State of The Union 2012

[AquaMan]

The crap truck stopped by here and illegally unloaded.

Best I can tell, several people around here seem to think because increasing taxes is a slower boat to prosperity than slash and burn, that we should just ignore such remedies because they are related to "basal" emotions of fairness and equality, both actually Communist/Socialist ploys to simply take money from the upper classes.

I remember laughing in psychology about the arguments between behaviorists and those who believed in "wired" genetics. Nature/nurture. Just like Gas they argued passionately that only their side was right. Now we know 30 years later that it is both. Can we afford to wait 30 years for Gas et al to learn the same lesson in economics even though it goes against their script? I think not.

[Conan71]

The crap truck stopped by here and illegally unloaded.

Best I can tell, several people around here seem to think because increasing taxes is a slower boat to prosperity than slash and burn, that we should just ignore such remedies because they are related to "basal" emotions of fairness and equality, both actually Communist/Socialist ploys to simply take money from the upper classes.

I remember laughing in psychology about the arguments between behaviorists and those who believed in "wired" genetics. Nature/nurture. Just like Gas they argued passionately that only their side was right. Now we know 30 years later that it is both. Can we afford to wait 30 years for Gas et al to learn the same lesson in economics even though it goes against their script? I think not.

Great!  Add some mechanics to the conversation then.  What do you propose is a workable tax rate and why?  

Talking about tax increases on the 1% is great for politicians because it creates a bogeyman to take the focus off how their incompetence has contributed to the lack of job growth the last 4 years.  It's an interesting smoke screen because they've managed to benefit a lot of 1%'ers with stimulus spending and government loans which will never be repaid.

[Gaspar]

The crap truck stopped by here and illegally unloaded.

Yes it did.
It's just a question of who was driving.




Added:  I love your concept that "raising taxes is a slow boat to prosperity."  May I use that?

In fact the concept that taxation has a causal relationship on prosperity is so very powerful.  That's like saying theft is the path to security, or rape is the path to love.  So very uniquely liberal.  You've made my day.

[heironymouspasparagus]

I am glad you are open to a reduction to spending.  Where should that come from?  All agencies across the board or a chosen few?

How much do you think that the "top 1%" pay in taxes?  For instance, Romney just released his tax returns.  He paid about 15% over the last two years returns (13.9%, 15.4%) .  Most of his income was from investment.  If he paid 15% in taxes on investment income, what does that make his tax rate?

Again...as I have said repeatedly....how about if we go back to the Fountain From Which All Goodness supposedly flows...Reagan.  He is the gold standard to which all is compared, isn't he?

Actually, no, that is not where I would take it.  See the response following for specific answers - also repeated repeatedly - to Conans specific question about what and why.

[AquaMan]

Conan, lets just take a minute to see what we're trying to accomplish here and how. For me to get into the mechanics of it all means, like alot of other people around here, I'm going to have to go Google, Wiki and website searching to find the materials to substantiate what I already believe. Is that helpful? What I believe has been accumulated over a lifetime of education, reading, watching and experiencing. It is distilled into a framework of beliefs as to what works or doesn't work, what is fantasy or logic, and what is simply noise. From this framework I derive my "script". Others are doing the same.

So, in the end, no one benefits from me doing so anymore than I benefit from Gas's $5 explanations of 50 cent logic. Just have to wade through it and remember when I was forty. Mostly this is all just noise. Come on, "Basal" emotions? Fairness and equality are now bad things?

However, I do find much to believe in your last sentence. 1%ers are just as much a scapegoat for a system that has been failed by its operators. Decades of mismanagement of our resources to benefit smaller and smaller populations using "noise" as a cover has damaged us severely.

[AquaMan]

Yes it did.
It's just a question of who was driving.




Added:  I love your concept that "raising taxes is a slow boat to prosperity."  May I use that?

In fact the concept that taxation has a causal relationship on prosperity is so very powerful.  That's like saying theft is the path to security, or rape is the path to love.  So very uniquely liberal.  You've made my day.

Not who was driving...who pulled the lever to dump!

I am honored you find anything I say important enough to repeat. I do fail to understand how you jump from taxation being a causal relationship to prosperity over to criminal activities. If taxation is not causal, then why did so many companies jump over to Ireland to operate, which added a fair amount of money into their economy, thus keeping them more prosperous.

Any one tactic or change in strategy or change in leadership at this point in time means a slow road to prosperity. Why you find that adjective humorous tells me something about your misunderstanding of how we got here, and how long it took. Impatience.

[AquaMan]

Heiro, I have forgotten more about 1983-84 than I care to admit. Reagan made a speech around that time about taxes. He said that there had been too many who had abused our tax system and had not paid their fare share. He proposed that Capital Gains be taxed at the same level as ordinary income. Forgive me if that is not totally accurate. I just saw the clip on cable a couple days ago.

Can you imagine that? He said "fair share"!! He said "tax Capital Gains"!! What a liberal.

[Conan71]

Conan, lets just take a minute to see what we're trying to accomplish here and how. For me to get into the mechanics of it all means, like alot of other people around here, I'm going to have to go Google, Wiki and website searching to find the materials to substantiate what I already believe. Is that helpful? What I believe has been accumulated over a lifetime of education, reading, watching and experiencing. It is distilled into a framework of beliefs as to what works or doesn't work, what is fantasy or logic, and what is simply noise. From this framework I derive my "script". Others are doing the same.

So, in the end, no one benefits from me doing so anymore than I benefit from Gas's $5 explanations of 50 cent logic. Just have to wade through it and remember when I was forty. Mostly this is all just noise. Come on, "Basal" emotions? Fairness and equality are now bad things?

However, I do find much to believe in your last sentence. 1%ers are just as much a scapegoat for a system that has been failed by its operators. Decades of mismanagement of our resources to benefit smaller and smaller populations using "noise" as a cover has damaged us severely.

Increasing taxes because it makes us feel better or gives the appearance of fairness is no more a reason to raise taxes than it would be to lower them.  Even when the marginal rate was 70%+ we had ghettos and extremely poor rural areas.  It should be for purely economic reasons and the reasons stated in President Obama's fairness rhetoric are not economic realities.  He cannot lift the underclass or create hope by increasing taxes on the rich.  All he's doing is promising the peasants their pound of flesh.  The reality is, he's not done anything to improve the underclass, he's done what previous administrations have done: funneled more money and favors toward his major supporters.  He has zero intention of raising taxes on the wealthy, he's simply in campaign mode as usual.

If taxation is not causal, then why did so many companies jump over to Ireland to operate, which added a fair amount of money into their economy, thus keeping them more prosperous.

Proof that lower taxes helps create jobs, wouldn't you say? 

[Teatownclown]

Heiro, I have forgotten more about 1983-84 than I care to admit. Reagan made a speech around that time about taxes. He said that there had been too many who had abused our tax system and had not paid their fare share. He proposed that Capital Gains be taxed at the same level as ordinary income. Forgive me if that is not totally accurate. I just saw the clip on cable a couple days ago.

Can you imagine that? He said "fair share"!! He said "tax Capital Gains"!! What a liberal.

http://news.yahoo.com/arkansas-democrats-cat-killed-painted-liberal-211435575.html

the usual suspects.....

[AquaMan]

Conan, how do you rationalize Reagan's proposals to increase taxes on the rich because of inherent unfairness? Yet now you think that should just be a decision based on economics? Truth is that if we eliminate taxes on the top tier of taxpayers altoghether, it will have a tremendous effect on the economy. So, is that the best path?

And, yes, thanks for reinforcing my tax prosperity causality argument. No one doubts that companies with short sighted leadership, no restraints, no loyalty, no patriotism and no morals will follow the path of least resistance every time. And the people they bless with the results of those characteristics, prosper. Just like a drug dealers girlfriend!

[heironymouspasparagus]

Great!  Add some mechanics to the conversation then.  What do you propose is a workable tax rate and why?  

Talking about tax increases on the 1% is great for politicians because it creates a bogeyman to take the focus off how their incompetence has contributed to the lack of job growth the last 4 years.  It's an interesting smoke screen because they've managed to benefit a lot of 1%'ers with stimulus spending and government loans which will never be repaid.

Specifically - let the Bush tax BS expire.  Let the capital gains return to its previous level.

And why?  Because that is exactly what was working very well before the Bush Debacle.  We had surpluses - even if not as many as Newt is claiming for his credit.  The economy was doing well before Bush under that structure - actually was the best expansion we have ever had, then followed by years of lackluster muddling along.  There was plenty of money to satisfy all but the most egregious excesses of appetite.  There was investment in new fields of technology.  In general, the economy was working better than it has since. 

It operated at a point that allowed ongoing operation of the economy.


And biggest of all, we had not condemned our grandkids to being loaded down with the tangible expression of this generation's greed, hubris, and narcissism.



It would also be nice if as a side note we could get out of this loop of continuous war as our main economic policy.

[heironymouspasparagus]

Heiro, I have forgotten more about 1983-84 than I care to admit. Reagan made a speech around that time about taxes. He said that there had been too many who had abused our tax system and had not paid their fare share. He proposed that Capital Gains be taxed at the same level as ordinary income. Forgive me if that is not totally accurate. I just saw the clip on cable a couple days ago.

Can you imagine that? He said "fair share"!! He said "tax Capital Gains"!! What a liberal.

Even with his tax cuts and adjustments, he understood that deficit spending was a dead end trap - even if he was the biggest deficit spender in over 200 years.  (Until Bush and Bush came along.)  That's why we had the biggest tax hikes in the history of the country up to that point under him.


The extreme right that is running around today invoking the name and memory of Reagan would have him crucified if he were running today.  The tax rate for more than 3/4 of his term was OVER 50%.  (Today we are at 33% and expiration of the Bush cuts would take it to 36%.  And long term capital gains would go to 25% from 15%)

[Conan71]

Specifically - let the Bush tax BS expire.  Let the capital gains return to its previous level.

And why?  Because that is exactly what was working very well before the Bush Debacle.  We had surpluses - even if not as many as Newt is claiming for his credit.  The economy was doing well before Bush under that structure - actually was the best expansion we have ever had, then followed by years of lackluster muddling along.  There was plenty of money to satisfy all but the most egregious excesses of appetite.  There was investment in new fields of technology.  In general, the economy was working better than it has since.  

It operated at a point that allowed ongoing operation of the economy.


And biggest of all, we had not condemned our grandkids to being loaded down with the tangible expression of this generation's greed, hubris, and narcissism.



It would also be nice if as a side note we could get out of this loop of continuous war as our main economic policy.

I agree, the Clinton era tax code worked at the time.  It seems we finally hit a magic equilibrium between GDP, government receipts, and government spending during that period.  There was also the decided advantage of massive investment in new bio technologies which resulted in many new treatments for diseases real or imagined, the rapid growth and exploitation of the internet, new telecom technology and (over)expansion, new IT technologies, etc.  

That was a true time of greed, hubris, and narcissism.  What made an upstart company which had lost millions over the previous three years with a very sketchy business plan suddenly worth $500 million or so overnight?  

The unfortunate part is all those happened within roughly the same time frame which lead to bubbles everywhere you looked: housing, venture capital, IPO's, etc.  A whole lot of mortgages out there (literally and figuratively) that we are charging off now.  Had the growth come in waves rather than pretty much all at once, we might not be in this mess now.

No less than Bill Clinton has said though, that now is not the time to go back to the tax rates of the 1990's.  We need to be in more of a recovery mode prior to increases.

All that said, we don't know that the Clinton era tax codes would be the proper equilibrium in this day and age any more than whether or not Keynesian measures taken during the Great Depression are still as relevant today.  It was an entirely different economic climate in the private sector 12-15 years ago.

[AquaMan]

Think this might come up in the SOTU address tonight?

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-01-24/payrolls-rose-in-25-u-s-states-in-december-while-jobless-rate-fell-in-37.html

Very optimistic article. Not just December. Texas and Cali joblessnes declined for the year. Bama sucks, but still came out on top in joblessness growth. Of course you know, its only Bloomberg. A business magazine. Better get this Obama character out of office before someone notices.

sorry for the constant edits. Left handed, aged, alcohol deprived. bad combination.

[nathanm]

Come on guys, you know that I'm not phased when you start in with the ridicule and name calling.

I made some simple observations.  I'm sorry if they upset you, but they are none the less true.

And this is just further evidence of your delusion when it comes to politics. The ridicule and name calling come out because you say ridiculously outlandish things worthy of name calling. I still find it hilarious that you can't tell the difference between a Republican moving to the right and a Democrat moving to the left. You constantly make inane posts and use cherry picked statistics in an attempt to justify your position.

I'm sorry that makes me laugh and poke fun. I should be a better person, but I'm not. I just can't wrap my head around why on God's green earth you'd continually carry water for the group of people who have seen their after tax income triple since 1979. Why should I care what they make, you ask? Well, maybe I should care because they're actively taking it from the rest of us through tax and other policy while the income share of everyone below them have at best remained stagnant (for the rest of the top 80%) or declined since that time.

Yet still you think that the problem is too much taxes? It's like you're stuck in 1972 with no way to get home or something.