***Official Political Discussion Thread***

[dwalk31]

I'm still stuck on how someone could disagree that the gov't is inherently good but still trust and believe this plan is the best option available or set to benefit the people

1. I never said that the government was inherently good or bad. I think that is a silly notion because of the nature of government. But, the history of the American government is certainly not the brightest for people that look like me. But that is unrelated. I am all for less government intrusion and less regulation. Lower taxes is a part of the smaller government. I am not sure how that concept escapes you.

 

[whywesteppin]

So then what do we disagree on? You think giving people more money is good. Ok, we are good there. Some people will pay more, but the majority wont. We are good there. It is disproportionate, but of course it is. What in America isn't? And we all know where the money will eventually come from. Welfare reform. Paul Ryan has run on this consistently. Do you think welfare reform is bad?

I'll give you the first point. On the second one, it is all about proportions. It's just not that simple. $500 back to a single mom and $5 million back to a CEO is not something any reasonable person would just sweep away.

Welfare reform could be good or it could be bad. It could be awful. It could be disastrous. Given that the phrase "welfare reform" is used as a dog whistle, I don't have much faith in it.

 

[dwalk31]

And please explain to me how a $500 tax cut will make a difference when they will result in either being dropped from their insurance or have their premiums skyrocket by 50-100% and end up being say now $450 per month. It’s a net loss for many of these people. And the people who will be hit hardest are the lower income by all of this. Those of us in white collar work will just take the savings to our portfolios or savings and enjoy the 401k growth. Those people will end up in a worst spot than they already were.

And guess who pays when they go to a doctor and can’t afford their costs. We actually do.

Being naive is a gentle explanation of what you are because you aren’t even acknowledging the notion that you maybe wrong.

If it results in a net loss for the majority of Americans, then the Republicans will lose the majority in 2018. Problem solved.

I get the sky is falling routine. We will see if that is what happens.

 

[RustyShackleford]

Well, I'm not going to go back amd read the exchange but I too have a little bit of experience in Economics ...

I'll just ask this simple question - Are the incentives in this Tax plan greater than the current, as they relate to production of the widespread economy, i.e. are more people goinng to produce more stuff (or the same people produce more stuff) given the new tax law?

Ultimately, this is the only economic question to answer as the construct of greater good is too subjective and impossible to resolve given the variability of human thought ...

No it really is not.

All you just asked really is if this tax bill is a supply side bill. That is it. If it will have some supply side effects. Maybe yes, but so what?

Better questions if it will boast economic growth enough. It will not, the CBO already said this. Plus the sale pitch of supply side cuts is that they are either budget neutral or give more revenue. I mean it seems conservatives can't even get Laffer right. Anyway, reports have come out they will be neither.

On the jobs front, the predictions have been weak too.

Won't boost consumption or aggregate demand so it wont really lead to much investment which in turn will not lead growth

Also is accelerates inequality, which looking at it through just an economic lense, still structurally weakens our economy.

It incentives jobs going overseas that drives down wages and consumption

And since firms are profit maximizers. They will naturally pursue things that help their bottom line and stock price. Especially when they is not sufficient demand or competition to warrant them investing in labor.

So, you're not asking a very good economic question at all. You kinda just deflecting

But at least your not Blco, so apologies for that.

 

[harlemtothebronx]

And you, by contrast, feel that government is inherently good. And you feel that government is the most expedient and reliable way to manage these goals.

We can agree to disagree on that point.

Not at all. I feel that there are incentives and compulsions laid through our law that ensures that these things take place.

Your idea would be the complete opposite.

Are you trolling or are you intentionally being this dense?

 

[noskey]

Y'all still arguing with this troll?

Well, I'm not going to go back amd read the exchange but I too have a little bit of experience in Economics ...

I'll just ask this simple question - Are the incentives in this Tax plan greater than the current, as they relate to production of the widespread economy, i.e. are more people goinng to produce more stuff (or the same people produce more stuff) given the new tax law?

Ultimately, this is the only economic question to answer as the construct of greater good is too subjective and impossible to resolve given the variability of human thought ...

Anyways, to touch on this real quick. If I'm wrong, please correct me, but I'm fairly certain there's been studies done that prove tax rates or taxes paid DO NOT have any affect the productivity of companies, or economies at large. Tax breaks are by and large a way for companies to hoard cash and return to shareholders, with no change in economic output. Again, may be wrong, but I'm certain I've read studies showing that. A quick Google search may have helped me sauce my post, but alas, here we are.

 

[harlemtothebronx]

Y'all still arguing with this troll?

You right.

 

[iamdef]

Glad that people will be getting that $1k next year. So close to having the necessary 6 months salary for medical emergencies.

 

[dwalk31]

Not at all. I feel that there are incentives and compulsions laid through our law that ensures that these things take place.

Your idea would be the complete opposite.

Are you trolling or are you intentionally being this dense?

Not trolling, being serious

 

[EddieDoyers]

All I know is that they are going to go after SS and Medicare to cut at the deficit the tax bill just created

Elderly people gonna suffer

 

[boris]

Source for my opinion? Me....

Ok, so what is your opinion based on?

 

[harlemtothebronx]

Ok, so what is your opinion based on?

His opinion alone isn't enough to form an informed opinion?

 

[RustyShackleford]

All I know is that they are going to go after SS and Medicare to cut at the deficit the tax bill just created

Elderly people gonna suffer

The AARP were idiots.

There was clearly a party on your side, and they chose to half step.

Some fools gotta learn the hard way

 

[EddieDoyers]

This is the hill Trump really wants our country to die on though
For Israel

 

[ninjahood]

If it results in a net loss for the majority of Americans, then the Republicans will lose the majority in 2018. Problem solved.

I get the sky is falling routine. We will see if that is what happens.

that's all im waiting on.

i wanna see for myself if da legendary Reaganomics worked 1st hand, cuz da way ol' boy sweeped in his 2nd term re-election with a 49 state landslide gives me da impression that da Country strongly approved of da job he was doing...

once Trump signs it in, we shall see........if da economy goes gang busters Trump is being re-elected easily...if it fails, he'll be neutered via a loss in one of da houses of Congress.. now we wait....

 

[harlemtothebronx]

Didn't realize the tax plan passed.

It's really a smash and grab. They threw as much garbage as they could into that bill.

 

[RustyShackleford]

Using elections to judge economic policy

 

[IATT]

This is the hill Trump really wants our country to die on though
For Israel

 

[RustyShackleford]

This is the hill Trump really wants our country to die on though
For Israel

What a piece of ****.

 

[sundoobie]

And please explain to me how a $500 tax cut will make a difference when they will result in either being dropped from their insurance or have their premiums skyrocket by 50-100% and end up being say now $450 per month. It’s a net loss for many of these people. And the people who will be hit hardest are the lower income by all of this. Those of us in white collar work will just take the savings to our portfolios or savings and enjoy the 401k growth. Those people will end up in a worst spot than they already were.

And guess who pays when they go to a doctor and can’t afford their costs. We actually do.

Being naive is a gentle explanation of what you are because you aren’t even acknowledging the notion that you maybe wrong.

I agree with most of what you're saying but you're making an assumption as though every American is dying or sick and needs health insurance. Not every single American poor or wealthy needs health insurance. I know several lower income folks that are paying almost 25% of their net paychecks on health insurance and that amount includes the premium assistance by Covered CA. Crazy part NOT once have they gone to see the doctor.. not even for the free annual physical that doesn't require a co-pay. I ask em all the time why are you paying so much for health insurance or why are you even in the Silver plan when you're not even using it, and basically their answer is because they are just simply following the law. I give em the

 

[RustyShackleford]

I agree with most of what you're saying but you're making an assumption as though every American is dying or sick and needs health insurance. Not every single American poor or wealthy needs health insurance. I know several lower income folks that are paying almost 25% of their net paychecks on health insurance and that amount includes the premium assistance by Covered CA. Crazy part NOT once have they gone to see the doctor.. not even for the free annual physical that doesn't require a co-pay. I ask em all the time why are you paying so much for health insurance or why are you even in the Silver plan when you're not even using it, and basically their answer is because they are just simply following the law. I give em the

You really have a very poor understanding of healthcare policy.

 

[harlemtothebronx]

Using elections to judge economic policy

I mean, considering how low the bar has been set for Trump and Republicans in general, there might be a shot.

But I can also see a much higher turnout for liberal voters, and less of a push for a third party.

I don't see it happening, but considering how people were willing to look past all of Trump's glaring flaws, I wouldn't be shocked. On top of that, I don't really see Democrats doing enough to prop themselves up still.

I'm hopeful, but I'll never be sure again. There's a large portion of the country who either genuinely believes or continues to convince themselves that they're winning...and this is only more confirmation bias.

 

[IATT]

What a piece of ****.

speaking of pieces of shh

 

[iamdef]

I agree with most of what you're saying but you're making an assumption as though every American is dying or sick and needs health insurance. Not every single American poor or wealthy needs health insurance. I know several lower income folks that are paying almost 25% of their net paychecks on health insurance and that amount includes the premium assistance by Covered CA. Crazy part NOT once have they gone to see the doctor.. not even for the free annual physical that doesn't require a co-pay. I ask em all the time why are you paying so much for health insurance or why are you even in the Silver plan when you're not even using it, and basically their answer is because they are just simply following the law. I give em the

They may not understand it fully but insurance is always best to have and not need it than the other way around. With insurance when I broke my hand I paid 650 out of pocket on a $3.5k surgery. I pay well over how much many family uses insurance each year but I'd much rather over pay and never use it than under pay and be shackled with medical debt

 

[rillo561]

that reads too much like a Ryan/McConnell talking point packaged for the lowest common denominator (reflexive trump voters).

This. "Who doesn't want to keep more of their money?"

Meanwhile insurance is going up, good and services will cost more. So there goes "your money"