RE: Economics for Estring

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: Economics for Estring

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Economics for Estring

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Economics for Estring - 9/21/2006 2:25:59 PM

Archer

Posts: 3207
Joined: 3/11/2005
Status: offline

LOL I was ondering WTF I said that was that good, LOL
I have a basic economic understading and my learning has a definite capitalist bent to it. Happens when you Take Economics as part of a Business degree program before you switch majors, LOL

(in reply to KenDckey)

Profile

Post #: 41

RE: Economics for Estring - 9/21/2006 3:07:16 PM

KenDckey

Posts: 4121
Joined: 5/31/2006
Status: offline

Hey Archer I sent you an e-mail. That is what I was thinking. oh btw I retired at Fort Gillem (the old Atlanta Army Depot) which probably should be a major superfund site.

(in reply to Archer)

Profile

Post #: 42

RE: Economics for Estring - 9/21/2006 3:27:44 PM

Estring

Posts: 3314
Joined: 1/1/2004
Status: offline

Wow, a thread devoted to me! Wonderful.
I don't share kedicat's dour assessment of the state of the US economy. Last I checked, it was doing pretty well.
I still am amazed at the opposition to tax cuts. That money is our money. The tax cuts just mean we get to keep more of what we earn. And on one of the threads I gave information on the percentage of taxes that are paid by the richest here in the US. Why shouldn't those who pay the most in taxes benefit the most from a tax cut? Makes sense to me.
And the question of why Kennedy's endorsement of tax cuts were right, yet Bush's endorsement is wrong is a good one. The answer is, they are both right. Bush inherited an economy that was in a recession. Add to that the happenings of 9/11, and you have a sick economy. The tax cuts were exactly what you do to jumpstart a sluggish economy. Why is that so hard to understand? Especially when it works?
Now if Bush would quit spending like a Democrat on steroids, we could really be on to something.

_____________________________

Boycott Whales!

(in reply to KenDckey)

Profile

Post #: 43

RE: Economics for Estring - 9/22/2006 1:17:55 AM

Kedicat

Posts: 251
Joined: 3/13/2005
Status: offline

Presidential debt graph and article.

http://zfacts.com/p/318.html

Jobs
http://zfacts.com/p/320.html

Poverty.
http://zfacts.com/p/335.html

All this data is from the US goverernment. Of course data from year to year and decade to decade is very fuzzy at the edges. New definitions of wages, debt, taxrates come and go over the years. But the trends are easy to see.

< Message edited by Kedicat -- 9/22/2006 1:37:25 AM >

(in reply to Estring)

Profile

Post #: 44

RE: Economics for Estring - 9/22/2006 1:35:49 AM

Kedicat

Posts: 251
Joined: 3/13/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Estring

Wow, a thread devoted to me! Wonderful.
I don't share kedicat's dour assessment of the state of the US economy. Last I checked, it was doing pretty well.
I still am amazed at the opposition to tax cuts. That money is our money. The tax cuts just mean we get to keep more of what we earn. And on one of the threads I gave information on the percentage of taxes that are paid by the richest here in the US. Why shouldn't those who pay the most in taxes benefit the most from a tax cut? Makes sense to me.
And the question of why Kennedy's endorsement of tax cuts were right, yet Bush's endorsement is wrong is a good one. The answer is, they are both right. Bush inherited an economy that was in a recession. Add to that the happenings of 9/11, and you have a sick economy. The tax cuts were exactly what you do to jumpstart a sluggish economy. Why is that so hard to understand? Especially when it works?
Now if Bush would quit spending like a Democrat on steroids, we could really be on to something.

Glad you can chuckle at it.
I apologize. It was petty and a cheap shot. No excuse.
I rant at you regularly. But in direct reply, within a thread is different. I had a lapse of judgement.

(in reply to Estring)

Profile

Post #: 45

RE: Economics for Estring - 9/22/2006 5:26:53 AM

seeksfemslave

Posts: 4011
Joined: 6/16/2006
Status: offline

Amelican Fliends, the chinese hold you in the palm of their hands and is there anything you can do ?

Massive trade deficit that can only get worse. Chines have the skills ti improve their products by leaps and bounds.
Federal budget deficit with about 30% - 40% held by China.
Outsourcing of manufacture to the Far East.

and you fiddle/faddle about with tax cuts and trickle down economics.
I have no answer but I can see the problem.

Just thought of something......serious economic decline ?

< Message edited by seeksfemslave -- 9/22/2006 5:27:51 AM >

(in reply to Kedicat)

Profile

Post #: 46

RE: Economics for Estring - 9/22/2006 10:31:48 AM

Amaros

Posts: 1363
Joined: 7/25/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Estring

Wow, a thread devoted to me! Wonderful.
I don't share kedicat's dour assessment of the state of the US economy. Last I checked, it was doing pretty well.
I still am amazed at the opposition to tax cuts. That money is our money. The tax cuts just mean we get to keep more of what we earn. And on one of the threads I gave information on the percentage of taxes that are paid by the richest here in the US. Why shouldn't those who pay the most in taxes benefit the most from a tax cut? Makes sense to me.
And the question of why Kennedy's endorsement of tax cuts were right, yet Bush's endorsement is wrong is a good one. The answer is, they are both right. Bush inherited an economy that was in a recession. Add to that the happenings of 9/11, and you have a sick economy. The tax cuts were exactly what you do to jumpstart a sluggish economy. Why is that so hard to understand? Especially when it works?
Now if Bush would quit spending like a Democrat on steroids, we could really be on to something.

So, you didn't read any of that or what? The economy wasn't in recession, when Bush "inherited" it, it was on a roll in fact - consumer spending barely hiccuped when the tech bubble popped, housing markets remained strong, demand for durable goods, etc., even the labor market recoverd rapidly - growth was such that thre was enough demand to absorb pretty much everybody who had been laid off - because the labor market had been streched so tight previously - hell, half of high school seniors were employed full time, there was nobody left to fill jobs just before the bubble burst.

How long you need to recover from a popped bubble, 4 year? 8 Years? Quit yer whining, the lack of backbone evident in this constant crying about liberals is nauseating, it's hard to watch supposedly full grown men act like two year olds - stand up and take some responsibility for chrissakes.

Go back and read my previous posts, then ask your question.

(in reply to Estring)

Profile

Post #: 47

RE: Economics for Estring - 9/22/2006 10:40:08 AM

Amaros

Posts: 1363
Joined: 7/25/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: seeksfemslave

Amelican Fliends, the chinese hold you in the palm of their hands and is there anything you can do ?

Massive trade deficit that can only get worse. Chines have the skills ti improve their products by leaps and bounds.
Federal budget deficit with about 30% - 40% held by China.
Outsourcing of manufacture to the Far East.

and you fiddle/faddle about with tax cuts and trickle down economics.
I have no answer but I can see the problem.

Just thought of something......serious economic decline ?