Healthcare Summit thread

[Grizalltheway]

Did Fox News actually interview a band member of the Grateful Dead???? WTF???

It was probably BUCDAD.

[kalm]

That can't be right. That would make Republicans correct.

Exactly. From what I can decipher, the first Bush tax cuts took place right before 9/11. We saw what 9/11 did to the economy, not to mention Bush inherited Clinton's recession. The second set was in 2003. Look at that graph climb when the tax cuts were enacted.

Am I missing something?

That tax cuts might create bubble economies.

[SeattleGriz]

Exactly. From what I can decipher, the first Bush tax cuts took place right before 9/11. We saw what 9/11 did to the economy, not to mention Bush inherited Clinton's recession. The second set was in 2003. Look at that graph climb when the tax cuts were enacted.

Am I missing something?

That tax cuts might create bubble economies.

What is a bubble economy?

[AZGrizFan]

That tax cuts might create bubble economies.

What is a bubble economy?

It's the opposite of the economy we're in now.

You know, 4% unemployment (instead of 10%), 1% delinquency (instead of 10%), rising home values....

shitty things like that.

[kalm]

That tax cuts might create bubble economies.

What is a bubble economy?

We're trying to recover from one right now. Do we get to call it the Bush recession?

[SeattleGriz]

What is a bubble economy?

We're trying to recover from one right now. Do we get to call it the Bush recession?

I still am not understanding what you mean by bubble economy. If tax revenues are up, then the only reason for a deficit, is too much spending. I don't see how that is a bubble economy.

Call it a Bush recession if you like, but I like to look at it as more of a media recession. I say this because if you remember how the mainstream media tried to paint the Bush administration as causing a recession as far back as four years ago, buy yet, new jobs increased and GDP rose or stayed the same.

It was this constant hammering of how bad the economy was, that has caused everyone to hold onto their money. In essence, I feel the media screwed over Barack Obama by beating a non existent drum ad naseum for years when Bush was in office, and now the public won't spend and get the money flowing that is needed to end this thing.

Funny how Bush created jobs, but was in a recession. Barack has lost jobs, but is in recovery?

[ngineer]

Speaking of taxes, if Bush hadn't cut them, we'd be in much better shape right now to afford healthcare. Throw the 700 billion we've spent in Iraq and we're in even better shape.

Does anyone on this board know where we can find facts in regards to whether cutting taxes actually decreases revenues to the government? I still find it hard to believe the cutting of taxes worked for Reagan, but it didn't work for Bush.I ask, because you see what happens to the states that raise taxes on the wealthy. They move. While I know I am comparing state to federal here, the premise is still the same.

Because Reagan didn't take us half way around the world into two wars at the same time. You can't go to war in such a fashion and not expect to either raise revenue, or ask the American people to sacrifice in other ways, i.e. significant cuts across the board in everything. Bush never asked to country, other than our soldiers, to make any sacrifice to support the effort. That is where we went haywire.

[GannonFan]

Exactly. From what I can decipher, the first Bush tax cuts took place right before 9/11. We saw what 9/11 did to the economy, not to mention Bush inherited Clinton's recession. The second set was in 2003. Look at that graph climb when the tax cuts were enacted.

Am I missing something?

That tax cuts might create bubble economies.

Come on, that's just bunk - tax cuts cause bubble economies? You don't seriously believe that, do you? We've had cyclical economies for the past century and plenty of them had nothing to do with low tax rates. I know a simpleton view like that is great for political soundbites, but that's about it.

[kalm]

That tax cuts might create bubble economies.

Come on, that's just bunk - tax cuts cause bubble economies? You don't seriously believe that, do you? We've had cyclical economies for the past century and plenty of them had nothing to do with low tax rates. I know a simpleton view like that is great for political soundbites, but that's about it.

Just like with tax cuts increasing tax revenue, it's only a theory. But this article makes some compelling points on the subject:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/larry-bei ... 44281.html

The economy is obviously very complex and many factors contribute to busts and booms. But the fact is the three worst economic downturns of the last century were preceded by large tax cuts - especially on the wealthy, and a short period of crazy expansion and over-reaching. The longest period of sustained growth featured the highest top marginal tax rates.

It's like the story about the old bull and young bull standing on a hill looking over a herd of cows. I tend to side with the old bull.

[GannonFan]

Come on, that's just bunk - tax cuts cause bubble economies? You don't seriously believe that, do you? We've had cyclical economies for the past century and plenty of them had nothing to do with low tax rates. I know a simpleton view like that is great for political soundbites, but that's about it.

Just like with tax cuts increasing tax revenue, it's only a theory. But this article makes some compelling points on the subject:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/larry-bei ... 44281.html

The economy is obviously very complex and many factors contribute to busts and booms. But the fact is the three worst economic downturns of the last century were preceded by large tax cuts - especially on the wealthy, and a short period of crazy expansion and over-reaching. The longest period of sustained growth featured the highest top marginal tax rates.
It's like the story about the old bull and young bull standing on a hill looking over a herd of cows. I tend to side with the old bull.

Super - all we have to do is kick start another World War, hope we win it, and hope that the rest of the world is so devastated that we get a large, sustained economic boom trying to put the whole world back together again! Pure genius!!!!

[danefan]

Just like with tax cuts increasing tax revenue, it's only a theory. But this article makes some compelling points on the subject:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/larry-bei ... 44281.html

The economy is obviously very complex and many factors contribute to busts and booms. But the fact is the three worst economic downturns of the last century were preceded by large tax cuts - especially on the wealthy, and a short period of crazy expansion and over-reaching. The longest period of sustained growth featured the highest top marginal tax rates.

It's like the story about the old bull and young bull standing on a hill looking over a herd of cows. I tend to side with the old bull.

Super - all we have to do is kick start another World War, hope we win it, and hope that the rest of the world is so devastated that we get a large, sustained economic boom trying to put the whole world back together again! Pure genius!!!!

Uhhhh.........I thought that's what we were doing now..........

[GannonFan]

Super - all we have to do is kick start another World War, hope we win it, and hope that the rest of the world is so devastated that we get a large, sustained economic boom trying to put the whole world back together again! Pure genius!!!!

Uhhhh.........I thought that's what we were doing now..........

The thing is, we have to target some better countries. Rebuilding Iraq and Afghanistan (Iraq had a bunch of oil and Afghanistan had a bunch of opium farms) pale in comparison to rebuilding Europe. We need more widespread destruction if we're going to get the bounce kalm is talking about.

[YoUDeeMan]

Just like with tax cuts increasing tax revenue, it's only a theory. But this article makes some compelling points on the subject:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/larry-bei ... 44281.html

The economy is obviously very complex and many factors contribute to busts and booms. But the fact is the three worst economic downturns of the last century were preceded by large tax cuts - especially on the wealthy, and a short period of crazy expansion and over-reaching. The longest period of sustained growth featured the highest top marginal tax rates.

It's like the story about the old bull and young bull standing on a hill looking over a herd of cows. I tend to side with the old bull.

Speaking of bull...anyone who uses the post WWII economic boom as a comparison to any other time is full of it. Kalm, that is a stupid example used by stupid, narrow minded people. Congrats!

Hey, let's destroy the world's factories, cities, every form of transportation, kills off millions and millions of working aged people, all while the US and its work force remains untouched, and I will cover all bets as to which country has an economic boom...no matter what the tax rate is.

[kalm]

War spending = governement stimulus, paid for by taxes.

Although I suppose in neo-conservative fantasy land that type of economic growth doesn't count.

[native]

...BTW, it's still the 1st half, but the Republican strategy of ball control and shortening the game appear to be working.

The Dem's are getting out-physicalled as usual.

Score?

Pregame: Glib new Blue team quarterback becomes the darling of the sports press, despite limited playing time, zero regular season performance stats, previous experience not as an actual athlete but as a "sports activist," and obvious lack of conditioning and physical skills. New Blue team QB gets into title qame due to massive losses and mistakes by potential opponents and overwhelming sportswriter bias in coverage and polls.

First quarter: Blue team fills stands to capacity, and starts game inside opponent's red zone due to opponent's egregious penalties and turnovers, but fails to score. Fans flock out of stadium when Blue team offense fumbles and stumbles backwards down the field, and Blue team owners raise ticket prices despite pre-game promises not to do so.

Second quarter: Despite flagrantly Blue home team refs, Red team scores three points to take the lead. Red team subs prove better than many of the veteran players. Blue team confidently proclaims of millions of tickets created or saved, but twenty percent of fans nationwide remain outside the stadium, unable to even view the game. A third of the embarrassed blue team fans who left the stadium in the first quarter change gear in the parking lot and begin to fill the red team stands. The empty Blue team sidelines begin to look like the Villanova stands. Blue team continues to flail on both offense and defense, and suffers multiple injuries due to lack of fundamental football skills. The inept quarterback was apparently all pre-game hype, and continues to lead the team in penalties and turnovers. The Red team gives him the easy short yardage plays, but the idiot continues to throw futile Hail Mary passes.

Third quarter: How many Blue team starters will return for the second half? How it will affect the game? Can the Blue team find any players who can play the game without ruining the game? Will the red team become overconfident and return to its own mistakes and penalties?

Fourth quarter: The future of football hangs in the balance.

[grizzaholic]