Democrats and Raising Taxes

[Rachel Redeemed]

Jobs did not go overseas in past generations- textiles made in Japan were not quality materials. It was considered cheap if your clothing said “made in Japan or Taiwan” or other countries. Jobs left first, then lower wage Americans had to buy from the Walmart’s. Wasn’t this before Americans became flooded with cheaper knock offs? Wasn’t it the corporations who wanted cheaper labor in order to make more money? Now, Corporations are so used to living off the fat of foreign labor (which does not have the medical infrastructure for healthy workers), that a Corona Virus has Wall St. is rethinking labor supply nearer home. When you eat steak and champagne every day, it is only a matter of time when it all catches up with you. Businesses are so greedy, that that is where the problems are. In the 20”s through the 70’s, companies having a bad two quarters would tighten supplies and put off new fleet purchases. Now everyone lays off people first. If most of your profits end up in the hands of a few, homelessness, crime, drug usage will go up. I’m not talking socialism, I am talking about a social contract businesses had with their communities. Or would they rather end up behind heavily guarded walls and bulletproof cars, as the middle classes, with younger poor college students who already are resorting to sleeping with wealthy landlords to cover rental and tuition costs. It is time we stop relying on corporations, who hold communities and government hostage with their demands to be taxed less with smaller businesses and medium sized manufacturers who can bring this country back. That is how we make America great again.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

The OP is basically just presenting examples of proposed solutions to the currently broken system that failed in order to avoid addressing the actual problems caused by unchecked and unregulated capitalism.

Fact is, layoffs and industry collapses still happen in a financial system where corporations make unchecked profits and benefit off financial incentives and tax loopholes. Because, as much as the free market fantasy wishes it were so, unchecked capitalism does not result in financial freedom and competition benefiting the customer or workforce - because massive corporations don't care about their customers, or their workforce. They aren't beholden to either. They are only beholden to their shareholders. Their interest is in making profits, and then maximizing those profits, even if doing so is not in the best interests of their customers or will adversely negatively impact their lower-level workforce. We see this all time, with many companies laying off hundreds of their lower-level employees even after posting record-breaking profits, countless companies taking advantage of cheap overseas labour, mistreating their employees, zero-hour contracts, etc. etc. All of the problems proposed in the OP as being caused by taxation are also problems that always existed and continue to exist in a system where massive Corporations are allowed to evade tax.

Ultimately, the way the system is currently set up doesn't benefit the workforce or the consumer. It only benefits shareholders and executives. It's a broken system, and the OP is just distracting from that fact. Don't fall for this garbage.

"Our merchants and master-manufacturers complain much of the bad effects of high wages in raising the price, and thereby lessening the sale of their goods both at home and abroad. They say nothing concerning the bad effects of high profits. They are silent with regard to the pernicious effects of their own gains. They complain only of those of other people."
- Adam Smith, the Wealth of Nations, Chapter IX​

 

[bobhikes]

I listened to the Democrats (liberals) tonight and they were all talking about raising taxes.

.

It matters not to me the discussion about Taxes because every year no matter who wins my taxes increase. Even if federal taxes go down that year my local taxes go up. When my local taxes freeze(they never go down) my federal taxes go up. If both freeze than I will get a new tax. Its all a joke.

The republicans tax you behind your back
The democrats tax your face.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

The goal is to tax the income, not the toys people buy with it. And anyway, what loss is it, really, that we have fewer rich pricks running around on expensive yachts? How does yacht building really effect the overall quality of life in the U.S. compared to affordable health care and education?

But OP fully expects to be in the yacht owning class one day... if only the darn libruls would stop holding him back!

 

[Stevicus]

I listened to the Democrats (liberals) tonight and they were all talking about raising taxes.

The problem with Democrats / liberals is they have a real problem looking into the future to see the horrendous damage their policies do.

Do you remember when the liberals placed a 10% luxury tax on yacht sales ("get the rich")? What happened was the rich quit buying yachts, so the yacht manufacturers lost all kinds of money and the little guy who helped build the yachts got laid off. So it wasn't "get the rich," it was the liberals screwing the little guy - again.

Another prime example: The do-gooders in San Francisco decided to give $400 'welfare' checks to homeless people. Higher taxes helped pay for that. Help the poor, right? Well, next thing you know every vagrant in America (criminals too) began showing up in San Fran for a free ride. Crime went up, and the homeless were everywhere hitting on regular folks for money, etc., and engaging in criminal activities. The police finally had enough and told the libs they had to stop the madness, which they eventually did. Liberalism gone mad again.

Want to raise taxes on the corporations? Since all competitors will have their taxes raised, they’ll just raise their prices and pass it along to the little guy – the consumer. We’ll be paying the higher taxes for the corporations. The little guy gets screwed again. Or, corporations will leave America and operate out of lower tax countries. Common sense. Liberals don’t have it.

Tax the wealthy? A great many of them will move to whatever state or country gives them a better deal. Redistribute their wealth? Aryeh Spero noted, “It is America’s men and women of wealth, imbued with religious and civic responsibility, who have served as the greatest patrons of the civic infrastructure, be it hospitals, libraries, museums, the arts, or the charitable United Way. England once had those patrons, but they went away as redistribution of wealth came in.” The same thing will happen in America.

Redistribution of Wealth is, at its core, a radical left-wing economic scheme centered in greed and covetousness for other people’s money, rather than exercising personal responsibility and initiative and earning it one’s self.

Democrats…

Discussion...

Historically, Republicans gave us the Great Depression, while Democrats (FDR) not only got us out of the Depression, but established wise policies which led to the greatest economic boom in the nation's history. This lasted from about 1945 until the late 60s, at which time the Republicans regained power and screwed up the economy again.

This is the one point which Republicans and conservative economists consistently avoid and fail to address. They spout off endless theories and economic models, but not once have they ever been able to prove that their theories have any practical, real world success.

In contrast, the Democrats have had proven success, and many voters still remember those times when America's economy was better and more productive.

If you judge them solely by their track record and actual performance, any reasonable person would see that Democratic policies have far greater demonstrative success than Republican policies, which have mostly resulted in failure, layoffs, factory closures, and economic stagnation.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Historically, Republicans gave us the Great Depression, while Democrats (FDR) not only got us out of the Depression, but established wise policies which led to the greatest economic boom in the nation's history. This lasted from about 1945 until the late 60s, at which time the Republicans regained power and screwed up the economy again.

This is the one point which Republicans and conservative economists consistently avoid and fail to address. They spout off endless theories and economic models, but not once have they ever been able to prove that their theories have any practical, real world success.

In contrast, the Democrats have had proven success, and many voters still remember those times when America's economy was better and more productive.

If you judge them solely by their track record and actual performance, any reasonable person would see that Democratic policies have far greater demonstrative success than Republican policies, which have mostly resulted in failure, layoffs, factory closures, and economic stagnation.

You need to stop lying.

https://www.history.com/topics/great-depression/great-depression-history

 

[Stevicus]

You need to stop lying.

https://www.history.com/topics/great-depression/great-depression-history

I'm not going to bother looking at a blind link. If you really believe that I'm lying, then post your own arguments in your own words. Don't just post a blind link.

 

[Revoltingest]

To be honest, the political culture of the US doesn't really allow it. Cutting services to the population is extremely unpopular for obvious reasons and raising the taxes are unpopular for obvious reason too. That's a recepe for perpetually unbalanced budgets. No politician wants to risk his or her job by doing the conservative thing of raising new taxes for no new services or cutting services without lowering taxes.

There's a disconnect in most voters' minds. They like the promises
made & the actions taken, but they don't think of the secondary
consequence, ie, that the piper must be paid. And when carping
about high taxes, they're not thinking of the fact that they wanted
government to do spendy things. A strong economy is the enabler.
Note though that I'm not complaining about the enabler.

 

[Twilight Hue]

I'm not going to bother looking at a blind link. If you really believe that I'm lying, then post your own arguments in your own words. Don't just post a blind link.

Ok fine. Nobody's getting forced or anything. Two things.

If memory serves me, I remember time and time again being told that the Republicans of the old days were actually the Democrats. It's a little tongue-in-cheek, but just saying......

That's the first thing.

The second thing is, market speculation is what caused the crash by inflating stock value well beyond what they were actually worth. Its's true Coolidge and Hoover were warned by some banks and regulators about the dangers of market speculation, but it can't be pinned soley on the Republican party or the Democrats for that matter. There was an ongoing farm crisis at the time and a glut of consumer goods.

The crash could be best described as 'The Perfect Storm'.

Could Republicans had done better? They certainly could have and paid for it at the voting booth when FDR was elected.

Was FDR's solution to the great depression all that great? No. The New deal was not a success. It did not get people out.

What did get people out of the depression was World War II. Yea. That.

War profiteering of all things.

 

[Kenny]

And not a citation in sight...

I don't think any citation was necessary.

Case in point... Cuba and Venezuela. No citation needed.

 

[Kenny]

Don't you think that running a constant budget deficit that isn't covered by inflation and GDP growth is damaging? Last time I checked the US had a huge debt and a relatively poor social net. If you don't raise new taxes, you are going to end up having to make painful cuts to social services which can seriously harm the population, economic stability, capital mobility and the general health of the American society or raise new taxes simply to pay off the debt itself. I must admit that from my point of view the US tax system is byzantine in style.

The answer, IMV, is not more taxes but less spending.

When someone's personal budget is awry, the first thing they say is "STOP SPENDING AND LIVE WITHIN YOUR MEANS" and then begin chipping away at deficit.

If you look at the interest US has, you have just eaten up the general health of American society. Get rid of the interest and you have financed the health of the society, economic stability and capital mobility,

It worked for me.

 

[Revoltingest]

Historically, Republicans gave us the Great Depression, while Democrats (FDR) not only got us out of the Depression, but established wise policies which led to the greatest economic boom in the nation's history. This lasted from about 1945 until the late 60s, at which time the Republicans regained power and screwed up the economy again.

This is the one point which Republicans and conservative economists consistently avoid and fail to address. They spout off endless theories and economic models, but not once have they ever been able to prove that their theories have any practical, real world success.

In contrast, the Democrats have had proven success, and many voters still remember those times when America's economy was better and more productive.

If you judge them solely by their track record and actual performance, any reasonable person would see that Democratic policies have far greater demonstrative success than Republican policies, which have mostly resulted in failure, layoffs, factory closures, and economic stagnation.

It's always amazing how 2 different people can look at the same
historical events, & come away with totally opposite explanations.
The Great Depression lasted longer than it had to.
(Same was true for the recession when Bush & Obama reigned.)
Ref....
https://www.history.com/news/trade-war-great-depression-trump-smoot-hawley
The post-WW2 economic boom was complex, but hardly due to one party or the other.
Ref.....
Post–World War II economic expansion - Wikipedia

Presidents get either too much blame or too much credit for things they
don't control. Tis always best when judging them to look at results where
their actions were the primary cause. Things are so often beyond party.

 

[Stevicus]

Ok fine. Nobody's getting forced or anything. Two things.

If memory serves me, I remember time and time again being told that the Republicans of the old days were actually the Democrats. It's a little tongue-in-cheek, but just saying......

That's the first thing.

The second thing is, market speculation is what caused the crash by inflating stock value well beyond what they were actually worth. Its's true Coolidge and Hoover were warned by some banks and regulators about the dangers of market speculation, but it can't be pinned soley on the Republican party or the Democrats for that matter. There was an ongoing farm crisis at the time and a glut of consumer goods.

The crash could be best described as 'The Perfect Storm'.

Could Republicans had done better? They certainly could have and paid for it at the voting booth when FDR was elected.

Was FDR's solution to the great depression all that great? No. The New deal was not a success. It did not get people out.

What did get people out of the depression was World War II. Yea. That.

War profiteering of all things.

The Republicans had been in power throughout the 1920s, and they were in power at the onset of the Depression.

FDR was thinking more in the long-term, as there were no viable "quick fixes" available. The New Deal was not meant to change overnight, but it eventually succeeded - and many of those same progressive ideas were retained in the post-war years, leading to a great boom and rise in standard of living. Education improved, healthcare improved, housing became more plentiful and affordable, unions were strong, wages were increasing, along with a proactive expansion of civil rights for all Americans.

Whole generations of Americans were enjoying the good life that their grandparents could hardly have dreamed of. It was still a work in progress and it was still far from idyllic or perfect. But there was marked improvement and success.

However, there were also certain downsides to the whole thing. Yes, WW2 was a significant factor which boosted American industrial production and ended the Depression. Of course, that's another story in itself, since FDR was forced to increase war production - and he had to do so very quickly. He had to mobilize the economy and marshal all our resources and industries to gear up towards war production (not just for ourselves, but our allies as well). And he had no time to play around with capitalistic BS; he implemented wage and price controls and practically had a command economy. But at least back then, both the capitalists and the working classes were staunchly patriotic, so they were willing to endure sacrifices for the greater good.

The other major downside was the Cold War. That was an unnecessary waste and a drain on resources. The Democrats certainly had no small role in bringing us into the Cold War, although in fairness, they did try to reprove themselves and change their ways in the 1960s, which led to internal rifts within the party. The Republicans capitalized on that. It seems to be the same story today, as the Democrats squabble with each other on a sinking ship.

 

[Stevicus]

It's always amazing how 2 different people can look at the same
historical events, & come away with totally opposite explanations.
The Great Depression lasted longer than it had to.
(Same was true for the recession when Bush & Obama reigned.)
Ref....
https://www.history.com/news/trade-war-great-depression-trump-smoot-hawley
The post-WW2 economic boom was complex, but hardly due to one party or the other.
Ref.....
Post–World War II economic expansion - Wikipedia

Presidents get either too much blame or too much credit for things they
don't control. Tis always best when judging them to look at results where
their actions were the primary cause. Things are so often beyond party.

The whole point is that, at least in context of the OP and the oft-repeated insinuation that "Democrats don't know anything about how to run an economy" is that the notion is completely false.

Conservative economists speak like Chicken Little and warn that the sky is falling if the Democrats are able to implement any given proposal. No matter if the issue is minimum wage, price controls, raising taxes, environmental regulation, or whatever it might be. The wealthy "free market" types warn of utter disaster, such as the OP of this thread, if we raise taxes or do anything might give the little guy a break.

My only point here is to show that such policies that they endlessly decry today do not lead to utter disaster and destruction, as past results would indicate.

 

[Revoltingest]

The whole point is that, at least in context of the OP and the oft-repeated insinuation that "Democrats don't know anything about how to run an economy" is that the notion is completely false.

Perhaps they do, but they (like Republicans) make decisions
which wreck the economy. Typically, they're politically driven.

Conservative economists speak like Chicken Little and warn that the sky is falling if the Democrats are able to implement any given proposal. No matter if the issue is minimum wage, price controls, raising taxes, environmental regulation, or whatever it might be. The wealthy "free market" types warn of utter disaster, such as the OP of this thread, if we raise taxes or do anything might give the little guy a break.

My only point here is to show that such policies that they endlessly decry today do not lead to utter disaster and destruction, as past results would indicate.

Taking minimum wage as an example, I've seen no economist treat it
as a sky-is-falling issue. It has its share of problems (& benefits), but
it's not reasonable to say that to criticize is to "Chicken Little" about it.

Tis best to avoid partisan attack & defense of economic policy.

 

[Spartan]

Republicans in Indiana raised taxes in Indianapolis to buy the Colts a damn stadium. Republicans too are fans of taxes.

The difference is the stadium provides revenues to the city. Duh.

 

[Spartan]

No they won't. If they were, they would've by now. They have the means, and put their money over seas anyways.

Are you blind? Do you not see a great number of the wealthy bailing out of New York, California, and New Jersey?

Excerpt from the article below:

"The Wall Street Journal reported Florida is seeing a new wave of well-to-do transplants from New York, New Jersey and other high-taxing states."

https://www.modbee.com/opinion/article226101685.html

Your economics is as bad as your theology, lol.

 

[Spartan]

It seems like the best combo is a Democrat in the White House and Republicans controlling the Congress. Republican presidents tend to really suck fiscally, and Republicans in Congress only care about deficits when a Dem is president.

I don't see it that way. Liberals screw up virtually everything they touch. Liberalism is moral, economic, and intellectual syphilis

 

[Rachel Redeemed]

You missed it all growing up or in your past?

That's another thing about liberals. They have no memory of the damages they've caused in the past, LOL?

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Redistribution of Wealth is, at its core, a radical left-wing economic scheme centered in greed and covetousness for other people’s money, rather than exercising personal responsibility and initiative and earning it one’s self.

You drank the whole cup, didn't you?

Liberalism is moral, economic, and intellectual syphilis

Who told you that, Hannity or Limbaugh?

it's easier to get Republicans to balance a budget than Democrats

LOL. The last effort at balancing the budget was by Clinton. Bush shattered that in five minutes with wars and tax cuts for the rich (the wars were for the rich as well).

What you don't understand is that you are carrying water for people that don't like you or care about you. The plan is to cut their taxes, not yours, and use the government to shift wealth from the middle class to themselves. They also intend to cut government spending on ordinary people.

If you don't raise new taxes, you are going to end up having to make painful cuts to social services

That's by design. That's the plan. Here are the words of the driving force behind this anti-tax govement:

"My goal is to cut government in half in twenty-five years, to get it down to the size where we can drown it in the bathtub"

Don't expect the war budget or the police and prisons spending to go down. He's referring to what he scornfully calls entitlements. He doesn't care about your medical expenses or tuition, nor your small business start-up

what loss is it, really, that we have fewer rich pricks running around on expensive yachts? How does yacht building really effect the overall quality of life in the U.S. compared to affordable health care and education?

They're the ones that this is for. They're the ones that people mindlessly serving as vectors for conservative propaganda are serving.

And they care less about you as you do about them.

"Our merchants and master-manufacturers complain much of the bad effects of high wages in raising the price, and thereby lessening the sale of their goods both at home and abroad. They say nothing concerning the bad effects of high profits. They are silent with regard to the pernicious effects of their own gains. They complain only of those of other people." - Adam Smith, the Wealth of Nations, Chapter IX

Exactly. Just like today's 1%. Nobody's friend.

It matters not to me the discussion about Taxes because every year no matter who wins my taxes increase. Even if federal taxes go down that year my local taxes go up. When my local taxes freeze(they never go down) my federal taxes go up. If both freeze than I will get a new tax.

Exactly. This tax reduction isn't for you.

The other major downside was the Cold War. That was an unnecessary waste and a drain on resources.

Yes, from the perspective of the ordinary citizen and taxpayer, but not from the perspective of those receiving all of that "wasted" money. None of this is too difficult to understand. The trick is to not be duped by the propagandists who appreciate the support of anybody that they can convince to support them in their nefarious plan.