. But in the shorter term, like years and months, just as most everything else in the world, vacillates up and down and in between. The entire problem with society, government, and people is that few of us are capable or prepared to handle the downturns. So we cry like babies, the media sensationalizes every nuance of the economy, the government feels sorry for people and bends over to help maintain the status quo.

Until we grow up, learn how to fiscally manage our lives and businesses and governments, stop living on debt money, literally living from pay check to pay check or tax dollar to tax dollar, every time the economy hiccups...these standard and assumed downturns in the economy will dominate the air space. But our society has developed a nasty sense of entitlement in which we demand but don't pay for our demands...and folks...today and tomorrow this behavior is not sustainable...

 

Interesting but being so down on consumer debt puts you at odds with the entire philosophy of the right wing.

On consequetive occasions the right has beleived that trickle down would work, they were somewhat successful only as long the rest of were willing to keep buying stuff we dont need.

 

They did nothing of the sort, the tried to get the Democrats to act responsibly and honor the "OK higher taxes then let's do something about the spending and the debt" and of course the Democrats refused and held the debt hostage to even higher spending and more debt.

 

There was and advance on future tax returns in 2001 that was paid back. The tax rate cuts did not go into full effect until 2003. That was exactly the right policy to deal with the slowdown and recession he inherited.

During that slowdown recession the deficit hit a one time high of $400 billion then began a drastic fall as the recovery took over. If fell drastically in 2005, 2006 and 2007 down to a measly $161B. Bush and the Republicans did NOT add $10 trillion to the deficit. The 2008 and 2009 budgets which were DEMOCRAT budgets increased the deficit back up to $400B which was not unexpected in the slowdown and recession that was beginning, but then they took it to $1,400B and kept it over $1,100B ever since. THAT is where the huge deficit and out of control spending has come from.

The tax rate cuts ushered in HUGE increases if revenue, where did you get the idea that revenues did not SOAR in that recovery they ushered in?

Talk to Obama and the Democrats and their supporters here about that.

 

And the conservative philosphy is you don't incur the bills you can't pay, that is why the Republican are trying to prevent new spending without offsetting spending cuts. Obama and the Democrats are fighting against that tooth and nail and now even say the deficit and debt don't matter anyway. So who are you going to support?

No it was under Newt Gingrich and John Kasich, Clinton fought against the measures that brought us close.

He cut tax rates to keep revenues up and flowing and increasing by growing the economy. It worked. We came close again to a balanced budget and then the Democrats took over.

They vote Obama back in with his promises of even higher spending without paying for it.

And the only way we are going to get back on a path to doing that is by growing the economy, not through higher tax rates.

You are preaching to the choir, now tell me you didn't vote for Obama did you?

 

Yes, you do. You just don't recognize it when you do it.

The source does not matter. You will deny or spin as appropriate.

Do you realize you just swerved into the truth? If government spending goes up then there have been NO cuts.

 

"That" could have been managed and prevented and the recovered from had it not been for Obama and the Democrats and their policies.

- - - Updated - - -

Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
Increases in the money supply are "inflationary" by definition. No one disputes that. I'm just asking what the difference between "runaway inflation" and just "inflation" is. A primary source, like an economics textbook, would suffice to explain it.

No he's trying to get you to stop your dancing and answer the question posed to you.

 

It makes sense. You loved FDR. FDO is following in his footsteps. Both grew government in scope, reach and power of the citizens. Both did relatively little to grow the economy by reducing government obstacles to the private sector. And the drones loved both of them.

 

And the corporation pays employment taxes on all the employees.

On profits and then the people who make up the corporation pay income taxes on the net profits they collect.

Capital gains which are derived from the profits.

 

Bull(*)(*)(*)(*). Prove it.

I answered it. Trying reading the thread and then you won't make ignorant statements.

 

Like Hitler Obama told us what he intended to do to us. So yes, the marginal workers were fired, in self defense, once the Marxist was elected.

Nearly every bad thing that happens is the result of too much government.

- - - Updated - - -

It is possible he was a librarian with a spelling problem.


Arghhh. I hate this software.

 

Why did you leave out the number for 2007, the last Republican/Bush budget, and 2008 the first Democrat budget which Obama supported and voted for? So spare us the "Obama the great spending cutter". The Democrats have cut nothing because they haven't submitted a budget in 4 years spending has been on auto pilot and even now they claim the deficit doesn't matter. Maybe you should consider getting better analysis of the data rather than Chris Matthews and Rachel Maddow.

 

Because 2007 and 2008 were not years spending was reduced.

Trying reading the thread and then you won't make ignorant statements.

 

You know he was looking for context. You do know that, don't you?

LOL. I love the lies of omission.

 

How is that relevant to the issue of whether spending ever decreased?

Trying reading the thread and then you won't make ignorant statements.

 

It would appear that the only one who needs ignorance is you. Your world view collapses without the support of ignorance.

The rest of us are doing just fine.

 

Baseless ad hom when there is no argument to be made. Par for more of our conservative friends.

 

You don't have any conservative friends.

 

Do you normally assert facts about things you know nothing about?

Why yes, you do.

 

Well, not every bad thing, but most coercive things. Brady didn't miss that superbowl pass last year because of the government

But yeah I agree with you, I just think it's silly to focus on the President so much. The fed has a much larger role in the recession cycle - as does Congress. Obama is no doubt still guilty, but he's not the main factor here.

 

Yes they were greatly INCREASED by Obama and the Democrats making your bragging about their then minor reductions from these HUGE increases in spending quite laughable. And making you subsequent statement one of desperation. Try citing the numbers in context so your post don't appear so ignorant.

- - - Updated - - -

It is the normal tactic employed even though it gets blown out of the water every time.

 

In order.

Payroll taxes are a tax on compensation for labor and are not a tax on the employer. They represent a tax collected upon "non-reportable income" to the worker.

Once agian income taxes paid by stockholders that receive dividend payments are taxable to the individual and are not a tax imposed on the corporation. In fact, a coporation may pay a dividend and the stockholder might not pay any taxes at all on that dividend. Additionally the maximum tax rate for long term caplital gains is 20% and no FICA/Payroll taxes are imposed on the individual.

Yes, capital gains taxes are based up profit by the individual that are unrelated to the profits of a corporation they might own stocks in. A person can realize a capital gain even if a corporation hasn't had a profit for decades and/or has never paid a dividend to stockholders. Most corporate profits are reinvested in the corporation as opposed to being paid out to the stockholders. The maximum tax rate for long term capital gains is 20% and can be as low as zero percent regardless of net income (e.g no taxes are imposed on income from upon off-shore tax havens like the Caymen Islands and Belize).

When we address taxes paid they are based upon the tax return filed and not on someone else's tax return. For example when I purchase a commidity I am technically paying my share of all of the taxes imposed in the supply chain that delivers that product to me. I'm paying "my share" of all of the income taxes of the employees, all of the Payroll taxes and all of the taxes of every enterprise involved in producing and delivering that product. All taxes are ultimately transferred to the consumer. Yes, that represents the total tax burden but does not represent the itemized tax burden that must be used for camparative analysis.

If we want to know the effective tax rates then we look at the individual tax return regardless of whether it's for an enterprise or a person. Once again, based upon tax returns a small business owner would pay a 37.3% tax rate on $100K/yr in net income, a corporation would pay 22% on that income and an investor under the long term Capital Gains tax laws could pay zero in taxes while having the a maximum tax rate of 20%. This is unfair taxation because all income dollars should be subjected to the identical tax rates.

 

Yes the economy actually became smaller last quarter, the Democrats will try and manipulate all the other numbers to gloss this over but when your economy over all SHRINKS....it is a huge problem.

So glad this President who does not understand how the economy works in the first place was re-elected.

 

2007 and 2008 were not years spending was reduced. Not to mention Obama wasn't president.

Trying reading the thread and then you won't make ignorant statements.