southsider2k5 Posted October 15, 2009 Share Posted October 15, 2009 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 14, 2009 -> 10:07 PM) We went over this a lot during the stimulus discussion and I've got too much work to do to really rehash it, here's a source citing work by a couple of people including the Congressional budget office and the congressional research service. Kap will say it's more complicated and those people are wrong, I will say Kap is flat out wrong, Kap will say that we have one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world, I'll respond "Yeah, if you assume that all of the deductions don't exist", I have to go worry about water-partitioning. The funny part of that is that the same people who are saying the corporate tax rate doesn't do much are the same people running around for Barack giving the "jobs saved" number. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted October 15, 2009 Share Posted October 15, 2009 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 14, 2009 -> 08:16 PM) The funny part of that is that the same people who are saying the corporate tax rate doesn't do much are the same people running around for Barack giving the "jobs saved" number. Yeah. Because he didn't cut the corporate tax rate. Otherwise he wouldn't have been saving jobs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cknolls Posted October 15, 2009 Share Posted October 15, 2009 These people surely could use the public option. WOW!!! http://www.drugfree.org/Portal/DrugIssue/M...aces/index.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted October 15, 2009 Share Posted October 15, 2009 is this going to be a part of the new "obama's health care plan will force feed you meth" meme or something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted October 15, 2009 Share Posted October 15, 2009 Obama wants to force feed me meth? Sweet, where do I sign up for this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 15, 2009 Share Posted October 15, 2009 QUOTE (bmags @ Oct 15, 2009 -> 02:55 PM) is this going to be a part of the new "obama's health care plan will force feed you meth" meme or something? No, but these will be some of the people that we will all be forced to pay for under the "no one can be dropped" portion of the plan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted October 15, 2009 Share Posted October 15, 2009 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 15, 2009 -> 03:03 PM) No, but these will be some of the people that we will all be forced to pay for under the "no one can be dropped" portion of the plan. Which would in turn probably end up reducing certain medical costs, because more of them would get treatment, be put into programs, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted October 15, 2009 Share Posted October 15, 2009 Drug rehab and treatment programs > mandatory stiff penalties, incarceration, etc. but that's an argument for another time, another day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted October 15, 2009 Share Posted October 15, 2009 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 15, 2009 -> 04:03 PM) No, but these will be some of the people that we will all be forced to pay for under the "no one can be dropped" portion of the plan. We are already forced to pay for them when they need emergency treatment and don't have money to pay the ER bills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted October 15, 2009 Share Posted October 15, 2009 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 15, 2009 -> 09:03 PM) No, but these will be some of the people that we will all be forced to pay for under the "no one can be dropped" portion of the plan. LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted October 16, 2009 Author Share Posted October 16, 2009 QUOTE (lostfan @ Oct 14, 2009 -> 08:36 PM) I tend to agree with kap on the slowing of bleeding, but perpetual tax cutting is s***ty budget policy. Well, there certainly has to be an endgame. You can't just perpetually do it, duh... but in times of deep recession, it's something that has proven to work well IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR, which is where jobs should be, not the damn government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 QUOTE (kapkomet @ Oct 15, 2009 -> 09:23 PM) Well, there certainly has to be an endgame. You can't just perpetually do it, duh... but in times of deep recession, it's something that has proven to work well IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR, which is where jobs should be, not the damn government. I believe there's a sweet spot somewhere, that you can raise taxes to a certain point before it starts negatively affecting the economy. The problem is that tax increases are taboo to mention even when they're necessary. I don't know why it's political suicide to suggest minor tax increases for people in my tax bracket. Seriously my entire family is not going to go bankrupt and die if I have to give an extra 600 dollars a year to the feds, after they give me multiple tax cuts over a decade or so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted October 16, 2009 Author Share Posted October 16, 2009 QUOTE (lostfan @ Oct 15, 2009 -> 08:32 PM) I believe there's a sweet spot somewhere, that you can raise taxes to a certain point before it starts negatively affecting the economy. The problem is that tax increases are taboo to mention even when they're necessary. I don't know why it's political suicide to suggest minor tax increases for people in my tax bracket. Seriously my entire family is not going to go bankrupt and die if I have to give an extra 600 dollars a year to the feds, after they give me multiple tax cuts over a decade or so. When there's real economic growth, no one wants to talk about it except get those "evil, rich motherf***ers". In reality, everyone benefits, but that's taboo for Dems to admit as well. The problem is, the middle class is no longer going to be the middle class before too long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 yes, dem's wouldn't get elected if they ran on tax cuts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DukeNukeEm Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 (edited) For government revenues, sure. Because that means corporations get to keep more of their own money and invest it how they want to instead of handing it over to the government. They just spend the money they save on Corporate Tax cuts to strengthen their lobbies and pay off election officials to make favorable policies for them. Edited October 17, 2009 by DukeNukeEm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_genius Posted October 18, 2009 Share Posted October 18, 2009 QUOTE (lostfan @ Oct 15, 2009 -> 02:58 PM) Obama wants to force feed me meth? Sweet, where do I sign up for this? you, sir, are a drug addict. luckily for you that's covered in the Obama plan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted October 18, 2009 Share Posted October 18, 2009 QUOTE (mr_genius @ Oct 17, 2009 -> 08:06 PM) you, sir, are a drug addict. luckily for you that's covered in the Obama plan. I actually forgot I was black so I don't do meth. Are coke addicts covered? I make enough money to not have to do crack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_genius Posted October 18, 2009 Share Posted October 18, 2009 QUOTE (lostfan @ Oct 17, 2009 -> 07:14 PM) I actually forgot I was black so I don't do meth. Are coke addicts covered? I make enough money to not have to do crack. All those drugs you mentioned are covered. 'Magic Mushroom' addiction? not covered. sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Starting to look like Health Insurers will lose their anti-trust exemption. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 21, 2009 -> 12:26 PM) Starting to look like Health Insurers will lose their anti-trust exemption. Good. Bring on the competition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 21, 2009 -> 12:26 PM) Starting to look like Health Insurers will lose their anti-trust exemption. SWEET! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 21, 2009 -> 10:50 AM) Good. Bring on the competition. As long as it's not run by the government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 21, 2009 -> 02:27 PM) As long as it's not run by the government. One entity putting the others out of business by selling a product artificially below cost is illegal for any other group in the country to do. It is anti-competitive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 21, 2009 -> 12:28 PM) One entity putting the others out of business by selling a product artificially below cost is illegal for any other group in the country to do. It is anti-competitive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 21, 2009 -> 02:42 PM) Or this... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts