Biden address
Comments
-
There are plenty of people just like you who claim they want higher taxes. You don't need to play it by yourself. But nice try dumbfuck.HHusky said:
If I want to play a basketball game, I don't try to play it by myself.SFGbob said:
Interesting how you need a change in the tax law in order to do something that you claim you already want to do.HHusky said:
You should have listened to the rest of the speech.RaceBannon said:
I believe the jury is still waiting on how we build the economy from the bottom up. Raise taxes on the poor? Enlighten usHHusky said:
In your own words, Gasbag, explain how Joe's plan is not Keynsian, but is actually Marxist.WestlinnDuck said:HHusky said:
#KeynesRaceBannon said:
Any of you Bidentards want to tell us how you grow an economy from the bottom? If trickle down doesn't work explain how trickle up works please
Or just deflect, deny and ignore per usual#KeynesMarx. Fixed it for you.
Keynes was a capitalist. He even stated, in plain English that he was on the side of the capitalists: ... But he also understood that unfettered capitalism could actually undermine its own existence and lead to socialism.
Your taxes wouldn't rise. Mine would.
It's never been my goal to raise only my own taxes. -
So you're proposing that we all subsidize the people who earn as much or more than we do. Maybe we do that to some extent through charitable donations, but people earning the kind of money we're talking about should be paying at a higher marginal tax rate.SFGbob said:
There are plenty of people just like you who claim they want higher taxes. You don't need to play it by yourself. But nice try dumbfuck.HHusky said:
If I want to play a basketball game, I don't try to play it by myself.SFGbob said:
Interesting how you need a change in the tax law in order to do something that you claim you already want to do.HHusky said:
You should have listened to the rest of the speech.RaceBannon said:
I believe the jury is still waiting on how we build the economy from the bottom up. Raise taxes on the poor? Enlighten usHHusky said:
In your own words, Gasbag, explain how Joe's plan is not Keynsian, but is actually Marxist.WestlinnDuck said:HHusky said:
#KeynesRaceBannon said:
Any of you Bidentards want to tell us how you grow an economy from the bottom? If trickle down doesn't work explain how trickle up works please
Or just deflect, deny and ignore per usual#KeynesMarx. Fixed it for you.
Keynes was a capitalist. He even stated, in plain English that he was on the side of the capitalists: ... But he also understood that unfettered capitalism could actually undermine its own existence and lead to socialism.
Your taxes wouldn't rise. Mine would.
It's never been my goal to raise only my own taxes. -
lolHHusky said:
We also massively assisted the rebuilding of those competitors. Their industrial base was more modern than ours at that point. But this was about broadly distributed prosperity vs. trickle down economics. Our middle class didn't become suddenly prosperous in 1946 and stand pat. The middle class in this country became more prosperous and numerous for about 35 years after the war ended. Bombing Hamburg doesn't explain that--West Germany's middle class also became more prosperous and numerous over those years.SFGbob said:
Yeah, all we need to do in order to return to those glory days is use the military to destroy the industrial capacity of every major economic competitor. Of course Dazzler is so fucking stupid he think our tax policy explains our post WWII economic growth.HHusky said:
The 20th Century economic boom didn't begin in 1983, no matter what you all keep telling yourselves. Biden is proposing a return to what became mainstream economics from 1933 through about 1979, a period that saw reasonably prosperous and and large middle class arise in this country and elsewhere.RaceBannon said:Right. No answer. It was a stupid tweet. Got it
Of course, Gasbag seems to think that was Marxism.
Got stuck in the deep end again *gurgle*
Was this "broadly distributed prosperity" from the "bottom up" as Biden proposes? And how does that work?
Because you are describing trickle down.
The country was a shambles in 1979. Then the Great Reset and the lowering of the tax rates and the Roaring 80's were born that lasted through the 90's with Bubba being convinced to stay the fuck out of the way
Even Obama kept the "Bush Tax Cuts" that he ran against
The we had yet another boom happening under Trump until your ilk decided electing a dementia patient was more important -
We now spend far, far more on our current welfare state than we ever did rebuilding our competitors. We had little to no competition in automobiles, electronics, personal consumer goods like refrigerators, washing machines and televisions you name it for nearly 30 years after the war had ended. The destruction of the industrial base of every world competitor we had had everything to do with this. No one claimed the middle class "suddenly" became prosperous in 1946. That's the standard Dazzler strawman ass fuck. The growth and prosperity of our middle class had everything to do with the lack of competition.HHusky said:
We also massively assisted the rebuilding of those competitors. Their industrial base was more modern than ours at that point. But this was about broadly distributed prosperity vs. trickle down economics. Our middle class didn't become suddenly prosperous in 1946 and stand pat. The middle class in this country became more prosperous and numerous for about 35 years after the war ended. Bombing Hamburg doesn't explain that--West Germany's middle class also became more prosperous and numerous over those years.SFGbob said:
Yeah, all we need to do in order to return to those glory days is use the military to destroy the industrial capacity of every major economic competitor. Of course Dazzler is so fucking stupid he think our tax policy explains our post WWII economic growth.HHusky said:
The 20th Century economic boom didn't begin in 1983, no matter what you all keep telling yourselves. Biden is proposing a return to what became mainstream economics from 1933 through about 1979, a period that saw reasonably prosperous and and large middle class arise in this country and elsewhere.RaceBannon said:Right. No answer. It was a stupid tweet. Got it
Of course, Gasbag seems to think that was Marxism.
Take commercial airlines. Other than the British, there was no other competition out there and the Brits cratered their aviation industry by the late 50s. If you wanted to purchase a commercial aircraft the US was the only game in town. Same with construction equipment and automobiles. We didn't even have any real competition in that field until the late 60s early 70s.
Your claim that our tax rates had something to do with our post WWII prosperity is pure bullshit. -
@kobestopperRaceBannon said:
I specifically asked how the economy will be grown with trickle up referring to Biden's retarded tweet that wasn't mean. As I suspected there is no answer but that doesn't slow you down does it?HHusky said:
You should have listened to the rest of the speech.RaceBannon said:
I believe the jury is still waiting on how we build the economy from the bottom up. Raise taxes on the poor? Enlighten usHHusky said:
In your own words, Gasbag, explain how Joe's plan is not Keynsian, but is actually Marxist.WestlinnDuck said:HHusky said:
#KeynesRaceBannon said:
Any of you Bidentards want to tell us how you grow an economy from the bottom? If trickle down doesn't work explain how trickle up works please
Or just deflect, deny and ignore per usual#KeynesMarx. Fixed it for you.
Keynes was a capitalist. He even stated, in plain English that he was on the side of the capitalists: ... But he also understood that unfettered capitalism could actually undermine its own existence and lead to socialism.
Your taxes wouldn't rise. Mine would.
Worker coops. -
A few smart people have turned their entire economic systems into worker co-ops. Went well.
-
Letting people keep more of the money they earn only qualifies as a "subsidy" to people who believe every dollar really belongs to the government.HHusky said:
So you're proposing that we all subsidize the people who earn as much or more than we do. Maybe we do that to some extent through charitable donations, but people earning the kind of money we're talking about should be paying at a higher marginal tax rate.SFGbob said:
There are plenty of people just like you who claim they want higher taxes. You don't need to play it by yourself. But nice try dumbfuck.HHusky said:
If I want to play a basketball game, I don't try to play it by myself.SFGbob said:
Interesting how you need a change in the tax law in order to do something that you claim you already want to do.HHusky said:
You should have listened to the rest of the speech.RaceBannon said:
I believe the jury is still waiting on how we build the economy from the bottom up. Raise taxes on the poor? Enlighten usHHusky said:
In your own words, Gasbag, explain how Joe's plan is not Keynsian, but is actually Marxist.WestlinnDuck said:HHusky said:
#KeynesRaceBannon said:
Any of you Bidentards want to tell us how you grow an economy from the bottom? If trickle down doesn't work explain how trickle up works please
Or just deflect, deny and ignore per usual#KeynesMarx. Fixed it for you.
Keynes was a capitalist. He even stated, in plain English that he was on the side of the capitalists: ... But he also understood that unfettered capitalism could actually undermine its own existence and lead to socialism.
Your taxes wouldn't rise. Mine would.
It's never been my goal to raise only my own taxes.
but people earning the kind of money we're talking about should be paying at a higher marginal tax rate.
They already are. But with leftist it's never enough. Because as we can see with Biden's spending, they can never spend enough.
You know what's going to happen after all this spending. All the "inequality" that Biden says he wants to address is still going to be there because the reasons for the inequality have nothing to do with a lack of money. We are going to piss away trillions and every problem the left bitches about now will still be there after we've done so.
Providing "free" daycare isn't going get rid of inequality. All it will do is piss away Billions on daycare/childcare centers that most successful people wouldn't put their dogs into. -
You're not richHHusky said: -
You don't need gloves to take out a 135lb dipshitTequilla said:
Do I need to take the gloves off here?HHusky said:
See, 1933-45.RaceBannon said:
I specifically asked how the economy will be grown with trickle up referring to Biden's retarded tweet that wasn't mean. As I suspected there is no answer but that doesn't slow you down does it?HHusky said:
You should have listened to the rest of the speech.RaceBannon said:
I believe the jury is still waiting on how we build the economy from the bottom up. Raise taxes on the poor? Enlighten usHHusky said:
In your own words, Gasbag, explain how Joe's plan is not Keynsian, but is actually Marxist.WestlinnDuck said:HHusky said:
#KeynesRaceBannon said:
Any of you Bidentards want to tell us how you grow an economy from the bottom? If trickle down doesn't work explain how trickle up works please
Or just deflect, deny and ignore per usual#KeynesMarx. Fixed it for you.
Keynes was a capitalist. He even stated, in plain English that he was on the side of the capitalists: ... But he also understood that unfettered capitalism could actually undermine its own existence and lead to socialism.
Your taxes wouldn't rise. Mine would. -
whatever you sayRoadTrip said:
but my taxes would rise under the proposal I heard Joe make last night -
A return to "leftist" GWB rates.SFGbob said:
Letting people keep more of the money they earn only qualifies as a "subsidy" to people who believe every dollar really belongs to the government.HHusky said:
So you're proposing that we all subsidize the people who earn as much or more than we do. Maybe we do that to some extent through charitable donations, but people earning the kind of money we're talking about should be paying at a higher marginal tax rate.SFGbob said:
There are plenty of people just like you who claim they want higher taxes. You don't need to play it by yourself. But nice try dumbfuck.HHusky said:
If I want to play a basketball game, I don't try to play it by myself.SFGbob said:
Interesting how you need a change in the tax law in order to do something that you claim you already want to do.HHusky said:
You should have listened to the rest of the speech.RaceBannon said:
I believe the jury is still waiting on how we build the economy from the bottom up. Raise taxes on the poor? Enlighten usHHusky said:
In your own words, Gasbag, explain how Joe's plan is not Keynsian, but is actually Marxist.WestlinnDuck said:HHusky said:
#KeynesRaceBannon said:
Any of you Bidentards want to tell us how you grow an economy from the bottom? If trickle down doesn't work explain how trickle up works please
Or just deflect, deny and ignore per usual#KeynesMarx. Fixed it for you.
Keynes was a capitalist. He even stated, in plain English that he was on the side of the capitalists: ... But he also understood that unfettered capitalism could actually undermine its own existence and lead to socialism.
Your taxes wouldn't rise. Mine would.
It's never been my goal to raise only my own taxes.
but people earning the kind of money we're talking about should be paying at a higher marginal tax rate.
They already are. But with leftist it's never enough. Because as we can see with Biden's spending, they can never spend enough.
You know what's going to happen after all this spending. All the "inequality" that Biden says he wants to address is still going to be there because the reasons for the inequality have nothing to do with a lack of money. We are going to piss away trillions and every problem the left bitches about now will still be there after we've done so.
Providing "free" daycare isn't going get rid of inequality. All it will do is piss away Billions on daycare/childcare centers that most successful people wouldn't put their dogs into. -
I wouldn't mind if it happenedHHusky said:
If I want to play a basketball game, I don't try to play it by myself.SFGbob said:
Interesting how you need a change in the tax law in order to do something that you claim you already want to do.HHusky said:
You should have listened to the rest of the speech.RaceBannon said:
I believe the jury is still waiting on how we build the economy from the bottom up. Raise taxes on the poor? Enlighten usHHusky said:
In your own words, Gasbag, explain how Joe's plan is not Keynsian, but is actually Marxist.WestlinnDuck said:HHusky said:
#KeynesRaceBannon said:
Any of you Bidentards want to tell us how you grow an economy from the bottom? If trickle down doesn't work explain how trickle up works please
Or just deflect, deny and ignore per usual#KeynesMarx. Fixed it for you.
Keynes was a capitalist. He even stated, in plain English that he was on the side of the capitalists: ... But he also understood that unfettered capitalism could actually undermine its own existence and lead to socialism.
Your taxes wouldn't rise. Mine would.
It's never been my goal to raise only my own taxes. -
You should talk to him about it.RaceBannon said: -
We spent about 5% of our GDP in 1948 on the entire Marshall plan. We currently spend over 12% of our current GDP every year on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. That's doesn't even take into account the money we already spend on Welfare. So why don't we already have that widespread prosperity you claim only happens with government raising taxes and spending Dazzler?
How is providing people with government paid for daycare centers going to increase prosperity? The same neighborhoods that have government paid for shitty schools will have government paid for shitty daycare centers and the only thing we will have achieved is taking billions of dollars and lighting it on fucking fire.
-
I've been telling you for years that as soon as you present a plausible scenario of the electorate voting to cut their own entitlements, you'll be making a solid case for reducing, or at least not increasing taxes. But here in reality, the only question is when taxes will rise. Sooner would be better. The GOP's credit card approach to spending isn't sustainable.SFGbob said:We spent about 5% of our GDP in 1948 on the entire Marshall plan. We currently spend over 12% of our current GDP every year on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. That's doesn't even take into account the money we already spend on Welfare. So why don't we already have that widespread prosperity you claim only happens with government raising taxes and spending Dazzler?
How is providing people with government paid for daycare centers going to increase prosperity? The same neighborhoods that have government paid for shitty schools will have government paid for shitty daycare centers and the only thing we will have achieved is taking billions of dollars and lighting it on fucking fire.
And besides, there are additional things people want from their government besides paying social security to old fuckers. -
And now it's a world of skyscrapers instead of a 1 bedroom, crack house falling down.RaceBannon said:It took the Great Reset under Reagan to undo the damage of 33-79 where the whole house of cards collapsed leading to Reagan.
-
Weird because Biden and the Rats you vote are currently adding more to the "credit card" than at any other time in our post-war history and you don't seem to have any fucking problem with it. Btw, love the way how you just dodged your bullshit about government spending and tax policies are what created the post war prosperity.HHusky said:
I've been telling you for years that as soon as you present a plausible scenario of the electorate voting to cut their own entitlements, you'll be making a solid case for reducing, or at least not increasing taxes. But here in reality, the only question is when taxes will rise. Sooner would be better. The GOP's credit card approach to spending isn't sustainable.SFGbob said:We spent about 5% of our GDP in 1948 on the entire Marshall plan. We currently spend over 12% of our current GDP every year on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. That's doesn't even take into account the money we already spend on Welfare. So why don't we already have that widespread prosperity you claim only happens with government raising taxes and spending Dazzler?
How is providing people with government paid for daycare centers going to increase prosperity? The same neighborhoods that have government paid for shitty schools will have government paid for shitty daycare centers and the only thing we will have achieved is taking billions of dollars and lighting it on fucking fire.
And besides, there are additional things people want from their government besides paying social security to old fuckers.
Tell us how giving "free" daycare is going to create greater prosperity Dazzler? -
How much would the democrats have to raise taxes to get off the credit card with no reduction in entitlements or other spending like free daycare and college that the democrats support?HHusky said:
I've been telling you for years that as soon as you present a plausible scenario of the electorate voting to cut their own entitlements, you'll be making a solid case for reducing, or at least not increasing taxes. But here in reality, the only question is when taxes will rise. Sooner would be better. The GOP's credit card approach to spending isn't sustainable.SFGbob said:We spent about 5% of our GDP in 1948 on the entire Marshall plan. We currently spend over 12% of our current GDP every year on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. That's doesn't even take into account the money we already spend on Welfare. So why don't we already have that widespread prosperity you claim only happens with government raising taxes and spending Dazzler?
How is providing people with government paid for daycare centers going to increase prosperity? The same neighborhoods that have government paid for shitty schools will have government paid for shitty daycare centers and the only thing we will have achieved is taking billions of dollars and lighting it on fucking fire.
And besides, there are additional things people want from their government besides paying social security to old fuckers.
That's what I though
I guess spending 40 years calling the GOP racist and wanting to kill granny when the subject of cutting spending comes up has come home to roost.
The democrats aren't calling on new taxes to pay off the credit card. They want to spend even more than they raise
Your bullshit is so patently false one wonders why you bother -
Reagan was as Keynesian as can be. The Boomers were in their 20s and 30s too. We had a lot going for us.RoadTrip said:
And now it's a world of skyscrapers instead of a 1 bedroom, crack house falling down.RaceBannon said:It took the Great Reset under Reagan to undo the damage of 33-79 where the whole house of cards collapsed leading to Reagan.
But the myth that followed--that cutting taxes is like magic and raising them is forbidden--has done a lot of damage. -
That poor strawmanHHusky said:
Reagan was as Keynesian as can be. The Boomers were in their 20s and 30s too. We had a lot going for us.RoadTrip said:
And now it's a world of skyscrapers instead of a 1 bedroom, crack house falling down.RaceBannon said:It took the Great Reset under Reagan to undo the damage of 33-79 where the whole house of cards collapsed leading to Reagan.
But the myth that followed--that cutting taxes is like magic and raising them is forbidden--has done a lot of damage. -
Homefuckingrun here Bob!SFGbob said:We spent about 5% of our GDP in 1948 on the entire Marshall plan. We currently spend over 12% of our current GDP every year on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. That's doesn't even take into account the money we already spend on Welfare. So why don't we already have that widespread prosperity you claim only happens with government raising taxes and spending Dazzler?
How is providing people with government paid for daycare centers going to increase prosperity? The same neighborhoods that have government paid for shitty schools will have government paid for shitty daycare centers and the only thing we will have achieved is taking billions of dollars and lighting it on fucking fire. -
Joe's proposing to pay for it. So other than that, fabulous point!SFGbob said:
Weird because Biden and the Rats you vote are currently adding more to the "credit card" than at any other time in our post-war history and you don't seem to have any fucking problem with it. Btw, love the way how you just dodged your bullshit about government spending and tax policies are what created the post war prosperity.HHusky said:
I've been telling you for years that as soon as you present a plausible scenario of the electorate voting to cut their own entitlements, you'll be making a solid case for reducing, or at least not increasing taxes. But here in reality, the only question is when taxes will rise. Sooner would be better. The GOP's credit card approach to spending isn't sustainable.SFGbob said:We spent about 5% of our GDP in 1948 on the entire Marshall plan. We currently spend over 12% of our current GDP every year on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. That's doesn't even take into account the money we already spend on Welfare. So why don't we already have that widespread prosperity you claim only happens with government raising taxes and spending Dazzler?
How is providing people with government paid for daycare centers going to increase prosperity? The same neighborhoods that have government paid for shitty schools will have government paid for shitty daycare centers and the only thing we will have achieved is taking billions of dollars and lighting it on fucking fire.
And besides, there are additional things people want from their government besides paying social security to old fuckers.
Tell us how giving "free" daycare is going to create greater prosperity Dazzler?
We've got a demographic problem. I think we'd better wise up and start providing a lot of benies to people of child rearing age. (We could steal that idea from China! They have the same problem and they're addressing it.) -
The USA doesn't have a demographic problem. China definitely does. And it's their own fault. The USA will be just fine, thanks to our superior economic system that certain people want to destroy, and to our horrible racist immigration system that allows nearly anyone to come here.HHusky said:
Joe's proposing to pay for it. So other than that, fabulous point!SFGbob said:
Weird because Biden and the Rats you vote are currently adding more to the "credit card" than at any other time in our post-war history and you don't seem to have any fucking problem with it. Btw, love the way how you just dodged your bullshit about government spending and tax policies are what created the post war prosperity.HHusky said:
I've been telling you for years that as soon as you present a plausible scenario of the electorate voting to cut their own entitlements, you'll be making a solid case for reducing, or at least not increasing taxes. But here in reality, the only question is when taxes will rise. Sooner would be better. The GOP's credit card approach to spending isn't sustainable.SFGbob said:We spent about 5% of our GDP in 1948 on the entire Marshall plan. We currently spend over 12% of our current GDP every year on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. That's doesn't even take into account the money we already spend on Welfare. So why don't we already have that widespread prosperity you claim only happens with government raising taxes and spending Dazzler?
How is providing people with government paid for daycare centers going to increase prosperity? The same neighborhoods that have government paid for shitty schools will have government paid for shitty daycare centers and the only thing we will have achieved is taking billions of dollars and lighting it on fucking fire.
And besides, there are additional things people want from their government besides paying social security to old fuckers.
Tell us how giving "free" daycare is going to create greater prosperity Dazzler?
We've got a demographic problem. I think we'd better wise up and start providing a lot of benies to people of child rearing age. (We could steal that idea from China! They have the same problem and they're addressing it.)
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/world-population-2100-country/
-
That's not Rider ball.hardhat said:
The USA doesn't have a demographic problem. China definitely does. And it's their own fault. The USA will be just fine, thanks to our superior economic system that certain people want to destroy, and to our horrible racist immigration system that allows nearly anyone to come here.HHusky said:
Joe's proposing to pay for it. So other than that, fabulous point!SFGbob said:
Weird because Biden and the Rats you vote are currently adding more to the "credit card" than at any other time in our post-war history and you don't seem to have any fucking problem with it. Btw, love the way how you just dodged your bullshit about government spending and tax policies are what created the post war prosperity.HHusky said:
I've been telling you for years that as soon as you present a plausible scenario of the electorate voting to cut their own entitlements, you'll be making a solid case for reducing, or at least not increasing taxes. But here in reality, the only question is when taxes will rise. Sooner would be better. The GOP's credit card approach to spending isn't sustainable.SFGbob said:We spent about 5% of our GDP in 1948 on the entire Marshall plan. We currently spend over 12% of our current GDP every year on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. That's doesn't even take into account the money we already spend on Welfare. So why don't we already have that widespread prosperity you claim only happens with government raising taxes and spending Dazzler?
How is providing people with government paid for daycare centers going to increase prosperity? The same neighborhoods that have government paid for shitty schools will have government paid for shitty daycare centers and the only thing we will have achieved is taking billions of dollars and lighting it on fucking fire.
And besides, there are additional things people want from their government besides paying social security to old fuckers.
Tell us how giving "free" daycare is going to create greater prosperity Dazzler?
We've got a demographic problem. I think we'd better wise up and start providing a lot of benies to people of child rearing age. (We could steal that idea from China! They have the same problem and they're addressing it.)
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/world-population-2100-country/
Total population isn't the issue. We have old fuckers coming out our ears.
What about kids? -
Any money Joe lol raises is already spent and he will end up raising less by raising taxesHHusky said:
Joe's proposing to pay for it. So other than that, fabulous point!SFGbob said:
Weird because Biden and the Rats you vote are currently adding more to the "credit card" than at any other time in our post-war history and you don't seem to have any fucking problem with it. Btw, love the way how you just dodged your bullshit about government spending and tax policies are what created the post war prosperity.HHusky said:
I've been telling you for years that as soon as you present a plausible scenario of the electorate voting to cut their own entitlements, you'll be making a solid case for reducing, or at least not increasing taxes. But here in reality, the only question is when taxes will rise. Sooner would be better. The GOP's credit card approach to spending isn't sustainable.SFGbob said:We spent about 5% of our GDP in 1948 on the entire Marshall plan. We currently spend over 12% of our current GDP every year on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. That's doesn't even take into account the money we already spend on Welfare. So why don't we already have that widespread prosperity you claim only happens with government raising taxes and spending Dazzler?
How is providing people with government paid for daycare centers going to increase prosperity? The same neighborhoods that have government paid for shitty schools will have government paid for shitty daycare centers and the only thing we will have achieved is taking billions of dollars and lighting it on fucking fire.
And besides, there are additional things people want from their government besides paying social security to old fuckers.
Tell us how giving "free" daycare is going to create greater prosperity Dazzler?
We've got a demographic problem. I think we'd better wise up and start providing a lot of benies to people of child rearing age. (We could steal that idea from China! They have the same problem and they're addressing it.)
But still -
We all understand that Daddy ran huge deficits. Still, Joe's proposal includes paying for Joe's proposal.RaceBannon said:
Any money Joe lol raises is already spent and he will end up raising less by raising taxesHHusky said:
Joe's proposing to pay for it. So other than that, fabulous point!SFGbob said:
Weird because Biden and the Rats you vote are currently adding more to the "credit card" than at any other time in our post-war history and you don't seem to have any fucking problem with it. Btw, love the way how you just dodged your bullshit about government spending and tax policies are what created the post war prosperity.HHusky said:
I've been telling you for years that as soon as you present a plausible scenario of the electorate voting to cut their own entitlements, you'll be making a solid case for reducing, or at least not increasing taxes. But here in reality, the only question is when taxes will rise. Sooner would be better. The GOP's credit card approach to spending isn't sustainable.SFGbob said:We spent about 5% of our GDP in 1948 on the entire Marshall plan. We currently spend over 12% of our current GDP every year on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. That's doesn't even take into account the money we already spend on Welfare. So why don't we already have that widespread prosperity you claim only happens with government raising taxes and spending Dazzler?
How is providing people with government paid for daycare centers going to increase prosperity? The same neighborhoods that have government paid for shitty schools will have government paid for shitty daycare centers and the only thing we will have achieved is taking billions of dollars and lighting it on fucking fire.
And besides, there are additional things people want from their government besides paying social security to old fuckers.
Tell us how giving "free" daycare is going to create greater prosperity Dazzler?
We've got a demographic problem. I think we'd better wise up and start providing a lot of benies to people of child rearing age. (We could steal that idea from China! They have the same problem and they're addressing it.)
But still -
It's always pay your fair share. You live in Cali and right now the wealthy are paying a top rate over 50% on their additional income. Taking more than half of someone's money doesn't seem fair to me. And Cali is screaming for more money to cover their government employee pension give away and for being the nation's welfare magnet to illegal aliens. Central planning at it's finest.RaceBannon said:
Any money Joe lol raises is already spent and he will end up raising less by raising taxesHHusky said:
Joe's proposing to pay for it. So other than that, fabulous point!SFGbob said:
Weird because Biden and the Rats you vote are currently adding more to the "credit card" than at any other time in our post-war history and you don't seem to have any fucking problem with it. Btw, love the way how you just dodged your bullshit about government spending and tax policies are what created the post war prosperity.HHusky said:
I've been telling you for years that as soon as you present a plausible scenario of the electorate voting to cut their own entitlements, you'll be making a solid case for reducing, or at least not increasing taxes. But here in reality, the only question is when taxes will rise. Sooner would be better. The GOP's credit card approach to spending isn't sustainable.SFGbob said:We spent about 5% of our GDP in 1948 on the entire Marshall plan. We currently spend over 12% of our current GDP every year on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. That's doesn't even take into account the money we already spend on Welfare. So why don't we already have that widespread prosperity you claim only happens with government raising taxes and spending Dazzler?
How is providing people with government paid for daycare centers going to increase prosperity? The same neighborhoods that have government paid for shitty schools will have government paid for shitty daycare centers and the only thing we will have achieved is taking billions of dollars and lighting it on fucking fire.
And besides, there are additional things people want from their government besides paying social security to old fuckers.
Tell us how giving "free" daycare is going to create greater prosperity Dazzler?
We've got a demographic problem. I think we'd better wise up and start providing a lot of benies to people of child rearing age. (We could steal that idea from China! They have the same problem and they're addressing it.)
But still -
Just patheticHHusky said:
We all understand that Daddy ran huge deficits. Still, Joe's proposal includes paying for Joe's proposal.RaceBannon said:
Any money Joe lol raises is already spent and he will end up raising less by raising taxesHHusky said:
Joe's proposing to pay for it. So other than that, fabulous point!SFGbob said:
Weird because Biden and the Rats you vote are currently adding more to the "credit card" than at any other time in our post-war history and you don't seem to have any fucking problem with it. Btw, love the way how you just dodged your bullshit about government spending and tax policies are what created the post war prosperity.HHusky said:
I've been telling you for years that as soon as you present a plausible scenario of the electorate voting to cut their own entitlements, you'll be making a solid case for reducing, or at least not increasing taxes. But here in reality, the only question is when taxes will rise. Sooner would be better. The GOP's credit card approach to spending isn't sustainable.SFGbob said:We spent about 5% of our GDP in 1948 on the entire Marshall plan. We currently spend over 12% of our current GDP every year on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. That's doesn't even take into account the money we already spend on Welfare. So why don't we already have that widespread prosperity you claim only happens with government raising taxes and spending Dazzler?
How is providing people with government paid for daycare centers going to increase prosperity? The same neighborhoods that have government paid for shitty schools will have government paid for shitty daycare centers and the only thing we will have achieved is taking billions of dollars and lighting it on fucking fire.
And besides, there are additional things people want from their government besides paying social security to old fuckers.
Tell us how giving "free" daycare is going to create greater prosperity Dazzler?
We've got a demographic problem. I think we'd better wise up and start providing a lot of benies to people of child rearing age. (We could steal that idea from China! They have the same problem and they're addressing it.)
But still
Joe ain't paying for shit. Just hurting the economy and ringing up the card -
I hope he is has good health insurance.RaceBannon said:
That poor strawmanHHusky said:
Reagan was as Keynesian as can be. The Boomers were in their 20s and 30s too. We had a lot going for us.RoadTrip said:
And now it's a world of skyscrapers instead of a 1 bedroom, crack house falling down.RaceBannon said:It took the Great Reset under Reagan to undo the damage of 33-79 where the whole house of cards collapsed leading to Reagan.
But the myth that followed--that cutting taxes is like magic and raising them is forbidden--has done a lot of damage.
