Subject:
|
Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No!
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 17 Oct 2006 07:20:44 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2266 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote:
| |
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!
|
I give your weak attempt at humor a 2.5 out of 5 (whoopie-cushions).
|
Hey, I’ll take that. That’s 25% of perfect, after all.
|
How’s that math working for you lately, Dave!? Looks like half of perfect
from here the obstructed-view seats....
|
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!
|
“Half-wit” I’d say, but that would be too easy! >:-D
| |
| |
But it is the metric by which we have consistently gauged the economy.
|
But it’s accurate only inasmuch as an IQ test accurately measures IQ. Which
is to say that the IQ test doesn’t measure intelligence; it measures how
well you do on the test. The DJA is an indication of how well stocks are
trading, and in what volume, blah blah blah. But at best it’s a short-hand
means of describing how one measure of the economy sees things.
|
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 all aspects of prosperity, it is definitely a
bellwether of good times and bad.
| |
| |
I realize that there will always be people in any boom who are not affected,
but overall, booms favor everyone, if for no other reason than the
commonwealth becomes greater, allowing even the lazy and ne’er-do-wells to
benefit.
|
Some of them even make it to the Whitehouse, despite a long track record of
miserably doomed business ventures and personal failures. Maybe this is
the land of opportunity after all.
|
| |
Tim already gave a good answer, but I’d add that a booming economy doesn’t
help those in the lower income bracket, even if they’re there not out of
laziness but out of circumstance. Why is wealth-redistribution acceptable
when it’s redistributed to the wealthy, but not to the poor? The argument is
that the wealthy will put the money back into the economy. Well, what are
the impoverished going to do with it? Burn it?
|
The idea is that it gets reinvested into businesses which further spurs growth,
jobs, and wage increases.
| |
Some boats rise higher on a rising tide, not because of merit but because
they started higher (and because they’re not averse to dropping their anchors
(ie., the tax burden) onto the other boats.
|
Life isn’t fair? Tell me something new. Waging class war is just destructive;
there will always be someone richer than you, and always someone poorer. But
let’s be honest-- the poor don’t pay income tax-- tax cuts favor the rich
because they are the ones who pay the taxes. The top 5% of wage earners in this
country pay over half of our taxes-- the top half of wage earners pay nearly ALL
taxes.
I’d love to have to pay a lot of taxes-- it would mean that I would be pretty
rich indeed!
JOHN
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No!
|
| (...) 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)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Supply-Side Economics? The Evidence Says No!
|
| (...) 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)
|
19 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
|
|
|
|
