Reagan insider: 'GOP destroyed U.S. economy'

And we would all be worse for ware, and deserving of the consequences. How exactly does the working class NOT benefit from tax cuts, btw?
The Bush taxcuts don't help them and add billions to the deficit. That does not help them. Deficits matter. The working class is not seeing their wages improve because the top 3% of the population got a tax cut. Rich people are holding on to their money as tightly as anyone.
 
The Bush taxcuts don't help them and add billions to the deficit. That does not help them. Deficits matter. The working class is not seeing their wages improve because the top 3% of the population got a tax cut. Rich people are holding on to their money as tightly as anyone.

Would the working class be better off if we raised its taxes?
 
Last edited:
The Bush taxcuts don't help them and add billions to the deficit. That does not help them. Deficits matter. The working class is not seeing their wages improve because the top 3% of the population got a tax cut. Rich people are holding on to their money as tightly as anyone.

The "working class" is not seeing their wages improve because they are fortunate to still have a JOB! We are currently at a real UE rate of about 25%, and there is absolutely NOTHING on the horizon to lead us to believe this is going away anytime soon. We just continue to extend unemployment and welfare, and spending more money on more shit we can't afford.

Now... get unemployment down to around 4%, and suddenly, you have a completely different dynamic. The "working class" then becomes in greater demand, and can leverage employers to pay them more to keep them. If the employer doesn't want to pay more, there are ample jobs out there and others who will pay more, and one way or another, the "working class" improves their income. As it currently stands, the "working class" might actually be forced to take a CUT in pay, just to keep their job!

Rich people are holding on to their money, because they are uncertain about the future, what mandates and fees are going to be imposed on them next, with this anti-capitalist administration. They aren't hiring new people, because it isn't going to be profitable for them to do so, once they have to pay all the mandated costs associated with new employees.

I laugh at the stupidity of Dummycrats who seem to think, raising taxes on the rich is going to somehow teach them a lesson or punish them for success, and return that money to the people who need it most. The reality is, rich people do not have to earn a taxable income! They are set for life, have everything they will ever need, have their kids futures taken care of, and there is absolutely no need for them to make another dime. Raising their taxes has the negative effect of making even more of them retire and move to the Caribbean, taking their wealth completely out of the game.

You can go back and look at this, I have... Every time we have ever reduced the top marginal tax rates, revenues from taxes increased in the following years. The reason? Because lowering taxes on "the rich" enables them to invest and spend, expand and grow, create new jobs and more business, and of course, more profit to be taxed.
 
The "working class" is not seeing their wages improve because they are fortunate to still have a JOB! We are currently at a real UE rate of about 25%, and there is absolutely NOTHING on the horizon to lead us to believe this is going away anytime soon. We just continue to extend unemployment and welfare, and spending more money on more shit we can't afford.

Now... get unemployment down to around 4%, and suddenly, you have a completely different dynamic. The "working class" then becomes in greater demand, and can leverage employers to pay them more to keep them. If the employer doesn't want to pay more, there are ample jobs out there and others who will pay more, and one way or another, the "working class" improves their income. As it currently stands, the "working class" might actually be forced to take a CUT in pay, just to keep their job!

Rich people are holding on to their money, because they are uncertain about the future, what mandates and fees are going to be imposed on them next, with this anti-capitalist administration. They aren't hiring new people, because it isn't going to be profitable for them to do so, once they have to pay all the mandated costs associated with new employees.

I laugh at the stupidity of Dummycrats who seem to think, raising taxes on the rich is going to somehow teach them a lesson or punish them for success, and return that money to the people who need it most. The reality is, rich people do not have to earn a taxable income! They are set for life, have everything they will ever need, have their kids futures taken care of, and there is absolutely no need for them to make another dime. Raising their taxes has the negative effect of making even more of them retire and move to the Caribbean, taking their wealth completely out of the game.

You can go back and look at this, I have... Every time we have ever reduced the top marginal tax rates, revenues from taxes increased in the following years. The reason? Because lowering taxes on "the rich" enables them to invest and spend, expand and grow, create new jobs and more business, and of course, more profit to be taxed.

Some folks just don't get it.

To start with unemployment is not a problem. It is a good sign. Try and follow the logic here.

Before the industrial revolution everybody had to work in order to survive. That's why, for example, there were a lot of farmers back then. One farmer could not supply the food necessary for, say, 20 people. He could only dig so much ground and plant so many seeds by hand.

If someone wanted a house the vast majority of people built it themselves because their neighbor was building their own house. People had to work in order to produce enough things in order to live.

As machines and new technologies came available more was produced by less effort. One farmer could grow enough of a vegetable or fruit for 100 people. Factories turned logs into boards to build houses. People didn't have to saw the logs. In short, jobs disappeared and that was good.

So, new ideas and products came on the market. The focus shifted from producing things necessary to survive to producing things for amusement or further simplification. The TV remote was certainly not a necessity but it was developed and sold by people who required those with money to trade their money for the items. The dynamics shifted. The shift resulted in some people producing items in order to survive (sell an item and buy groceries) and others simply looking for things to spend their money on.

As a glut of items entered the market through mass production some people bought cars and TVs and refrigerators and stoves until they didn't require anymore. They had all they needed and they still had money. Even many of the middle class today have those things and they do not require immediately replacing so what does a person who doesn't have money have to sell to the guy who does?

The point is not everyone has to work. That was and is the goal of technological advancement. Why should we insist a citizen of a first world nation, a nation that has abundant food and can build houses in factories and deliver them to a site, a nation that has an abundance of all life's necessities, why should we require a citizen of that country to work at the most menial tasks just so they are able to eat?

We don't lack natural resources. We don't lack factories and the energy necessary to build things. There is no shortage of cars or stoves. If there were shortages people would be building them and selling them.

We are looking at a good thing and calling it a crisis. We have reached the point where everyone does not have to work. That was the goal 200 years ago. We're finally seeing the rewards. The problem is how do we deal with it?

One thing is certain. Having people suffer and do without life's basic necessities is not the way.
 
Some folks just don't get it.

To start with unemployment is not a problem. It is a good sign. Try and follow the logic here.

Before the industrial revolution everybody had to work in order to survive. That's why, for example, there were a lot of farmers back then. One farmer could not supply the food necessary for, say, 20 people. He could only dig so much ground and plant so many seeds by hand.

If someone wanted a house the vast majority of people built it themselves because their neighbor was building their own house. People had to work in order to produce enough things in order to live.

As machines and new technologies came available more was produced by less effort. One farmer could grow enough of a vegetable or fruit for 100 people. Factories turned logs into boards to build houses. People didn't have to saw the logs. In short, jobs disappeared and that was good.

So, new ideas and products came on the market. The focus shifted from producing things necessary to survive to producing things for amusement or further simplification. The TV remote was certainly not a necessity but it was developed and sold by people who required those with money to trade their money for the items. The dynamics shifted. The shift resulted in some people producing items in order to survive (sell an item and buy groceries) and others simply looking for things to spend their money on.

As a glut of items entered the market through mass production some people bought cars and TVs and refrigerators and stoves until they didn't require anymore. They had all they needed and they still had money. Even many of the middle class today have those things and they do not require immediately replacing so what does a person who doesn't have money have to sell to the guy who does?

The point is not everyone has to work. That was and is the goal of technological advancement. Why should we insist a citizen of a first world nation, a nation that has abundant food and can build houses in factories and deliver them to a site, a nation that has an abundance of all life's necessities, why should we require a citizen of that country to work at the most menial tasks just so they are able to eat?

We don't lack natural resources. We don't lack factories and the energy necessary to build things. There is no shortage of cars or stoves. If there were shortages people would be building them and selling them.

We are looking at a good thing and calling it a crisis. We have reached the point where everyone does not have to work. That was the goal 200 years ago. We're finally seeing the rewards. The problem is how do we deal with it?

One thing is certain. Having people suffer and do without life's basic necessities is not the way.

No I don't follow you that unemployment is a good thing. I'm technically unemployed and it sucks. Please tell me how it's great.
 
Last edited:
Holy shit, I watched Being There on TV only last week. I hadn't seen it for ages and I had forgotten how fucking amazing it is, it's nice to know that other people appreciate it as well.

Being There (1979)
I loved that movie. I consider it, along with Catch-22, the best high comedies ever made. I'll never ever forget the scene with Shirley McClain.....I like to watch! LOL

It was certainly Peter Sellers crowning achievement. He should have won the acadamy award. It was a brilliant performance.
 
No I don't follow you that unemployment is a good thing. I'm technically unemployed and it sucks. Please tell me how it's great.


Bummer, that sucks, man.

This is OT....and I don’t know if this is applicable in any way to you, but if anyone is stuck in a rut of unemployment due to a shitty economy, IMO a good strategy to ride out the storm is to enroll in school, work on a degree or get some classes under your belt....and either get training for a different career or make yourself unstoppable with the skills you already have.

The upside of this strategy is that potential employers who interview you won’t freak out as much when they hear about the length of an extended unemployment spell – you’re totally covered! You can say you were in school. Secondly, and perhaps most importantly, is that being is school is an outstanding way to meet hella awesome chicks! :clink: (j/k)
 
Bummer, that sucks, man.

This is OT....and I don’t know if this is applicable in any way to you, but if anyone is stuck in a rut of unemployment due to a shitty economy, IMO a good strategy to ride out the storm is to enroll in school, work on a degree or get some classes under your belt....and either get training for a different career or make yourself unstoppable with the skills you already have.

The upside of this strategy is that potential employers who interview you won’t freak out as much when they hear about the length of an extended unemployment spell – you’re totally covered! You can say you were in school. Secondly, and perhaps most importantly, is that being is school is an outstanding way to meet hella awesome chicks! :clink: (j/k)

It's cool, thanks man. I've been doing some side work for people while still looking for a corporate job. Actually right up your alley I just a took a class at UC Berkeley Extension in Sustainable Building. I can't say it's my greatest passion but especially in San Francisco there is move towards that in real estate so got to update the skills.

And actually in class the teacher was asking everyone why they were taking the class. Everyone gave legit but stuffy answers. I of course told the teacher I thought being considered 'green' in San Francisco would get me more dates. :)
 
It's cool, thanks man. I've been doing some side work for people while still looking for a corporate job. Actually right up your alley I just a took a class at UC Berkeley Extension in Sustainable Building. I can't say it's my greatest passion but especially in San Francisco there is move towards that in real estate so got to update the skills.

And actually in class the teacher was asking everyone why they were taking the class. Everyone gave legit but stuffy answers. I of course told the teacher I thought being considered 'green' in San Francisco would get me more dates. :)

Nicely played! You gotta admire the dude who has his priorities right. Good luck with the awesome enviro-chicks!
 
Nobody Cares

Is the brainwashing that powerful?
The fact that this thread isn't 30 pgs long by now speaks volumes.
We all know Trickle Down Economics destroyed the economy and the RP but we're more concerned about silly shit. Hiding our head in the sand and denying our guilt is the order of the day and yes, I'm a Republican. We don't deserve to hold office again.
 
There are ways for democracy and capitalism to thrive together. But not in the U.S.

German Economy Leaping Forward as Americans Fall Behind

The official figures are showing that the German economy has leaped forward by 2.2% in the three months to the end of June, its fastest quarterly growth in more than 20 years. The German national statistics office said, "Such quarter-on-quarter growth has never been recorded before in reunified Germany." The higher-than-expected growth was due to strong exports, helped by a weaker euro. The eurozone economy grew by 1% during the quarter. Another big factor in the continuing growth of the German economy is that during the Great Recession German workers never saw layoffs or significant reductions in pay. This is because all German corporations are required to have a board of directors comprised 50% of workers, and that during the financial crisis the German government filled in the pay gaps of workers working fewer hours. Thus demand never dropped in the German economy, because workers always had a good paycheck, and so their economy continues to be robust."
http://www.thomhartmann.com/
 
Germany Gets It...Why Can't We?

It's the workers that produce America's wealth. Forgetting that is a crime that will result in serfdom for us all.
 
There are a few wingnuts here that will disagree with you. They believe that investing our money in Communist China is a good thing for American workers and our economy. What they mean is it's good for corporate profits and to hell with the American people. What means more to the right? America, or the profits their corporate masters get from Chinese slave labor? They have proven over and over that they are on the side of Communist China and now the people of this country are starting to realize this.
 
Everybody Wants To Be Rich

There are a few wingnuts here that will disagree with you. They believe that investing our money in Communist China is a good thing for American workers and our economy. What they mean is it's good for corporate profits and to hell with the American people. What means more to the right? America, or the profits their corporate masters get from Chinese slave labor? They have proven over and over that they are on the side of Communist China and now the people of this country are starting to realize this.

Most do disagree with me. I've been speaking out against the Dark Force that has grabbed control of the party since Nixon. We haven't had a Republican president since IKE.

China will soon own more of America than you. The Conservatives claim to fear a Commie takeover yet they are the ones who destroyed our economy...not the Commies!
 
The "working class" is not seeing their wages improve because they are fortunate to still have a JOB! We are currently at a real UE rate of about 25%, and there is absolutely NOTHING on the horizon to lead us to believe this is going away anytime soon. We just continue to extend unemployment and welfare, and spending more money on more shit we can't afford.

Now... get unemployment down to around 4%, and suddenly, you have a completely different dynamic. The "working class" then becomes in greater demand, and can leverage employers to pay them more to keep them. If the employer doesn't want to pay more, there are ample jobs out there and others who will pay more, and one way or another, the "working class" improves their income. As it currently stands, the "working class" might actually be forced to take a CUT in pay, just to keep their job!

Rich people are holding on to their money, because they are uncertain about the future, what mandates and fees are going to be imposed on them next, with this anti-capitalist administration. They aren't hiring new people, because it isn't going to be profitable for them to do so, once they have to pay all the mandated costs associated with new employees.

I laugh at the stupidity of Dummycrats who seem to think, raising taxes on the rich is going to somehow teach them a lesson or punish them for success, and return that money to the people who need it most. The reality is, rich people do not have to earn a taxable income! They are set for life, have everything they will ever need, have their kids futures taken care of, and there is absolutely no need for them to make another dime. Raising their taxes has the negative effect of making even more of them retire and move to the Caribbean, taking their wealth completely out of the game.

You can go back and look at this, I have... Every time we have ever reduced the top marginal tax rates, revenues from taxes increased in the following years. The reason? Because lowering taxes on "the rich" enables them to invest and spend, expand and grow, create new jobs and more business, and of course, more profit to be taxed.
Not extending the bush tax cuts only raises the tax rate 3%. Extending INCREASES the deficit. I thought you were against that? This SHOULD be a time of austerity. When the boat is sinking EVERYONE swims. I agree, we should not be extending unemployment and increasing welfare healthcare at this time, but EVERYONE should feel the pinch.
 
Back
Top