The push to Socialism

Discuss local, regional, state, federal, and world politics. Keep it classy, Cleveland.

The push to Socialism

Postby Michaels153 » February 25th, 2020, 10:26 am

https://video.foxnews.com/v/6135613706001#sp=show-clips
By Sean Hannity
2/25/20

If you want to follow the math, go ahead. The cost of the programs propagandized by the Socialist party is unaffordable over any time period: one year, ten years, twenty years, any years. The arguments that it would cost more to wait belie the fact that it is still unaffordable. It is a carrot stick meant to attract votes. All the Democrats become Santa Claus every time there is an election, and few of them give the necessary details for their plans. They hide behind their playbook of platitudes. They promise to make the rich pay their fair share, and never put in writing what that fair share is. And why are they unwilling to identify what that fair share of the rich is? It is precisely because it does not matter to them whatever rate is identified. They will always come back and say that the rich need to pay more. They will always claim that the rich are not paying their fair share. But even with the rich as their scapegoat, they still cant
pay for their programs on the backs of the rich.
Check the GDP, the budget, and the total income for any year and then compare that to the price tag for these socialists plans. You can not pay for Warren's or Biden's Health Care alone, even if you were to tax all income at 100%
Deficits don't matter since we already have them? Well then why are these Socialist's talking about ways to pay for them if the deficits don't matter? Because once in power, they will be making the money they want and gaining the connections to make even more money for themselves. Remember the Liberal Creed:
Take all the money you can, from all the people you can, in all the ways that you can, for as long as you can.
The Liberal Creed: Take all the money you can, from all the people you can, in all the ways that you can, for as long as you can.
Michaels153
 
Posts: 2692
Joined: February 9th, 2011, 3:25 pm

Re: The push to Socialism

Postby Mrtazeman » February 25th, 2020, 2:18 pm

Can you point out any country in the world with unregulated capitalism that worked? US isnt a pure capitalist country..
Real USA
Mrtazeman
 
Posts: 603
Joined: July 18th, 2013, 10:02 am

Re: The push to Socialism

Postby Michaels153 » February 26th, 2020, 11:28 am

No, but that does not mean that Socialism is the answer. Socialists point to problems like a democrat and says there is only one way to deal with the problem - their way. The step from a socialist act or policy to socialism is the difference between freedom and compliance to an ever increasing list of restrictions. How is Socialism better at solving problems than Capitalism?
The Liberal Creed: Take all the money you can, from all the people you can, in all the ways that you can, for as long as you can.
Michaels153
 
Posts: 2692
Joined: February 9th, 2011, 3:25 pm

Re: The push to Socialism

Postby leftyg » February 26th, 2020, 12:15 pm

The problem is Michaels, pure capitalism is not the answer either. We ave to find a sweet spot where things work. And the real global shift is not to socialism; it is to oligarchy. plutocracy and kleptocracy. We no longer blink when one person makes more money than tern million people. And we should blink a lot because that is crazy, a lot crazier than a woman on welfare "scamming" t he government so she can feed her kids.

When I looked at what you said, I realized you proffered a false dichotomy. The problem is: how do we find a combination of the two that works because what we have now simply does not.
leftyg
 
Posts: 5535
Joined: February 10th, 2011, 7:40 pm

Re: The push to Socialism

Postby Michaels153 » February 26th, 2020, 5:29 pm

Well I politely disagree with your oversimplification in your global assessment. You have identified other areas that can become problems but are not always problems. Rule by a few as in an oligarchy can be more efficient than death by committee. Our own history reminds us that our native americans were more efficient an orderly in their own tribes, than when they joined in pacts with multiple tribes. Our local and even state Governments sometimes run more efficiently than Congress does. The same can be said for plutocracy, with examples of benevolent kings during the middle ages and before that. But all your choices have show your common disdain for wealth, and belief that wealth is evidence of "something" being wrong. Yet, previous solutions "proffered by you always include those who have "wealth". Always bite the hand that feeds you?
Pure capitalism is not without problems. When you have something wrong with your own car you try to fix it. You don't try to add another car to your broken car. Instead of looking for greener grass on the other side of the fence, take a soil sample and identify what is missing or needs improving. :)
The Liberal Creed: Take all the money you can, from all the people you can, in all the ways that you can, for as long as you can.
Michaels153
 
Posts: 2692
Joined: February 9th, 2011, 3:25 pm

Re: The push to Socialism

Postby leftyg » February 27th, 2020, 8:25 pm

You oversimplified the problem Michaels, making it an either or between capitalism and communism. Rule by a few may lbe efficient, but all the ducats will wind up in their accounts and that is the road to slavery.

I have no more disdain for weath than Jesus did when he threw the moneychangers out of the Temple. Look money is fine, but huge disaprities are sure and they are cured by taxes. One way to look at it is the Gini INdex. Look at this link, and go around to all the countries and see haow it varies http://worldpopulationreview.com/countr ... y-country/ Also, Look at the Happiness Index https://countryeconomy.com/demography/w ... ness-index Both are simple and easy to understand. Notice that the happiest countries have the lwoest Gini Indexes which may mean something.

Michaels I have to go watch Jeopardy now because I am qn addict of that show. Later.
leftyg
 
Posts: 5535
Joined: February 10th, 2011, 7:40 pm

Re: The push to Socialism

Postby Michaels153 » February 28th, 2020, 3:56 am

[quote="leftyg"]You oversimplified the problem Michaels, perhaps, but I thought I was clearing out the junk and making it easier for you to see what you were targeting - wealth. Governments the world over try different things (experiment if you will), in their efforts to address the needs of their people.
Here, in this country, we have been tempted by you, liberals, the left, progressives, socialists, and even communists to abandon Capitalism because it is not perfect, as if another way would be perfect (Utopia).
making it an either or between capitalism and communism. Rule by a few may lbe efficient, but all the ducats will wind up in their accounts and that is the road to slavery. Really, again with the wealth, and the implication that it winds up in the hands of the few and that is the road to slavery. You know Leftyg, many today believe that the overbearing nature of our government today leaves it's citizens as modern day serfs, in a type of slavery. It is not just in the way you look at things, how you want to see it. But I really do not want to go down the road of psychological explanations here.

I have no more disdain for wealth (I added the l) than Jesus did when he threw the moneychangers out of the Temple. You know I really did not want to go to Biblical examples because of examples like this. The money changers could have done their work elsewhere. Jesus' said: My house shall be called the house of prayer, but you have made it a den of thieves. Jesus was pointing out the inappropriate nature of what the money changers were doing in the temple, (not that what they were doing was wrong period). The Bible is filled with examples of people that God had blessed with wealth, meaning that there was nothing wrong with people having it. Abraham, Lot, Jacob, David, Solomon, all were blessed by God with wealth. There were examples of other people who were wealthy that God judged and punished. Please do not try to make an oversimplification here on wealth. To me, that is from my point of view, people should not look at money as simply the difference between the "have's and the have nots"(As you stated, an either / or condition) Look money is fine, but huge disaprities are sure and they are cured by taxes. Look at you, in one breath: "money is fine", and even as you exhale you declare money to be something like a disease that needs a cure for, and well what do you know, you already know what the cure for money is because according to you, it is "cured by taxes." One way to look at it is the Gini INdex. Not again Look at this link, No, I am through with the Gini Index, having discussed it with you before, and having no desire to do so again.and go around to all the countries and see haow it varies http://worldpopulationreview.com/countr ... y-country/ Also, Look at the Happiness Index
[color=#FF0000]The happiness index, sheesh, Hebrews 13:5...";and be content with such things as ye have." (And my next comment is something you would resort to. I never heard of Jesus telling anybody, Move to Finland and be ye happy.) From the Gini index to the Happiness Index, you persist in your Jihad against wealth, as if to declare that lack of money is equal to despair, but you neglect counter examples in life that show that not all people who do not have (Whatever amount you make as the "happiness line") are unhappy. And there are plenty of people who are wealthy who are not happy either.
And I wished I was watching television instead of responding to your post. Television is definitely higher up in my happiness index than responding to posts.
The Liberal Creed: Take all the money you can, from all the people you can, in all the ways that you can, for as long as you can.
Michaels153
 
Posts: 2692
Joined: February 9th, 2011, 3:25 pm

Re: The push to Socialism

Postby leftyg » February 28th, 2020, 1:12 pm

Michaels, the problem is we abandoned pure capitalism long ago. We have Social Security and Medicare. We have public schools and a slight safety net for the unfortunate. In a pure capitalistic system you have none of that. It is dog eat dog and over generations of wealth accumulation, there becomes a ruling elite. What is necessary is at least a stiff tax on inheritances to prevent this because that is not what the Founders of this country wanted; they did not want an aristocracy. Passing wealth, untaxed generation to generation creates an aristocracy even if they do not have the "titles." https://www.salon.com/2015/06/05/robert ... y_partner/

The Bible says that the "Love of money is the root of all evil."And that is the problem. When you love it so much you put it first in your life and make it your god, then that is a problem. There is nothing wrong with wealth, but when we have kids in this country that cannot get enough to eat or clean water to drink or a good school to go to so rich people can pay low taxes and make low taxation a god, then there is a problem. The countries I listed (the Happy countries) have lower Gini Indexes then we do frankly, and they are happier. One of my favorite philosophers of science was a man named Gregory Bateson, and Mr. Bateson said that "no relationship in nature is monotonic" which means more of anything is not necessarily better.

Remember that capitalism is not in the Constitution https://www.alternet.org/2016/05/sorry- ... stitution/ And this country has a vested interest in creating social programs to educate poor children and give them opportunities https://www.vox.com/2019/8/15/20801907/ ... pportunity https://www.epi.org/publication/usa-lag ... -mobility/

The key to making sure that the American dream applies to everyone, and depending on private charity will not work https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/ar ... ty/284552/
We need government to help us prepare for the future. But we also need a vibrant private sector. So I am not going to provide the either or argument that you seek.
leftyg
 
Posts: 5535
Joined: February 10th, 2011, 7:40 pm

Re: The push to Socialism

Postby Michaels153 » March 3rd, 2020, 8:09 pm

Leftyg, you have outdone yourself with this post. The is the worst piece of cow dung you have ever written. I was very tempted to just ignore this.

leftyg wrote:Michaels, the problem is we abandoned pure capitalism long ago. Is this your opinion? Is this someone's conclusion based upon a study? No citation. Tell us Leftyg, when you observe a crime being committed how do you interpret that? We have Social Security and Medicare. We have public schools and a slight safety net for the unfortunate. In a pure capitalistic system you have none of that. Is this your opinion? Is this someone's conclusion based upon a study? Who said public schools is not part of capitalism? It is dog eat dog and over generations of wealth accumulation, This is just a jaded perspective built upon an overused cliche.there becomes a ruling elite. would you care to provide an example. What is necessary is at least a stiff tax on inheritances But the inheritance tax is not fair, nor just, it is just robbery. You, the left have no justification for such a tax. A person purchases something and pays taxes for it at the time of purchase. Property taxes are paid yearly. The person who purchased something with their own money that has already been taxed at the Federal, state, and probably at the city level. And now they can not pass that down to their family unless you steal more money from them. There is a principal here that you want to ignore. You can't say that you just want to place an inheritance tax on the rich, because the rich have paid their taxes too. When you Leftist/Marxist believe that all money belongs to the state, you reject personal property, which THE FOUNDERS DID NOT REJECT!Says you? Says Robert Reich? You are making up a crisis where there is none, and then you are making the cure for the crisis based upon your own bs ideas of inequality, and fairness. to prevent this because that is not what the Founders of this country wanted; they did not want an aristocracy. Just quote what you think the Founders said. The left, the Progressives have always rejected the Founders and have wanted to replace the founders with Marx Passing wealth, Passing wealth to your family, as in last will and testament, is normal and there is nothing objectionable to that. untaxed Untaxed? How is it untaxed?
I just explained how that something is taxed over and over again, which after the first time is not tax, but theft.
generation to generation creates an aristocracy even if they do not have the "titles."
That, is another load of cow dung.
https://www.salon.com/2015/06/05/robert_reich_the_founding_fathers_never_wanted_an_aristocracy_partner/ I did not see a quote by Mr. Reich as to what the founders said. Nor did I read an explanation of how a farmer's family, or anybody's family becomes an aristocracy if they don't pay a stiff inheritance tax.

The Bible says that the "Love of money is the root of all evil." Yes the Bible does say that. So? you don't care about the Bible showing examples of people who were blessed by God with wealth, that did not give it to the government when they died!And that is the problem. When you love it so much you put it first in your life and make it your god, then that is a problem. And how do you prove that people do not love money to the point they make it their
God? Your answer is that you appoint a Leftist panel to decide how much to take away for people they determine to have too much?
There is nothing wrong with wealth,But, here comes the but, their is always a but, -> but when we have kids in this country that cannot get enough to eat or clean water to drink or a good school to go to so rich people can pay low taxes and make low taxation a god, then there is a problem. Just stop with the leftist script. Jesus said the poor you will have with you always (Mark 14:7) And an inheritance tax will not eliminate all the ills you just mentioned. The countries I listed (the Happy countries) have lower Gini Indexes then we do frankly, and they are happier. Good for them, do they have children that cannot get enough to eat, or clean water to drink, or a good school to go to? One of my favorite philosophers of science was a man named Gregory Bateson, Ah yes, another atheist influence in your life, what a surprise. and Mr. Bateson said that "no relationship in nature is monotonic" which means more of anything is not necessarily better.

Remember that capitalism is not in the Constitution https://www.alternet.org/2016/05/sorry- ... stitution/ The lack of the word capitalism does not mean that our constitution does not advocate capitalistic ideals. The fifth amendment talks about no body's property can be taken by the government without proper compensation.
And this Leftyg, is contrary to your desire to impose a stiff inheritance tax on the dead.
And this country has a vested interest in creating social programs to educate poor children and give them opportunities https://www.vox.com/2019/8/15/20801907/ ... pportunity https://www.epi.org/publication/usa-lag ... -mobility/ This country, as a capitalist republic provides for the education of its citizens. Part of the education that this capitalistic country provides is the teaching of equal opportunity for all, which you Leftists do not believe exists nor is it possible. And because you don't believe it, you feel it is your duty to force the masses to accept your solution to provide your equality.

The key to making sure that the American dream applies to everyone, and depending on private charity will not work https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/ar ... ty/284552/
We need government to help us prepare for the future. But we also need a vibrant private sector. So I am not going to provide the either or argument that you seek.
No you wont provide an either / or argument because with you, and with the Left there are no two sides to getting what you seek, there is only adherence to your propositions.
The Liberal Creed: Take all the money you can, from all the people you can, in all the ways that you can, for as long as you can.
Michaels153
 
Posts: 2692
Joined: February 9th, 2011, 3:25 pm

Re: The push to Socialism

Postby leftyg » March 4th, 2020, 1:50 pm

[s]Leftyg, you have outdone yourself with this post. The is the worst piece of cow dung you have ever written. I was very tempted to just ignore this.[/s]

Michaels I prove with evidence that what you write is cow dung; you are so weak in argument, you can only state it. Anybody can say "Einstein was an idiot, but you need to give evidence, and, as usual, you come up way short.

It is a general consensus that we have moved away form pure capitalism. All we have to do is look at Medicare Social Security and public education to realize that simple fact. You no longer have to cite Copernicus when you say that the sun is the center of the solar system; it is general knowledge. Public schools are not part of capitalism. They are funded by government aid and property taxes. That statement you you is utterly idiotic

Over generations, if there is no inheritance tax, huge inequities emerge https://www.theguardian.com/inequality/ ... -says-oecd

You ask for an example of ruling elites, and I have already given the example of the Gini Index. So for the hard headed among us (you) I will give it again https://www1.compareyourcountry.org/inequality

The inheritance tax is extremely fair. You and I do not have to pay it; it is only for huge fortunes. You only pay it if your estate is worth over 11.58 million dollars https://www.investopedia.com/articles/p ... w-much.asp

And your logic in arguing against the estate tax is impeccably bad. First just because you have already paid taxes on income does not mean inheritances should not be taxed. I pay taxes on things I buy, so should all that money be exempt from federal tax?

Besides that is not the problem. The problem is that most of the money of people who make over 11.58 million dollars in their lifetimes grows untaxed in investments and only becomes taxable at death. And the rich have not paid that tax https://www.google.com/search?q=wealth+ ... e&ie=UTF-8 Look at all these loopholes

And you rant, idiotically I might add, with absolutely no source citation. You are a liar bearing a false straw man you right wing coward, afraid of an honest debate. I am very ardently pro personal property; I am just anti-oligarch and anti-fascist. Your naive beliefs about property are a gateway to either extreme. My gateway to communism or socialism would be if I did not believe in private property. The only thing is I do believe in private property. So dispose of your straw man before he burns you.

My belief is that the insane stupidity of the left is encapsulated in the statement that "property is theft." The insane stupidity of the right is encapsulated in the statement "that "taxation is theft." Both are insane extremes.

Stop trying to muddle the argument on the inheritance tax with taxes on farms. Nobody in the last 35 years of searching has ever lost a farm to the estate tax. https://www.google.com/search?q=example ... e&ie=UTF-8 Please Michaels, little source free Michaels.

Little source free Michael, the amount has been determined, and with all of the problems in the world, why are you most interested in what effects the uber rich? Seems like a weak-minded choice of a cause.

This country is not a capitalist republic. Capitalism is not in the Constitution little source free Michaels https://www.alternet.org/2016/05/sorry- ... stitution/
And as usual, little source free Michaels, you come up with no document that supports that we are a capitalist country constitutionally.

Little source free Michaels your entire rant in red was absent source documentation truth or coherent argument. Never insult Gregory Bateson again. He is ten times the thinker Rush Limbaugh and Donald Trump could ever hope to be.

leftyg
 
Posts: 5535
Joined: February 10th, 2011, 7:40 pm

Re: The push to Socialism

Postby Michaels153 » March 4th, 2020, 8:17 pm

It is a general consensus that we have moved away form pure capitalism. No citation given just your bloviatingAll we have to do is look at Medicare Social Security and public education to realize that simple fact. Article 1, Section 8 of the constitution: The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
Medicare and Social Security both fall under -> "...provide for the common Defence and general welfare of the United States. Education falls under providing for the general Welfare of the United States. Article 1, Section 8 specifically states that Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes...to pay the Debts and provide for ...the general welfare of the United States And that would include to lay and collect taxes for our schools.
You no longer have to cite Copernicus when you say that the sun is the center of the solar system; it is general knowledge. Public schools are not part of capitalism. Google capitalism and schools. 1. Schools are central institutions of modern capitalist society....Public education is an important mechanism in creating social consensus because it is based on the idea that school offers "equal opportunities" for all citizens. This idea of education is a strong legitimate force of capitalsim.
MILTON FRIEDMAN’S LEGACY
In 1962, University of Chicago economics professor Milton
Friedman, who would later win the Nobel Prize for Economics,
produced a controversial and influential manifesto on the proper
role of government in a free society titled [color=#FF0000]Capitalism and Freedom.
In a 23-page chapter titled “The Role of Government in
Education, Capitalism and schools” Friedman set out a profound challenge to the status
quo of government funding and operation of K–12 schools, calling
it “an indiscriminate extension of governmental responsibility.”1
[/color]

So the word Capitalism is not in the constitution; and to you that means that this country is not a capitalist country. But as I said, the constitution contains the principles of capitalism. Your suggestion that Medicare, Social Security and public education are evidence that we are not a capitalist country, that the existence of these three is not found in Capitalism.
But from the Google reference it says Schools are central institutions of modern capitalist society
. I showed you in the Constitution where Medicare, and Social Security would fall under providing for the General Welfare of the United States.
And in my previous post I pointed out that the fifth amendment talks about protecting property which goes against your idea of a stiff inheritance tax.
So what did you prove "with evidence"? I will take a wild guess here. You proved that you don't have the consensus that we have moved away from pure capitalism. We have not moved away from capitalism period. (Pure, in any form, whatever, we have not moved away from Capitalism.)What you suggested as evidence of us not being part of capitalism is wrong. The existence of the equivalent of Medicare, or Social Security, or Schools anywhere else in the world that is specifically designated as something other than a capitalistic society, in no way proves that the United States is not a capitalist society, and it does not prove that this country no longer practices capitalism. And since your having a hard time understanding this; the existence of a practice that you identify as being socialistic, does not mean that this country practices Socialism. You want a sports analogy? If a person puts on the uniform of a professional sports team, that does not make them a professional athlete. If I put Lefty Groves uniform on, walked onto the pitcher's mound, that doesn't even make me a professional pitcher.
It is not without reason that we have the idiom: "Don't judge a book by it's cover."

You ask for an example of ruling elites, and I have already given the example of the Gini Index. So for the hard headed among us (you) I will give it again https://www1.compareyourcountry.org/inequality
Hey bonehead, your Gini Index talks about countries. You said what is needed is at least a stiff tax on inheritances, and followed that comment by suggesting what the Founders wanted, and saying they did not want an aristocracy. I asked for an example from you thinking you may say the Kennedy''s or Bertrand Russell's family. I wanted you to explain to all of us how farmers, and everyday common families who pass down their wealth (whatever amount that might be) without your "stiff tax on inheritance" suddenly become members of the aristocracy like the Kennedy's or the Russell's. But you couldn't figure that out, or didn't want to go there.
So now you can explain to us how that those same families that I just mentioned, become the countries in your Gini Index by passing down their wealth down to family members without your "stiff tax on inheritance." ….Well? were waiting...

The inheritance tax is extremely fair. You and I do not have to pay it; it is only for huge fortunes. You only pay it if your estate is worth over 11.58 million dollars. I don't have much, and I think it is wrong for those that do to be penalized for what they have earned over a lifetime https://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/120715/estate-taxes-who-pays-what-and-how-much.asp [color=#FF0000]I know you, as a liberal do not consider principles in your life philosophy. You pretend so much, about fairness. You equate financial inequality as being unfair, but you see nothing wrong with people of skill getting paid for the hard work they put into getting to where they can get paid for their skills. It is okay for X to be paid more, as long as they pay more in taxes. But when someone suggests that the rich pay $1,000.00 for a loaf of bread, and let whoever you deem pay $1.00 for a loaf of bread, you can not see that that is not fair. How much is a gallon of gas? Do we have separate pumps? No. but maybe in your mind we should. Maybe there should be a pump for the rich to pay $1,000.00 per gallon of gas and another pump for S1.00 per gallon of gas. This country went from what we defined as discrimination being morally wrong, to advocating separate but equal.
Is this the liberals latest version of separate by equal?[/color]

And your logic in arguing against the estate tax is impeccably bad. First just because you have already paid taxes on income does not mean inheritances should not be taxed. I pay taxes on things I buy, so should all that money be exempt from federal tax? Maybe it should be exempt. Some states do not have income tax and rely on sales taxes. My question remains, if you have paid for an item, including the taxes on that item, why continue to tax somebody for the same item over and over again? (As in property taxes), And then after all those years of doing just that, come back and say to the dead, you still have not paid "your fair share", we are going to tax you again.

My belief is that the insane stupidity of the left is encapsulated in the statement that "property is theft." The insane stupidity of the right is encapsulated in the statement "that "taxation is theft." Both are insane extremes. - Not bad! Now if you are going to quote Reich fine, but he does not speak for the founders. And if he disagrees with the Founders ideas fine, but have him or you quote the founders first and then state your argument. You just criticized me because you said I do not acknowledge my bias.

[/size][/quote]
The Liberal Creed: Take all the money you can, from all the people you can, in all the ways that you can, for as long as you can.
Michaels153
 
Posts: 2692
Joined: February 9th, 2011, 3:25 pm

Re: The push to Socialism

Postby leftyg » March 5th, 2020, 5:31 pm

Michaels, you made a point with the Fifth Amendment, but government can still take away property with just compensation. Conversely. the Preamble of the Constitution does talk about promoting the public welfare. So both capitalism and socialism seem implied in the Constitution which is what we have. But we are not constitutionally a capitalistic country or a socialistic country. We are in practical terms a country that practices capitalist principles as well as some socialist principles.

It is no different than us being a Christian country constitutionally. We are not a country of any denomination or sect so much as we are a country that guarantees religious freedom for all. This is why Muslim bans are unconstitutional.

You cannot put in the constitution what the framers did not except when a consent of three quarters of the states is reached. Good luck doing that these days.

Please do not call me a bonehead, I won't call you little source Michaels because you did show me that indeed the Constitutions shows some implied capitalism and some implied socialism as if the framers figured we needed a little of both.

Loved the Lefty Grove analogy. Despite his moniker, he was a Republican. He even lived in the county Republican headquarters when his business was swept into the river in his hometown of Lonaconing, Maryland during a flood. But that is a good point. You have to show something. Do that and we are OK.

But, Michaels, answer this: how are you going to stop the emergence of an aristocracy in a free country. If we consider the public welfare, isn't it important to make sure that every child has an equal opportunity at a successful life? It is in the best interest of the country. and if we have to take a portion of the wealth of the rich to guarantee that, then so be it. No family farm or business has ever been lost to my knowledge because of an inheritance tax. Besides, there is no tax on the first 11.58 million dollars. Trump got caught in a pants on fire lie on this by Factcheck https://www.factcheck.org/2017/09/death ... -wont-die/ They write:
In 2015, roughly 2.5 million people died, and just 4,918 people had to pay an estate tax, according to IRS data. That’s about one out of every 500 deaths resulting in any estate tax liability.

The numbers are even smaller for farm operators. Only 639 estates that listed any farm assets had to pay the estate tax (and 122 of them had assets of $20 million or more).

A study published last year and updated in March by the Economic Research Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture estimated that 38,328 farms would become part of estates in 2016, of which only 0.42 percent — 161 estates — would owe any estate tax at all.
https://www.factcheck.org/2017/09/death ... -wont-die/

I as a liberal care about principles and live by them. It sickens me that you are such a true believer in an ideology that is simply cruel and mindlessly stupid. It is certainly OK for people to be paid for their skills, but that is not what we are talking about. We are addressing the inheritance tax. Why should people inherit a vast sum of money when people who actually work for money have to pay a tax on that? You did not address that! And please stop with the hyperbole. The gas pump analogy was stupid.

Relying on sales tax discriminates against people who have the least money. If we do not have property tax, we cannot keep up our communities safe; we cannot have schools; we cannot have jails. Remember Michaels that most wealth sets untaxed in investments. Very few people squirrel away almost 12 million dollars that they saved in the bank in after tax earnings. Most of them grew their wealth in investments, and as long as they kept the money there it was never taxed. That is a reason for the inheritance tax. I can think of no good reason not to have one.

Lets continue this discussion and keep it on point: why shouldn't the rich pay an inheritance or estate tax? Please no detours; stay on topic.
leftyg
 
Posts: 5535
Joined: February 10th, 2011, 7:40 pm

Re: The push to Socialism

Postby Michaels153 » March 6th, 2020, 4:11 am

leftyg wrote:Michaels, you made a point with the Fifth Amendment, Thank you. but government can still take away property with just compensation. Lets not conflate eminent domain with the inheritance or estate tax. Along with the Fifth Amendment, there is the Eighth Amendment, which states "...nor excessive fines be imposed. Now I am not playing legal semantics here, I posit for your consideration the "practical" differentiation between a fine and a tax. The Constitution makes clear that there shall not be financial costs that are a burden to the individual (excessive). Now I would argue that the inheritance tax, is in effect, an excessive tax, that in practical purposes, is equivalent to a fine for dying wealthy.
Now relax, and think this through. I want to share two examples with you followed by a simple question.
https://www.forbes.com/2006/12/04/estate-tax-estee-lauder-irs-ent-law-cx_mf_1204estatetax.html#948b97ac4b93
When Joe Robbie, founder of the Miami Dolphins football team, passed away in 1990, his family had to sell the franchise to pay a reported $47 million in estate taxes. In 2004, when cosmetic magnate Estee Lauder died, her family unloaded some 11 million shares in the company to pay a $55 million tax tab.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kellyphillipserb/2019/12/06/man-loses-home-after-failing-to-pay-841-in-property-taxes/#7f5d5c852a20
$8.41. That was how much 83-year-old Uri Rafaeli, a retired engineer, in Michigan underpaid his property taxes by in 2014. That was all it took for him to lose his house.

Rafaeli bought a 1,500-square-foot Southfield home in 2011. He paid $60,000 for the property, and the deed was recorded by the Oakland County Register of Deeds on January 6, 2012. He put additional money into the home, too, as he intended to use the rental income from the property to fund his retirement.

Rafaeli believed that he was paying his property taxes on time and in full, but in 2012, he received notice that he had underpaid his 2011 tax bill by $496. He paid up in 2013 but made a mistake figuring the interest (interest also accrued while his check was in the mail): He was short by $8.41.

In response, Oakland County seized his property and put it up for sale. The home netted just $24,500 at auction; according to Zillow, the property is now estimated to be worth nearly $130,000. The County kept the overage from the auction: $24,215 in profits, or 8,496% of the actual tax, penalties, and interest due (the debt had grown to $285 with penalties, interest, and fees). It was all legal.

[color=#FF0000]Now consider those three examples. Two cases of inheritance tax, and one case of a tax debt of $8.41 that resulted in the forfeiture of a $60,000. home. All three examples were excessive in my opinion. And what was the benefit to society from these legal actions?

Now my question. Since the inheritance tax was started, do we still have people in need? Yes, of course we do. So the inheritance tax has not accomplished what you implied that it was put in place for. Then why continue it? I am not arguing that "every little bit helps", I am asking this to discuss "fairness".
Joe Robbie's family lost the franchise (a source of income to them). Uri Rafaeli lost his home and what he hoped would be a source of income for his retirement. I don't consider either case to be fair, and however many people were helped with the money taken, these people were hurt by it.
In your statistical library do you have a fairness index. Is their a formula to identify the acceptable collateral damage for taxes obtained by the government?
Beyond the immediate impact of cases such as these are the everyday impact faced by people living their lives.
There are substantial emergencies, and conditions confronted by people of all walks of life. Life is not easy for most people. So when people can accumulate something, and have something that they can pass on to their families when they die, that is a good thing. First it helps a little to insulate their family from harm when facing adverse conditions. Remember Lefty Grove who lost his business in a flood. There are hurricanes, floods, loss of jobs, costs of education, .....People who pass down (their "wealth") to their families help them in case they have to face those challenges or other forms of adversity. Also, family wealth passed down this way, helps to keep these people from needing or applying for governmental help. They are X amount less of a strain to the government, and that allows the government to redirect their resources to others.
I posed several examples in my previous post that highlighted unequal treatment to make a point. We as a society don't approve of price gouging, nor do we believe in discriminatory behavior. Sales taxes are fair because they do not discriminate against anyone. I believe in sales tax, a flat income tax rate, and I believe that you could do the same with property taxes and estate taxes. But an inheritance tax is not fair in my opinion for the reason already stated.
And taxing people by the same percentage is fair. The Bible talks about tithing as the acceptable offering amount to the Lord. It was a tenth of all that a person had [regardless of who that person was or how much that person had] The tithe was uniformed and considered fair. That is a good example for us to follow. We could all give the same percentage of everything we have in taxes. But an inheritance tax does not do that.
[/color]Conversely. the Preamble of the Constitution does talk about promoting the public welfare. So both capitalism and socialism seem implied in the Constitution which is what we have. But we are not constitutionally a capitalistic country or a socialistic country. We are in practical terms a country that practices capitalist principles as well as some socialist principles. I understand how your looking at this, but we should talk more about this at another time. In he past I made a point of arguing that abortion was not a religious argument It was an argument of life and death. And further that laws against killing are not Biblical laws, it is part of the universal laws to protect humanity, because an atheist believes that murder is wrong. The same can be said of money and societies. Some of the things argued about are not attributed to Socialism or Capitalism. Some of these things are just part of universal economics.

It is no different than us being a Christian country constitutionally. We are not a country of any denomination or sect so much as we are a country that guarantees religious freedom for all. This is why Muslim bans are unconstitutional. There was no Muslim ban in this country.

You cannot put in the constitution what the framers did not except when a consent of three quarters of the states is reached. I know what the constitution says about the process of amendments. Now what are you inferring about putting into the constitution what the framers did not?Good luck doing that these days.

Please do not call me a bonehead, okay, fair enough.I won't call you little source Michaels okay, fair enough because you did show me that indeed the Constitutions shows some implied capitalism and some implied socialism as if the framers figured we needed a little of both.

Loved the Lefty Grove analogy. Despite his moniker, he was a Republican. He even lived in the county Republican headquarters when his business was swept into the river in his hometown of Lonaconing, Maryland during a flood. But that is a good point. You have to show something. Do that and we are OK.

But, Michaels, answer this: how are you going to stop the emergence of an aristocracy in a free country. Leftyg, I reject the premise of your position in this. The Kennedy's did not take away the freedom of our country. They were an aristocracy but we did not have reason to fear them or others.If we consider the public welfare, isn't it important to make sure that every child has an equal opportunity at a successful life? I already believe that in this country, everybody, beginning with children has an equal opportunity at a successful life.It is in the best interest of the country. and if we have to take a portion of the wealth of the rich to guarantee that, That is the problem Leftyg, you, I, no one can guarantee that. And since we can not guarantee that, we can not justify the action of taking a portion of the wealth for that purpose. Either redistribute the existing taxes to provide more help to this area, or tax all people by an equal percentage for this purpose. It is not the sole responsibility of the wealthy to see that all children have an equal opportunity at a successful life. There are people called parents who have responsibility in the area.then so be it. No family farm or business has ever been lost to my knowledge because of an inheritance tax. That is why I provided the link about the Robbie familyBesides, there is no tax on the first 11.58 million dollars. The inheritance tax is wrong in my opinion, it is unfair, and because I see it that way, it does not matter where the starting point of this tax is placed at.I as a liberal care about principles and live by them. It sickens me that you are such a true believer in an ideology that is simply cruel and mindlessly stupid. you asked for me to please not call you bonehead, and you said you would not call me little source Michaels. And just a few lines from that you say I believe in an ideology that is simply cruel and mindlessly stupid. There is nothing that I believe in that is cruel, simply or otherwise. There is nothing that I believe in that is cruel. I also have been blessed by God with a good strong mind, and with good intelligence.It is certainly OK for people to be paid for their skills, but that is not what we are talking about. We are addressing the inheritance tax. Why should people inherit a vast sum of money when people who actually work for money have to pay a tax on that? Your going to have to explain this. I do not want to guess at what you tried to say here.You did not address that! And please stop with the hyperbole. The gas pump analogy was stupid. No Leftyg, the gas pump analogy was to remind you that people in our society do not believe in price gouging, But you did not connect that to the inheritance tax, which is gouging the wealth of some. That you did not pick that up was stupid. When you said this: "It is a general consensus that we have moved away form pure capitalism. All we have to do is look at Medicare Social Security and public education to realize that simple fact." When you said: " You no longer have to cite Copernicus when you say that the sun is the center of the solar system; it is general knowledge. Public schools are not part of capitalism." That was stupid. But the gas pump analogy was not stupid, it did not work obviously, because I had overestimated what you could understand

Relying on sales tax discriminates against people who have the least money. Then wouldn't relying on people who have more money to pay on the sales tax be discriminating against people who have more money? If it is wrong to discriminate, then it is wrong to discrimiinate. If we do not have property tax, we cannot keep up our communities safe; we cannot have schools; we cannot have jails. I never said that I was opposed to taxes. Now your jumping from inheritance tax to property tax. That is fine by me, but you said: "We are addressing the inheritance tax."Remember Michaels that most wealth sets untaxed in investments. Very few people squirrel away almost 12 million dollars that they saved in the bank in after tax earnings. Most of them grew their wealth in investments, and as long as they kept the money there it was never taxed. That is a reason for the inheritance tax. I can think of no good reason not to have one. I can think of a good reason not to have one. The definition of theft is to take something that does not belong to you away from somebody.

Lets continue this discussion and keep it on point: why shouldn't the rich pay an inheritance or estate tax? I have given you my reasons why the "rich" as you call them, should not pay an inheritance tax. I have touched upon estate tax as well. Please no detours; stay on topic.
I did stay on topic and my only "detours" were to provide word pictures for you so that you would understand the material.
The Liberal Creed: Take all the money you can, from all the people you can, in all the ways that you can, for as long as you can.
Michaels153
 
Posts: 2692
Joined: February 9th, 2011, 3:25 pm

Re: The push to Socialism

Postby leftyg » March 7th, 2020, 1:31 pm

Michaels, you wrote:
When Joe Robbie, founder of the Miami Dolphins football team, passed away in 1990, his family had to sell the franchise to pay a reported $47 million in estate taxes. In 2004, when cosmetic magnate Estee Lauder died, her family unloaded some 11 million shares in the company to pay a $55 million tax tab.
The problem here Michaels is that the Dolphins are currently worth 2.5 billion dollars. https://www.bizjournals.com/southflorid ... teams.html That they could have had control of that for a mere 47 million dollars shows how shortsighted the family was. And if they had to pay 47 million dollars that means they could have afforded to pay the tax. BTW, the Dolphins were worth 68 million at Robbie's death https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct- ... story.html One of the reasons why we have an inheritance tax is that so often heirs simply are not cut out to carry on the family legacy. The family had a couple hundred million in assets and they felt that holding on to the Football team would cost them. So they sold it for pen money. They were not cut out for business and probably did the right thing for them. . But it cost them 2.432 billion dollars in retrospect. But it did give them the cash to buy a couple nice mansions in the Miami area with cash.

Meanwhile Este Lauder's daughter Jane held on to the stock and paid the 55 million. Right now she is worth 4.3 billion and is one of the wealthiest women in the world according to Bloomberg Billionaire Index https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/ma ... 770647.cms. For her, she wisely understood that 55 million was just pen money to get to the future she envisioned.

BTW, do not conflate this to talking about property tax. You said it yourself: stick to the inheritance tax. People make mistakes and horrible things happen, but that is generally an accident. The rich have lawyers and accountants to protect against that. I totally agree about the injustice done Mr. Rafaeli, but it is not pertinent to this discussion.

To keep this discussion about the inheritance tax you said that. BTW I was not calling you stupid; I was calling an ideology stupid and cruel You wrote that
The inheritance tax is wrong in my opinion, it is unfair, and because I see it that way, it does not matter where the starting point of this tax is placed at.
The problem Michaels is that that is a belief, not an argument. I have shown you a family (The Robbies) who threw away billions to save 47 million. And I shown you another family that paid the price of 55 million (the Lauders) whose living heir, Jane Lauder is worth 4.3 billion dollars. She paid the relative pittance.

And to close and tie some of the ideas together, I want to continue the inheritance tax so that the poor kids I talked about can get adequate care and nutrition to get a good education and become members of a robust society, Taxation of the rich only occurs on money in excess of their needs. The Robbie family would have still been fine if they had paid the 47 million in tax without unloading a valuable family asset. But it served a social good in getting that asset out of the hands of people who lacked vision and were frankly "penny wise and dollar foolish." It served a social good to have them sell the team. conversely the Lauders were smart, and they paid the piper and are billions richer for doing so.

My belief is that nobody at birth is entitled to a lifetime of luxury simply because of the birth canal from which they emerged. My compromise is to let them have their wealth and their millions as long as they pay something for it and say thank you to the world that allowed them their wealth. The taxes they pay may even educate some of the kids that will do the hands on running of their businesses. You rigidity, forces you to see the billion dollars the heir receives in the same light as the ten grand I got from my mother when she passed away. Hint: they are not the same.
leftyg
 
Posts: 5535
Joined: February 10th, 2011, 7:40 pm

Re: The push to Socialism

Postby Michaels153 » March 8th, 2020, 5:59 pm

When Joe Robbie, founder of the Miami Dolphins football team, passed away in 1990, his family had to sell the franchise to pay a reported $47 million in estate taxes[color=#FF0000]Which was paid
The problem here Michaels is that the Dolphins are under different ownership and Joe Robbie died thirty years ago. If at the time of his death, the dolphins were worth 68 million, then the family could only afford to pay their employees for one maybe two years more. (As of two years ago, according to Zippia, there were 350 front office and training staff with the average pay being $63,985.00. Yet the annual revenue was 3.8 million. They had to be supplementing their incomes in other ways. Remember what Art Model said about his having to leave. Whatever business ability the Robie family had, they could not overcome the tax debts and still run the team they had been running for 24 years. I want you to keep in mind that there were hundreds of direct employees and others that the Robbie family was providing an income for.You seem to be very short sighted in this and unfair in your judging of the Robie family.
One of the reasons why we have an inheritance tax is that so often heirs simply are not cut out to carry on the family legacy. [color=#FF0000]citation please.
The family had a couple hundred million in assets i don't tjink that is accurateand they felt that holding on to the Football team would cost them. So they sold it for pen money. They probably did the right thing for them. . i abbreviated what you said here only to point out what i agree with. The Robbie family never made billions off of the Miami franchise. They would probably still be in charge of the franchise if they did.

To keep this discussion about the inheritance tax you said that. BTW I was not calling you stupid; I was calling an ideology stupid and cruel [color=#FF0000]okay thank you for clarifying that.
You wrote that
The inheritance tax is wrong in my opinion, it is unfair, and because I see it that way, it does not matter where the starting point of this tax is placed at.
The problem Michaels is that that is a belief, not an argument. Leftyg, you elaborated on tthe examples that i provided but you did not justfy your position.


And to close and tie some of the ideas together, I want to continue the inheritance tax so that the poor kids I talked about can get adequate care and nutrition to get a good education and become members of a robust society, Taxation of the rich only occurs on money in excess of their needs. The Robbie family would have still been fine if they had paid the 47 million in tax without unloading a valuable family asset. I dont think your assessment of the Robie family is accurate but my position is that unlike a sales tax where a person pays a tax on what he does not own (yet), an inheritance tax is paid on something you own (and have already paid taxes on) Your position is that the inheritance tax is fair because it goes to a good purpose and it does not hurt the people it is taken from. Ideologically you dont believe it is fair to tell a woman what she should do with her body, but if she had a lot of money you believe it is okay to tell her family what to pay (do) with her money.
In both cases your making decions on actions regarding other people. I dont think people have a right to tell families what to do with their money. ]
The Liberal Creed: Take all the money you can, from all the people you can, in all the ways that you can, for as long as you can.
Michaels153
 
Posts: 2692
Joined: February 9th, 2011, 3:25 pm

Re: The push to Socialism

Postby Mrtazeman » March 12th, 2020, 4:32 am

When rightwing propaganda machine talks about capitalism it is not to protect freedom, it is because they are paid to get republicans elected that will increase the economic and political power of corporations and wealthy individuals while reducing that of ordinary Americans and entities which represent them. The closer you can get to pure capitalism the easier that will be...
Real USA
Mrtazeman
 
Posts: 603
Joined: July 18th, 2013, 10:02 am

Re: The push to Socialism

Postby leftyg » March 12th, 2020, 11:25 am

When rightwing propaganda machine talks about capitalism it is not to protect freedom, it is because they are paid to get republicans elected that will increase the economic and political power of corporations and wealthy individuals while reducing that of ordinary Americans and entities which represent them. The closer you can get to pure capitalism the easier that will be...
I wanted to get that out in a bigger font because what you said is very important. That is why I always said that umpires love baseball; referees love basketball and the whole officiating crew loves football. What they do not like is cheating by one team, and that is what you get when one team is in control. You get the Houston Astros sitting out in centerfield stealing signs with binoculars and thinking it is OK. You get cheating that seems always to favor elites
leftyg
 
Posts: 5535
Joined: February 10th, 2011, 7:40 pm

Re: The push to Socialism

Postby Michaels153 » March 12th, 2020, 1:08 pm

The last two posts by Leftyg and Mrtazeman were just commentary (not a single reference). You both stated your opinions, which to me sounds like the liberal echo chamber. If you want to keep your last two posts as just your opinions fine. But if you have anything in the manner of evidence that you could point to as being the basis of your opinion I would like to hear it. Why don't you follow Toulmin's method of argumentation - Leftyg. Why don't you make these statements your claims and then bring out your grounds?
The Liberal Creed: Take all the money you can, from all the people you can, in all the ways that you can, for as long as you can.
Michaels153
 
Posts: 2692
Joined: February 9th, 2011, 3:25 pm

Re: The push to Socialism

Postby Michaels153 » March 12th, 2020, 3:18 pm

Leftyg, you said: "both Capitalism and socialism seem implied in the constitution."
Where is socialism implied in the constitutton?
You also wrote: "as if the framers figured we needed a little of both."
When was the constitution written?
When was Socialism conceptualized?
The Liberal Creed: Take all the money you can, from all the people you can, in all the ways that you can, for as long as you can.
Michaels153
 
Posts: 2692
Joined: February 9th, 2011, 3:25 pm

Re: The push to Socialism

Postby leftyg » March 12th, 2020, 4:01 pm

Leftyg, you said: "both Capitalism and socialism seem implied in the constitution."
Where is socialism implied in the constitutton?
You also wrote: "as if the framers figured we needed a little of both."
When was the constitution written?
When was Socialism conceptualized?
Well, I think the Preamble definitely talks about the public welfare. So I would say there. And that is an opinion, just like your opinion about capitalism.
leftyg
 
Posts: 5535
Joined: February 10th, 2011, 7:40 pm

Re: The push to Socialism

Postby leftyg » March 12th, 2020, 4:07 pm

The last two posts by Leftyg and Mrtazeman were just commentary (not a single reference). You both stated your opinions, which to me sounds like the liberal echo chamber. If you want to keep your last two posts as just your opinions fine. But if you have anything in the manner of evidence that you could point to as being the basis of your opinion I would like to hear it. Why don't you follow Toulmin's method of argumentation - Leftyg. Why don't you make these statements your claims and then bring out your grounds?
My last post in response was one of the best I have done. It is far better than a cut and post of thinking by the likes of Kurt Schlicther and Rush Limbaugh, two of the more dimly lit bulbs in the bunch. I try to stick with empirical evidence. I do follow Toulmin's model, and yes I was giving an opinion.

Remember when you say that tax cuts grow the economy, that is not based on evidence but on noise from the right wing noise machine
leftyg
 
Posts: 5535
Joined: February 10th, 2011, 7:40 pm

Re: The push to Socialism

Postby Michaels153 » March 13th, 2020, 2:22 am

leftyg wrote:
The last two posts by Leftyg and Mrtazeman were just commentary (not a single reference). You both stated your opinions, which to me sounds like the liberal echo chamber. If you want to keep your last two posts as just your opinions fine. But if you have anything in the manner of evidence that you could point to as being the basis of your opinion I would like to hear it. Why don't you follow Toulmin's method of argumentation - Leftyg. Why don't you make these statements your claims and then bring out your grounds?


My last post in response was one of the best I have done. Then you have accepted the gutter as your standard for being the best.
Your last post was not even good. And you still have not accepted you were wrong and just go right back to doubling down on your claim.
It is far better than a cut and post of thinking by the likes of Kurt Schlicther and Rush Limbaugh, two of the more dimly lit bulbs in the bunch. I try to stick with empirical evidence. I do follow Toulmin's model, and yes I was giving an opinion.

I know you were giving your opinion here. Let's try to stick with empirical evidence here. The constitution was written September 17, 1787. Socialism is conceptualized in 1848. In your opinion; "I think the Preamble definitely talks about the public welfare. So I would say there." (that was your answer to this question that I posed to you: "Where is socialism implied in the constitution? And I posed this question to you because you said: " both Capitalism and socialism seem implied in the constitution."
So your answer to that question, is "your opinion", but it is not an opinion based upon a fact. It could not be a fact because there is no part of the Constitution that has a basis (implied or otherwise) in Socialism, because it was written before Socialism was even conceptualized. You said a person is entitled to their own opinion but they are not entitled to their own facts.
So since the "public welfare" referred to in the Constitution could not be Socialism, what else could it be? It could be, that the reference to "public welfare" in the constitution came from the influence of the Christian Bible (which also can not contain references to Socialism for the same reason the Constitution doesn't).
After your answer you said this: " And that is an opinion, just like your opinion about capitalism." I do have opinions about capitalism and I shared some of them already in this thread. But you were the one who brought up the Constitution here and said schools were not found in pure capitalism. I showed you how your statement was "incorrect".


Remember when you say that tax cuts grow the economy, that is not based on evidence but on noise from the right wing noise machine


Tax cuts do grow the economy Leftyg, I have already shown you that with evidence that you continue to ignore. viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3742#p43912 Cities (Akron, Collinwood, Deborah City, Beachwood, and Cleveland) setting up opportunity zones and granting tax abatement's (a tax cut) that results in Building renovations, and or the development of new buildings [growth to the local economy] More income coming into the local economy as a result of these opportunity zones; the hiring of more people to renovate or build the new developments, the added income tax [economic growth to the local economy], the addition of tourists to the area to consume from the new developments - buying products, watching movies, going to the theater, going out to eat at a restaurant, etc. [economic growth through additional sales tax] All of these are examples of growing the economy as a result of tax cuts. And a tax abatement is one form of a tax cut. Merriam-Webster Dictionary: Define tax abatement: an amount by which a tax is reduced.
Google: A tax cut is a reduction in the rate of tax charged by a government. viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3742#p43912Then there are all the example of the same kind of growth as a result of what President Trump's tax reform act where I listed example after example of anecdotal evidence where workers received wage increases, more workers were hired, companies expanded their business, all evidence of growth to the economy as a result of tax cuts.
So tax cuts do grow the economy, that statement is based on evidence, and whatever "noise" from the right wing your referring to is telling you the truth and you should listen to it.
The Liberal Creed: Take all the money you can, from all the people you can, in all the ways that you can, for as long as you can.
Michaels153
 
Posts: 2692
Joined: February 9th, 2011, 3:25 pm

Re: The push to Socialism

Postby leftyg » March 14th, 2020, 3:16 pm

Then you have accepted the gutter as your standard for being the best.
Your last post was not even good. And you still have not accepted you were wrong and just go right back to doubling down on your claim.
Coming from a supporter of Limbaugh and Trump that is funny. You are at the bottom of the gutter because you cannot argue. You believe things you do not have the information to backup. My post was a fine little metaphor. I liked it, and it made sense. People who like to keep order usually love the things they are trying to order. That you cannot see that frankly stuns me. Then you call Trump a great President.

Well they say you judge a man be the enemies he makes, and I am glad to have you as one. If you had thought me smart or my idea witty, I would frankly be insulted.

I know you were giving your opinion here. Let's try to stick with empirical evidence here. The constitution was written September 17, 1787. Socialism is conceptualized in 1848
. No socialism was conceptualized much earlier. Probably indistant antiquity. That aside, Thomas More wrote Utopia 1516, and that book was pattered after Plato's Republic that was written in the 4th century BC.

The arguments between systems that advantage the individual and those that advantage the group are very, very old. As a matter of fact, they are in the Bible.

Michaels, you are going to have to learn that lots of what you think is fact is mere opinion. Study hermeneutics. Look when somebody says that they can absolutely tell you what the text of anything means, they are full of it. They are also dangerous. Remember our conversation about 1619. Your problem then, as now, is that you have a very fragile and rigid view of reality that does not allow for other ideas. I would love to have an honest conversation with you, but you turn it into a personal attack or some attack on my ignorance or logic. Your definition of reason is reasons like me,and that is unfortunate

I am sorry Michaels, I stand by what I said before that the Preamble makes a strong case for a measure of socialism in our society (as do current events with the Corona virus). The problem is that neither pure capitalism nor pure socialism seem to work. But the Constitution does not endorse capitalism or socialism.. The Constitutional allows for a level of ownership, but it also allows for the general welfare. No place in it is either system endorsed.

Tax cuts grow the economy? Prove it. Most evidence says they create deficits. Yes, if tax cuts were limited to the poor and the working class and new business start ups, but we have gotten into so much trouble giving them to millionaires. But across the board tax cuts to the rich result in deficits https://www.crn.com/slide-shows/managed ... c-policies. We know that Reagan
s tax cuts resulted in deficits, that Bush's tax cuts resulted in deficits. We know that the recent Trump tax cuts resulted in share buybacks and very little hiring https://money.cnn.com/2018/07/10/invest ... index.html https://www.forbes.com/sites/annemariek ... 97e76337fb There is little evidence that giving rich people more money does anything other than make the rich richer.
leftyg
 
Posts: 5535
Joined: February 10th, 2011, 7:40 pm

Re: The push to Socialism

Postby Michaels153 » March 14th, 2020, 4:15 pm

Tax cuts do grow the economy. I proved it. My 3/13/20 post here provided links showing it worked. Move on. Next.
The Liberal Creed: Take all the money you can, from all the people you can, in all the ways that you can, for as long as you can.
Michaels153
 
Posts: 2692
Joined: February 9th, 2011, 3:25 pm

Re: The push to Socialism

Postby leftyg » March 15th, 2020, 8:13 pm

Tax cuts do grow the economy. I proved it. My 3/13/20 post here provided links showing it worked. Move on. Next.


Get the post yourself. It is not my job to do that. Post the link or the evidence. I posted mine. The recent tax cuts did not https://markets.businessinsider.com/new ... 1028780773 https://www.forbes.com/sites/christianw ... 7e66b158c1

I will be elaborating on it later. got a watch the debate
leftyg
 
Posts: 5535
Joined: February 10th, 2011, 7:40 pm

Re: The push to Socialism

Postby Michaels153 » March 16th, 2020, 11:50 am

Remember when you say that tax cuts grow the economy, that is not based on evidence but on noise from the right wing noise machine
Here is the link Leftyg, that you didn't see, and were too lazy to go to

Tax cuts do grow the economy Leftyg, I have already shown you that with evidence that you continue to ignore. viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3742#p43912 Cities (Akron, Collinwood, Deborah City, Beachwood, and Cleveland) setting up opportunity zones and granting tax abatement's (a tax cut) that results in Building renovations, and or the development of new buildings [growth to the local economy] More income coming into the local economy as a result of these opportunity zones; the hiring of more people to renovate or build the new developments, the added income tax [economic growth to the local economy], the addition of tourists to the area to consume from the new developments - buying products, watching movies, going to the theater, going out to eat at a restaurant, etc. [economic growth through additional sales tax] All of these are examples of growing the economy as a result of tax cuts. And a tax abatement is one form of a tax cut. Merriam-Webster Dictionary: Define tax abatement: an amount by which a tax is reduced.

Here is the link again Leftyg, that you didn't see, and were too lazy to go to.
Google: A tax cut is a reduction in the rate of tax charged by a government. viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3742#p43912 Then there are all the example of the same kind of growth as a result of what President Trump's tax reform act where I listed example after example of anecdotal evidence where workers received wage increases, more workers were hired, companies expanded their business, all evidence of growth to the economy as a result of tax cuts.
So tax cuts do grow the economy, that statement is based on evidence, and whatever "noise" from the right wing your referring to is telling you the truth and you should listen to it.


Here is where the Link goes to Leftyg. Take a look at the date when I posted this. January 10, 2018! You responded right after this.

Merriam-Webster Dictionary: Define tax abatement: an amount by which a tax is reduced.
Google: A tax cut is a reduction in the rate of tax charged by a government.

http://www.cleveland.com/akron/index.ss ... city-.html
Akron prepares to launch city-wide residential tax abatement this summer
Updated Apr 10, 2017; Posted Apr 10, 2017
By Jennifer Conn
AKRON, Ohio - Akron is poised to launch a city-wide residential tax abatement, a move expected to increase home values and draw new residents to the city by enhancing neighborhoods.[[ ...
With Akron City Council and state approval, the city-wide tax abatement will exempt 100-percent of the added property value on new home construction and on significant home renovations for 15 years. ...
On the success of similar initiatives by Cleveland and other Ohio cities, Akron recently commissioned several studies that looked closely at different aspects of Akron's neighborhoods to learn if such a move would be beneficial here.

The centerpiece of that research is the Planning to Grow Akron report released in February, in which the city-wide tax abatement was the top recommendation.

According to the report, among the benefits new housing and renovated homes would bring is a stronger tax base, which would support city services, boost revenues that would attract new businesses and, in turn, generate jobs.



http://www.crainscleveland.com/article/ ... renovation
Collinwood group seeks Cleveland tax abatement for theatre renovation
By Jay Miller
...
CODE: SELECT ALL
The project is expected to create the equivalent of 25 full-time jobs.


https://decorahnewspapers.com/Content/H ... 2/-2/41571
Success of tax abatement program raising eyebrows
By Sarah Strandberg, News Editor
The Decorah City Council voted unanimously last week to renew the city’s residential tax abatement program.
The three-year tax abatement program, implemented in November of 2014, expires Dec. 31, 2017, but the Council reviews whether to continue it annually.
“The program was intended to increase affordable housing,” City Manager Chad Bird commented.
He said he’s aware of residents who used the abatement program to “build up,” making their former homes of lesser value available to buyers who have either been renting or living outside the community.
“Those are clear examples of what you’re trying to effect – affordable housing,” he said.
In 2016, 20 new homes totaling $7.5 million were built, up from $3.9 million in 2015, and 11 homes were improved for a total of $1.4 million, compared to $408,000 the year before. Before the tax abatement program was initiated, the city was averaging about four new homes a year.
Council member Randy Schissel commented the program has spurred development and helped rehabilitate older neighborhoods. Council member Kirk Johnson said at a recent housing meeting at Northeast Iowa Community College, the results of Decorah’s residential abatement program “raised some eyebrows.”
“It’s pretty apparent it seems to be working,” Johnson said.
The tax abatement program provides residents a five-year, 100-percent property tax abatement for new residential construction and remodeling, and commercial residential properties (apartments) anywhere within city limits.


http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf ... posit.html
Ohio tax chief reverses position, says Cleveland Clinic facilities in Beachwood and Cleveland should be exempt from property taxes.
By Jackie Borchardt.


[quote Leftyg]Can you cite studies that show that corporations hire more people when there are tax cuts? [/quote]
[color=#FF0000] Study this genius:[/color]

Example:
CEO Sergio Marchionne said in a statement that these announcements reflect the company's ongoing commitment to manufacturing in the U.S. He also cited the recently signed tax bill as an opportunity to share the savings with Fiat Chrysler employees.
The automaker said it will invest more than $1 billion in a Michigan plant and relocate production of its Ram Heavy Duty truck in 2020. That model is currently being produced in Saltillo, Mexico.
Fiat Chrysler said this decision would create about 2,500 jobs in addition to the ones that have been previously announced.
The company said it will also pay 60,000 of its U.S. employees bonuses of $2,000 each. Fiat Chrysler said these bonuses would not include senior leadership.

Example:
EXXON Mobil to invest $50 billion in US over 5 years, citing tax reform..... :lol: :lol: :lol:
Exxon in March said it would spend $20 billion to construct chemical, refining, lubricant and liquefied natural gas facilities along the coast. The company said at the time it aimed to create 12,000 permanent jobs on the back of the investment.


Grounds, - report:
Economy Hits a High Note, and Trump Takes a Bow
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/27/busi ... y-gdp.html
By Ben Casselman
July 27, 2018

Tax cuts and federal spending are adding fuel to the already strong economy, putting the United States on a pace for its best year of growth in well over a decade. Did you catch that Leftyg, this journalist from the New York Times reports that Tax cuts and, not Federal spending only. He said tax cuts and federal spending were adding fuel to the already strong economy, putting the United States on pace for its best year of GROWTHin well over a decade. He did not cite a specific corporation, which incidentally would only qualify as anecdotal to you. He looked at all the DATA, and then reported his findings.
The Commerce Department reported Friday that gross domestic product, the broadest measure of goods and services produced in the economy, grew at a 4.1 percent rate in the second quarter of the year.


https://www.johnlocke.org/update/how-do-tax-cuts-spur-economic-growth/
JOHN LOCKE UPDATE / RESEARCH BRIEF
How Do Tax Cuts Spur Economic Growth?
by Dr. Roy Cordato
posted on September 17, 2019 in Fiscal Insight, Spending & Taxes

It is widely believed, with plenty of evidence to support the hypothesis, that tax cuts spur economic growth

Read the Research Brief to understand this...."all did what their advocates said the tax cuts would do:
they increased economic growth rates and secondarily enhanced goverment revenues.


Toulmin's Method of Argumentation.

Claim: Tax cuts grow the economy

Grounds: Provided; Decorah City Council /Iowa., Collinwood, Ohio, Fiat Chrysler, Exxon Mobil

Backing: John Locke research Brief.

Warrant: Economic growth is identified by growth in the GDP, and measured by factors leading to the growth and distribution of products, including Human resources. Economic output can be increased through robotics and by workers. Generally, when demands for products increase, more workers are needed to produce and distribute the products. The increase of workers and wages in a company is normally seen as a sign of company success and growth. Therefore, if tax cuts lead to increased wages, increased hiring, company expansion, then it is evidence of economic growth at any level - local (city), state, and country (federal) The grounds and backing support the claim and comprise the warrant of this argument.

Qualifier: Because "historical" records of tax cuts may not have shown "tax cuts" to grow the economy it is not proof nor evidence that tax cuts can not grow the economy. Evidence then of tax cuts that cause economic growth should be accepted as proof that tax cuts can and do result in economic growth regardless of the size or the frequency of the growth.

Rebuttal: Some times there are questions as to the cause of economic growth. Because two companies making the same product with each having different numbers of employed, the argument could be made that increase in productivity may be identified as due to robotics, or due to the employed workers. Perhaps one company has more investment capital at its disposal than the other causing a company with less capital to rely on workers, while the other company can employ more robotics in their company. It is for reasons like this, where reasons for economic output may be questioned, that the answer given by company representatives are better sources than outside speculations.

The Claim that tax cuts grow the economy has been made and shown to be true.
Last edited by Michaels153 on March 16th, 2020, 4:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The Liberal Creed: Take all the money you can, from all the people you can, in all the ways that you can, for as long as you can.
Michaels153
 
Posts: 2692
Joined: February 9th, 2011, 3:25 pm

Re: The push to Socialism

Postby leftyg » March 16th, 2020, 1:08 pm

Michaels, this is a remarkably worthless quote dump from the right wing echo chamber. I give you empirical evidence; you give me projections from right wing pundits who assume far too much. The empirical evidence does not show it. Mark Zandi showed that food stamps and infrastructure development are much better stuimuli to the economy than are tax cuts to corporations. You are right about one thing. Tax cuts to help small business grow. but tax cuts to rich individuals are a waste of effort.
Bangforthebuck.png
Bangforthebuck.png (134.75 KiB) Viewed 64 times


And Jared Bernstein shows that it was tax cuts to the rich by Republican administrations that grew our deficit. Now you have seen this, but it is still valid
US-national-debt-GDP-graph.png
US-national-debt-GDP-graph.png (20.61 KiB) Viewed 64 times


Now this is hard empirical evidence. You may not like it. Nothing you put up showed an outcome because it did not address the issue of demand, and it was not a study. What you had was predictive theories that have never held up.

We need to stop shouting and stick to evidence; predictions are not evidence
leftyg
 
Posts: 5535
Joined: February 10th, 2011, 7:40 pm

Re: The push to Socialism

Postby Michaels153 » March 16th, 2020, 4:06 pm

leftyg wrote:Michaels, this is a remarkably worthless quote dump from the right wing echo chamber. I give you empirical evidence; you give me projections from right wing pundits who assume far too much. The empirical evidence does not show it. Mark Zandi showed that food stamps and infrastructure development are much better stuimuli to the economy than are tax cuts to corporations. You are right about one thing. Tax cuts to help small business grow. but tax cuts to rich individuals are a waste of effort.
Bangforthebuck.png


And Jared Bernstein shows that it was tax cuts to the rich by Republican administrations that grew our deficit. Now you have seen this, but it is still valid
US-national-debt-GDP-graph.png


Now this is hard empirical evidence. You may not like it. Nothing you put up showed an outcome because it did not address the issue of demand, and it was not a study. What you had was predictive theories that have never held up.

We need to stop shouting and stick to evidence; predictions are not evidence
The Liberal Creed: Take all the money you can, from all the people you can, in all the ways that you can, for as long as you can.
Michaels153
 
Posts: 2692
Joined: February 9th, 2011, 3:25 pm

Re: The push to Socialism

Postby leftyg » March 16th, 2020, 10:37 pm

You have clearly abdicated reason. You reject empirical evidence and accept the Mad Hatter rantings of far right pundits who merely say things and never prove any of it with evidence,just with hollow claims. I gave you hard empirical data
leftyg
 
Posts: 5535
Joined: February 10th, 2011, 7:40 pm

Re: The push to Socialism

Postby Michaels153 » March 17th, 2020, 12:21 pm

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/02/confronting_leftist_lies_.html
Confronting Leftist Lies
By Lloyd Marcus

Leftists who hate America as founded dominate fake news media, Hollywood, public education, and social media. Their mission is to bring America down from her status as the world power. This is why leftists are so repulsed by Trump's desire to make America great again. Leftists hate the free market and seek to replace it with socialism; a big brother government controlling every aspect of our lives.

Leftists are liberals. Most people think "liberal" means having a live and let live attitude. The reality is that liberals are super aggressive, using government to force their ungodly agenda items down the throats of the masses. This why Obama hates our Constitution -- because it restricts government from dictating how we behave. Obama dissed our Constitution with these words: "a charter of negative liberties. It says what the states can't do to you. Says what the federal government can't do to you but doesn't say what the federal government or state government must do on your behalf."

Obama's rant against our Constitution is typical leftist arrogance. They believe their superior intellect should grant them the authority to dictate how we peons should live.

Leftists are also obsessed with poking their finger in the eye of the God of Christianity; transforming America into an anything goes sexually society (bestiality, pedophilia, incest, and etc.). Leftists hate the God of Christianity because He requires moral standards of behavior.

John Adams said, "Our Constitution was made only for moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." The American left is in a relentless pursuit to strip America of an remnant of her moral and religious roots and heritage.

There is more to this article and I encourage you to read it.

Read more: https://www.americanthinker.com/article ... z6Gxow9Hau
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook
The Liberal Creed: Take all the money you can, from all the people you can, in all the ways that you can, for as long as you can.
Michaels153
 
Posts: 2692
Joined: February 9th, 2011, 3:25 pm

Re: The push to Socialism

Postby leftyg » March 17th, 2020, 4:38 pm

Michaels, what is the pint of the last post. People on my side of the political divide do not hate America, at least I don't. and would you learn the difference between social democracy and communism. I am beginning to think that maybe you are a fascist. What are you a conservative or a fascist. You know there is a difference. It sounds like a quick way for you to dismiss people that you do not agree with and dismiss their ideas. You sound as demented as Dennis Prager.

And please enough of Lloyd Marcus. for Go's sake stop cutting and posting the drivel of idiots like that. First of all "a negative liberty" is like the ten commandments that are negative laws that tell you what you cannot do so that in doing they make all other things available to you.

Liberals do not poke the eye of God; they simply say that no religious group can impose its values on America. That is a great idea. If you want religious freedom then all religions have to have voice, and none gets to impost their particular values.

And Marcus does quote John Adams, but misunderstands his words. You cannot be a true Christian and back stand your ground laws and dismiss the killing of young black men or anybody else. God frowns on people who lack compassion.

Stop pasting right wing drivel and address me directly.
leftyg
 
Posts: 5535
Joined: February 10th, 2011, 7:40 pm

Re: The push to Socialism

Postby leftyg » March 17th, 2020, 4:42 pm

I did not want to take a post you wrote, Michaels down. But you put up an irrelevant post over on the Bob Frantz cite. I did not want you to think that I am censoring your ideas. All I want to do is put it in the right spot. And this thread (your thread) seemed more appropriate.


Remember when you say that tax cuts grow the economy, that is not based on evidence but on noise from the right wing noise machine
Here is the link Leftyg, that you didn't see, and were too lazy to go to

Tax cuts do grow the economy Leftyg, I have already shown you that with evidence that you continue to ignore. viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3742#p43912 Cities (Akron, Collinwood, Deborah City, Beachwood, and Cleveland) setting up opportunity zones and granting tax abatement's (a tax cut) that results in Building renovations, and or the development of new buildings [growth to the local economy] More income coming into the local economy as a result of these opportunity zones; the hiring of more people to renovate or build the new developments, the added income tax [economic growth to the local economy], the addition of tourists to the area to consume from the new developments - buying products, watching movies, going to the theater, going out to eat at a restaurant, etc. [economic growth through additional sales tax] All of these are examples of growing the economy as a result of tax cuts. And a tax abatement is one form of a tax cut. Merriam-Webster Dictionary: Define tax abatement: an amount by which a tax is reduced.

Here is the link again Leftyg, that you didn't see, and were too lazy to go to.
Google: A tax cut is a reduction in the rate of tax charged by a government. viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3742#p43912 Then there are all the example of the same kind of growth as a result of what President Trump's tax reform act where I listed example after example of anecdotal evidence where workers received wage increases, more workers were hired, companies expanded their business, all evidence of growth to the economy as a result of tax cuts.
So tax cuts do grow the economy, that statement is based on evidence, and whatever "noise" from the right wing your referring to is telling you the truth and you should listen to it.


Here is where the Link goes to Leftyg. Take a look at the date when I posted this. January 10, 2018! You responded right after this.

Merriam-Webster Dictionary: Define tax abatement: an amount by which a tax is reduced.
Google: A tax cut is a reduction in the rate of tax charged by a government.

http://www.cleveland.com/akron/index.ss ... city-.html
Akron prepares to launch city-wide residential tax abatement this summer
Updated Apr 10, 2017; Posted Apr 10, 2017
By Jennifer Conn
AKRON, Ohio - Akron is poised to launch a city-wide residential tax abatement, a move expected to increase home values and draw new residents to the city by enhancing neighborhoods.[[ ...
With Akron City Council and state approval, the city-wide tax abatement will exempt 100-percent of the added property value on new home construction and on significant home renovations for 15 years. ...
On the success of similar initiatives by Cleveland and other Ohio cities, Akron recently commissioned several studies that looked closely at different aspects of Akron's neighborhoods to learn if such a move would be beneficial here.

The centerpiece of that research is the Planning to Grow Akron report released in February, in which the city-wide tax abatement was the top recommendation.

According to the report, among the benefits new housing and renovated homes would bring is a stronger tax base, which would support city services, boost revenues that would attract new businesses and, in turn, generate jobs.



http://www.crainscleveland.com/article/ ... renovation
Collinwood group seeks Cleveland tax abatement for theatre renovation
By Jay Miller
...
CODE: SELECT ALL
The project is expected to create the equivalent of 25 full-time jobs.


https://decorahnewspapers.com/Content/H ... 2/-2/41571
Success of tax abatement program raising eyebrows
By Sarah Strandberg, News Editor
The Decorah City Council voted unanimously last week to renew the city’s residential tax abatement program.
The three-year tax abatement program, implemented in November of 2014, expires Dec. 31, 2017, but the Council reviews whether to continue it annually.
“The program was intended to increase affordable housing,” City Manager Chad Bird commented.
He said he’s aware of residents who used the abatement program to “build up,” making their former homes of lesser value available to buyers who have either been renting or living outside the community.
“Those are clear examples of what you’re trying to effect – affordable housing,” he said.
In 2016, 20 new homes totaling $7.5 million were built, up from $3.9 million in 2015, and 11 homes were improved for a total of $1.4 million, compared to $408,000 the year before. Before the tax abatement program was initiated, the city was averaging about four new homes a year.
Council member Randy Schissel commented the program has spurred development and helped rehabilitate older neighborhoods. Council member Kirk Johnson said at a recent housing meeting at Northeast Iowa Community College, the results of Decorah’s residential abatement program “raised some eyebrows.”
“It’s pretty apparent it seems to be working,” Johnson said.
The tax abatement program provides residents a five-year, 100-percent property tax abatement for new residential construction and remodeling, and commercial residential properties (apartments) anywhere within city limits.


http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf ... posit.html
Ohio tax chief reverses position, says Cleveland Clinic facilities in Beachwood and Cleveland should be exempt from property taxes.
By Jackie Borchardt.


Can you cite studies that show that corporations hire more people when there are tax cuts?

Study this genius:

Example:
CEO Sergio Marchionne said in a statement that these announcements reflect the company's ongoing commitment to manufacturing in the U.S. He also cited the recently signed tax bill as an opportunity to share the savings with Fiat Chrysler employees.
The automaker said it will invest more than $1 billion in a Michigan plant and relocate production of its Ram Heavy Duty truck in 2020. That model is currently being produced in Saltillo, Mexico.
Fiat Chrysler said this decision would create about 2,500 jobs in addition to the ones that have been previously announced.
The company said it will also pay 60,000 of its U.S. employees bonuses of $2,000 each. Fiat Chrysler said these bonuses would not include senior leadership.

Example:
EXXON Mobil to invest $50 billion in US over 5 years, citing tax reform..... :lol: :lol: :lol:
Exxon in March said it would spend $20 billion to construct chemical, refining, lubricant and liquefied natural gas facilities along the coast. The company said at the time it aimed to create 12,000 permanent jobs on the back of the investment.


Grounds, - report:
Economy Hits a High Note, and Trump Takes a Bow
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/27/busi ... y-gdp.html
By Ben Casselman
July 27, 2018

Tax cuts and federal spending are adding fuel to the already strong economy, putting the United States on a pace for its best year of growth in well over a decade. Did you catch that Leftyg, this journalist from the New York Times reports that Tax cuts and, not Federal spending only. He said tax cuts and federal spending were adding fuel to the already strong economy, putting the United States on pace for its best year of GROWTHin well over a decade. He did not cite a specific corporation, which incidentally would only qualify as anecdotal to you. He looked at all the DATA, and then reported his findings.
The Commerce Department reported Friday that gross domestic product, the broadest measure of goods and services produced in the economy, grew at a 4.1 percent rate in the second quarter of the year.


https://www.johnlocke.org/update/how-do ... ic-growth/
JOHN LOCKE UPDATE / RESEARCH BRIEF
How Do Tax Cuts Spur Economic Growth?
by Dr. Roy Cordato
posted on September 17, 2019 in Fiscal Insight, Spending & Taxes

It is widely believed, with plenty of evidence to support the hypothesis, that tax cuts spur economic growth

Read the Research Brief to understand this...."all did what their advocates said the tax cuts would do:
they increased economic growth rates and secondarily enhanced goverment revenues.

Toulmin's Method of Argumentation.

Claim: Tax cuts grow the economy

Grounds: Provided; Decorah City Council /Iowa., Collinwood, Ohio, Fiat Chrysler, Exxon Mobil

Backing: John Locke research Brief.

Warrant: Economic growth is identified by growth in the GDP, and measured by factors leading to the growth and distribution of products, including Human resources. Economic output can be increased through robotics and by workers. Generally, when demands for products increase, more workers are needed to produce and distribute the products. The increase of workers and wages in a company is normally seen as a sign of company success and growth. Therefore, if tax cuts lead to increased wages, increased hiring, company expansion, then it is evidence of economic growth at any level - local (city), state, and country (federal) The grounds and backing support the claim and comprise the warrant of this argument.

Qualifier: Because "historical" records of tax cuts may not have shown "tax cuts" to grow the economy it is not proof nor evidence that tax cuts can not grow the economy. Evidence then of tax cuts that cause economic growth should be accepted as proof that tax cuts can and do result in economic growth regardless of the size or the frequency of the growth.

Rebuttal: Some times there are questions as to the cause of economic growth. Because two companies making the same product with each having different numbers of employed, the argument could be made that increase in productivity may be identified as due to robotics, or due to the employed workers. Perhaps one company has more investment capital at its disposal than the other causing a company with less capital to rely on workers, while the other company can employ more robotics in their company. It is for reasons like this, where reasons for economic output may be questioned, that the answer given by company representatives are better sources than outside speculations.

The Claim that tax cuts grow the economy has been made and shown to be true.
Last edited by Michaels153 on March 16th, 2020, 3:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
[/quote]The Liberal Creed: Take all the money you can, from all the people you can, in all the ways that you can, for as long as you can.
leftyg
 
Posts: 5535
Joined: February 10th, 2011, 7:40 pm

Re: The push to Socialism

Postby leftyg » March 17th, 2020, 5:28 pm

The Atlantic writes that the tax cuts did not work https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archi ... ed/601153/ They said that Trup promised a 6 % growth from them and instead got about 2% which is not any better than what Obama was getting. And the studies I put up by Zandi and Bernstein were also disconfirming of the idea. Most of the benefits of tax cuts accrue to poor and middle income people, More money to the rich and or corporations does little bkut initiate stock buy backs and executive bonuses

Understand Michaels, what you wet your pants in glee over are the promises made by ppoliticians, and that sort of thing has no weight.

The Atlantic article went on to say that Trump achieved something that never happened before: he created a one trillion dollar deficit in a time of full employment. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archi ... ed/601153/

And Forbes agrees with a headline that states that The 2017 Tax Cuts Didn't Work, The Data Prove It.https://www.forbes.com/sites/christianw ... bdd54658c1
The article begins with this paragraph:
The independent, non-partisan Congressional Research Service just released a report showing that the 2017 tax cuts for the richest Americans and corporations did not work. This confirms what anybody who has been looking at the data already knew. Investment did not boom and workers will not see the promised bump in pay . Instead, the federal government incurred massive deficits while wealth inequality increased to its highest level in three decades.

Again these are nonpartisan scientists who who simply looked at the data and did not cherry pick anything. And as always business gave Americans promises that they did not keep. The money was put in stock buy backs and bonuses that hae resulted in the biggest income inequalities since the Depression https://fortune.com/2019/02/13/us-incom ... epression/
leftyg
 
Posts: 5535
Joined: February 10th, 2011, 7:40 pm

Re: The push to Socialism

Postby Michaels153 » March 18th, 2020, 6:56 am

https://townhall.com/columnists/walterewilliams/2020/03/18/socialisms-past-n2565057
Socialism's Past
By Walter E. Williams
Senator Bernie Sanders' call for socialism has resonated among many Americans, particularly young Americans. They've fallen prey to the idea of a paradise here on Earth where things are free and there's little want. But socialists never reveal what turns out to be their true agenda. Let's look at the kind of statements they used to gain power. You'll note that all of their slogans before gaining power bore little relation to the facts after they had power.....

Stalin's campaign didn't mention that he would enact policies that would lead to the slaughter of 62 million people in the Soviet Union between 1917 to 1987. Mao Zedong didn't mention that his People's Republic of China would engage in brutal acts that would lead to the loss of 76 million lives at the hands of the government from 1949 to 1987. The late Professor Rudolph J. Rummel of the University of Hawaii documented this tragedy in his book "Death by Government: Genocide and Mass Murder Since 1900."

Because socialism is a fight against basic human nature, it requires brute force in the attempt to reach its goals. The best warning about socialism comes from Aesop, who said, "Those who voluntarily put power into the hands of a tyrant ... must not wonder if it be at last turned against themselves." We shouldn't ignore Martin Luther King Jr.'s warning, "Never forget that everything Hitler did in Germany was legal."
The Liberal Creed: Take all the money you can, from all the people you can, in all the ways that you can, for as long as you can.
Michaels153
 
Posts: 2692
Joined: February 9th, 2011, 3:25 pm

Re: The push to Socialism

Postby Mrtazeman » March 18th, 2020, 9:38 am

So, Trump is discussing giving every American $1000 to close to every citizen. This is a Socialist concept. Looks like Trump is blowing holes through this concept that "Pure Capitalism" economics can work. If republicans actually believed in their economic philosophy, they would want big corporations and the very wealthy to receive this money, because that has been their philosophy for every given economic situation. A pure capitalist such as some people on this website should want the government to do nothing and let the chips fall where they fall..
Real USA
Mrtazeman
 
Posts: 603
Joined: July 18th, 2013, 10:02 am

Re: The push to Socialism

Postby Michaels153 » March 18th, 2020, 11:08 am

Mrtazeman wrote:So, Trump is discussing giving every American $1000 to close to every citizen. This is a Socialist concept. Looks like Trump is blowing holes through this concept that "Pure Capitalism" economics can work. If republicans actually believed in their economic philosophy, they would want big corporations and the very wealthy to receive this money, because that has been their philosophy for every given economic situation. A pure capitalist such as some people on this website should want the government to do nothing and let the chips fall where they fall..


Helping people is a Christian concept. I did not raise the topic of Pure Capitalism. Your description of what Republicans would want is flawed and fallacious. You may be confused about economic and political philosophies: Capitalism, Socialism, Republican, Libertarian.
The Liberal Creed: Take all the money you can, from all the people you can, in all the ways that you can, for as long as you can.
Michaels153
 
Posts: 2692
Joined: February 9th, 2011, 3:25 pm

Re: The push to Socialism

Postby leftyg » March 18th, 2020, 2:30 pm

Helping people is a Christian concept. I did not raise the topic of Pure Capitalism. Your description of what Republicans would want is flawed and fallacious. You may be confused about economic and political philosophies: Capitalism, Socialism, Republican, Libertarian.
Michaels people who live in glass houses should keep their mouths shut. Yesterday you wrote this little ditty:
Leftists who hate America as founded dominate fake news media, Hollywood, public education, and social media. Their mission is to bring America down from her status as the world power. This is why leftists are so repulsed by Trump's desire to make America great again. Leftists hate the free market and seek to replace it with socialism; a big brother government controlling every aspect of our lives.
Now Lloyd Marcus is a dip, but you authorized his stuoidity.
leftyg
 
Posts: 5535
Joined: February 10th, 2011, 7:40 pm

Re: The push to Socialism

Postby Michaels153 » March 19th, 2020, 10:37 am

Re: The push to Socialism
Post by leftyg » March 17th, 2020, 3:42 pm

I did not want to take a post you wrote, Michaels down. But you put up an irrelevant post over on the Bob Frantz cite. I did not want you to think that I am censoring your ideas. All I want to do is put it in the right spot. And this thread (your thread) seemed more appropriate. So now your going to take down your March 13th, 2018 post in my Billy Graham thread?
The Liberal Creed: Take all the money you can, from all the people you can, in all the ways that you can, for as long as you can.
Michaels153
 
Posts: 2692
Joined: February 9th, 2011, 3:25 pm

Re: The push to Socialism

Postby leftyg » March 20th, 2020, 11:49 am

I did not want to take a post you wrote, Michaels down. But you put up an irrelevant post over on the Bob Frantz cite. I did not want you to think that I am censoring your ideas. All I want to do is put it in the right spot. And this thread (your thread) seemed more appropriate. So now your going to take down your March 13th, 2018 post in my Billy Graham thread?
The post you put there was irrelient beacause it was not about Bob Frantz or anything he said. I did find a perfect place to put it, so I put it there. If I did not have a place to put it where it was not inline with the argument. I would have left it alone. I will never censor your ideas, but I will move them to where they do the most good

My posts over at the Frantz thread always involve things Frantz has said. Sometimes he says things about Trump. If he said what you said it would have stayed also. Listen, I never put up irrelevant stuff about Frantz. He is our areas far right extremist, and for that I think he is dangerous and has to be exposed.

As to Billy Graham, I will go back and look at the post.
leftyg
 
Posts: 5535
Joined: February 10th, 2011, 7:40 pm

Re: The push to Socialism

Postby leftyg » March 20th, 2020, 11:54 am

Michaels, I looked, and you were right. I do not know how it got there, but it did. So I moved it here to show you were right and deleted it over there. Thanks for the correction.

growth in spendin hc.png
growth in spendin hc.png (79.87 KiB) Viewed 35 times
leftyg
 
Posts: 5535
Joined: February 10th, 2011, 7:40 pm

Re: The push to Socialism

Postby Michaels153 » March 20th, 2020, 12:31 pm

Leftyg,
Fair enough. Thank you.
The Liberal Creed: Take all the money you can, from all the people you can, in all the ways that you can, for as long as you can.
Michaels153
 
Posts: 2692
Joined: February 9th, 2011, 3:25 pm

Re: The push to Socialism

Postby Mrtazeman » March 21st, 2020, 10:41 am

Helping people is a Christian concept

Its also a socialist concept
Real USA
Mrtazeman
 
Posts: 603
Joined: July 18th, 2013, 10:02 am

Re: The push to Socialism

Postby leftyg » March 21st, 2020, 1:41 pm

What astounds me is the far right's effort to reduce Christianity to something else besides the practice of love for your fellow humans among other things. This is one of my pet peeves with these people. They show their love by supporting the death penalty , preemptive war, stand your ground killings the whole bit. I remember not long ago that Bob Frantz exposed a priest for espousing a gospel that looked like Matthew the fifth and sixth chapters. It is kindly called liberation theology. But all it is is really practicing Christianity the way Jesus did in his ministry on earth with alms for the poor and compassion and forgiveness for all. But Frantz and his buddy, some old right wing bigot who tries to fit Christianity into the square peg hole that is the Christianity they believe in. In Effect, they are actively trying to take the Gospel and the Sermon on the Mount out of Christianity and replace it with a sterner more loveless version where only aborted fetuses are grieved and others are thrown to the curve.
leftyg
 
Posts: 5535
Joined: February 10th, 2011, 7:40 pm

Re: The push to Socialism

Postby Michaels153 » March 22nd, 2020, 12:37 pm

Without a personal relationship with The Lord Jesus Christ there can be no understanding of Christianity. Having accepted Jesus Christ as your Lord and saviour is the first step, the beginning. There is no acceptance of Jesus minus this or that. And there is no acceptance of Jesus Christ with this or that. Liberation theology is a blending of some things that Jesus said and taught (but not all things that he said and taught) with Marxism.
Liberation theology is not Christian theology. Bob Frantz should be thanked for exposing the fraud. You should stop hindering people from finding Jesus Christ by lying to them and telling them that they can do things other than what the Lord Jesus Christ said they should do.
The Liberal Creed: Take all the money you can, from all the people you can, in all the ways that you can, for as long as you can.
Michaels153
 
Posts: 2692
Joined: February 9th, 2011, 3:25 pm

Re: The push to Socialism

Postby leftyg » March 22nd, 2020, 5:34 pm

I think you are right about how people should not criticize others walk with Christ if there is no "understanding of Christianity. For example what I want to know is how can a person be a Christian and support racism and organizations like the Klu Klux Klan. Kee p it simple Michaels, a yes or no will do.

But it is hard for me to be short winded on this subject because I think that father Koesel's bonafides as a Christian far exceed those of Bob Frantz who burns with haterd. You see you cannot be a racist and a Christian; you cannot support standing your ground and killing young black people and be a Christian. Gore Vidal called such people Christers, and they are an abomination.
leftyg
 
Posts: 5535
Joined: February 10th, 2011, 7:40 pm

Re: The push to Socialism

Postby Michaels153 » March 24th, 2020, 1:34 am

No.
The same holds true for abortion where Catholics have been denied communion and threatened with excommunication.
The Liberal Creed: Take all the money you can, from all the people you can, in all the ways that you can, for as long as you can.
Michaels153
 
Posts: 2692
Joined: February 9th, 2011, 3:25 pm

Re: The push to Socialism

Postby Michaels153 » March 27th, 2020, 9:47 am

Hey Mrtazeman.
How about you sharing with us when helping others in this country is a Christian act, or when it is a Socialist act?
The Liberal Creed: Take all the money you can, from all the people you can, in all the ways that you can, for as long as you can.
Michaels153
 
Posts: 2692
Joined: February 9th, 2011, 3:25 pm


Return to Politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests