Debate : 21573


Off-Topic / Debate / 21573	21572 \| 21574

Subject:	Re: How many things need to stack up before we throw this jerk out?
Newsgroups:	lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date:	Mon, 14 Jul 2003 19:53:12 GMT
Viewed:	361 times

In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Mike Petrucelli wrote: > I haven't heard anyone using the ten-year-trail other than economics teachers > period. In that context it makes sense, outside that context is anyones guess. > > But that's my point! Dubya (or at least his supporters) blame Clinton for > > current economic woes because, alledgly, the impact of Clinton's policies is > > only now being seen (due to the 10-year-swing). > > I haven't acctually heard anyone saying that. Really? Pretty much every discussion about the economy that I hear gives Reagan all the credit for the mid/late 90's boom, while all the blame for the Dubya-era recession goes to Clinton. I would go so far as to say that, among conservative pundits, I've never heard otherwise. > > "The buck stops somewhere else." -- George W. Bush > > Of course the original point was the only way for the Government to help the > economy is to cut taxes. Anything else is simply robbing Peter to pay Paul. I don't accept that caricature of taxation, however. And in many cases, Paul has been robbing Peter for decades, so I don't mind if Paul has to be forced to give some of it back. > Even the previous "study" you > cited stated that they did not take into account state and local tax rates, > which really invalidates any conclusions they could make. A great point! Of course, the main reason that state and local tax rates are rising is because Dubya's administration has cut Federal aid to states. That way, Dubya can claim to have lowered taxes, even though we're all (well, except for corporations and the super-rich) are paying much more at the local and state levels. Additionally, Dubya will probably claim that his economic stimulus package *would* have worked if only the states hadn't raised their own taxes! I don't have any documentation of this, but I'd be curious to learn whether Republican-held or -majority states are receiving some sort of hidden compensation, while Democratic-held states are being forced to tax themselves to death... Dave!

Message has 2 Replies:

		Re: How many things need to stack up before we throw this jerk out?
(...) Well that's the first thing I have heard on the subject that makes any sense at all. (...) Personally I think the real reason the Democrats are always against tax cuts is so they can spend the money on their social engineering agenda rather (...) (21 years ago, 14-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

		The Economy, Stupid! (was Re: How many things etc)
(...) You're so cynical, Dave! Too bad it is not more contagious, it might keep more politicians on their toes. In theory, I'd like to see taxes so low that much of what we now have as part of local, state, and federal governments would be (...) (21 years ago, 14-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Message is in Reply To:

		Re: How many things need to stack up before we throw this jerk out?
(...) I haven't heard anyone using the ten-year-trail other than economics teachers period. In that context it makes sense, outside that context is anyones guess. (...) I haven't acctually heard anyone saying that. (...) That is because most people (...) (21 years ago, 14-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

81 Messages in This Thread:

Entire Thread on One Page:: Nested: All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear: All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:: Nested: All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear: All | Brief | Compact

Custom Search