 | | Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No! —Dave Schuler
|
| | | Read about it (URL) in Scientific American. It's been clear since at least the time of Reagan's disastrous administration that this reward-the-wealthy approach wasn't the societal boon that it was advertised to be, but now we have scientific (...) (18 years ago, 16-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No! —Timothy Gould
|
| | | | (...) While I suspect the conclusions of the study are correct it seems like a highly flawed study from that write-up. For one thing calling Australia a low tax country is a little odd considering that the top rate was about 50% until very recently. (...) (18 years ago, 16-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No! —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | (...) All things considered, I'm more annoyed that you didn't riff on my rating system than that you questioned the methodology of the study! Dave! (18 years ago, 16-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No! —John Neal
|
| | | | (...) I give your weak attempt at humor a 2.5 out of 5 (whoopie-cushions). As for the study, I was under the impression that the whole debate WRT supply-side economics was all but over. It worked fabulously for Reagan (spending did him in). It is (...) (18 years ago, 16-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No! —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | (...) Hey, I'll take that. That's 25% of perfect, after all. (...) That's right--it's a disastrous policy divorced from reality and favored only by the very wealthy who understand its implications and the not-so-wealthy who don't. End of debate! (...) (18 years ago, 16-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No! —John Neal
|
| | | | (...) How's that math working for you lately, Dave!? Looks like half of perfect from here the obstructed-view seats.... (...) Well, that certainly was easy....:-) (...) But it is the metric by which we have consistently gauged the economy. I realize (...) (18 years ago, 16-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No! —Timothy Gould
|
| | | | | --snip-- (...) But that's true in any developed country at any time since WWII. The standard of living of the developed world has increased consistently (albeit faster or slower at times) because science and technology has allowed it to. It's a true (...) (18 years ago, 16-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No! —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | (...) Whoops! Not a failing of math, but of reading comprehension. I totally blew past your maximum of five and read a ten in its place. But half-perfect is nifty, too! (...) But it's accurate only inasmuch as an IQ test accurately measures IQ. (...) (18 years ago, 17-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No! —John Neal
|
| | | | | | (...) "Half-wit" I'd say, but that would be too easy! >:-D (...) Well, my point is that it has been consistently used through the decades and therefore is a sort of standardized snapshot of our economy, if only one part. Though it doesn't reflect (...) (18 years ago, 17-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No! —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | (...) That would be nice if it were true, but despite two administrations espousing that view, it has yet to work as promised. It fails for a number of reasons. First, you can't build a business if there isn't a demand to support it, and if the (...) (18 years ago, 17-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No! —John Neal
|
| | | | | | (...) Well, let's be honest here. If your product is too expensive for the masses in the USA, it probably doesn't stand much of a chance in an even MORE empoverished world market overseas, especially with foreign governments' market-protection (...) (18 years ago, 17-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No! —Timothy Gould
|
| | | | | | (...) Not quite true any more. The EU is providing a balanced offset against the US nowadays (look at the strength of the Euro). From a world markets point of view the US is playing less of a role. And I wouldn't whinge about tariffs. Check how much (...) (18 years ago, 17-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No! —John Neal
|
| | | | | | (...) What about all of this rubbish about the US being 5% of the world's population (300,000,000 strong now, thankyouverymuch) and yet consuming 75%-ish of the world's resources? Balance that! (...) It's a wonder we are even able to dress ourselves (...) (18 years ago, 17-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No! —Timothy Gould
|
| | | | | | (...) I've never heard it said that the US consumes 75% of the worlds resources. I've heard it consumes 25%. Are you learning percentages from Dave Schuler? (...) To be honest it kind of is. Your rates of literacy and numeracy are incredibly poor by (...) (18 years ago, 17-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No! —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | (...) I find that offensive and insulting. I've worked long and hard to foul up my understanding of percentages, and I won't have you casting aspersions on my diligent efforts! Do you think dim-wittedeness like this comes easily? No way! Besides, (...) (18 years ago, 17-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No! —John Neal
|
| | | | | | (...) Hey, I think I was just sucker-punched.... JOHN (18 years ago, 17-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No! —Tim David
|
| | | | (...) Depends on what perfect is. Could be 2x perfect (if perfect=0) Tim (18 years ago, 17-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No! —Tim David
|
| | | | (...) OK, my maths is really wrong there :very embarassed: (2x0=0) Infinately better than perfect then. Tim (18 years ago, 17-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No! —John Neal
|
| | | | (...) 2 out of 10 for spelling though;-) JOHN (18 years ago, 17-Oct-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
