Would that be like the "affordable care act" 76?
Premiums no one can afford without subsidies and Insurance providers cant write without them too?
Nice!
New Flash - Obama lied in the runup to 2012 election
- Thread starter TarHeelEer
- Start date
Premiums no one can afford without subsidies and Insurance providers cant write without them too?
Nice!
Don’t ever question my ability to educate my students again. I don’t indoctrinate. I don’t use the classroom as my personal pulpit. I respect every mind that comes into my classroom, I respect every parent of those students......no subject is as black and white as you make it out to be. I teach critical thinking, not ideology. I expect an apology, but I’m sure I won’t recieve it.
If you don't do that then I apologize. However if you're teaching them what you are strenuously and I assume honestly arguing in this forum you are not only wrong but doing them a huge disservice not to mention woefully ill informed about how our free enterprise capitalistic economy functions. You are cheating them boom if these are your sincerely held beliefs.
The worst backhanded and bs apology I ever received.
I don’t teach my beliefs. I teach critical thinking. I teach perspectives of history. I balance as best I can.
And, my friend, you’re cheating yourself. You’re not right about everything. Nor am I wrong about everything. And I think YOUR understanding of modern economic function is terribly out of touch with reality.
You are certainly entitled to that opinion boom but I will go to my grave believing that government cannot and does not create wealth if you can show me where it does I will change my mind but it is impossible for you to do so.
Don’t see what? As gas prices double, how do you think that effects a working class / middle class families. How do you think that impacts their budget, their spending for Christmas, their travel plans for the year? How does it effect flight costs? How does that effect the tourism industries? How does that effect jobs and spending for people that lose their jobs in those industries?
I see the prices increase step for step with our engagement in Iraq and Afghanistan. I think it was a substantial factor in the eventual economic crisis. As savings account are depleted, as 401k contributions shrink, as budgets tighten, as mortgage payments are missed.....the weight on the economy increases.
Supply and demand affect gas prices Boomer not our engagement in a war.
I linked you to information that showed the supply of gas and oil actually went up during our involvement in Iraq & the prices actually went down.
You are entitled to your opinions but you cannot change facts. if you don't want to accept them fine it doesn't change what they are.
Supply in oil has always been controlled. And the invasion of Iraq directly effected oil supply.
No!
Defense contractors fill specific needs ordered by the government they do not generate wealth which is a function of entrepreneurs creating goods and services that people want need or desire.
So when we are not in a war what dictates prices of gas and oil?
If War dictates the price of gas and oil why have they both been going down steadily all while we have been engaged in an ongoing war against terrorism?
Wealth generation is the iPod or the MRI machines.
Government spending is a Sherman tank or a Howitzer or food stamps.
One pays dividend to private investors and risk takers. The other collects money from taxpayers and spends it within a closed market which generates limited if any profits.
For Defense contractors yes. But not for a competitive marketplace where competing goods or services are offered as an option.
How many companies build tanks and sell them to the general public like Ford builds F 150s?
Invasion of an oil producing nation effects supply. WHEN we do it again, you will see the same results.
Your analysis always seems to revolve around comparisons that make no sense. The defense industry creates an entire population of men and women whose income is derivative from taxpayer funds. These men and women use these funds to spend on goods and services. The “wealth” created was derived from existing “wealth”, butnthats always the case. From the oil tycoon that creates “wealth” from the work and tool of his staff, and the demand of consumers....to the stock market that creates “wealth” through the demand of a certain stock that is tied to the demand of a product or service which is paid for by using the “wealth” of a consumer.
Take the huge tax cut you recieve and run out and start three businesses in good locations selling goods or providing a service that is in demand. And as you love to point out, those businesses will provide jobs for many, which will spend and add to the “wealth” of the economy. However, if those providing the demand for your goods or services do not have the budget to spend.....the demand will not sustain, and your businesses will close their doors. If those tax cuts were given to those that drive demand, then the demand is sustainable, and those three businesses will open one way or the other. It might not be the richy richys that open them to increase their already substantial “wealth”. It might be members of the working or middle class taking risks to improve their position.
When Iraqi oil disappeared from the World Market Saudi and Venezuelan and Mexican oil supplies increased not to mention our own domestic supplies which further depressed prices on World Market exchanges.
Facts Boomer they are stubborn things you know?
That's all fine Boomer but we're talking about who generates the wealth and creates it in the first place? I'm arguing it's not the government you're trying to say it is.
You're wrong!
Especially so when it comes to taxing wealth producers.
You are deluded. Maybe you are referencing the old man Bush’s Gulf War?
I’m 2003, coinciding with the onset of the Iraq War, oil production outside of the ME began a substantial decrease. In addition, unlike old man Bush, an increase in domestic reserves was not approved during the Iraq War. The cost of oil shot up. Many see it as a result of lower supply from outside the ME, and not asnlinked to the invasion as others. I consider the invasion as a contributing factor as well. And the long run was directly effected by the War. Only when the economic collapse was evident, did the price fall substantially. Prior to that, oil and gas prices rose steadily after the invasion.
Show me where these are not facts!
Tax cuts are not "giving" wage earners anything boom unless you assume as most Leftists do that what one earns belongs to Government. It does not! Tax cuts allow people who earn their money to keep more of it. What they keep Government doesnt get to spend. The more they get to keep instead of surrendering it to revenuers, the bigger and faster our economy grows producing more wealth and an expanding middle class.
Government has no role in that dynamic except to screw it up.
I said policy helps create a larger middle class, and a larger middle class creates a sustainable economic driving force.
Your idea of “wealth” as being “created” by only business is just old and tired....maybe that’s why you gravitate so heavily to it.
https://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/05/21/who-creates-the-wealth-in-society/
There are many theories on economics. To treat such a complex subject so simply, is evidence of your serious lack of open mindedness
I already linked you to it. Go back and read it. If what you claim is true, Iraq is a bigger mess now than it was then and its oil is still not on the market and prices are still depressed due to increased supply.
We were well out of Iraq in terms of ongoing War when gas prices shot up in 2008. We had actually secured the country and were trying to stabilize the Al Maliki(sp) Government. Oil prices shot up when the housing market caused a credit collapse.
And I said there is no middle class without wealth first being created then expanded.
Oh no, the government has a major role in it....or else your love affair with Heir Trump wouldn’t be so passionate. Defense, education, the eradication of disease, the prevention of pollution and overuse of resources, the protection of wellbeing, the protection of creative license, the safety of our streets, the system of laws and courts that render judgements that protect people’s wealth and health are the areas in which our government acts as a major player in our society’s economy and directly impacts our nation’s wealth. We pay taxes to ensure these protections and systems are there for us, acting as if though the taxes are not needed for your health and wellbeing of your wealth and life is just simply ignorant. It is easy to act as if though each tax dollar you sacrifice is “stolen” from you, as you (and your customers or suppliers) use government built and protected roads, as your wealth is generated under the peace and tranquility of an environment maintained by that government, and that your assets are protected by laws and a court system designed to ensure their protection and implemented by that government......but playing the helpless victim to the taxman’s Brutality is just ridiculousness. Without that government, someone stronger and more ruthless would simply destroy or take away all of your precious “wealth” at will.
And this the “chicken and egg” argument ensues.....I conceded the fact that jobs must be present for spending to exist.....but spending must exist in order for those jobs to be created in the first place.
No wrong boomer. Policy follows the actions of private individuals taking risk, implementing their ideas, creating new products and services for sometimes non existent markets.
These folks "create" new demand, attract investors and build customer bases that drive their expansion (if it's a good product)
and allows entrepreneurs to grow by hiring more folks so they can grow their enterprises.
Without those risk takers and investors and entrepreneurs, there is no middle class.
I agree the more wage earners we have the better, but you still need capital formation so businesses can grow and hire more folks.
You don't start out with a bunch of folks to hire unless you are making something that people want to buy! The more folks who want to buy your stuff...the more folks you can hire to serve their demands.
Last edited:
Yes boomer! That's why we need freedom and our guns to prevent that.
But what Im arguing is who the driver on this equation is? I agree with you Government has a role but it is or should be limited.
Why?
Because its tendency is to control. Government can't dictate our needs wants or desires. That's what markets are for.
We need Government assuring a safe fair level playing field not deciding who gets to play. I agree with you we need accountability, less favoritism and Government picking winners and losers through manipulation of the tax code and cutting favors for monied lobbyists.
I'm for Freedom. Freedom to work save invest innovate and yes pursue wealth without it being confiscated by Government to redistribute to its hand picked sycophants who keep the money changers in power by buying votes and confiscating more money from wealth producers to continue executing the scam.
But what Im arguing is who the driver on this equation is? I agree with you Government has a role but it is or should be limited.
Why?
Because its tendency is to control. Government can't dictate our needs wants or desires. That's what markets are for.
We need Government assuring a safe fair level playing field not deciding who gets to play. I agree with you we need accountability, less favoritism and Government picking winners and losers through manipulation of the tax code and cutting favors for monied lobbyists.
I'm for Freedom. Freedom to work save invest innovate and yes pursue wealth without it being confiscated by Government to redistribute to its hand picked sycophants who keep the money changers in power by buying votes and confiscating more money from wealth producers to continue executing the scam.
Last edited:
Prices fell during the collapse. They shot BACK up in 2008 when Obama’s saving policies created worldwide confidence that the economy would not continue to fall.
Last edited:
Nice sidestep there. Credit for the juke, but point being made is that our government plays a substantial role in the environment that “creates wealth” (no matter the source) and that taxes are an obligation that all of us have in maintaining that environment. Some more than others, IMO.
Then why was his economic recovery so weak? Usually after a recession we come out of it with 2.5% growth or more ( like we're doing now) He hardly got much above 1% let along 2% GDP. Worse economic performance of ANY President ever.
Boomer wealth is created when something made is sold for profit. What does Government make and then sell for profit?
Basic economics boom. Suppose a student in your class argues this from the wealth creation side? Do you accept his understanding of how a Free market driven by capital formation actually functions?
IMO, Obama was attempting a change in the employment base in our nation, and also trying to shift the energy market. As production employment was shifting to more healthcare oriented and tech jobs, from oil and gas to green energy, there was bound to be slowing of recovery.....but added sustainability.
But this isn’t a debate on Obama’s economic plan. Don’t blend everything together in order to win a debate chubs. I was simply pointing to the confidence in oil demand that caused prices to rise back up in 2008. They fell because of substantial fear in demand as the economic crisis set in. Econ 101 ATL!
I don’t teach economics. When economics are discussed in my class, we discuss all perspectives. The only point I would seek to drive home in my students with regards to economics is that it is never simple. It is very complex and requires substantial attention and appreciation.
And as I said, there are many different economic theories, theories being formed today, theories being challenged today, critical thought and open mindedness are required for healthy policy to render positive results.
