Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Tax rate on richest 400 lower than every other group
Comments
-
I didn't say it needs to increase the size of the economy as a blanket statement as you are dumbfuck. However, if you are trying to balance the budget, or even come close. You can't have revenue increasing slower than the economy while having expenditures grow with the economy. And basically no politicians willing to cut expenditures.MikeDamone said:2001400ex said:
Revenue is down relative to the size of the economy. Idiot.MikeDamone said:
Since revenue is up it seems like all that’s left to do is cut spending. Why won’t they?2001400ex said:
I agree with most of this. Although to reduce the deficit it has to be both revenues and expenditures. Like you said, but in a different way. No politician is actually going to cut spending. Even tho Americans hate the wasteful spending, they all want their money still. Yes even the wealthy want the money spent their way too.PurpleThrobber said:Da fuq difference does it make what anyone pays in taxes?!?
The debt ceiling is apparently unlimited and annual deficits have no meaning.
Until the endless wars and re-fucking-diculous spending ends, this who pays more argument is exactly what the two parties want as the shiny object to stay in power.
Wake up, sheeple.
And yes we need to cut spending but neither party will. For reasons I've stated many times. Even in the post you quoted. You really are struggling today.
Explain, in your words why revenue needs to increase to the size of the economy. Dumb fuck.2001400ex said:
Revenue is down relative to the size of the economy. Idiot.MikeDamone said:
Since revenue is up it seems like all that’s left to do is cut spending. Why won’t they?2001400ex said:
I agree with most of this. Although to reduce the deficit it has to be both revenues and expenditures. Like you said, but in a different way. No politician is actually going to cut spending. Even tho Americans hate the wasteful spending, they all want their money still. Yes even the wealthy want the money spent their way too.PurpleThrobber said:Da fuq difference does it make what anyone pays in taxes?!?
The debt ceiling is apparently unlimited and annual deficits have no meaning.
Until the endless wars and re-fucking-diculous spending ends, this who pays more argument is exactly what the two parties want as the shiny object to stay in power.
Wake up, sheeple.
And yes we need to cut spending but neither party will. For reasons I've stated many times. Even in the post you quoted. You really are struggling today.
That's basic math Mike. I thought you might be smarter than that but apparently not.
I should go back and pull up the posts on December 2017 of you shitdicks arguing ad nauseum that cutting taxes would reduce the deficit. -
It is not the government’s inherent right or purpose to increase taxes at the rate of economic growth.2001400ex said:
I didn't say it needs to increase the size of the economy as a blanket statement as you are dumbfuck. However, if you are trying to balance the budget, or even come close. You can't have revenue increasing slower than the economy while having expenditures grow with the economy. And basically no politicians willing to cut expenditures.MikeDamone said:2001400ex said:
Revenue is down relative to the size of the economy. Idiot.MikeDamone said:
Since revenue is up it seems like all that’s left to do is cut spending. Why won’t they?2001400ex said:
I agree with most of this. Although to reduce the deficit it has to be both revenues and expenditures. Like you said, but in a different way. No politician is actually going to cut spending. Even tho Americans hate the wasteful spending, they all want their money still. Yes even the wealthy want the money spent their way too.PurpleThrobber said:Da fuq difference does it make what anyone pays in taxes?!?
The debt ceiling is apparently unlimited and annual deficits have no meaning.
Until the endless wars and re-fucking-diculous spending ends, this who pays more argument is exactly what the two parties want as the shiny object to stay in power.
Wake up, sheeple.
And yes we need to cut spending but neither party will. For reasons I've stated many times. Even in the post you quoted. You really are struggling today.
Explain, in your words why revenue needs to increase to the size of the economy. Dumb fuck.2001400ex said:
Revenue is down relative to the size of the economy. Idiot.MikeDamone said:
Since revenue is up it seems like all that’s left to do is cut spending. Why won’t they?2001400ex said:
I agree with most of this. Although to reduce the deficit it has to be both revenues and expenditures. Like you said, but in a different way. No politician is actually going to cut spending. Even tho Americans hate the wasteful spending, they all want their money still. Yes even the wealthy want the money spent their way too.PurpleThrobber said:Da fuq difference does it make what anyone pays in taxes?!?
The debt ceiling is apparently unlimited and annual deficits have no meaning.
Until the endless wars and re-fucking-diculous spending ends, this who pays more argument is exactly what the two parties want as the shiny object to stay in power.
Wake up, sheeple.
And yes we need to cut spending but neither party will. For reasons I've stated many times. Even in the post you quoted. You really are struggling today.
That's basic math Mike. I thought you might be smarter than that but apparently not.
I should go back and pull up the posts on December 2017 of you shitdicks arguing ad nauseum that cutting taxes would reduce the deficit.
-
That's a completely different discussion than the one we are having. In the context of balancing the budget or reducing the deficit. Revenues have to increase at least as fast as, or faster than, the economy. Look at the 90s for instance. It's not a coincidence than there was a tax increase, spending cuts, and great growth that led to a balanced budget.PurpleThrobber said:
It is not the government’s inherent right or purpose to increase taxes at the rate of economic growth.2001400ex said:
I didn't say it needs to increase the size of the economy as a blanket statement as you are dumbfuck. However, if you are trying to balance the budget, or even come close. You can't have revenue increasing slower than the economy while having expenditures grow with the economy. And basically no politicians willing to cut expenditures.MikeDamone said:2001400ex said:
Revenue is down relative to the size of the economy. Idiot.MikeDamone said:
Since revenue is up it seems like all that’s left to do is cut spending. Why won’t they?2001400ex said:
I agree with most of this. Although to reduce the deficit it has to be both revenues and expenditures. Like you said, but in a different way. No politician is actually going to cut spending. Even tho Americans hate the wasteful spending, they all want their money still. Yes even the wealthy want the money spent their way too.PurpleThrobber said:Da fuq difference does it make what anyone pays in taxes?!?
The debt ceiling is apparently unlimited and annual deficits have no meaning.
Until the endless wars and re-fucking-diculous spending ends, this who pays more argument is exactly what the two parties want as the shiny object to stay in power.
Wake up, sheeple.
And yes we need to cut spending but neither party will. For reasons I've stated many times. Even in the post you quoted. You really are struggling today.
Explain, in your words why revenue needs to increase to the size of the economy. Dumb fuck.2001400ex said:
Revenue is down relative to the size of the economy. Idiot.MikeDamone said:
Since revenue is up it seems like all that’s left to do is cut spending. Why won’t they?2001400ex said:
I agree with most of this. Although to reduce the deficit it has to be both revenues and expenditures. Like you said, but in a different way. No politician is actually going to cut spending. Even tho Americans hate the wasteful spending, they all want their money still. Yes even the wealthy want the money spent their way too.PurpleThrobber said:Da fuq difference does it make what anyone pays in taxes?!?
The debt ceiling is apparently unlimited and annual deficits have no meaning.
Until the endless wars and re-fucking-diculous spending ends, this who pays more argument is exactly what the two parties want as the shiny object to stay in power.
Wake up, sheeple.
And yes we need to cut spending but neither party will. For reasons I've stated many times. Even in the post you quoted. You really are struggling today.
That's basic math Mike. I thought you might be smarter than that but apparently not.
I should go back and pull up the posts on December 2017 of you shitdicks arguing ad nauseum that cutting taxes would reduce the deficit. -
I challenge you to find a post where I said tax cuts would cut the deficit. It possible I said they may increase revenue, so I was right there.2001400ex said:
I didn't say it needs to increase the size of the economy as a blanket statement as you are dumbfuck. However, if you are trying to balance the budget, or even come close. You can't have revenue increasing slower than the economy while having expenditures grow with the economy. And basically no politicians willing to cut expenditures.MikeDamone said:2001400ex said:
Revenue is down relative to the size of the economy. Idiot.MikeDamone said:
Since revenue is up it seems like all that’s left to do is cut spending. Why won’t they?2001400ex said:
I agree with most of this. Although to reduce the deficit it has to be both revenues and expenditures. Like you said, but in a different way. No politician is actually going to cut spending. Even tho Americans hate the wasteful spending, they all want their money still. Yes even the wealthy want the money spent their way too.PurpleThrobber said:Da fuq difference does it make what anyone pays in taxes?!?
The debt ceiling is apparently unlimited and annual deficits have no meaning.
Until the endless wars and re-fucking-diculous spending ends, this who pays more argument is exactly what the two parties want as the shiny object to stay in power.
Wake up, sheeple.
And yes we need to cut spending but neither party will. For reasons I've stated many times. Even in the post you quoted. You really are struggling today.
Explain, in your words why revenue needs to increase to the size of the economy. Dumb fuck.2001400ex said:
Revenue is down relative to the size of the economy. Idiot.MikeDamone said:
Since revenue is up it seems like all that’s left to do is cut spending. Why won’t they?2001400ex said:
I agree with most of this. Although to reduce the deficit it has to be both revenues and expenditures. Like you said, but in a different way. No politician is actually going to cut spending. Even tho Americans hate the wasteful spending, they all want their money still. Yes even the wealthy want the money spent their way too.PurpleThrobber said:Da fuq difference does it make what anyone pays in taxes?!?
The debt ceiling is apparently unlimited and annual deficits have no meaning.
Until the endless wars and re-fucking-diculous spending ends, this who pays more argument is exactly what the two parties want as the shiny object to stay in power.
Wake up, sheeple.
And yes we need to cut spending but neither party will. For reasons I've stated many times. Even in the post you quoted. You really are struggling today.
That's basic math Mike. I thought you might be smarter than that but apparently not.
I should go back and pull up the posts on December 2017 of you shitdicks arguing ad nauseum that cutting taxes would reduce the deficit.
You seem to think Congress is trying to balance the budget. What a fucking idiot.
Hondo falls for the common myth in Econ that all else will remain equal. If taxes are raised, all other variables are unchanged, therefore fthe only outcome is more revenue. -
And a pretty sweet bubble that popped at the end.2001400ex said:
That's a completely different discussion than the one we are having. In the context of balancing the budget or reducing the deficit. Revenues have to increase at least as fast as, or faster than, the economy. Look at the 90s for instance. It's not a coincidence than there was a tax increase, spending cuts, and great growth that led to a balanced budget.PurpleThrobber said:
It is not the government’s inherent right or purpose to increase taxes at the rate of economic growth.2001400ex said:
I didn't say it needs to increase the size of the economy as a blanket statement as you are dumbfuck. However, if you are trying to balance the budget, or even come close. You can't have revenue increasing slower than the economy while having expenditures grow with the economy. And basically no politicians willing to cut expenditures.MikeDamone said:2001400ex said:
Revenue is down relative to the size of the economy. Idiot.MikeDamone said:
Since revenue is up it seems like all that’s left to do is cut spending. Why won’t they?2001400ex said:
I agree with most of this. Although to reduce the deficit it has to be both revenues and expenditures. Like you said, but in a different way. No politician is actually going to cut spending. Even tho Americans hate the wasteful spending, they all want their money still. Yes even the wealthy want the money spent their way too.PurpleThrobber said:Da fuq difference does it make what anyone pays in taxes?!?
The debt ceiling is apparently unlimited and annual deficits have no meaning.
Until the endless wars and re-fucking-diculous spending ends, this who pays more argument is exactly what the two parties want as the shiny object to stay in power.
Wake up, sheeple.
And yes we need to cut spending but neither party will. For reasons I've stated many times. Even in the post you quoted. You really are struggling today.
Explain, in your words why revenue needs to increase to the size of the economy. Dumb fuck.2001400ex said:
Revenue is down relative to the size of the economy. Idiot.MikeDamone said:
Since revenue is up it seems like all that’s left to do is cut spending. Why won’t they?2001400ex said:
I agree with most of this. Although to reduce the deficit it has to be both revenues and expenditures. Like you said, but in a different way. No politician is actually going to cut spending. Even tho Americans hate the wasteful spending, they all want their money still. Yes even the wealthy want the money spent their way too.PurpleThrobber said:Da fuq difference does it make what anyone pays in taxes?!?
The debt ceiling is apparently unlimited and annual deficits have no meaning.
Until the endless wars and re-fucking-diculous spending ends, this who pays more argument is exactly what the two parties want as the shiny object to stay in power.
Wake up, sheeple.
And yes we need to cut spending but neither party will. For reasons I've stated many times. Even in the post you quoted. You really are struggling today.
That's basic math Mike. I thought you might be smarter than that but apparently not.
I should go back and pull up the posts on December 2017 of you shitdicks arguing ad nauseum that cutting taxes would reduce the deficit. -
No. No they don’t. Govt Revenue does NOT have to keep pace with ‘the economy’2001400ex said:
That's a completely different discussion than the one we are having. In the context of balancing the budget or reducing the deficit. Revenues have to increase at least as fast as, or faster than, the economy. Look at the 90s for instance. It's not a coincidence than there was a tax increase, spending cuts, and great growth that led to a balanced budget.PurpleThrobber said:
It is not the government’s inherent right or purpose to increase taxes at the rate of economic growth.2001400ex said:
I didn't say it needs to increase the size of the economy as a blanket statement as you are dumbfuck. However, if you are trying to balance the budget, or even come close. You can't have revenue increasing slower than the economy while having expenditures grow with the economy. And basically no politicians willing to cut expenditures.MikeDamone said:2001400ex said:
Revenue is down relative to the size of the economy. Idiot.MikeDamone said:
Since revenue is up it seems like all that’s left to do is cut spending. Why won’t they?2001400ex said:
I agree with most of this. Although to reduce the deficit it has to be both revenues and expenditures. Like you said, but in a different way. No politician is actually going to cut spending. Even tho Americans hate the wasteful spending, they all want their money still. Yes even the wealthy want the money spent their way too.PurpleThrobber said:Da fuq difference does it make what anyone pays in taxes?!?
The debt ceiling is apparently unlimited and annual deficits have no meaning.
Until the endless wars and re-fucking-diculous spending ends, this who pays more argument is exactly what the two parties want as the shiny object to stay in power.
Wake up, sheeple.
And yes we need to cut spending but neither party will. For reasons I've stated many times. Even in the post you quoted. You really are struggling today.
Explain, in your words why revenue needs to increase to the size of the economy. Dumb fuck.2001400ex said:
Revenue is down relative to the size of the economy. Idiot.MikeDamone said:
Since revenue is up it seems like all that’s left to do is cut spending. Why won’t they?2001400ex said:
I agree with most of this. Although to reduce the deficit it has to be both revenues and expenditures. Like you said, but in a different way. No politician is actually going to cut spending. Even tho Americans hate the wasteful spending, they all want their money still. Yes even the wealthy want the money spent their way too.PurpleThrobber said:Da fuq difference does it make what anyone pays in taxes?!?
The debt ceiling is apparently unlimited and annual deficits have no meaning.
Until the endless wars and re-fucking-diculous spending ends, this who pays more argument is exactly what the two parties want as the shiny object to stay in power.
Wake up, sheeple.
And yes we need to cut spending but neither party will. For reasons I've stated many times. Even in the post you quoted. You really are struggling today.
That's basic math Mike. I thought you might be smarter than that but apparently not.
I should go back and pull up the posts on December 2017 of you shitdicks arguing ad nauseum that cutting taxes would reduce the deficit.
Revenues need to outpace expenditures (at a base level, BARELY outpace expenditures. There is no mandate or requirement that expenditures need to keep pace with GDP or any other measure of economic growth. Yours is an absolute fallacy which is probably the primary reason the deficits keep growing - it’s almost the very basis of year over year budgeting with no recognition of actual expenditures. Government agencies feel they are being good stewards by ‘only’ spending a wee bit more than last year percentage-wise or keeping pace with GDP or inflation.
It’s total bullshit. No corporate restructuring or reorganization would ever take that approach. They’d look at actual spending. Real dollars. Not pegging a percentage on some index. That’s just fucked up finance.
-
You do realize that saying revenues would go up like 1% while the economy has increased 5+% over two years is fucktarded right?MikeDamone said:
I challenge you to find a post where I said tax cuts would cut the deficit. It possible I said they may increase revenue, so I was right there.2001400ex said:
I didn't say it needs to increase the size of the economy as a blanket statement as you are dumbfuck. However, if you are trying to balance the budget, or even come close. You can't have revenue increasing slower than the economy while having expenditures grow with the economy. And basically no politicians willing to cut expenditures.MikeDamone said:2001400ex said:
Revenue is down relative to the size of the economy. Idiot.MikeDamone said:
Since revenue is up it seems like all that’s left to do is cut spending. Why won’t they?2001400ex said:
I agree with most of this. Although to reduce the deficit it has to be both revenues and expenditures. Like you said, but in a different way. No politician is actually going to cut spending. Even tho Americans hate the wasteful spending, they all want their money still. Yes even the wealthy want the money spent their way too.PurpleThrobber said:Da fuq difference does it make what anyone pays in taxes?!?
The debt ceiling is apparently unlimited and annual deficits have no meaning.
Until the endless wars and re-fucking-diculous spending ends, this who pays more argument is exactly what the two parties want as the shiny object to stay in power.
Wake up, sheeple.
And yes we need to cut spending but neither party will. For reasons I've stated many times. Even in the post you quoted. You really are struggling today.
Explain, in your words why revenue needs to increase to the size of the economy. Dumb fuck.2001400ex said:
Revenue is down relative to the size of the economy. Idiot.MikeDamone said:
Since revenue is up it seems like all that’s left to do is cut spending. Why won’t they?2001400ex said:
I agree with most of this. Although to reduce the deficit it has to be both revenues and expenditures. Like you said, but in a different way. No politician is actually going to cut spending. Even tho Americans hate the wasteful spending, they all want their money still. Yes even the wealthy want the money spent their way too.PurpleThrobber said:Da fuq difference does it make what anyone pays in taxes?!?
The debt ceiling is apparently unlimited and annual deficits have no meaning.
Until the endless wars and re-fucking-diculous spending ends, this who pays more argument is exactly what the two parties want as the shiny object to stay in power.
Wake up, sheeple.
And yes we need to cut spending but neither party will. For reasons I've stated many times. Even in the post you quoted. You really are struggling today.
That's basic math Mike. I thought you might be smarter than that but apparently not.
I should go back and pull up the posts on December 2017 of you shitdicks arguing ad nauseum that cutting taxes would reduce the deficit.
You seem to think Congress is trying to balance the budget. What a fucking idiot.
Hondo falls for the common myth in Econ that all else will remain equal. If taxes are raised, all other variables are unchanged, therefore fthe only outcome is more revenue.
I don't recall what you said. I just remember Houston arguing like a clown all fucking day and how wrong he was.
I think I've said repeatedly that almost no one in Congress wants to balance the budget. Which is hilarious given how the GOP cried about deficits under Obama. And most of you shitdicks here cried about the deficit as well. Now the deficit doesn't matter again cause it's your guy in the White House. -
What’s more fucktarded is not understanding Hauser's law. What an idiot.2001400ex said:
You do realize that saying revenues would go up like 1% while the economy has increased 5+% over two years is fucktarded right?MikeDamone said:
I challenge you to find a post where I said tax cuts would cut the deficit. It possible I said they may increase revenue, so I was right there.2001400ex said:
I didn't say it needs to increase the size of the economy as a blanket statement as you are dumbfuck. However, if you are trying to balance the budget, or even come close. You can't have revenue increasing slower than the economy while having expenditures grow with the economy. And basically no politicians willing to cut expenditures.MikeDamone said:2001400ex said:
Revenue is down relative to the size of the economy. Idiot.MikeDamone said:
Since revenue is up it seems like all that’s left to do is cut spending. Why won’t they?2001400ex said:
I agree with most of this. Although to reduce the deficit it has to be both revenues and expenditures. Like you said, but in a different way. No politician is actually going to cut spending. Even tho Americans hate the wasteful spending, they all want their money still. Yes even the wealthy want the money spent their way too.PurpleThrobber said:Da fuq difference does it make what anyone pays in taxes?!?
The debt ceiling is apparently unlimited and annual deficits have no meaning.
Until the endless wars and re-fucking-diculous spending ends, this who pays more argument is exactly what the two parties want as the shiny object to stay in power.
Wake up, sheeple.
And yes we need to cut spending but neither party will. For reasons I've stated many times. Even in the post you quoted. You really are struggling today.
Explain, in your words why revenue needs to increase to the size of the economy. Dumb fuck.2001400ex said:
Revenue is down relative to the size of the economy. Idiot.MikeDamone said:
Since revenue is up it seems like all that’s left to do is cut spending. Why won’t they?2001400ex said:
I agree with most of this. Although to reduce the deficit it has to be both revenues and expenditures. Like you said, but in a different way. No politician is actually going to cut spending. Even tho Americans hate the wasteful spending, they all want their money still. Yes even the wealthy want the money spent their way too.PurpleThrobber said:Da fuq difference does it make what anyone pays in taxes?!?
The debt ceiling is apparently unlimited and annual deficits have no meaning.
Until the endless wars and re-fucking-diculous spending ends, this who pays more argument is exactly what the two parties want as the shiny object to stay in power.
Wake up, sheeple.
And yes we need to cut spending but neither party will. For reasons I've stated many times. Even in the post you quoted. You really are struggling today.
That's basic math Mike. I thought you might be smarter than that but apparently not.
I should go back and pull up the posts on December 2017 of you shitdicks arguing ad nauseum that cutting taxes would reduce the deficit.
You seem to think Congress is trying to balance the budget. What a fucking idiot.
Hondo falls for the common myth in Econ that all else will remain equal. If taxes are raised, all other variables are unchanged, therefore fthe only outcome is more revenue.
I don't recall what you said. I just remember Houston arguing like a clown all fucking day and how wrong he was.
I think I've said repeatedly that almost no one in Congress wants to balance the budget. Which is hilarious given how the GOP cried about deficits under Obama. And most of you shitdicks here cried about the deficit as well. Now the deficit doesn't matter again cause it's your guy in the White House. -
What's more fucktarded is you don't realize that 3-4.5% of GDP is a huge fucking number. Hauser's "law" was created for simpletons like you. There's even a cool graph with a messed up scale that makes it look like it never really changes. Cause simple minds like you don't don't stop and wonder how big 1% is GDP is.MikeDamone said:
What’s more fucktarded is not understanding Hauser's law. What an idiot.2001400ex said:
You do realize that saying revenues would go up like 1% while the economy has increased 5+% over two years is fucktarded right?MikeDamone said:
I challenge you to find a post where I said tax cuts would cut the deficit. It possible I said they may increase revenue, so I was right there.2001400ex said:
I didn't say it needs to increase the size of the economy as a blanket statement as you are dumbfuck. However, if you are trying to balance the budget, or even come close. You can't have revenue increasing slower than the economy while having expenditures grow with the economy. And basically no politicians willing to cut expenditures.MikeDamone said:2001400ex said:
Revenue is down relative to the size of the economy. Idiot.MikeDamone said:
Since revenue is up it seems like all that’s left to do is cut spending. Why won’t they?2001400ex said:
I agree with most of this. Although to reduce the deficit it has to be both revenues and expenditures. Like you said, but in a different way. No politician is actually going to cut spending. Even tho Americans hate the wasteful spending, they all want their money still. Yes even the wealthy want the money spent their way too.PurpleThrobber said:Da fuq difference does it make what anyone pays in taxes?!?
The debt ceiling is apparently unlimited and annual deficits have no meaning.
Until the endless wars and re-fucking-diculous spending ends, this who pays more argument is exactly what the two parties want as the shiny object to stay in power.
Wake up, sheeple.
And yes we need to cut spending but neither party will. For reasons I've stated many times. Even in the post you quoted. You really are struggling today.
Explain, in your words why revenue needs to increase to the size of the economy. Dumb fuck.2001400ex said:
Revenue is down relative to the size of the economy. Idiot.MikeDamone said:
Since revenue is up it seems like all that’s left to do is cut spending. Why won’t they?2001400ex said:
I agree with most of this. Although to reduce the deficit it has to be both revenues and expenditures. Like you said, but in a different way. No politician is actually going to cut spending. Even tho Americans hate the wasteful spending, they all want their money still. Yes even the wealthy want the money spent their way too.PurpleThrobber said:Da fuq difference does it make what anyone pays in taxes?!?
The debt ceiling is apparently unlimited and annual deficits have no meaning.
Until the endless wars and re-fucking-diculous spending ends, this who pays more argument is exactly what the two parties want as the shiny object to stay in power.
Wake up, sheeple.
And yes we need to cut spending but neither party will. For reasons I've stated many times. Even in the post you quoted. You really are struggling today.
That's basic math Mike. I thought you might be smarter than that but apparently not.
I should go back and pull up the posts on December 2017 of you shitdicks arguing ad nauseum that cutting taxes would reduce the deficit.
You seem to think Congress is trying to balance the budget. What a fucking idiot.
Hondo falls for the common myth in Econ that all else will remain equal. If taxes are raised, all other variables are unchanged, therefore fthe only outcome is more revenue.
I don't recall what you said. I just remember Houston arguing like a clown all fucking day and how wrong he was.
I think I've said repeatedly that almost no one in Congress wants to balance the budget. Which is hilarious given how the GOP cried about deficits under Obama. And most of you shitdicks here cried about the deficit as well. Now the deficit doesn't matter again cause it's your guy in the White House. -
What’s even more fucktarded is a monkey like you not realizing that very little has changed in the past 60 years, except spending. Yet you jump around like a moron yelling about graphs scales, but don’t apply your same logic to the actual problem, spending.2001400ex said:
What's more fucktarded is you don't realize that 3-4.5% of GDP is a huge fucking number. Hauser's "law" was created for simpletons like you. There's even a cool graph with a messed up scale that makes it look like it never really changes. Cause simple minds like you don't don't stop and wonder how big 1% is GDP is.MikeDamone said:
What’s more fucktarded is not understanding Hauser's law. What an idiot.2001400ex said:
You do realize that saying revenues would go up like 1% while the economy has increased 5+% over two years is fucktarded right?MikeDamone said:
I challenge you to find a post where I said tax cuts would cut the deficit. It possible I said they may increase revenue, so I was right there.2001400ex said:
I didn't say it needs to increase the size of the economy as a blanket statement as you are dumbfuck. However, if you are trying to balance the budget, or even come close. You can't have revenue increasing slower than the economy while having expenditures grow with the economy. And basically no politicians willing to cut expenditures.MikeDamone said:2001400ex said:
Revenue is down relative to the size of the economy. Idiot.MikeDamone said:
Since revenue is up it seems like all that’s left to do is cut spending. Why won’t they?2001400ex said:
I agree with most of this. Although to reduce the deficit it has to be both revenues and expenditures. Like you said, but in a different way. No politician is actually going to cut spending. Even tho Americans hate the wasteful spending, they all want their money still. Yes even the wealthy want the money spent their way too.PurpleThrobber said:Da fuq difference does it make what anyone pays in taxes?!?
The debt ceiling is apparently unlimited and annual deficits have no meaning.
Until the endless wars and re-fucking-diculous spending ends, this who pays more argument is exactly what the two parties want as the shiny object to stay in power.
Wake up, sheeple.
And yes we need to cut spending but neither party will. For reasons I've stated many times. Even in the post you quoted. You really are struggling today.
Explain, in your words why revenue needs to increase to the size of the economy. Dumb fuck.2001400ex said:
Revenue is down relative to the size of the economy. Idiot.MikeDamone said:
Since revenue is up it seems like all that’s left to do is cut spending. Why won’t they?2001400ex said:
I agree with most of this. Although to reduce the deficit it has to be both revenues and expenditures. Like you said, but in a different way. No politician is actually going to cut spending. Even tho Americans hate the wasteful spending, they all want their money still. Yes even the wealthy want the money spent their way too.PurpleThrobber said:Da fuq difference does it make what anyone pays in taxes?!?
The debt ceiling is apparently unlimited and annual deficits have no meaning.
Until the endless wars and re-fucking-diculous spending ends, this who pays more argument is exactly what the two parties want as the shiny object to stay in power.
Wake up, sheeple.
And yes we need to cut spending but neither party will. For reasons I've stated many times. Even in the post you quoted. You really are struggling today.
That's basic math Mike. I thought you might be smarter than that but apparently not.
I should go back and pull up the posts on December 2017 of you shitdicks arguing ad nauseum that cutting taxes would reduce the deficit.
You seem to think Congress is trying to balance the budget. What a fucking idiot.
Hondo falls for the common myth in Econ that all else will remain equal. If taxes are raised, all other variables are unchanged, therefore fthe only outcome is more revenue.
I don't recall what you said. I just remember Houston arguing like a clown all fucking day and how wrong he was.
I think I've said repeatedly that almost no one in Congress wants to balance the budget. Which is hilarious given how the GOP cried about deficits under Obama. And most of you shitdicks here cried about the deficit as well. Now the deficit doesn't matter again cause it's your guy in the White House.
