The real party of NO, the GOP, steps it up

[Riot]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

None of these 'rich' people you speak of hides their money under the matress. They invest in new business ventures, speculate and start businesses. The rest usually goes into stocks, REIT's (yea real estate) and T-bills and bonds mostly to save in tax liabilities.

Just because Pelosi speaks doesn't make it so.

I'm not listening to Pelosi in the least. I'm listening to every economist in the world. You might try not politicizing things that have nothing to do with politics, and learn something.

Guess what, Dell? Putting money into stocks, REIT's, T-bills and bonds - to save in tax liabilities - is exactly why giving money to rich people does NOT go back into the economy, and decreases government income. All those things you listed above takes money OUT of the economy. You just proved my point. Thanks

Consider this: Bush initiated massive tax benefits to the wealthy in 2001 and 2003. Since that time we've lost 800,000 jobs. Gee - doesn't seem to work the way the GOP says it does, does it?

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by Riot

Consider this: Bush initiated massive tax benefits to the wealthy in 2001 and 2003. Since that time we've lost 800,000 jobs. Gee - doesn't seem to work the way the GOP says it does, does it?

Are you actually saying that they didn't decide to add many more workers with the money they saved? Oh, they got to have something that says different. Just you wait.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Riot

Guess what, Dell? Putting money into stocks, REIT's, T-bills and bonds - to save in tax liabilities - is exactly why giving money to rich people does NOT go back into the economy, and decreases government income. All those things you listed above takes money OUT of the economy. You just proved my point. Thanks ?

so commercial real estate (REITS) treasury bills (America) and bonds (everything from road projects to bridges) yes muni bonds are where the tax beni's lie are taking money out of the economy?

[Riot]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

so commercial real estate (REITS) treasury bills (America) and bonds (everything from road projects to bridges) yes muni bonds are where the tax beni's lie are taking money out of the economy?

Yes, Dell. When you save money, it is not circulating in the economy. It is not liquid and circulating.

An unemployed person gets 300 a week (average). That - every penny - goes right back into the economy immediately, directly to food, gasoline, rent/mortgage, heat, electricity, etc. Multiply that by millions as we have now.

Louisville and Lexington have about 700,000 people in the metro areas roughly. We have 100,000 on unemployment in KY (that will be off by end of Dec if not extended). Figuring only 25,000 of those live in the metro areas, that is $7,500,000 a week out of the Lexington and Louisville economies if unemployment doesn't get extended by end of December. Already this week thousands are off it in this state. People can't buy groceries, gasoline and electricity, those companies lay off employees, quickly. We go into a depression really quickly.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Riot

Yes, Dell. When you save money, it is not circulating in the economy. It is not liquid and circulating.

An unemployed person gets 300 a week (average). That - every penny - goes right back into the economy immediately, directly to food, gasoline, rent/mortgage, heat, electricity, etc. Multiply that by millions as we have now..

what if by chance a rich person owns the apartment building, bank note and is invested in utilities? And a terrorist Muslim owns the grocery store.

Explain how that $300 comes back as more than it went out w/o a color quality copy machine?

[Riot]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

what if by chance a rich person owns the apartment building, bank note and is invested in utilities? And a terrorist Muslim owns the grocery store.

Explain how that $300 comes back as more than it went out w/o a color quality copy machine?

That $300 goes immediately out into the economy as cash. It isn't saved.

Pretend $50 goes to the grocery store. The grocery then gives $20 out in salaries (which goes out again to groceries, rent, etc a second time), puts $5 into inventory (grows business) and he puts $10 out in car purchase (expands who gets part of that $300) and $5 out into his groceries, rent, etc.

Pretend $250 goes to rent. Repeat the above with the owner paying off the mortage, then buying groceries, etc.

That $300 goes out and circulates throughout the economy multiple times before it ends up "taken out" (into long-term capital investments, savings, etc) Each time it circulates, it requires a business to be open and have inventory, it supports salaries: grocery, truck line, grower of food, gas station owner, clerk, gasoline tanker driver, etc.

Bonds, etc. only make money that goes into the economy the first time they are sold. Trading stocks, etc. in the markets does NOT circulate money into the economy that causes growth.

[Riot]

Today the House passed a bill giving tax cut continuation only to 98% of Americans (not to the wealthy for their income above $250K)

The rumor [edit: not a rumor, it's true] is that the Senate has now abandoned the idea of having 4 straw poll type of votes tomorrow.

Harry Reid is apparently listening to the massive pressure from the left on this tax cut issue (ad from MoveOn.org, innundation of White House and Senate with e-mails, telephone calls from constituents, etc) and [correction Saturday] the Senate will hold TWO REAL VOTES, one on tax cuts to the middle class, then another on tax cuts to the wealthy.

Edit: The first vote will be to extend tax cuts for the middle class (up to $250K) The second vote will be to raise that ceiling from $250K to 1 million dollars. The second is an overt compromise to the GOP. The Dems will vote against the second.

Reid will dare the GOP to not vote for the middle class tax cut. If the GOP does not vote yes, nothing will get passed - and all the tax cuts expire at the end of the year. And the GOP can take it up again in the new Congress on their own.

So Harry Reid has taken a stand, and it's up to the GOP now.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

No. Not when our citizens are starving in the midst of recession. This is America. We feed them and house them and help them. We don't buy new weapons systems, but we feed our own and care for our own.

If the morals of the situation fail to impress, consider that especially when in the midst of a slow jobless recession recovery, that money goes directly to keeping the economy going. In their pockets and directly out into the economy. Each dollar of unemployment results in $1-$2 of economic stimulus. If we take that infusion of money out of the economy now, we will fall back in a big way, and then our costs (Medicare, health, food stamps, etc) will skyrocket.

Magic?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

Good stats :-) Do you have the total number of seats the parties controlled before and after the elections?

Percentage of wins/losses is important, yes, but it's relative to the starting point. Certainly this election alot of House seats changed over, a huge percentage, but many had Dems sitting in them, rather than the usual GOP, to start with. Those Dems were oddities that were only there because of the Obama effect of 2008, many of those seats are historically GOP seats, and reverted right back to them.

The most notable thing I see post-election is what is being discussed in the southern states - locally and at a state level, Dems are becoming an endangered species. And changing over to be "GOP" (parties switch) so they can be involved in policy making. This goes directly to gerrymandering district configurations.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE69929420101103

Obama confessed to having suffered a long night on Tuesday as Republicans seized control of the House of Representatives and made gains in the Senate, handing him the biggest defeat of his career and threatening to block his agenda for the second half of his term.

"I feel bad," the subdued president said when asked to reflect on the drubbing his party took at the polls.


Republicans picked up at least 60 House seats in the biggest shift in power since Democrats gained 75 House seats in 1948. The election outcome put pressure on Obama to make a mid-course correction as he seeks to reduce the 9.6 percent jobless rate and prepares to seek re-election in 2012.



Interesting that Democrats are disappearing in Southern states and some still feel the GOP is party in trouble

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

It doesn't solve everything. The facts are that the rich have gotten richer, and the Middle Class has gotten poorer. The divide between the two is increasing. If it was the other way around, then, you'd be making a lot more sense.

The middle class isnt getting poorer. The Democrats are just lowering the value of Rich. the truth is that if people who make $250k are now considered rich then the rich are getting a lot poorer.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

Yes, it will. That article is nice, but assumes much not in evidence.

Well actually it doesnt. The biggest joke of an assumption is that you can raise taxes on job creators and that it wont negatively effect jobs.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

It's not a matter of "belief", it's the truth. The only disagreement among economist is the amount of benefit you get per doller. Those funds DO keep the unemployment level lower. Unemployment money is immediately plowed right back into the economy - food, rent, gas, etc. That keeps those folks providing those services employed, keeps demand high there.

No they dont. The jobs that service basic needs are not ones that are in jeopardy.

Unemployment benefits as economic stimulus and unemployment reducer.

You can't make this stuff up....

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

I'm not listening to Pelosi in the least. I'm listening to every economist in the world. You might try not politicizing things that have nothing to do with politics, and learn something.

Guess what, Dell? Putting money into stocks, REIT's, T-bills and bonds - to save in tax liabilities - is exactly why giving money to rich people does NOT go back into the economy, and decreases government income. All those things you listed above takes money OUT of the economy. You just proved my point. Thanks

Consider this: Bush initiated massive tax benefits to the wealthy in 2001 and 2003. Since that time we've lost 800,000 jobs. Gee - doesn't seem to work the way the GOP says it does, does it?

You say these things as they were factual.

Cutting taxes on the wealthy increases gov't income.

Tax payments by millionaire households more than doubled to $273 billion in 2007 from $132 billion after the tax rates were cut in 2003. The number of tax returns with $1 million or more in annual reported income doubled over that period thanks to the strong economic rebound.

You seem to fail to grasp the fact the a stronger economy is a far greater generator of govt revenues than raising tax rates. That is a fact.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

Are you actually saying that they didn't decide to add many more workers with the money they saved? Oh, they got to have something that says different. Just you wait.

Yes they just hoard it, no business are created by people who make more than $250k a year. Only govt spending creates jobs.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

Yes, Dell. When you save money, it is not circulating in the economy. It is not liquid and circulating.

An unemployed person gets 300 a week (average). That - every penny - goes right back into the economy immediately, directly to food, gasoline, rent/mortgage, heat, electricity, etc. Multiply that by millions as we have now.

Louisville and Lexington have about 700,000 people in the metro areas roughly. We have 100,000 on unemployment in KY (that will be off by end of Dec if not extended). Figuring only 25,000 of those live in the metro areas, that is $7,500,000 a week out of the Lexington and Louisville economies if unemployment doesn't get extended by end of December. Already this week thousands are off it in this state. People can't buy groceries, gasoline and electricity, those companies lay off employees, quickly. We go into a depression really quickly.

What?

There is a looming depression because unemployed people arent getting $300 a week?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

That $300 goes immediately out into the economy as cash. It isn't saved.

Pretend $50 goes to the grocery store. The grocery then gives $20 out in salaries (which goes out again to groceries, rent, etc a second time), puts $5 into inventory (grows business) and he puts $10 out in car purchase (expands who gets part of that $300) and $5 out into his groceries, rent, etc.

Pretend $250 goes to rent. Repeat the above with the owner paying off the mortage, then buying groceries, etc.

That $300 goes out and circulates throughout the economy multiple times before it ends up "taken out" (into long-term capital investments, savings, etc) Each time it circulates, it requires a business to be open and have inventory, it supports salaries: grocery, truck line, grower of food, gas station owner, clerk, gasoline tanker driver, etc.

Bonds, etc. only make money that goes into the economy the first time they are sold. Trading stocks, etc. in the markets does NOT circulate money into the economy that causes growth.

The problem with your theory is that all the jobs you believe are saved are all govt subsidized or in no danger anyway. The food production business is already massively subsidized by the govt, public utilities as well. The oil industry is hardly hurting (gas stations).

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Riot

Today the House passed a bill giving tax cut continuation only to 98% of Americans (not to the wealthy for their income above $250K)

The rumor [edit: not a rumor, it's true] is that the Senate has now abandoned the idea of having 4 straw poll type of votes tomorrow.

Harry Reid is apparently listening to the massive pressure from the left on this tax cut issue (ad from MoveOn.org, innundation of White House and Senate with e-mails, telephone calls from constituents, etc) and [correction Saturday] the Senate will hold TWO REAL VOTES, one on tax cuts to the middle class, then another on tax cuts to the wealthy.

Edit: The first vote will be to extend tax cuts for the middle class (up to $250K) The second vote will be to raise that ceiling from $250K to 1 million dollars. The second is an overt compromise to the GOP. The Dems will vote against the second.

Reid will dare the GOP to not vote for the middle class tax cut. If the GOP does not vote yes, nothing will get passed - and all the tax cuts expire at the end of the year. And the GOP can take it up again in the new Congress on their own.

So Harry Reid has taken a stand, and it's up to the GOP now.

Yes the Democrats as usual have put their agenda ahead of the American people. Too bad they didnt see fit to temporarily extend all of the cuts so we could avoid all the issues that will be created and let the newly elected Congress tackle the issue.

Of course the GOP will reject this foolish plan and then simply bring back the legislation right after the 1st of the year and force the Democrats to kill it.

[jms62]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Well actually it doesnt. The biggest joke of an assumption is that you can raise taxes on job creators and that it wont negatively effect jobs.

Job creators in where India, China, Vietnam, Brazil, where ever labor can be arbitraged? Your logic is based upon old-school economcis which do not exist in the 21st century. Lowering the taxes on job creators simply means more money into the pockets of the CEO's.. They will continue outsourcing and using H1B labor. These lost jobs actually are the consumers of their own or customers products.. It is a game of financial musical chairs and at the end those at the VERY VERY top will have theirs and the rest will fend for the crumbs. The race to the bottom continues.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by jms62

Job creators in where India, China, Vietnam, Brazil, where ever labor can be arbitraged? Your logic is based upon old-school economcis which do not exist in the 21st century. Lowering the taxes on job creators simply means more money into the pockets of the CEO's.. They will continue outsourcing and using H1B labor. These lost jobs actually are the consumers of their own or customers products.. It is a game of financial musical chairs and at the end those at the VERY VERY top will have theirs and the rest will fend for the crumbs. The race to the bottom continues.

Thank You. Cannon, that covers the responses to about 5 of your entries above.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

The middle class isnt getting poorer. The Democrats are just lowering the value of Rich. the truth is that if people who make $250k are now considered rich then the rich are getting a lot poorer.

Oh, do you think the republicans would agree to only extending the tax cut for those making $500k etc. a year? I don't think so. They care about the rich. No matter the ceiling, the fact is that they care most about the rich. This is a chance for the President to show the American people exactly that point. Hell, if he offers a 1 mil/ year ceiling, I don't think they'd agree to it. They care most about the rich, and that separation in ideology needs to be clear for the voters in 2012. The amount of American people that want to extend this for those over $250k? The percentage is in the 30's range. He needs those 60 some odd percent of the population to know exactly which party (more importantly which Presidential Candidate in 2012) agrees with them on this. Let the Republicans keep digging their grave..... Dumbo, please don't stop them.