+ Reply to Thread
Page 96 of 158 FirstFirst ... 46869495969798106146 ... LastLast
Results 1,426 to 1,440 of 2367

Thread: Another Democrat double standard

  1. #1426
    Champ RhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond repute RhythmDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Ruston, LA
    Posts
    6,114

    Re: Another Democrat double standard

    Quote Originally Posted by saltydawg View Post
    First off, I didn't even bother to look for an other country since what I posted ties in with the stupid republican mantra of voodoo economics.
    Secondly, you must be too young to remember when the country had very high marginal tax rates or otherwise you would know that they were meaningless since the wealthy had so many tax loop-holes and dodges that hardly anybody paid the highest rates. So your argument is meaningless.

    As for your argument that tax cuts for the wealthy and reduction of regulations produces robust economic growth because of what happened during Reagan's era, there are plenty of other explanations for the increase in economic growth such as a rebound from the Carter era recession and a large increase in government deficit spending. Perhaps you can list some of those Reagan era regulations that were repealed? And tell us again about how much Reagan increased the national debt. Why increase the national debt if voodoo economics worked?
    Ha ha. Salty you totally don't get it. Recall in my previous post in which I asked if you can explain it...because I can? I guess you can, too. The whole point is that, regardless of how much the government taxes the wealthy, they will never get it. Exactly what, and why, you stated. Congrats, you nailed it. So what is better...the wealthy finding legal loopholes and keeping their wealth sitting offshore earning interest, or letting that wealth into the country to be invested domestically and create jobs?

    And you said that history has proven it...but you can't name a country. History has NOT proven what you wrote.

    Give me a minute and I will give you some data on your second paragraph.

  2. #1427
    Champ saltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your time saltydawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    southern Nevada
    Posts
    11,262

    Re: Another Democrat double standard

    Quote Originally Posted by RhythmDawg View Post
    Ha ha. Salty you totally don't get it. Recall in my previous post in which I asked if you can explain it...because I can? I guess you can, too. The whole point is that, regardless of how much the government taxes the wealthy, they will never get it. Exactly what, and why, you stated. Congrats, you nailed it. So what is better...the wealthy finding legal loopholes and keeping their wealth sitting offshore earning interest, or letting that wealth into the country to be invested domestically and create jobs?

    And you said that history has proven it...but you can't name a country. History has NOT proven what you wrote.

    Give me a minute and I will give you some data on your second paragraph.
    There is nothing in voodoo economics that says that the wealthy have to invest their money in the USA. Under the old regime of high marginal tax rates they were required to do so in order to receive tax breaks. You going to answer the question about if voodoo economics works why Reagan had to use deficit spending to boost the economy? Or are you willing to concede that voodoo economics is a bust?

    "All roads lead to Putin" -- Thomas Jefferson



  3. #1428
    Champ RhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond repute RhythmDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Ruston, LA
    Posts
    6,114

    Re: Another Democrat double standard

    Quote Originally Posted by saltydawg View Post
    First off, I didn't even bother to look for an other country since what I posted ties in with the stupid republican mantra of voodoo economics.
    Secondly, you must be too young to remember when the country had very high marginal tax rates or otherwise you would know that they were meaningless since the wealthy had so many tax loop-holes and dodges that hardly anybody paid the highest rates. So your argument is meaningless.

    As for your argument that tax cuts for the wealthy and reduction of regulations produces robust economic growth because of what happened during Reagan's era, there are plenty of other explanations for the increase in economic growth such as a rebound from the Carter era recession and a large increase in government deficit spending. Perhaps you can list some of those Reagan era regulations that were repealed? And tell us again about how much Reagan increased the national debt. Why increase the national debt if voodoo economics worked?
    Try this on and see how it fits...

    This graph documents the number of pages in the Federal Registry from 1960 through 2014. Two points are especially instructive about this chart. First, note the noticeable jump in the page count from 2000 through the present. The count moves around the 80,000-page level, a peak only achieved for only two years back at the end of President Carter’s term. It is instructive that the period from 2000-14 of high regulatory activity is also associated with the two weakest periods of RGDP since 1960 recovery including both the Bush and Obama administrations. The GAO also reports that the rules promulgated during the Obama administration have been far more onerous than during the Bush administration. In its first six years, the Obama administration enacted 499 “major rules” across all federal agencies, a 43% increase over the first six years of the Bush administration. A major rule is one projected to cost the economy $100 million plus to implement.

    And again...W has more than his fair share of blame, as you can see...



    A second noteworthy point in Figure 1 is the comparison of the Obama period of a high-regulatory environment (an average of 78,880 pages a year so far) with the low regulatory
    environment of the Reagan years (54,335 pages a year). The Reagan years were associated with the second highest RGDP recovery numbers, while the high regulatory environment is associated with the lowest RGDP numbers since 1961.

    A second source of the weaker RGDP growth post-2009 has been the increased tax burden since that year. President Obama has made reducing income inequality a major mantra of his administration, and one tool for achieving that is raising the tax rate on higher income earners. During President Obama’s Administration, the top marginal tax rate was raised to 39.6% while the tax rate for lower income earners was lowered. In addition, higher income earners lost numerous deductions and exemptions, which effectively raised their marginal tax rate even higher. It may appear that the increase in the top marginal tax rate from about 35% to 39.6% is fairly minor, but this masks what occurred with two other key tax increases not captured in these figures. Two new taxes were passed to help fund the Affordable Care Act. First, the Additional Medicare Tax was imposed of 0.9%. For example, the threshold amount for married couples filing jointly is $250,000, and importantly it is without a cap. Secondly, a new Net Investment Income Tax of 3.8% was passed which hit those individuals with earnings from dividends, rental real estate, interest earnings, and other types of investments. One might argue that these tax increases were fair and needed in order to combat income inequality. The other side of the coin is that tax increases also arrest, rather than promote, economic growth.

    This is all credited to Loren Scott.

  4. #1429
    Champ RhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond repute RhythmDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Ruston, LA
    Posts
    6,114

    Re: Another Democrat double standard

    Quote Originally Posted by saltydawg View Post
    There is nothing in voodoo economics that says that the wealthy have to invest their money in the USA. Under the old regime of high marginal tax rates they were required to do so in order to receive tax breaks. You going to answer the question about if voodoo economics works why Reagan had to use deficit spending to boost the economy? Or are you willing to concede that voodoo economics is a bust?
    I am not yet ready to change the subject. We haven't finished discussing your faulty math. We can get to voodoo economics later. Stop deflecting.

    You inaccurately used history in an attempt to validate your point. I have a problem with that. Give me one country. Just one.

  5. #1430
    Champ dawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond repute dawg80's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    42,100

    Re: Another Democrat double standard

    Much of the debt accumulated during Reagan's term was rebuilding our military. To get his military rebuilding program thru a democrap congress he had to make concessions in other areas, namely over-spending on welfare etc. So, one has to know ALL THE FACTS before making statements. It was not "voodoo" anything! It was much the same formula followed by Bill Clinton, beginning in 1995 thanks to the real hero of the 90's economic growth: Newt Gingrich. Except we did not have to spend tons of money on the military and we CUT the same excesses in the welfare state that Reagan had reluctantly agreed to because he thought rebuilding our military was important enough to take on that additional baggage.

    People like saltymoron are so EFFING STUPID!!! Facts mean nothing to them.

    Okay....rant over.

    I have studied in gory detail the TRUTH about our national budget/spending etc... going back to Carter. I did it at first for papers I had to write in grad school, and thought it would be an interesting topic. I have kind of continued monitoring the data ever since. I had joined some blogs and subscribed to Internet economic newsletters back then as a student and still receive weekly/monthly, depending on the site, articles.

    On Reagan's military spending, yeah, he bit the bullet because he thought, and many others did as well, that the US Military had fallen behind the Soviets and the Chicoms. Our over-whelming dominance as the lone "super power" was thanks to Reagan. Bill Clinton didn't have to do anything special, as he inherited and benefitted from the "peace dividend" and thus our national debt was checked. I don't blame Bill Clinton for riding that horse, nor do I understate his role in a robust economy of the '90's. He did do things that helped boost our economy, and he did oversee a good economy during his tenure, which I have acknowledged. For the record, I did not vote for Clinton either time.

    But, I do grow weary of the bullshit revisions of history as it pertains to Reagan. He was exactly who we needed at the time to lift the US from a sagging economy, and to lift us out of a VERY dangerous position of not being the premier military force on Earth. And of course, Ronald Reagan respected the office, so he did not have sex with interns in the Oval Office, and he also didn't sell missile-guidance technology to the Chicoms to help fund his re-election campaign.

    Now, here we are again, after 8 years of obummer with a horrible economy and the US's position as the undisputable military power very much in doubt.

    BTW, as a historic side note, if you are interested in an example of what de-regulation does to boost the economy and create a growing middle class, read the book "Citizens." It's a LONG, like 1,000+ pages, of the history of France covering decades leading up to the French Revolution of 1789. It's very detailed, and kind of dry, but it does capture the truth of what happens when governments relinquish control of the economy. In this case, the French Royals, and the aristocracy was trying to throw the average French "citizen" a bone to sooth their disgruntled feelings to their economic plight. It worked! De-regulation boosted the French economy and the middle class benefitted and grew. It was only when, 30 years later, King Louie 16th rolled back those reforms that things got bad again for the French people and led to revolution.

    Anyway, written as a historic work on the French Revolution, it is, also an economic study.

  6. #1431
    Champ RhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond repute RhythmDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Ruston, LA
    Posts
    6,114

    Re: Another Democrat double standard

    Quote Originally Posted by dawg80 View Post
    Much of the debt accumulated during Reagan's term was rebuilding our military. To get his military rebuilding program thru a democrap congress he had to make concessions in other areas, namely over-spending on welfare etc. So, one has to know ALL THE FACTS before making statements. It was not "voodoo" anything! It was much the same formula followed by Bill Clinton, beginning in 1995 thanks to the real hero of the 90's economic growth: Newt Gingrich. Except we did not have to spend tons of money on the military and we CUT the same excesses in the welfare state that Reagan had reluctantly agreed to because he thought rebuilding our military was important enough to take on that additional baggage.

    People like saltymoron are so EFFING STUPID!!! Facts mean nothing to them.

    Okay....rant over.

    I have studied in gory detail the TRUTH about our national budget/spending etc... going back to Carter. I did it at first for papers I had to write in grad school, and thought it would be an interesting topic. I have kind of continued monitoring the data ever since. I had joined some blogs and subscribed to Internet economic newsletters back then as a student and still receive weekly/monthly, depending on the site, articles.

    On Reagan's military spending, yeah, he bit the bullet because he thought, and many others did as well, that the US Military had fallen behind the Soviets and the Chicoms. Our over-whelming dominance as the lone "super power" was thanks to Reagan. Bill Clinton didn't have to do anything special, as he inherited and benefitted from the "peace dividend" and thus our national debt was checked. I don't blame Bill Clinton for riding that horse, nor do I understate his role in a robust economy of the '90's. He did do things that helped boost our economy, and he did oversee a good economy during his tenure, which I have acknowledged. For the record, I did not vote for Clinton either time.

    But, I do grow weary of the bullshit revisions of history as it pertains to Reagan. He was exactly who we needed at the time to lift the US from a sagging economy, and to lift us out of a VERY dangerous position of not being the premier military force on Earth. And of course, Ronald Reagan respected the office, so he did not have sex with interns in the Oval Office, and he also didn't sell missile-guidance technology to the Chicoms to help fund his re-election campaign.

    Now, here we are again, after 8 years of obummer with a horrible economy and the US's position as the undisputable military power very much in doubt.

    BTW, as a historic side note, if you are interested in an example of what de-regulation does to boost the economy and create a growing middle class, read the book "Citizens." It's a LONG, like 1,000+ pages, of the history of France covering decades leading up to the French Revolution of 1789. It's very detailed, and kind of dry, but it does capture the truth of what happens when governments relinquish control of the economy. In this case, the French Royals, and the aristocracy was trying to throw the average French "citizen" a bone to sooth their disgruntled feelings to their economic plight. It worked! De-regulation boosted the French economy and the middle class benefitted and grew. It was only when, 30 years later, King Louie 16th rolled back those reforms that things got bad again for the French people and led to revolution.

    Anyway, written as a historic work on the French Revolution, it is, also an economic study.
    Hey can you list the blogs and newsletters you still get?

  7. #1432
    Champ saltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your time saltydawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    southern Nevada
    Posts
    11,262

    Re: Another Democrat double standard

    Quote Originally Posted by RhythmDawg View Post
    Try this on and see how it fits...

    This graph documents the number of pages in the Federal Registry from 1960 through 2014. Two points are especially instructive about this chart. First, note the noticeable jump in the page count from 2000 through the present. The count moves around the 80,000-page level, a peak only achieved for only two years back at the end of President Carter’s term. It is instructive that the period from 2000-14 of high regulatory activity is also associated with the two weakest periods of RGDP since 1960 recovery including both the Bush and Obama administrations. The GAO also reports that the rules promulgated during the Obama administration have been far more onerous than during the Bush administration. In its first six years, the Obama administration enacted 499 “major rules” across all federal agencies, a 43% increase over the first six years of the Bush administration. A major rule is one projected to cost the economy $100 million plus to implement.

    And again...W has more than his fair share of blame, as you can see...



    A second noteworthy point in Figure 1 is the comparison of the Obama period of a high-regulatory environment (an average of 78,880 pages a year so far) with the low regulatory
    environment of the Reagan years (54,335 pages a year). The Reagan years were associated with the second highest RGDP recovery numbers, while the high regulatory environment is associated with the lowest RGDP numbers since 1961.

    A second source of the weaker RGDP growth post-2009 has been the increased tax burden since that year. President Obama has made reducing income inequality a major mantra of his administration, and one tool for achieving that is raising the tax rate on higher income earners. During President Obama’s Administration, the top marginal tax rate was raised to 39.6% while the tax rate for lower income earners was lowered. In addition, higher income earners lost numerous deductions and exemptions, which effectively raised their marginal tax rate even higher. It may appear that the increase in the top marginal tax rate from about 35% to 39.6% is fairly minor, but this masks what occurred with two other key tax increases not captured in these figures. Two new taxes were passed to help fund the Affordable Care Act. First, the Additional Medicare Tax was imposed of 0.9%. For example, the threshold amount for married couples filing jointly is $250,000, and importantly it is without a cap. Secondly, a new Net Investment Income Tax of 3.8% was passed which hit those individuals with earnings from dividends, rental real estate, interest earnings, and other types of investments. One might argue that these tax increases were fair and needed in order to combat income inequality. The other side of the coin is that tax increases also arrest, rather than promote, economic growth.

    This is all credited to Loren Scott.
    There is no causative relationship shown. You are merely claiming an association.

    "All roads lead to Putin" -- Thomas Jefferson



  8. #1433
    Champ RhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond repute RhythmDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Ruston, LA
    Posts
    6,114

    Re: Another Democrat double standard

    Quote Originally Posted by saltydawg View Post
    There is no causative relationship shown. You are merely claiming an association.
    I'm not. One of the top economists in the country is. Are you an economist?

    And that is exactly what you are doing by the way.

  9. #1434
    Champ dawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond repute dawg80's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    42,100

    Re: Another Democrat double standard

    Quote Originally Posted by saltydawg View Post
    There is nothing in voodoo economics that says that the wealthy have to invest their money in the USA. Under the old regime of high marginal tax rates they were required to do so in order to receive tax breaks. You going to answer the question about if voodoo economics works why Reagan had to use deficit spending to boost the economy? Or are you willing to concede that voodoo economics is a bust?
    You really are that effing stupid. I was hoping you might come around, but I see there's no hope for you.

    Can't fix stupid.

  10. #1435
    Champ saltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your time saltydawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    southern Nevada
    Posts
    11,262

    Re: Another Democrat double standard

    Quote Originally Posted by RhythmDawg View Post
    I'm not. One of the top economists in the country is. Are you an economist?

    And that is exactly what you are doing by the way.
    Plenty of economists support my argument that voodoo economics doesn't work. As for your argument that regulations are a drag on economic growth, a very good argument can be that they promote economic growth by reducing unnecessary costs.

    "All roads lead to Putin" -- Thomas Jefferson



  11. #1436
    Super Moderator PawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond repute PawDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    57,422

    Re: Another Democrat double standard

    Quote Originally Posted by saltydawg View Post
    As for your argument that regulations are a drag on economic growth, a very good argument can be that they promote economic growth by reducing unnecessary costs.
    I know it won't do any good to ask, but PLEASE provide and example of this.

  12. #1437
    Champ dawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond repute dawg80's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    42,100

    Re: Another Democrat double standard

    I can say with absolute certainty that while regulations hurts all businesses, they disproportionately damage small to midsize businesses worst, since big biz has a war chest to deal with the extra costs that regulations ALWAYS burden the private sector with. Whew! that was a long, awkward sentence. Point is, placing artificial barriers in the path of the private sector does hurt the economy, does cost jobs, does reduce revenue to the US Treasury, and does do damage to the middle class, which is always the most vulnerable to economic down-turns.

  13. #1438
    Champ saltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your time saltydawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    southern Nevada
    Posts
    11,262

    Re: Another Democrat double standard

    Quote Originally Posted by PawDawg View Post
    I know it won't do any good to ask, but PLEASE provide and example of this.
    Take a look at EPA's Mercury and Air Toxics regulation. Annual cost to utilities about $600 million but it reduces health and other costs by billions.

    https://www.sciencedaily.com/release...0216152020.htm

    "All roads lead to Putin" -- Thomas Jefferson



  14. #1439
    Champ saltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your time saltydawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    southern Nevada
    Posts
    11,262

    Re: Another Democrat double standard

    Quote Originally Posted by dawg80 View Post
    I can say with absolute certainty that while regulations hurts all businesses, they disproportionately damage small to midsize businesses worst, since big biz has a war chest to deal with the extra costs that regulations ALWAYS burden the private sector with. Whew! that was a long, awkward sentence. Point is, placing artificial barriers in the path of the private sector does hurt the economy, does cost jobs, does reduce revenue to the US Treasury, and does do damage to the middle class, which is always the most vulnerable to economic down-turns.
    What do you think is the regulation that negatively impacts small business the most?

    "All roads lead to Putin" -- Thomas Jefferson



  15. #1440
    Champ saltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your timesaltydawg Ultimate jerk and not worth your time saltydawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    southern Nevada
    Posts
    11,262

    Re: Another Democrat double standard

    Quote Originally Posted by RhythmDawg View Post
    The whole point is that, regardless of how much the government taxes the wealthy, they will never get it.

    Then why is Trump wanting to cut the taxes on the wealthy by $600 billion?

    "All roads lead to Putin" -- Thomas Jefferson



+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts