Was Pitts right?
in [Golf]
|
From: Chris Bellomy on 21 Dec 2009 23:18 assimilate(a)borg.org wrote, On 12/21/09 9:57 PM: > On 20-Dec-2009, Chris Bellomy <ten.wohsdoog(a)sirhc> wrote: > >> Because the only way the government ever gets your >> money is if you spend it? Eventually nobody will buy >> anything they don't absolutely need, which will be >> too expensive for most due to the annihilation of >> jobs. You just can't even begin to imagine how >> severe the economic contraction would be. > > What is important here, which you ignore, is that the incentive structure be > reversed to promote production. This creates wealth. Bill, I hate showing you up, but in all honesty this is just about the stupidest thing I've ever read. You cannot create incentive to invest in production if nobody is buying anything. The world just doesn't work that way.
From: Chris Bellomy on 21 Dec 2009 23:19 assimilate(a)borg.org wrote, On 12/21/09 10:06 PM: > On 20-Dec-2009, Chris Bellomy <ten.wohsdoog(a)sirhc> wrote: > >> I can't even think of a single blogger taking Soros money. Not >> one. Can you name one? > > Media Matters take his money, so does Move On and Acorn Well, for the record, MMFA does not take money from Soros. MoveOn does. I have no idea if ACORN does. cb
From: BAR on 22 Dec 2009 07:52 In article <4b304276$0$31366$882e0bbb(a)news.ThunderNews.com>, assimilate(a)borg.org says... > > On 20-Dec-2009, Chris Bellomy <ten.wohsdoog(a)sirhc> wrote: > > > You said something about the economy being robust. That doesn't > > happen without spending. > > > > > Encourage savings, capital > > > development and outlays. This creates jobs and creates wealth. > > > > Encouraging savings in a top-heavy economy is a surefire > > ticket to revolution. > > Top-heavy economy is one where the savings rate is below 5%, right? Where > did you study ECON, K. Marx U? I didn't know I was doing it all wrong. I am fomenting revolution and I am doing it in a very big way.
From: BAR on 22 Dec 2009 07:54 In article <QM2dnaA7VYcT1a3WnZ2dnUVZ_tJi4p2d(a)supernews.com>, ten.wohsdoog(a)sirhc says... > > assimilate(a)borg.org wrote, On 12/21/09 9:57 PM: > > On 20-Dec-2009, Chris Bellomy <ten.wohsdoog(a)sirhc> wrote: > > > >> Because the only way the government ever gets your > >> money is if you spend it? Eventually nobody will buy > >> anything they don't absolutely need, which will be > >> too expensive for most due to the annihilation of > >> jobs. You just can't even begin to imagine how > >> severe the economic contraction would be. > > > > What is important here, which you ignore, is that the incentive structure be > > reversed to promote production. This creates wealth. > > Bill, I hate showing you up, but in all honesty this is > just about the stupidest thing I've ever read. You cannot > create incentive to invest in production if nobody is > buying anything. The world just doesn't work that way. Taxation inhibits production. Production = jobs. Jobs = wealth.
From: dsc-ky on 22 Dec 2009 16:16
On Dec 22, 1:10 pm, Chris Bellomy <ten.wohsdoog(a)sirhc> wrote: > BAR wrote, On 12/22/09 6:54 AM: > > > > > > > In article <QM2dnaA7VYcT1a3WnZ2dnUVZ_tJi4...(a)supernews.com>, > > ten.wohsdoog(a)sirhc says... > >> assimil...(a)borg.org wrote, On 12/21/09 9:57 PM: > >>> On 20-Dec-2009, Chris Bellomy <ten.wohsdoog(a)sirhc> wrote: > > >>>> Because the only way the government ever gets your > >>>> money is if you spend it? Eventually nobody will buy > >>>> anything they don't absolutely need, which will be > >>>> too expensive for most due to the annihilation of > >>>> jobs. You just can't even begin to imagine how > >>>> severe the economic contraction would be. > >>> What is important here, which you ignore, is that the incentive structure be > >>> reversed to promote production. This creates wealth. > >> Bill, I hate showing you up, but in all honesty this is > >> just about the stupidest thing I've ever read. You cannot > >> create incentive to invest in production if nobody is > >> buying anything. The world just doesn't work that way. > > > Taxation inhibits production. > > I truly, honestly, in all sincerity, have no desire to call > you guys names. I honestly want to have a civil discussion > with you about all this. I even like most of you. > > But that's just a stupid sentence. If you want to learn about > how economics actually works, you have to let go of your rabid > anti-tax dogma. Or else maybe you should move to that noted > libertarian tax-free paradise: Somalia. > > The only thing that inhibits production in the American > economic model is freezing of capital. Truly confiscatory > taxation that reaches too far down in brackets can have > the effect of discouraging productivity, but that's a > TOTALLY different statement than "taxation inhibits > production," which is really meant to stymie rational > discussion of the issue. > > cb Then how about "over-taxation kills production"? So where does over- taxation begin. I sure feel like I'm in it already. :) |